 that's interesting at least I mean I think it should be very comforting for you because you see how the rules of WTO matter at the same time we know there is a problem of governance and a lot of ills can we talk a little bit about it because I mean we see a lot of disruption on on worldwide state on trade and WTO is not efficient in regulating it so let's talk about the governance the ills of this institution and also we'll try to talk about its remedies but who wants the first shot on the WTO? Carl, he's the brave one. I pick up where we were and the basic rule of the WTO is the most favorite nation principle so you have to afford the same good treatment that you offer to one of the 164 members to all the other members and the free trade agreements are actually an exemption from it they are an exemption in that you can offer your partner more favorable treaty treatment than you offer the rest and the justification for allowing this exemption is that you have to cover essentially all trade and we have a committee that deliberates on the notified free trade agreements and it never produces a result that has a critical outcome for the parties because there is not the the courage for it so it's lack of political college of the institution yeah it lacks teeth they speak about the agreement the secretariat writes a factual report the factual report could actually make it very visible that it does not cover essentially all trade and then the parties not the parties the members discuss but there is no consequence before we move to the multilateral trading system I want to go back to the section 232 on autos I think USTR gave options to President Trump in May he extend his decision for for six months so these six months will come sometime in November so given the fact that we see friend Trump is very unpredictable so by that time whether he can extend this some some more months or he can he can declare something so we Koreans are also concerned about the final decision to be made by friend Trump on section 232 on autos but the the advantage of the free trade agreement between the US and Japan was just now described as avoiding a negative it should actually create a positive but it's only avoiding a negative this is not what it's all about that goes at least against the spirit of article 24 which says that the parties engaging in preferential trade agreement should actually lower their tariffs and if that's not happening the fact that the opposite is happening maybe if you throw in a rules of origin that is certainly not in the spirit of the of the article but if we're talking about the WTO I think it's very easy to blame the WTO but who is the WTO no it's it's a member it's a member driven organization and we you know when we comment about it we often forget that no we blame the WTO the WTO is inefficient it doesn't enforce its rules etc etc but then it's just the sum of its 164 members and so and then you know everyone including the even the Europeans that are very at least pay lip service yes they have Mr. Watanabe and then Marcus Norman well thank you very much one additional comment on this Japan US recent agreement on Japan US trade deal one of the major sort of misgivings of this agreement is is the fact that United States could not offer the zero-duty treatment on the parts of the parts and components for car industries that United States offered in TPP 12 negotiation that was concluded in October 2015 so you see the entire you know the passenger car duty is 2.5 percent even in a TPP 12 agreement you know the there was the phasing out of 2.5 percent duties over 25 years right so but instead for the car parts and components Japan got more than 87% of the tariff lines they're dealing with the car parts have been subject to zero duty it's a immediate duty elimination and that was the agreement in October 2015 so that is the thing that we couldn't get and that is the major sort of misgivings I would thought thank you and Marcus you wanted to add something yeah so the WTO has all sorts of problems but the WTO is only as good as its membership and I want to re-emphasize the point I made at the answer which is that for 80 years the United States government tried to promote a open liberal rules-based trade system wasn't always effective didn't always you know always adhere to its own norms but it was basically supportive of that kind of system that changed in 2016 we now have government that would be perfectly happy to watch the WTO strangle by simply not appointing appellate judges and so the question is why what changed in the United States and is it aberrant and can we expect a reversion to the norm or is this the future because if this is the future then it really poses a different set of questions for the system there is a growing body of scholarly analysis in the United States that tries to explain the shift I've done some of it Jeff Frieden who's sitting out in the audience has done some of it some of it is based on looking at individual voter preference some of it is done using analyzing county level voting patterns some of it is experimental and the lessons that seem to be emerging from that that a work are actually quite disturbing the turn towards protectionism in the United States seems to be based on a pernicious sense of victimhood and a victimhood in two different channels one is is usual that would be familiar to everybody in this room import competing sectors especially declining industries are getting hurt by imports they want protection and if you look at the Trump administration a lot of the people in it or his advisors are people who were owners or managers in declining industrial sectors of the US economy but the other one is at the individual level and what it seems the evidence seems to suggest is that this turn towards protection is very