Two Chinese experts and professors strongly criticize the US decision to impose unilateral tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada, in the case of China, under the pretext of fighting the fentanyl crisis. According to their analysis, the measures violate World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, fail to address the causes of the crisis – such as the huge domestic demand in the United States – and risk escalating trade conflicts and hampering international cooperation against drug trafficking.

Ji Wenhua, Professor of Law at the University of International Business and Economics, argues that the US tariff increases directly violate two key WTO principles: most-favored-nation (MFN) and bound tariffs.

The MFN principle requires that all WTO members are treated equally – a specific tariff against China without imposing the same on other countries is therefore overt discrimination, he explains. Moreover, through its tariffs, the US has exceeded bound tariffs, i.e. the levels it has formally committed not to exceed in the WTO.

"It is hardly likely that the US can justify its measures with either general exception or national security exception. More importantly, unilateral tariff measures are far from striking at the root of the fentanyl crisis in the US, Ji writes in China Daily.

He points out that the WTO's exception clauses (Articles 2 and 11 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, GATT) require that the measures are necessary, non-discriminatory and that no alternatives exist. According to Mr. Ji, the United States meets none of these requirements: stopping the fentanyl trade requires cross-border police cooperation and anti-abuse efforts, not tariffs.

He also warns that the US action sets a dangerous precedent that could "undermine the authority and stability of the multilateral trading system".

China becomes a scapegoat for US policy

Ying Pinguang, a professor at the Shanghai University of International Business and Economics, criticizes the US for deliberately distorting China's role. He recalls that China was the first country in the world to classify and regulate all fentanyl-related substances in 2019, long before international requirements came into force.

"According to reports from US Customs and Border Protection, since September 2019, the US has not seized any fentanyl substances originating from China. In this context, the US insists on dramatizing the issue and intentionally announces that China is the largest source of fentanyl precursor chemicals entering the US, which only lays bare its ulterior motives", he writes in the Global Times.

He argues that US tariffs violate not only WTO rules but also the principle of national treatment (Article 3 of the GATT), which prohibits inferior conditions for imported goods compared to domestic ones. Penalizing Chinese chemical exports – even though they are legal and regulated – creates an unfair competitive advantage for US manufacturers, according to Ying.

Warns of negative effects

Both experts warn of long-term effects. Ji points out that higher prices for imported goods will hit US consumers and businesses. Ying adds that sanctions risk driving smuggling activities to the dark web or third-party countries, making tracking more difficult.

At the same time, Ying highlights the Chinese regulatory framework: all fentanyl precursors (chemicals used to make the drug) are subject to strict licensing via the Non-Medical Use Drug Regulation (Chinese designation, ed.), and exports must be approved by both Chinese authorities and the UN chemical control system.

The solution according to experts: cooperation, not confrontation

Ji and Ying agree that the United States should focus on tightening domestic demand and expanding international cooperation. Ying points out that China and the US already have an anti-drug cooperation working group, where information and technology are shared.

"The US should cherish China's goodwill and maintain the hard-won anti-drug cooperation momentum between China and the US". Ying writes.