tv Wall Street Journal CEO Council Discussion with WT Os Roberto Azevedo CSPAN December 4, 2018 10:18pm-10:39pm EST
. >> thank you so much for joining us today coming straight from buenos aires argentina you prevent the wto report to world leaders can you summarize for us what you covered? . >> it shows a very large increase that has been covered by restricted measures around the world that is attributed to the increase tariffs to the united states and china so a much larger part of trade the
liberalizing managers are way behind those numbers. so i would like to put that conclusion into context your job is to scrutinize the world trade system and they say this is the doomsday clock how close we are and for context it is the closest they have been in decades. if you had a doomsday event wherewith the minute hand to be? . >> if i before a midnight we are one minute 37 seconds away. >> where would you put it
very significant differences between them that conversation sparks that conversation and what we see bilaterally between those countries and that we have a complete handle but we are beginning to find in the key threats so the wto the silver bullet that is a very significant part of that conversation. >> i'm still waiting to see. [laughter] but from this administration
negotiations and it takes a lot to get things done there are exceptions here and there. and five years ago. >> and that economic impact is very very large than if we eliminated all tariffs in the world today but the exception is not the rule. so then we could deliver more updated agreements t7 so i want to respond to this administration we had larry kudlow who described it as broken, president trump
earlier this year called it a catastrophe or a disaster for the nation if they don't shape up i will withdraw so what are the implications if they withdraw quick. >> the wto should have almost all global trade we are now more than 90 percent the us is a big chunk of that so they are very important players and participants for us but the system is very important to the united states as well the us if it ever left to both sides would lose significantly. i don't think we should be focusing on this but what is actually happening. and the united states is engaging very much with the wto they are negotiating.
they are making proposals to negotiate. they are bringing cases although they are blocking the appointment of the fellow party members but so clearly they see merit in the system and they said we need to change this. this is not working properly some members may even agree to that but they say no. but that's the nature. t7 one of the criticisms as it seems very slow moving the need for all members to agree so how do you create the necessary reforms with the system that seems completely rigged? .
>> there are the flexibilities that already exist. so we can divide by consensus we have decided we can do it but it takes a while. there are other ones that don't really require the information technology to bring the tariffs down to zero with that that is one. $3 trillion bigger than all of the other all tariffs going down to zero is done by a group of like-minded countries so that is one final thing we can do so to bring in tariffs
none of you can do that as we concluded not the most intellectual. . >> one of the issues with the rules and it revolves from china. and with the major power to deal with china as the critics say with that american-style capitalism. >> light heiser says wto would not be done on this scale. does he have a point quick. >> clearly. in the 1980s things have changed since then. china is in the nuclear market with and economy and this is
all of the things not just china but with those trade practices that change with government and a change over time and i think this is a conversation we have to have. not the only conversation that part of the conversation. what could it be clear of developing it doesn't have to move as quickly as others? does that make sense? . >> the reality is very different we are not seeing a situation where we think about this we have different perspectives and i am pretty sure that they are bringing different proposals to the
table. in different complaints and i think this is just the very very beginning of the conversation with a long way to go t7 this is what larry kudlow mentioned as one of the complaints the us had is called joint venture in the turnover technology transfer. that's not it trade rule but it had those implications. does the wto have any ability? . >> and with those concerns. but there is a very strong
trade which is part of the conversation. and we should be exploring. there are ways and a lot of those areas did not exist before 1995 services were not covered until 1995 so those that can improve we shouldn't be with their hands tied. >> and while they complain of those headaches one has to do with the unprecedented use of national security for justification us trading
partners and then to ask those rulings with the terrace back. can they tell the wto what is not a matter of national security? . >> whenever in the past to be justified there was never a challenge maybe there is a response that has happened before but now people are challenging others and that is very risky because my view in particular in some situations
me. but then not everything but most do but then to say that those rules are not good enough and then say china says i was invited i did not negotiate i accepted the rules than the other side says this is better. that is where we are now. >>. >> let me just come back if i'm understanding this the rules were negotiated decades ago based on assumptions of the world at the time the world has evolved economically and politically over that time. presumably no bad intent there
will still be imbalances with the assumptions made that our no longer in place sometimes they benefit under that but that requires consensus to change the rules but absent extraordinary pressure how does that ever occur when some people are benefiting under the rules but the world has changed since then quick. >> that is exactly where we are now. the pressure is there. but things have changed i have said that several times. we need to respond more we need to do something about it before the g 20 headlines or something else. because it recognizes what we have said for a long time we need to do something to make sure the wto response better.
so now let's see what are the rules we need now? are we negotiating or can we be more flexible to be in a more agile way? and not with this new process of conversations. >> what are the consequences at that point quick. >> that hard exit i suppose so therefore the wto rules will apply. if you look at that. nothing changes. for the uk i would say less than half the uk trades with
the world is already under the wto. trade with china, united state states, brazil, japan if that doesn't change, more than half of that is where some will exist. and that will vary from sector to sector that's where it will very where the e.u. tara is very low or those services thinking and tourism it could be a more significant impact those are the rules that would apply