Zur Rechtslage zu unmittelbaren Reaktionen auf die US-Zölle auf Stahl und Aluminium.
Grundsätzlich müssen handelsbezogene Gegenmaßnahmen von der WTO autorisiert werden. Derartige Verfahren können allerdings äußerst lange dauern. Außerdem kennt das WTO-Recht keine Möglichkeit, durch rechtswidrige Maßnahmen herbeigeführte Verluste oder entgangene Gewinne „hereinzuholen“. Sie basiert vielmehr auf dem guten Glauben ihrer Mitglieder beziehungsweise der Erkenntnis, dass sich alle grundsätzlich ans Recht halten, weil es sonst zu einer Abwärtsspirale kommen könnte. Also genau das, was wir derzeit beobachten.
Tariffs are working big time. Every country on earth wants to take wealth out of the U.S., always to our detriment. I say, as they come,Tax them. If they don’t want to be taxed, let them make or build the product in the U.S. In either event, it means jobs and great wealth…..
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) 5. August 2018
Eine Möglichkeit, außerhalb des WTO-Streitbeilegungssystems gegen die US-Zölle vorzugehen, findet sich in Artikel XIX GATT in Verbindung mit Artikel 8(2) und (3) Safeguards Agreement. Sie setzen allerdings gescheiterte Verhandlungen voraus. Solche hat es im gegenständlichen Fall allerdings nicht gegeben, weil die USA sich gar nicht auf die Möglichkeit zu handelsbezogenen Schutzmaßnahmen berufen haben. Vielmehr begründeten sie ihre Zölle mit nationalen Sicherheitsinteressen. Hier gibt es allerdings keine vergleichbare Möglichkeit, auf Schutzmaßnahmen ohne WTO-Autorisierung zu reagieren. Eine Rechtslücke, die den Interessen von Staaten in sensiblen Bereichen geschuldet ist – aber bei missbräuchlicher Anwendung eine Schwäche des WTO-Systems im Allgemeinen und der Streitbeilegung im Besonderen offenlegt.
Article XIX: Emergency Action on Imports of Particular Products
3. (a) If agreement among the interested contracting parties with respect to the action is not reached, the contracting party which proposes to take or continue the action shall, nevertheless, be free to do so, and if such action is taken or continued, the affected contracting parties shall then be free, not later than ninety days after such action is taken, to suspend, upon the expiration of thirty days from the day on which written notice of such suspension is received by the CONTRACTING PARTIES, the application to the trade of the contracting party taking such action, or, in the case envisaged in paragraph 1 (b) of this Article, to the trade of the contracting party requesting such action, of such substantially equivalent concessions or other obligations under this Agreement the suspension of which the CONTRACTING PARTIES do not disapprove.
(b) Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph (a) of this paragraph, where action is taken under paragraph 2 of this Article without prior consultation and causes or threatens serious injury in the territory of a contracting party to the domestic producers of products affected by the action, that contracting party shall, where delay would cause damage difficult to repair, be free to suspend, upon the taking of the action and throughout the period of consultation, such concessions or other obligations as may be necessary to prevent or remedy the injury.
Article 8: Level of Concessions and Other Obligations
2. If no agreement is reached within 30 days in the consultations under paragraph 3 of Article 12, then the affected exporting Members shall be free, not later than 90 days after the measure is applied, to suspend, upon the expiration of 30 days from the day on which written notice of such suspension is received by the Council for Trade in Goods, the application of substantially equivalent concessions or other obligations under GATT 1994, to the trade of the Member applying the safeguard measure, the suspension of which the Council for Trade in Goods does not disapprove.
3. The right of suspension referred to in paragraph 2 shall not be exercised for the first three years that a safeguard measure is in effect, provided that the safeguard measure has been taken as a result of an absolute increase in imports and that such a measure conforms to the provisions of this Agreement.
Ralph Janik 