much driven by or associated with white identity politics or racism and it's the notion that a growing anxiety among part of the white population the United States about loss of group status loss of their ability to control the system for their own benefits at the individual level and then that is reinforced by a sense among the elites who have these ideas of declining US status at the international level and the fact that China is both regarded as an economic and geopolitical rival means that that is where you where you get to focus on China so looking for towards the future obviously an electoral strategy that that emphasizes anger in the white population is demographically a losing hand in the long run whether it can work in 2020 or not if if if Trump is able to avoid impeachment and does get reelected then I think the second term it will be Katie bar the door on the kind of issues that we're discussing can you tell us what that means exactly it means it means it means it means close down because catastrophe is happening okay if the Democrats win that's that's no nirvana because while the Democrats and there's a lot and these are not just my opinion there's a lot of data that's worth this are much more positively inclined towards international cooperation their views on trade are not necessarily liberal and if you've got certain candidates and certain people you could get a pretty reasonable trade policy but if you get some of the others it could be quite challenging as well so the the future the political economy in the United States future outcomes range from kind of okay to disaster well that's very comforting yeah Gabriel you wanted to add something and then mr. Tart yeah I just wanted to say that there is only there is certainly this this international US centered discussion about the white grumpy man but but there's also and I think here's where Republicans and the Democrats are converged there's also this issue strategic issue with China no so when the when China entered into the WTO in 2001 no one really envisaged that in a period of 15 years or so they would be able to challenge the United States by having an economy that is almost as big and growing twice as fast I think that is there is there is and it's just strategic discussion will not stop and it will not stop when there is a different person in the White House and it also has implications for Europe of course because we too must ask ourselves and we have seen this session here today about you know the values of democracy that these are these are important important components to in this in this discussion and that don't lend to very much optimism neither because that she is strategic struggle which is not just a power military can I pass also about values that that won't go away okay I want to remind you that we are very sorry to talk about WTO in Marrakesh because you know 1994 Marrakesh had a meeting to produce WTO you know now we talk about the gloomy aspect of WTO in fact seven years ago I visited Rabat to have a bilateral ministers meeting and then they asked me where do you want to go after Rabat so I want to see Marrakesh because Marrakesh is the place who produced the WTO we came here and tried to find which hotel hosted this minister conference I forget the name but huge hotel huge hotel and some hotel manager come down and explain about the hotel so I said do you know this place you know we have a meeting for WTO he asked me what is WTO so there's no no plug no any anything you know so in any case well it's a good time you're here to you know give it the right but you know I'm also very you know pessimistic for future I'm sorry to you know I see we have 15 minutes left so Karl is going to speak and we're going to talk a little bit about the settlement problem with the WTO and then we'll open up for questions I want to say that the US has been the positive leader for more than 70 years in trade policy starting before the gut and they have used trade policy as an element of the foreign policy as an instrument of peace policy and if the US takes this role that you have described just now this does not solve the real issue because it only deals with the external elements that are the challenges for the US the real challenges are inside the US you the problem is America is not great anymore when America was great they could behave in the way they behaved as positive leaders and to make America great again is not happening via external conflicts and it's about it comes back to the disgruntled you know white people you were talking about who elected Trump and and express that but somewhere America has been expected is on this appointing judges for the WTO because it's the only way for countries to settle their differences and we know that this this part of your organization is really at a standstill and in December if no judge is appointed it's gone it's dead so what can we do about this this problem has started in 2017 and I think the efforts to resolve the issue have started pretty late right now we are having a group of countries that are under the leadership of the New Zealand ambassador trying to tackle issues on a technical level and here I would come to the one of the elements of the title of our meeting this afternoon trust one could try to rebuild trust by solving a few of the technical issues and one has to get the Europeans and the Americans talking to one another because I think the Europeans have made some very good proposals picking up all the grievances of the Americans one by one without saying that they share the concern but they offer some approach to it but the Americans are not yet engaging and I must say my suspicion is they have other issues they are dealing with China they are dealing with USMCA and the WTO is a third priority for them at this point in time