Blog post
Reforming the WTO – with or without the US?
Washington’s continued block of the process to fill vacant Appellate Body seats must be framed in the big picture of systemic trade distortions, says Elvire Fabry, senior research fellow at the Jacques Delors Institute, who argues that what is at stake are the gaps in multilateral rule that allow distortions such as Chinese subsidies to state-owned enterprises. She presents several options to keep dispute settlement functional.
On the same topic, see “Saving the WTO Appellate Body or Returning to the Wild West of Trade?“, Policy Paper by Elvire Fabry.
Threats, blackmail and martial confrontation are President Donald Trump’s policy tools in both geo-economics and geopolitics. But beyond the short-term negotiation strategy of trying to destabilise the other party, will he be able to manage the systemic shockwaves that this is creating?
It is not yet clear whether Trump intends to disengage the US from global value chains by building protectionist walls – from adding investment restrictions and export controls to imposing higher tariffs on imports, targeting China and other countries. Or is he willing to flip up the table of multilateralism to trade more fruitfully in what would have then turned into a Wild West of trade? In both cases, suspicion and fear will develop and could eventually contaminate the world.
Trump was elected on the promise of a new future for the American middle class, increasingly challenged by the development of a global middle class, notably in Asia. Yet, instead of developing welfare-state policies to help people adapt to the new challenges of globalisation – including data transfer, e-commerce and artificial intelligence – he seems happy to increase the distrust in global interdependence, with unknown consequences in the US and abroad.
With the US withdrawing further from multilateralism, one can only hope that Europeans will not also retreat from the promotion of a more regulated globalisation. There is obviously a fatigue about multilateralism. But the cornerstone of the regulation of international trade, namely the World Trade Organization’s dispute settlement mechanism, could soon be blocked if Washington continues to oppose the appointment of new judges to the Appellate Body.
The issue needs to be framed in the big picture of systemic trade distortions. Beyond a mere procedural reform of the Appellate Body, what is at stake here are the gaps in multilateral rules that allow distortions such as Chinese subsidies to state-owned enterprises.
Pushing China to the negotiating table
Will Beijing’s apparent commitment to the multilateral system pave the way for so-called constructive confrontation? Bringing China to the negotiating table remains a challenge. But restoring confidence in fair trade requires strengthening the two legs of the WTO: litigation and negotiation.
The European Commission must be supported in its initiative to create a coalition calling for WTO reform to save the dispute settlement mechanism. The pressure on Beijing to come to the negotiation table could and should be shared among a larger group of countries, as so many – particularly developing economies – will likely be penalised by the bilateral confrontation between the US and China.
A first step in the right direction would consist of countering subsidy notification failures: ensuring that WTO members comply with the requirements on subsidy notifications. Compliance levels with transparency obligations are low and decreasing since 1995 – with the percentage of members reporting subsidies falling from 50% to 38% today.[1]
Amending the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures may well be a long process – in particular, as regards the “less than adequate remunerations” through which the Chinese government supports companies. Europeans and the other members of the WTO cannot accept being held hostage by the US threat to block the dispute settlement mechanism. A strong coalition of WTO members is needed to adopt emergency measures to preserve a functional dispute settlement capacity, without the United States if necessary.
What can be done?
Several options could be considered:
– the “nuclear option” of a qualified majority to appoint new judges to the Appellate Body;
– recourse to an ad hoc arbitration system, already authorised by Article 25 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding, as a transition phase;
– replicate the Appellate Body’s procedures in a separate agreement, signed by a “coalition of the willing” determined to preserve the balance of international commerce without renegotiating the entire trade regime. This agreement would then take effect only if the US blocked the Appellate Body by not allowing vacancies to be filled before December 2019. This would move the dispute settlement mechanism out of the WTO, but would show willingness to preserve a multilateral system.
As Trump’s vision remains focused on the short term and is primarily influenced by the US mid-term elections in the autumn, it will be up to the other major trading powers, including the EU, to keep multilateral regulation alive.
Elvire Fabry
previously published in Borderlex
[1] “Improving disciplines on subsidies notification”, TN/RL/GEN/188, WTO, 2017.
SUR LE MÊME THÈME
ON THE SAME THEME
PUBLICATIONS
EU and China between De-Risking and Cooperation: Scenarios by 2035

Mapping the EU’s digital trade

Making migrant returns a pre-condition of trade openness

MÉDIAS
MEDIAS
L’OMC, paralysée, joue son avenir à Genève

N.Gnesotto – “Quel impact de l’affaire des sous-marins australiens ?”

