>On Behalf Of Rakesh Bhandari
>Are you saying that PMFN or
> WTO membership should not be granted so that the US (on the basis of EPI
> research) can threaten the PRC regime every year to give ever
> more on above
> fronts if it's to be granted access to US market.
Rakesh, what I don't understand about your position is that the China deal is not just WTO membership, but a whole package of even larger concessions by China of exactly the kind you oppose made in exchange for permanent status. Why is a "big bang" package so much more preferable than smaller bits of concessions possibly extracted on a yearly basis, especially since that yearly forum gives much more of a role to labor and other progressive grassroots groups to advocate for "concessions" that are not just to other capitalists.
If capitalist interests gain so much from annual review, why are they pushing so hard for permanent China WTO status?
Why are US capitalist interests slitting their own throats by your analysis?
-- Nathan Newman