Sure. That's the focus of the two-volume study, which I'm sure you'll be using to go to sleep at night in the near future.
Here's one example. We've had an issue with China on beef age restrictions, beef exports, unpredictability over BSE issues and the MRL issues. What the Americans have in their agreement is the following:
...within one month of the date of entry into force of this Agreement, China shall permit the importation into China of those...beef products, except...in Appendix I...inspected by the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) in an FSIS-approved facility.
5. Within one month of the date of entry into force of this Agreement, China shall adopt maximum residue limits (MRLs) for zeranol, trenbolone, [etc., that meet Codex standards]....
The Americans have essentially taken some of the issues we face, and they've dictated terms for China. There is no dispute resolution mechanism in this agreement. China either complies and the U.S. either complies or the agreement ends. China has lived up to this part of its trade agreement with the U.S.
I am not talking about purchase agreements. Wipe purchase agreements from your mind. This is the long game the Americans were playing with the U.S.-China phase one agreement, and this gives them a structural advantage in the terms of trade that leads Chinese importers to prefer Americans because of the certainty.
The Americans dictate the terms. There is no argument. There is no negotiation. China accepts and adapts. There is a host of issues that we face—from MRLs and BSE to pork, dairy, infant formula and rice—where the Americans have put these terms in the agreement.