Question

hellp pleaaaaaasssseeeeeeeeee

One of the roles of the World Trade Organization is to act as the policeman for international trade agreements. When one country feels aggrieved by the actions of another, it is often to the World Trade Organization that they turn for redress. One such example is the case that the US has bought against China in regard to the restrictions that China placed on imported films, music, and books. China remains one of the least profitable markets for US movie studios partly because China only allows 20 foreign films to be released in theaters every year. Towards the end of December 2009, the World Trade Organization made a ruling declaring the restrictions that China had placed on imported movies to be illegal. China vigorously defended their position, but the World Trade Organization rejected their appeal, sealing one of China's biggest ever losses in the World Trade Organization since it joined in 2001.

Answer 1

a) Yes, it has been effective but substantially. On one hand where declaring sanction illegal is concerned, it might have made a significant change in the way US can retaliate by putting equivalent sanctions at the level of account at which it is facing loss.On the other hand though, the WTO couldn't do much about how the trade happens in China, because Beijing is still regulating the market for lesser profit to US.

b) Movie are medium of communication and expression. The deliver ideas and irrespective of the country and the philosophies of political structure. In American movies, the country is just a part of its cast and shoot and show the brilliance of the landscape, where as there are stories which might glorify its demographic, geographical and sometimes even the military capability. This however, does not allow the Chinese economy to cut down the business which as mentioned is cutting edge in the film industry. This is unfair to the competition that all other economies are facing and China is being safe guarded by its restrictive trade policy. Protecting the audience from indecent portrayal is only justified if only some of the content is inappropriate, those parts can be censored. Completely shut down of movies from the screen is unjustified.

c) No, it does not change the opinion, because every nation is equal before WTO and has right of fair trade. If in the first case US was the victim, in the second it is at fault and it is right of WTO to fine them for illegal sanctions. The point of loss of local jobs are in question when the government of a country has not put enough thought to organize its local labor. WTO would not force a country to destroy its economy prosperity to let the foreign economy infiltrate.