European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 334

On November 13 2015 03:30 cLutZ wrote:

The European Commission. As well as a huge % of people who discuss the Isreal situation.

On November 13 2015 03:34 Nyxisto wrote:


Well the policy action is based on the assumption that Israel is violating international law and they are referring to the 1967 border situation, so I guess history is pretty relevant.

I also think there could have been other measures if you want to make a political statement than labeling Jewish products, because it invokes some really bad imagery.

On November 13 2015 03:43 cLutZ wrote:
Let's just talk about the 1967 situation: Isreal fought a defensive war, and in doing so annexed land that is extremely strategically valuable for defending from a similar offensive, and also establishes a more natural border for the state. Why I bring up 1914 is that France did the same following WWI, as did many other countries.

The reality is that Isreal appears to be guilty only of being too nice in 1967 and not simply annexing even more territory from the attacking Arab nations and establishing governments there.

well it's a clear violation of the gatt etc. will def be challenged.

Non-preferential rules of origin are used to determine the country of origin for certain purposes. These purposes may be for quotas, anti-dumping, anti-circumvention, statistics or origin labelling.

The basis for the non-preferential rules originates from the Kyoto convention which states that if a product is wholly obtained or produced completely within one country the product shall be deemed having origin in that country. For a product which has been produced in more than one country the product shall be determined to have origin in the country where the last substantial transformation took place.

To determine exactly what was the last substantial transformation, three general rules are applied:

Change of tariff classification (on any level, though 4-digit level is the most common)
Value added-rule (ad valorem)
Special processing rule, the minimum transformation is described. For instance, in the EU non-preferential rules of origin for T-shirts (HS6109), the origin is supposed to be in the country where the complete making-up was done.

According to the non-preferential rules a product always has exactly one country of origin. However, the non-preferential rules may differ from country to country; the same product may have different origins depending on which country's scheme is applied. Usually it is the rules of the country into which a product is being imported that apply.

On November 13 2015 03:55 oneofthem wrote:
evidently this move has been discussed but not implemented for a while. eu claim is that the occupied territories is not israel under intl law, so labeling them israeli is inaccurate for customs purposes and also misleading to consumer.

but this can still run into trouble if the rule is inconsistently applied, eg cyprus.

On November 13 2015 04:04 oneofthem wrote:
that question isnt really needed to defeat this see above

On November 13 2015 04:05 Nyxisto wrote:

A lot, or else the fuss wouldn't be so big every time the relationship between a European country and Israel is being discussed. It's a pseudo-distinction. Many Jews in Europe have family in Israel or partly live there themselves. Cleanly splitting the topic between "Israel-criticism" and the Jewish population of Europe is ironically almost always done by people who don't happen to be Jewish.

It's like being surprised about the fact that Turks are Kurds are regularly clashing in Europe. These conflicts are part of the identity of people living here. To act like these things don't play a role only serves the purpose of making the discussion look more innocent than it is.

On November 13 2015 04:11 oneofthem wrote:
cyprus is a domestic region of the ec so it is still violating national treatment, application of domestic regulation consistently.

Rules of origin are the criteria needed to determine the national source of a product. Their importance is derived from the fact that duties and restrictions in several cases depend upon the source of imports.

On November 13 2015 04:17 Nyxisto wrote:


The point is simply that you can not split Israelian and Jewish identity, at least not honestly. Many Jews in Europe are either staunchly opposed to what the government does or are in favor of it. There's a lot of strong opinions and but not much indifference, just taking a look at how these discussions explode among political and media channels is enough to confirm this.

On November 13 2015 04:21 oneofthem wrote:

ec is the european community, the party that shows up in wto disputes.

the measure in question is a labeling requirement so this origin stuff is irrelevant.

On November 13 2015 04:28 Plansix wrote:
Whitedog, how are you confused by this? Nyxisto isn't talking about you specifically, but a significant number of Jews in both the EU and US feeling some sort of allegiance to Israel. It is one of the main political hurtles when it comes to criticizing the county, since it has a direct effect on local politics.

On November 13 2015 04:28 oneofthem wrote:
country of origin is a technical determination or value, whether it needs to be slapped onto every product as a sticker with occupied territories spelled out is a different question.

for example if u want to determine customs standard, u need origin. but that doesnt need a label on every piece of product to the consumer. the measure is supposed one that exists to inform consumers, but whether its interest served in this respect is important enough to sustain the clear negative market impact is the important wto question.