By The Epoch Times | Created at 2026-10-03 23:06:56 | Updated at 2026-10-03 23:36:35
36 minutes ago
The United States said it was “severely disappointed” after several Group of 20 members declined to back joint action against excess industrial capacity and forced labor in global supply chains, which are often associated with China.
A proposed statement on excess industrial capacity was supported by all but “a handful” of trade ministers who met in Milwaukee this week, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said on Oct. 2.
The proposal called on countries to address structural overcapacity by ending non-market policies and practices that distort global trade. It also proposed creating new sector-specific platforms for coordinated action.
“A few” members “firmly rejected” that approach, according to Greer’s statement.
“The U.S. G20 Presidency was severely disappointed by their refusal to agree to the statement,” the United States, as the G20 chair, stated.
Greer did not identify the countries that opposed the proposal. China, however, has repeatedly rejected accusations that its industrial policies have created harmful excess capacity and has accused Western governments of politicizing trade disputes.
The dispute over industrial capacity is not new. The G20 chair’s statement noted that G20 trade ministers agreed at a 2016 meeting in Shanghai that excess capacity in steel and other industries was a global problem. They also acknowledged at that time that government subsidies and other forms of support could contribute to market distortions.
Washington now says that the problem has since worsened and that existing trade remedies permitted under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules are too slow to address government policies that encourage structural overproduction.
Concerns have increasingly focused on China’s steel, electric-vehicle, battery, solar, and other manufacturing sectors. Beijing, however, disputes the argument that its massive export strength—heavily supported by state industrial policies—amounts to harmful excess capacity.
The G20 was even more divided over forced labor, which the Trump administration said gives producers an unfair cost advantage while undermining workers and businesses that follow labor standards.
According to Greer, only Argentina and Mexico joined the United States during the Milwaukee meeting in supporting a statement calling for stronger action to keep goods made with forced labor out of global supply chains.
Greer said the United States was also “severely disappointed” that not everyone was on board.
“Forced labor should never be used to gain a competitive advantage nor excused under the guise of economic development,” he said.
U.S. concerns about forced labor have frequently centered on China’s Xinjiang region. The U.S. Department of Labor lists a range of Chinese goods that it says are linked to forced labor involving Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim minorities, including cotton, textiles, polysilicon, aluminum, and some auto parts.
Beijing has repeatedly rejected allegations of forced labor in Xinjiang and has accused Washington of using human-rights concerns as a pretext for restricting Chinese trade.
Despite the disagreements, G20 trade ministers did reach consensus in at least one area.
They agreed that trade in food and agricultural products should not be used as a tool of economic or political coercion, resulting in a separate statement condemning the “weaponization” of food.
The meeting also opened a broader debate over the WTO’s Most-Favored Nation (MFN) principle, which generally requires members to extend the same tariff treatment to other WTO members. The United States argued that the principle can make it harder for market-oriented economies to respond selectively to countries that engage in unfair, predatory practices.
“As a result, MFN acts not as a lubricant but as a glue, locking in the status quo and preventing new, beneficial agreements among trading partners,” Greer said.
Many G20 members continued to defend the MFN principle as a “cornerstone” of the global trading system, Greer said. But at the same time, he noted that a growing number of participants appeared willing to “think carefully” on changes to the rule or broader exceptions.
