According to Reuters, the simple decision of appointing one of the DDGs as the Acting DG has run into impasse due to the insistence of the US to appoint Alan Wolff instead of Karl Brauner as most Members prefer.
While seemingly surprising, I think this is the natural consequence of WTO Members' acquiescence (or even aiding and abetting) of the shameless blockage of the AB appointment process by the US.
As I suggested in this paper a year ago, the proper way to solve the AB crisis is by forcing through a majority decision on the issue at the General Council. This is not only the simplest and most effective, but also entirely legitimate as the WTO Agreement explicitly provides for the solution.
As I mentioned in the paper, such a solution not only provides a speedy solution to the problem, but also has the added benefit of deterring everyone who might follow the bad example set by the US in abusing the consensus process.
However, many Members, in fearing the "slippery slope" that the invocation of majority-voting procedure might lead to, has decided to bear the loss of the AB as the lesser evil. In doing so, they have confirmed to the US that:
- the US could just abuse the consensus decision-making rule and block any process, and
- the other Members would not dare to use the majority decision-making rule already provided for under the WTO Agreement.
And this is exactly why the US is playing the same trick again on the appointment of the Acting DG now.
Thus, to solve the pending DG crisis, the Members will need to first solve the AB crisis, by forcing a majority vote at the General Council, which will also create a precedent for solving the DG crisis, which will in turn lead to the result at the end of my article:
"Meanwhile, the blockage problem will be solved, and an invaluable lesson will be taught to other Members which might contemplate the same course of action."