L’acier et l’aluminium réchauffent les relations transatlantiques

ÉVÉNEMENTS
EVENTS
Euroquestions | EU-China relations: rivals, competitors, partners? [FR]

Euroquestions | Which European response to the US Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)?

Académie Notre Europe – L’Europe Commerciale et de la Défense

WEBINAR | What do we need a World Trade Organization for?

WEBINAR | A European Border Carbon Adjustment proposal

Greening the EU trade policy

Rupture or Reorder?

AmCham Confidential

Tunis, 3 may 2019 — Tunisia’s challenges and responses to threats to multilateralism

Madrid, 10 April 2019 – European Think Thank Summit

Paris, 10 January 2019 – The EU and the new silk roads

3 December 2018 – Is Brexit Reversible?

Brussels, 27 November 2018 – EU Trade Policy Day

Bordeaux, 23 November 2018 – EU trade policy: can we control globalization?

Brussels, 16 October 2018 – EU trade policy in 2019 and beyond

Paris, 15 October 2018 – Will the EU become a world power?

Paris, 10 October 2018 – What is Europe for? Myths and realities

Paris, 3 October 2018 – Beyond Trade Wars: From Free Trade to Fair Trade

Paris, 21 September 2018 – Trump, Brexit and the new challenges of European trade policy: is the European response adapted?

Paris, 12 September 2018 – Presentation of the book “L’économie mondiale 2019” of the CEPII

Brussels, 22 June 2018 – The multipolar world order, the EU and the multilateral system

Clichy, 19 June 2018 – How to make Europe the world economic leader?

Paris, 11 June 2018 – Round table on Brexit

Brussels, 8 June 2018 – EU Trade policy in a multilateral trading system under threat

Paris, 1st June 2018 – European Trade Policy

Strovolos, 1 June 2018 – Annual Lecture in Economics: Harnessing Globalisation

Berlin, 28 May 2018 – Global Solutions Summit

Paris, 16 May 2018 – Global Markets

Paris, 24 April 2018 – Trump, Brexit: Globalisation in crisis?

Paris, 12 April 2018 – France and Europe in globalisation

Beijing, 11 April 2018 – Reform of State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs)

Beijing, 11 April 2018 – The new Reform Agenda : Government vs. the Market

Paris, 4 April 2018 – Brexit : last months of negotiation

Beijing, 26 March 2018 – Will the World Fight a Trade War?

Beijing, 25 March 2018 – Pursuing Opening-up on All Fronts

Beijing, 24 March 2018 – A New Agenda for the World Economy

Paris, 15 March 2018 – A year before Brexit: What to do? How to do it?

Brussels, 23 February 2018 – CEPS Idea Lab

Geneva, 19 February 2018 – Trade: Headwinds or Maelstrom?

Paris, 15 February 2018 – Green Controversy

The Hague, 25 January 2018 – Managing Globalisation – EU Trade Policy in the Trump Era

London, 18 January 2018 – Launch of the Trade Knowledge Exchange

Brussels, 30 November 2017 – The Future of EU Trade Policy

Paris, 29 November 2017 – The new Political Economy of the European trade policy

Paris, 22 November 2017 – Between free-trade and a protectionist temptation

Le Chesnay, 20 May 2017 – Trump and the future of the European trade policy

Brussels, 24 January 2017 – The Future of the Trade

Paris, 14 December 2016 – What future for international trade?

Beijing, 2 Decembre 2016 – The Challenges of World Trade

Brussels, 6 September 2016 – New generation of free trade agreements: the challenges for the future?

Alpbach, 29 August 2016 – Boosting Trade and Protecting the Earth: A Catch 22 for the 21st Century?

Paris, 5th July 2016 – Will TTIP and CETA help SMEs to get into the US and Canadian Markets?

Paris, 14 June 2016 – TTIP: a dangerous project or a partnership for the future?

London, 7 June 2016 – 2016 and the politics of trade and globalisation

Paris, 19 April 2016 – Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – TTIP : Myths and Realities
