Tweet
There are two responses to the question of whether or not the WTO is a useful organization in resolving trade disputes. Admittedly, there are a lot of perpetuated myths about the ineffectiveness of the WTO. It has promise for trade dispute resolution and deserves tinkering with it to get where it needs to be to deal with China...... but it's not there yet and the central issue that I'd hang my hat on is that the adjudication process, as I understand and have read about it, is impaired by how differently trading entities, not just China, interpret a specific trade circumstance in dispute, view a ruling from the WTO judges and most importantly, following a ruling that requires action by the offending party, actually complying with that ruling.
A case in point is what seems to be the stumbling block in recent extramural negotiations between China and the US. How will China comply with the agreements that were reached? There were two different methods to insure Chinese compliance with those agreements, one was the US position requiring China to codify the process of complying, the other, China's, was to issue general guidance for compliance from China's governing bodies. Two very different approaches, apparently the later being a culturally acceptable method, a handshake between two honest parties, so to speak, to the Chinese that was not acceptable to the US side.
The same kind of problems of wide ranging interpretation of circumstances in dispute, what a ruling means and how offending parties are to comply with said rulings exist in the wider context of all trade disputes that come before the WTO . Most experts I read who have something to say about this is that the WTO remains a useful international body ...... if some of this adjudication and enforcement process can be improved. To date, that hasn't happened. I don't think a lot of people deep-dig enough to understand this beyond the 30 second sound bite we might here about the WTO working or not working.
A case in point is what seems to be the stumbling block in recent extramural negotiations between China and the US. How will China comply with the agreements that were reached? There were two different methods to insure Chinese compliance with those agreements, one was the US position requiring China to codify the process of complying, the other, China's, was to issue general guidance for compliance from China's governing bodies. Two very different approaches, apparently the later being a culturally acceptable method, a handshake between two honest parties, so to speak, to the Chinese that was not acceptable to the US side.
The same kind of problems of wide ranging interpretation of circumstances in dispute, what a ruling means and how offending parties are to comply with said rulings exist in the wider context of all trade disputes that come before the WTO . Most experts I read who have something to say about this is that the WTO remains a useful international body ...... if some of this adjudication and enforcement process can be improved. To date, that hasn't happened. I don't think a lot of people deep-dig enough to understand this beyond the 30 second sound bite we might here about the WTO working or not working.
Comment