International Economic Law and Policy Blog

800 Unavailable Pages: EC Loses on GMOs

The preliminary report has apparently been distributed to the parties, and it indicates, as many expected, that the EU has lost.  As suggested earlier, we will have to wait until the report is available to the public, but as details leak out, we will try to note them here.

Globalization, Mittal, Arcelor, and CSR

Frederick Kempe writes in today's WSJ:

The initial responses to Mr. Mittal's bid last week were quasi-racist, questioning his non-European values. Luxembourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Juncker vowed to use "all necessary means" to block the bid. Yet the rhetoric has now cooled and Arcelor now appears more focused on how to extract the best deal for workers and shareholders or mount a market-based defense.

The concern that Kempe refers to seems to be similar to what I described in my CSR post:  a concern that foreign persons are not sensitive enough to informal social control in the host state.  At the same time, others laud Mittal as entrepreneurial and iconoclastic.  Surely, unsettling informal equilibria may be either beneficial or detrimental, depending on the context.  But perhaps the increased contingency that comes with foreign-ness challenges these equilibria with greater intensity and velocity under globalization. 

Band of Bloggers

I would like to welcome Greg Shaffer and Todd Weiler, and soon Steve Charnovitz, to the band of bloggers.  I look forward with great anticipation to their insightful contributions.  I also look forward to announcing further additions to the group soon. 

The WTO's forgotten self

It is remarkable that the media's focus on the WTO is exhausted in the question will it or will it not yield an outcome this time (Doha round)? The WTO is a public institution, and public perceptions matter. Its biggest accomplishment, I would submit, is its very existence: the fact that the WTO exists, functions on an every day basis, peacefully resolves trade disputes, and, one should not forget, generates rounds. This often forgotten aspect of the WTO is the one on which, I would tend to think, the WTO should refocus its energy in the post-Doha era. For whatever outcome we end with at this end of this round, it will be a modest outcome, when compared to the title of the round that its 'godftahers' irresponsibly gave it. Development implicates numerous instruments, trade instruments being a small (and sometimes very small) sub-set of them. Assuming, however, that the WTO wants to join forces with other institutions and make development a priority item on its future agenda, it will have to take the whole issue more seriously, accept the limits of its mandate and open up to an ongoing dialogue with others. It can do play this role, because the WTO has an off rounds-existence, a legitimacy in the eyes of the international community which stems from its own existence: it has been around for some time now, has managed to persuade its membership to invest in it and new members to join in. It now provides the single most comprehensive (acorss international relations) compulsory third party adjudication system. It has, in short, a proven track record for international cooperation. Its biggest success is not a trade outcome every 10 or so years. It is its existence, its ability to produce such outcomes. 

Columbia Conference on Governance, Dispute Settlement and Developing Countries

On behalf of Rob and Petros, who are experiencing technical difficulties, I suggest those interested in international economic law consider attending the upcoming conference at Columbia.  It looks like a terrific line-up.

Phenomenal

Traditional realist political science considers traditional international law "epiphenomenal," meaning that the real action is in hard power politics, and the law does not affect behavior.  Recent experience at the WTO suggests that international law can affect behavior. 

The U.S. Congress has recently taken action to comply with international law commitments, in repealing the Byrd Amendment (albeit with a transition period) and eliminating certain cotton subsidies.  Both were found illegal in WTO panel and appellate body reports.

From the USTR press release regarding cotton:

The Deficit Reduction Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 2005, S. 1932, repeals the Step 2 program effective August 1, 2006 and implements recommendations and rulings of the WTO in the dispute brought by Brazil against certain U.S. agricultural programs, principally related to cotton. Repeal of the Step 2 program terminates export subsidies and import substitution subsidies cited by the WTO. It also addresses a WTO finding regarding suppression of world cotton prices.

This legislative action adds to the significant implementation efforts that the Administration undertook in July 2005, when it put in place administrative measures to implement the findings in the Cotton dispute with respect to export credit guarantees.

The withdrawal of these subsidies was finally agreed at the Hong Kong ministerial meeting in December. 

Rob Howse, Blogger

It is a pleasure to welcome Rob Howse, of University of Michigan Law School, to the blog.  Rob is one of the world's leading analysts of international trade law, and I look forward to his enlightening perspective.