Jul 11, 1984
U.S. ASKED TO RESCIND SOME TEXTILE RESTRICTIONS.
GENEVA, JULY 7 (IFDA/CHAKRAVARTHI RAGHAVAN) — The Textile Surveillance Board (TSB) in GATT, at its meetings this week, would appear to have found some of the recent U.S. actions to further restrain textiles and clothing imports from India and Pakistan, to be against the provisions of the Multifibre Arrangement (MFA).-In December 1983, the U.S.A. had unilaterally introduced new criteria for restrictive actions on imports. These introduced "presumptions" of market disruption.- In January this year, the U.S. actions were assailed in the GATT Textiles Committee, on the ground that the MFA had laid down strict criteria for judging "market disruption", and that the new U.S. criteria for "presumption" violated the MFA and bilateral accords under it.- At that meetings the U.S. had given assurances that the additional criteria announced by the white house were only "internal guidelines", and that the U.S.A. in its actions would not modify the or existing bilateral accords under it, but abide by the MFA provisions.- Nevertheless, under its new criteria, the U.S.A. has issued so far 80-90 "calls" on Third World exporting countries in respect of various products.- The "calls" are for consultations, aimed at securing voluntary restraints, or failing that to enable the U.S.A. to act on its own, by imposing quotas.- Increasingly, Third World exporters have been coming to the TSB, the body set up under the MFA to administer it, with complaints against the U.S.A.- The TSB consists of four exporting and four importing members of the MFA, and acts as a kind of arbitral body in disputes. But as in GATT, its rulings, even unanimous, have to be accepted by the parties.- Hong Kong was the first to come before the TSB this year, and won its case that some of the U.S. "calls" and restrictions were not backed by facts to warrant the "market disruption" or threat thereof.- Maldives, a small supplier but not a member of the MFA, had also complained to the TSB which had used its good offices to persuade the U.S.A. to rescind its orders.- This week, the TSB was seized of complaints from India, Pakistan and South Korea.- In the case of India, complaints involved Indian exports of cotton men's and boys' coats, and woollen sweaters. In the case of Pakistan, it related to some cotton apparel, while in regard to South Korea the "calls" had been made in respect of "luggage" made of synthetic fibres.- Pakistan had challenged the U.S. action before the TSB on procedural grounds, namely that the "market statements" that the U.S. had to provide prior to "calls" for consultations were inadequate and did not demonstrate any risk of market disruption.- In the case of India, both procedures and substance were involved. - The U.S. had asked India to "restrain" its exports even during the consultation period. On substance too, India had complained that the U.S. data showed no market disruption in terms of MFA, and merely "a presumption" under its own latest policy.- South Korea, which has agreed to consult with the U.S.A., however complained to the TSB that the "luggage" items were not even covered by the MFA which dealt only with textiles and apparel.- The board's findings, according to GATT sources, went against the U.S.A.- Pakistan and the U.S.A., were asked to consult quickly with each other and solve the problem, and the U.S. should remove the restraints.- In the case of India, the TSB has recommended that the U.S. should rescind its restraint orders.- The South Korean complaint is expected to come up again before the TSB after the consultations between the two parties.-