以法律利器捍卫海运权益，反制条款的战略价值与时代意义《国际海运条例》

中国船东协会专家评论文章二：

以法律利器捍卫海运权益，《国际海运条例》反制条款的战略价值与时代意义

中国坚定维护多边贸易体系，在全球海运治理中以负责任大国始终维护公平竞争，反对单边主义、保护主义。当前个别国家发动贸易战、关税战，并利用301条款对我海运、物流和造船业实施打压，严重冲击多边贸易规则和国际贸易秩序，违反互利共赢的合作原则。中国新修订《国际海运条例》的反制条款，既为受制裁的中国航运企业提供合法保护，更重塑了国际海运“以规则对霸权”的博弈格局，其战略价值可从法律正当性、市场矫正力和全球治理贡献三方面深入解读。

01 法律正当性：合规反制单边制裁，提供权利救济

美国对中国航运企业、中国造船舶征收歧视性港口费，本质是将国内法凌驾于国际法之上的霸权行为。这种“按国籍定价”的做法公然违反WTO非歧视原则，所谓“振兴美国造船业”的借口，也因美国民用船舶建造成本为中韩3-5倍而不成立。

修订后反制条款的核心价值，在于通过法定程序将中国反制纳入国际法“对等自卫”范畴，构建三层正当性基础：一是依“镜像原则”设计反制标准，实现对等收费；二是建立“预警-评估-实施”透明机制，符合WTO透明度要求；三是明确反制措施的临时性与可解除性，保持政策弹性。中国此举是对美国301政策对全球航运业系统性破坏的合法矫正。

02 市场矫正力：稳定全球供应链的关键抓手

美国制裁将引发连锁反应，全球航运企业因船队含中国造船舶面临额外支出，“连坐式处罚” 推高成本，未来美国港口拥堵风险还将传导至全球。

修订后反制条款给予中国收取相关费用的空间，其市场价值体现在三方面：一是遏制成本转嫁，使美籍及相关船舶面临同等成本压力，形成“双向约束”的市场均衡；二是保护中国航运业，缓解单艘船舶年靠港五次需付超千万美元的困境，避免行业“退出涉美航线”危机；三是稳定全球物流网络，为全球供应链安全筑牢防线。

03 全球治理贡献：推动航运规则民主化的制度突破

当前美国试图联合盟友构建“排华”港口联盟、《琼斯法案》等保护主义政策僵化全球航运体系，修订后反制条款突破 “霸权即规则” 旧逻辑，提供新治理范式，推动全球航运治理民主化：

规则层面，将“非歧视”“透明度”“对等性”嵌入国内立法，为发展中国家应对单边制裁提供可复制模板；标准层面，结合中国在绿色船舶、智能航运领域的技术优势，推动航运规则向更公平、可持续方向演进。修订后反制条款的终极意义并非 “以牙还牙”，而是通过制度创新捍卫 “航运自由≠霸权自由” 的准则。

历史证明美国制裁短视，此前对日本造船业的制裁致自身技术落后，如今中国造船业稳健发展，产业基础绝非制裁可撼动。当前美国消费者因保护主义政策承担通胀上升代价，美国农业、能源出口商因海运成本飙升陷入困境，世界越发看清单边制裁的虚妄。

我们认为中国政府有充足的理由重拳出击，我们呼吁中国政府依据《对外贸易法》、《反外国制裁法》和新修订的《国际海运条例》，采取效果对等反制措施，对中美航线上的外国船东和运营商挂靠中国港口加征港口费，保障中美航线公平竞争秩序，并不排除在必要时启动更具针对性的强力反制方案。这既是对公平贸易的捍卫、对开放合作的坚守，也唯有依靠包括特殊港口费在内的规则武器，才能让全球航运回归市场逻辑，让多边贸易体制重焕生机。

Expert Commentary 2 by the China Shipowners’ Association： 

Defending Maritime Transport Interests with the Weapon of Law: The Strategic Value and Contemporary Significance of the Countermeasure Provisions in the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on International Ocean Shipping

China firmly upholds the multilateral trading system. As a responsible major country, it consistently safeguards fair competition while opposing unilateralism and protectionism in the governance of global maritime shipping. Currently, a certain country has waged trade wars and tariff wars, and exploited Section 301 to suppress China’s maritime shipping, logistics and shipbuilding industries. Such action has severely undermined multilateral trade rules and the international trading order, and violated the principle of mutually beneficial cooperation. The countermeasure provisions in the newly revised Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on International Ocean Shipping not only provide legal protection for Chinese shipping enterprises under sanctions, but also reshape the “rule-based response to hegemony” game pattern in international maritime transport. Their strategic value can be deeply interpreted from three aspects: legal legitimacy, market correction power and contributions to global governance.

