《美墨加协定》“毒丸条款”法律性质之辨析  

Legal Analysis on the Poison Pill Clause of USMCA

作　　者：胡加祥[1] 孙泽慧 HU Jiaxiang;SUN Zehui(Koguan School of Law,Shanghai Jiao Tong University,Shanghai 20030,China)

机构地区：[1]上海交通大学凯原法学院,上海200030

出　　处：《东北大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第5期109-118,共10页Journal of Northeastern University(Social Science)

摘　　要：《美墨加协定》第32.10条强行赋予缔约方不得与一个“非市场经济国家”达成自由贸易协定的单向性义务。从性质上讲,该条款属于“驱逐”条款,而非“退出”条款,目的在于迫使缔约方与中国作切割,因为美国、墨西哥、加拿大三国目前都未正式承认中国为市场经济国家。美国政府官员也毫不讳言将此视为孤立中国的“毒丸条款”。面对以美国为首的西方国家推出的涉华贸易制裁新措施,我们需要正视“非市场经济国家”概念背后的法律逻辑和随之而来的救济难度。在美国力图架空WTO规则的背景下,解析“毒丸条款”的非法性对于我们认清贸易保护主义本质和捍卫多边贸易体制具有重要意义。与此同时,中国也可以通过积极加入区域贸易协定来化解涉华贸易制裁带来的消极影响。Article 30.10 of United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement(USMCA)imposes the unilateral obligation on its contracting parties not to sign a free trade agreement with a non-market country.In nature,this clause is an expulsion clause,not a withdrawl one with the aim at forcing the contracting parties to cut off the trade relations with China as none of the United States,Mexico and Canada has recognized China as a market country.The US government official did not hesitate to claim that this clause is a poison pill clause which will be copied to other FTAs.Confronted with these new restrictive measures imposed by the western countries led by the United States on China,we need to face squarely the logic behind the concept of the non-market country and the difficulty of the remedies for it.As the United States is trying to disable the WTO,the legal analysis on the illegality of the poison pill clause will help us to understand better the nature of trade protectionism and the significance to safeguard the multilateral trading system.Meanwhile,China may also dissolve the negative effect of those restrictive measures by its active engagement in those regional trade agreements.

关 键 词：《美墨加协定》 非市场经济国家 毒丸条款 非法性 

分 类 号：DF96[政治法律—国际法学]