Unsettled Settlement: Paralysis of the World Trade Organization Appellate Body (WTOAB)
knowledge.uchicago.edu
This paper looks into the recent cases of American blockings on the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body and the ensuing response of an interim option introduced under the leadership of Canada and the European Union. Across both the Obama and Trump Administrations, the U.S. has continued to block re-appointments and novel appointments of panelists serving on the appeals court leading to overall paralysis. How was the Appellate Body allowed to fall into this level of dysfunction and what are the prospects of the alternative provided by other member states? This paper seeks to show that the paralysis was knowingly inflicted by the U.S., but also that the response undertaken by other members has been unexpected in their willingness to contest American efforts of derailment at the WTO. Multiparty Interim Appeal Arbitration Arrangement
  • davel [he/him]@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    7·
    11 months ago

    I feel like I read something somewhere about the US having lost effective unilateral control of the WTO, so they’re choosing to sabotage it instead. Does that ring a bell for anyone? Does this paper get into motivations?

  • davel [he/him]@lemmygrad.mlEnglish
    1·
    11 months ago

    It seems to be over the US’ ability to impose protectionist policies, which ironically is what the US created the WTO for in the first place. How the turn tables.

    Naked Capitalism/Yves Smith, July 2019: Michael Hudson: U.S. Economic Warfare and Likely Foreign Defenses

    In the World Trade Organization, the United States has tried to claim that any industry receiving public infrastructure or credit subsidy deserves tariff retaliation in order to force privatization. In response to WTO rulings that U.S. tariffs are illegally imposed, the United States “has blocked all new appointments to the seven-member appellate body in protest, leaving it in danger of collapse because it may not have enough judges to allow it to hear new cases.” In the U.S. view, only privatized trade financed by private rather than public banks is “fair” trade.