I. Legal Legitimacy: Lawful Countermeasures against Unilateral Sanctions and Provision of Rights to Remedies

The United States imposes discriminatory port fees on Chinese shipping enterprises and Chinese-built ships, which is essentially a hegemonic act of placing domestic law above international law. This practice of “nationality-based pricing” flagrantly violates the WTO’s non-discrimination principle, and the so-called excuse of “revitalizing the U.S. shipbuilding industry” is also invalid, as the building cost of merchant ships in the U.S. is 3 to 5 times higher than that in China and South Korea.

The core value of the revised countermeasure provisions lies in incorporating China’s countermeasures into the scope of “reciprocal self-defense” under international law through statutory procedures, thereby establishing a three-tiered legitimacy framework: first, designing countermeasure standards in line with the “mirror principle” to ensure reciprocal fee imposition; second, establishing a transparent “early warning-assessment-implementation” mechanism that complies with WTO transparency requirements; third, clarifying the temporary and revocable nature of countermeasures to maintain policy flexibility. China’s move is a legal correction to the systemic damage caused by the U.S. Section 301 policy to the global shipping industry.

II. Market Correction Power: A Key Lever to Stabilize the Global Supply Chain

The U.S. sanctions will trigger a chain reaction: global shipping enterprises will face additional costs due to the inclusion of Chinese-built vessels in their fleets, while “collective punishment”-style measures will drive up costs further, and the risk of congestion at U.S. ports will also spread to the rest of the world in the future.

III. Contributions to Global Governance: An Institutional Breakthrough for Advancing the Democratization of Shipping Rules

At present, the United States is seeking to ally with its partners to establish an “anti-China” port coalition, while protectionist policies such as the Jones Act have rigidified the global shipping system. The revised countermeasure provisions break free from the outdated logic of “hegemony as the rule,” offer a new governance paradigm, and advance the democratization of global maritime shipping governance:

At the rule level, by embedding principles of “non-discrimination”, “transparency” and “reciprocity” into domestic legislation, it provides a replicable model for developing countries to respond to unilateral sanctions. At the standard level, leveraging China’s technological strengths in green vessels and intelligent shipping, the provisions drive the evolution of shipping rules toward greater fairness and sustainability. The ultimate significance of the revised countermeasure provisions is not “retaliation in kind,” but rather defending the principle that “freedom of navigation does not equate to freedom for hegemony” through institutional innovation.

History has proven that U.S. sanctions are short-sighted. Previously, its sanctions against Japan’s shipbuilding industry led to its own technological backwardness. Today, China’s shipbuilding industry is developing steadily, and its industrial foundation is by no means vulnerable to sanctions. At present, U.S. consumers are bearing the cost of rising inflation due to protectionist policies, and U.S. agricultural and energy exporters are trapped in difficulties amid the soaring maritime shipping costs. The world is increasingly seeing through the futility of unilateral sanctions.

We hold that the Chinese government has sufficient reasons to take decisive actions. We call on the Chinese government to impose countermeasures with equivalent effects in accordance with the Foreign Trade Law, the Anti-Foreign Sanctions Law and the newly revised Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on International Ocean Shipping. Specifically, it should levy additional port fees on foreign shipowners and operators calling at Chinese ports on China-US shipping routes to safeguard the fair competition order on China-U.S. routes, and not rule out launching more targeted and robust countermeasure plans when necessary. This is not only a defense of fair trade and a commitment to open cooperation, but also a necessary step: only by relying on rule-based tools—including special port fees—can we restore global maritime shipping to market logic and revitalize the multilateral trading system.

— END —