<s>[INST] The next text is a question of a member of the European parliament:"South Korea has long been distorting competition on the shipbuilding market by pricing its vessels below their real cost. The European Union and South Korea have held talks with a view to bringing about healthy competition on the shipbuilding market, but to no avail.  Disagreements over international competition issues are dealt with in the appropriate dispute settlement bodies of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Both the Union Member States and South Korea belong to the WTO.  Because the above negotiations ended in summer 2000 without levelling the playing field, the Member States meeting within the Council in December 2000 unanimously agreed that the EU should complain to the WTO because South Korea was breaching its obligations regarding support for ship exports.  Parliament also supported that view in its report on the second report from the Commission to the Council on the situation in world shipbuilding (A5-0371/2000), in which it """"""""[called] on the Commission to initiate a dispute settlement procedure with the Republic of Korea before the World Trade Organisation (WTO)"""""""".  In spite of these facts, the Commission has still not referred the matter to the WTO dispute settlement body.  Instead it has, totally artificially and with no solid legal justification, linked the start of a proper WTO dispute settlement procedure to its proposal for a regulation which stipulates that limited production aid to individual European shipyards could be temporarily allowed, while the WTO procedure was taking place, so as to counterbalance South Korea's action. Differences of opinion among the Member States as to the legitimacy and rationality of production aid have made it impossible to bring the proposal for a regulation into force.  The South Korean Government has said that South Korea is aiming to build even bigger ships, especially cruise liners, and still does not consider its aid policy to have been in any way wrong or contrary to international agreements.  From the point of view of the European shipbuilding industry the situation is completely intolerable. When will the Commission abandon its inaction and ensure that the matter can at last be dealt with by the WTO?"
Analyze carefully the text and assign it to the most relevant policy area among those listed below. Do not explain your answer and return only a number.
Policy area numbers: 1 = Macroeconomics
2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties
3 = Health
4 = Agriculture and Fisheries
5 = Labour, employment and pensions
6 = Education
7 = Environment
8 = Energy
9 = Immigration
10 = Transportation
12 = Law and Crime
13 = Social welfare
14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning
15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues
16 = Defence
17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues
18 = Foreign trade
19 = International affairs and foreign aid
20 = Governance and government
21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues
23 = Culture and media
[/INST]. Answer = [18]. </s>
South Korea has long been distorting competition on the shipbuilding market by pricing its vessels below their real cost. The European Union and South Korea have held talks with a view to bringing about healthy competition on the shipbuilding market, but to no avail.  Disagreements over international competition issues are dealt with in the appropriate dispute settlement bodies of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Both the Union Member States and South Korea belong to the WTO.  Because the above negotiations ended in summer 2000 without levelling the playing field, the Member States meeting within the Council in December 2000 unanimously agreed that the EU should complain to the WTO because South Korea was breaching its obligations regarding support for ship exports.  Parliament also supported that view in its report on the second report from the Commission to the Council on the situation in world shipbuilding (A5-0371/2000), in which it """"""""[called] on the Commission to initiate a dispute settlement procedure with the Republic of Korea before the World Trade Organisation (WTO)"""""""".  In spite of these facts, the Commission has still not referred the matter to the WTO dispute settlement body.  Instead it has, totally artificially and with no solid legal justification, linked the start of a proper WTO dispute settlement procedure to its proposal for a regulation which stipulates that limited production aid to individual European shipyards could be temporarily allowed, while the WTO procedure was taking place, so as to counterbalance South Korea's action. Differences of opinion among the Member States as to the legitimacy and rationality of production aid have made it impossible to bring the proposal for a regulation into force.  The South Korean Government has said that South Korea is aiming to build even bigger ships, especially cruise liners, and still does not consider its aid policy to have been in any way wrong or contrary to international agreements.  From the point of view of the European shipbuilding industry the situation is completely intolerable. When will the Commission abandon its inaction and ensure that the matter can at last be dealt with by the WTO?