WTO Members Work to
Overhaul Trade Watchdog Amid Trump’s Criticism
By Jacob M. Schlesinger in Washington, Paul Vieira in Ottawa and Emre Peker in Brussels (Wall Street Journal)
Updated Oct. 23, 2018 5:28 p.m. ET
Failure to meet U.S.
demands could leave global commercial court in limbo: ‘Every case potentially
becomes a trade war,’ one WTO official says
President Trump’s complaints about the World Trade
Organization have prompted American allies to seek ways to overhaul the body
before the U.S. protest effectively cripples the global commercial arbiter by
the end of next year.
In the broadest such effort, Canada is hosting a summit
opening on Wednesday with a dozen other partners to build support for changes
addressing Washington’s criticisms, including concerns that the WTO doesn’t do
enough to publicize and penalize trade distorted by government subsidies and
weak intellectual-property protections, practices seen as particularly common
in China.
The Trump administration also complains the WTO gives too
much flexibility to developing countries to skirt rules applying to more
advanced economies, and has been too slow to update
rules for digital commerce.
Some of Washington’s arguments resonate with other members.
“If the WTO is not reforming itself, it risks becoming irrelevant, and that
would be a disaster,” the European Union’s trade chief, Cecilia Malmstrom, told
reporters this month.
While the meetings are intended to accelerate the first
serious WTO restructuring debate in a quarter century, summit participants
don’t expect decisions from the two-day session. That is in part because
neither the U.S. nor China—the two largest WTO members and the main
protagonists in the tensions within the body—were invited. That leaves
uncertain the question of whether the slow-moving organization can reach
consensus on changes demanded by the U.S. at the pace the U.S. wants.
The members are working against an informal deadline of
December 2019. That is when the WTO legal system will grind to a halt unless
the Trump administration lifts its veto blocking appointment of new judges to
the Geeva court mediating trade disputes among its
164 members.
Washington has used its veto power to cut the size of the
seven-judge court down to three members, the bare minimum needed to hear a
case. The terms of two of those remaining judges expire Dec. 10, 2019. If they
aren’t replaced, the WTO’s “appellate body” will effectively shut down, leaving
the organization’s dispute-settlement powers in limbo.
Under that scenario, “every case potentially becomes a trade
war,” Alan Wolff, a deputy director-general of the WTO, warned in a recent
speech. “The state of nature applies.”
While Mr. Trump has periodically threatened to pull the U.S.
out of the WTO altogether, there is no sign he is planning to do so anytime
soon. But his criticism has lent a degree of urgency that members say they
haven’t witnessed since the organization’s 1995 founding. The U.S. was the
driving force behind the WTO’s creation during the heyday of globalization,
pushing for common, enforceable rules governing international commerce.
Mr. Trump has repudiated the longstanding American
establishment consensus favoring commercial globalization, which he described
at a Texas rally Monday night as the “rule of corrupt power-hungry globalists”
who want “the globe to do well” and who don’t “care about our country so much.”
For the past two decades, the U.S. has been the
organization’s leading defender. WTO advocates say the body’s ability to
arbitrate trade fights helped quell a Great Depression-like trade war during
the 2008 financial crisis.
His aides argue the WTO undermines American sovereignty and
treats the U.S. unfairly. They accuse the trade court of judicial overreach,
improperly tying Washington’s hands in protecting American companies from what
they consider unfair foreign competition.
The Trump complaints echo some made by earlier
administrations, albeit not as vociferously, and are shared in some form by
U.S. allies. As a result of pressure from
Washington—Mr. Trump’s “disruptively constructive leadership,” as his WTO
representative, Dennis Shea, puts it—a number of overhaul efforts have been
launched in recent months.
The EU and Canada have released their own blueprints for WTO
revision, and European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker signed a joint
statement with Mr. Trump at a July White House meeting pledging to “work
closely together with like-minded partners to reform the WTO and to address
unfair trading practices.” Japan has been active as well, facilitating a joint
push to update global trade rules with the U.S. and EU on the sidelines of a
WTO gathering in December.
This week’s Ottawa meeting will include a diverse range of members, including Australia, Mexico, Kenya and Singapore. Canadian Trade Minister Jim Carr said in an interview that his strategy was to start the discussion with “middle powers,” to “maximize the chances of building up a critical mass that can be rolled out to others.”
Beyond the body’s laborious decision-making process, another
challenge will be reaching consensus under current circumstances, since a core
U.S. demand is that the WTO unite in doing more to brand illegal—and
punish—many Chinese trade policies, a position Beijing and its allies are
unlikely to embrace.
Many countries “want to be middle-of-the-roaders when, in
fact they really need to pick a lane,” Mr. Shea said in a talk this month at
the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.
Europeans reject that framing, stressing the need for Chinese support. To that end, Brussels persuaded Beijing in July to work on a separate WTO effort with the EU, positioning the 28-member bloc as a potential arbiter between the two feuding titans.
“WTO reform cannot be done against this or that partner,” an
EU trade official said. “We are in a privileged situation because we are part
of all these different processes.”
The big question hanging over the WTO is just how hard a
line the Trump administration intends to take over the next year—whether
serious debate is sufficient to lift the judicial
blockade, or swift, concrete action is necessary.
“We’re not going to kick down the road these substantive concerns
for several more years,” Mr. Shea said. Asked if the U.S. felt urgency to keep
the WTO courts functioning past next year, he demurred, saying, “We’ll see.”
Write to Jacob M.
Schlesinger at jacob.schlesinger@wsj.com, Paul Vieira at paul.vieira@wsj.com
and Emre Peker at emre.peker@wsj.com
Appeared in the
October 24, 2018, print edition as 'WTO Members to Address Trump’s Criticism.'
RELATED
·
Capital Account: For U.S. to Stay in WTO, China
May Have to Leave
·
When the World Opened the Gates of China
·
China Defends WTO Record as Trade Fight Looms