New Fair Trade Principles Based on the 100-Meter Race Model

Joon-Yeop Lee | Published: 2025-07-08

― “Same Distance, Different Conditions Is Unfair”

■ The Issue: The Current Trade Order Is a ‘Race Favoring the Tall’

The new trade order led by the United States claims to promote “free and equal competition.” It eliminates tariff barriers, standardizes regulations, and labels the conditions for free global market participation as fair trade.

However, this is only superficial equality, far from true fairness. If the U.S. genuinely sought a fair trade order, it should have proposed rules designed with each country’s capacity in mind, not just its own.

The current international trade system is like an Olympic race governed by barbaric rules.

“All athletes run the same 100 meters. Their height, leg length, and muscle mass differ. Some run barefoot, others wear spikes. Yet the only rule is that the starting line and finish line are the same.”

This is clearly a structurally imbalanced, unfair competition. Nations with smaller capacities are thrown into a system where defeat is predetermined before the race even begins.

■ New Principle: A ‘Fair Race Model’ Adjusting Distance and Rules Based on Physical Traits

True fairness requires adjusting rules based on athletes’ conditions. Applied to the trade order, this principle translates as follows:

Athlete Trait	Track Adjustment	Trade Rule Equivalent
Short Legs	Reduce distance to 80m	Small-population countries receive tariff relief
Low Muscle Mass	Adjust reaction time allowance	Technologically weaker countries get relaxed technical barriers
Barefoot	Provide shoes or shorten distance	Countries with weak institutions get compliance grace periods
Poor Vision	Provide guided track	Countries with low trade regulation access receive education and consulting

Adjusting conditions to yield similar outcomes—that is true fairness.

The same applies to the trade order. Instead of applying identical rules to all, conditions must be tailored to each country’s capacity.

■ Redesigning Trade Rules: An ‘Equity-Based Global Trade Framework’

Population-Based Market Access Adjustment
Large-population countries benefit from their domestic market size.
→ Mutual Import Quotas: e.g., The U.S. must import a certain amount of South Korean goods to gain access to South Korea’s market.
Technology Gap-Based Tariff Adjustment
Technological disparities lead to market dominance and undermine fair competition.
→ Technology-Weighted Tariffs: Apply additional tariffs to patented products based on technological advancement levels.
Domestic Market Size-Based Adjustment
Trade with populous countries generates excess profits.
→ Introduce Market Entry Adjustment Tariffs: e.g., If excess profits arise in the U.S. market, South Korea imposes corrective tariffs.
Ethical Adjustment Tariffs for Labor and Environmental Standards
Apply corrective tariffs to products from countries with low labor or environmental standards.
Introduce ‘Social and Environmental Adjustment Tariffs’ to address unfair production conditions and foster ethical competition.
Incentives Based on Environmental Protection Levels
Grant export tax benefits to countries adopting sustainable technologies.
Apply incentives based on eco-friendly technology or clean energy adoption: e.g., Countries using biodegradable plastics receive export tax reductions.

■ Proposal: A Differentiated Fair Trade Framework (DFTF)

The DFTF differentiates trade rules based on three criteria:

Population Size and Purchasing Power
Technological Capacity and Institutional Development
Domestic Market Absorption and External Economic Dependence

International organizations like the WTO should apply a country-specific capacity chart in trade disputes, rationally adjusting tariffs and non-tariff measures. This shifts trade “fairness” from formal equality to substantive outcomes.

■ Conclusion: True Fairness Is Not a ‘Same Starting Line’ but a ‘Similar Chance to Finish’

For an Olympic 100-meter race to be fair, starting distances and conditions must be adjusted based on athletes’ physical traits. Similarly, international trade requires rules redesigned to reflect each country’s capacity, technology, population, and market structure.

The free and fair trade advocated by the U.S. today is essentially a system imposing rules tailored to its own capacity.

“Fairness means adjusting starting conditions to achieve similar outcomes.
It’s time to stop asking ‘Is the starting line the same?’
and start asking ‘Is there an equal chance to reach the finish line?’”

The South Korean government should share this framework with the international community and initiate discussions with the U.S. on what truly constitutes a fair trade order.

```