From the perspective of international trade law, the United States’ unilateral imposition of additional tariffs on China under the pretext of fentanyl may appear justified on grounds of protecting public health and safety, but it is difficult to find a reasonable basis for exemption under the legal framework of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The U.S. tariff measures violate fundamental obligations such as Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) treatment and commitments under its schedule of concessions (tariff bindings). Even if the United States claims to act unilaterally pursuant to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 or Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, these domestic-law bases cannot be exempted outside the WTO framework. Under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994)—including Article XX (General Exceptions) and Article XXI (Security Exceptions)—the United States must demonstrate the necessity of imposing tariff measures, and such measures must not constitute arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination in international trade. In light of existing WTO case law and interpretive practice, it is exceedingly difficult for the United States to justify such measures under the general exceptions or the national security exception. If the United States insists on moving forward, affected countries may, under the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU), initiate consultations, request the establishment of a panel for adjudication, or adopt trade retaliation in parallel. In the current global economic context, the United States’ abuse of unilateral tariff instruments will further undermine the stability and predictability of the multilateral trading system.

More critically, bundling public health issues with tariff pressure rarely contributes positively to curbing drug flows or advancing transnational law-enforcement cooperation. On the contrary, it may exacerbate political antagonism and impede effective governance based on consultation and cooperation. The truly effective way to address drug problems is to adopt a comprehensive policy mix and a shared-responsibility approach—reducing drug demand, conducting cross-border law-enforcement collaboration, and strengthening multilateral cooperation to seek more constructive global solutions to drug governance.

China is a responsible major country and applies the strictest control measures against drug production, trafficking, and abuse. China–U.S. counternarcotics cooperation is steadily advancing—this is the correct approach to the issue. If the United States persists with unilateral measures, it will undoubtedly damage the authority and stability of the multilateral trading system and run counter to the spirit of countries joining hands to address global challenges in an era of globalization. More importantly, unilateral tariff measures are unlikely to resolve the U.S. fentanyl crisis at its root. Major powers should act like major powers; actions that harm others without benefiting oneself are best avoided.

(Professor Ji Wenhua, School of Law, University of International Business and Economics)

Link: https://cn.chinadaily.com.cn/a/202502/02/WS679eeddfa310be53ce3f3fbd.html