The JCCT Produces More of the Same

By Matthew McMullan
Nov 23 2015 |
The powers that be would prefer you spend your time making turkey decorations with your hands on construction paper, instead of paying attention to the nonsense that comes out of the annual Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade. | Photo by Irisphotos

An annual meeting between U.S. and Chinese officials produces nothing new on trade issues.

It’s that time of the year again.

Time to force most of America, a captive audience loaded up on tryptophan, to watch the Detroit Lions play football.

Time to reminisce about John Madden’s turducken. Remember turducken?

Time to make pictures of turkeys by tracing our hands on construction paper.

Time for the annual meeting of the Sino-American Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT), which just wrapped up in the southern Chinese city of Guangzhou. It’s a holiday tradition like no other.

The JCCT is a forum where U.S. and Chinese government officials gather to discuss issues affecting – yes, you guessed it – commerce and trade between the two countries. There’s certainly a benefit gained when government representatives from the world’s largest economies interact. Trust is built. Regular dialogue is established. Yet, precious little commitment is ever made.

Until today! Spread the good news, U.S. Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker:

"We got significant outcomes on trade secrets which is a really big issue," Pritzker told Reuters in an interview.

"This is where China clarified its intent to make preliminary injunctions and meaningful remedies and other judicial protections more easily accessible to those who are confronting trade secret theft … It's a big deal."

Man! They clarified their intent. That does sound like a big deal, especially after the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission just released its annual report, which detailed a litany of trade abuses engaged in by the Chinese government.

Has it suddenly turned over a new leaf?

No. Obviously, no. According to the Commerce Department itself, the same promise on intellectual property – or a slightly more generic version – was made at JCCT 2014 in Chicago. And this is hardly a new problem; the New York Times editorial page wrote in 2010 that “for years, Chinese officials have promised to improve their protection of intellectual property. But the infringement of copyrights, patents and trade secrets has, in many instances, gotten worse.”

Regular dialogue between Chinese and American officials is useful. But what use is there in praising China for making and breaking the same old trade promises?

I bet we’ll be having this same conversation next year.