Unilateral Trade Sanctions to Secure Compliance with the Common Concern Doctrine

Zakeri Ahmad
{"title":"Unilateral Trade Sanctions to Secure Compliance with the Common Concern Doctrine","authors":"Zakeri Ahmad","doi":"10.1163/9789004446090_008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In continuation of examining different aspects of the Common Concern doctrine with respect to the role of trade in clean technology diffusion, this final chapter deals with the last and possibly the most controversial issue, i.e. unilateral countermeasures to respond to unaddressed common concerns across borders. Consequently, the general theme is the feasibility and consequence of unilateral trade sanctions as per dictates of the Common Concern doctrine to ensure compliance with the proposed narrative of lowcarbon technology (lct) diffusion. There are a number of issues to unpack in this regard, which are taken up in sequence. The chapter begins by sketching out the opposing views on the utility of unilateralism, especially trade sanctions. Like many contested areas of international law, the proponents of the approach see the benefit of sure compliance in sanctions, whereas the sceptics find the threat thereof as cooperation deterrent. To place the doctrine in the midst of the debate, it would be important to clarify how it may maximise the proclaimed benefits while minimising the predicted challenges. Going further, the chapter briefly outlines the grey areas of international law regarding unilateral actions, third party countermeasures in particular, and discusses the advancement thereupon made by the doctrine. Lastly, turning to the trade domain, it is recalled that unilateral sanctions are inherently illegal in the multilateral system, with some avenues to bring ex post legitimacy to actions when challenged. One question would be what, if any, additional benefit is brought by introducing the doctrine of Common Concern. Another is whether one should reconsider making such forwardlooking suggestions in the currently unfolding geopolitical reality of mistrust and economic warfare. Detailed discussions follow hereunder.","PeriodicalId":154957,"journal":{"name":"WTO Law and Trade Policy Reform for Low-Carbon Technology Diffusion","volume":"150 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WTO Law and Trade Policy Reform for Low-Carbon Technology Diffusion","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004446090_008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In continuation of examining different aspects of the Common Concern doctrine with respect to the role of trade in clean technology diffusion, this final chapter deals with the last and possibly the most controversial issue, i.e. unilateral countermeasures to respond to unaddressed common concerns across borders. Consequently, the general theme is the feasibility and consequence of unilateral trade sanctions as per dictates of the Common Concern doctrine to ensure compliance with the proposed narrative of lowcarbon technology (lct) diffusion. There are a number of issues to unpack in this regard, which are taken up in sequence. The chapter begins by sketching out the opposing views on the utility of unilateralism, especially trade sanctions. Like many contested areas of international law, the proponents of the approach see the benefit of sure compliance in sanctions, whereas the sceptics find the threat thereof as cooperation deterrent. To place the doctrine in the midst of the debate, it would be important to clarify how it may maximise the proclaimed benefits while minimising the predicted challenges. Going further, the chapter briefly outlines the grey areas of international law regarding unilateral actions, third party countermeasures in particular, and discusses the advancement thereupon made by the doctrine. Lastly, turning to the trade domain, it is recalled that unilateral sanctions are inherently illegal in the multilateral system, with some avenues to bring ex post legitimacy to actions when challenged. One question would be what, if any, additional benefit is brought by introducing the doctrine of Common Concern. Another is whether one should reconsider making such forwardlooking suggestions in the currently unfolding geopolitical reality of mistrust and economic warfare. Detailed discussions follow hereunder.
单边贸易制裁以确保遵守共同关注原则
在继续审查关于贸易在清洁技术扩散方面的作用的共同关切原则的不同方面时,最后一章讨论最后一个可能也是最具争议的问题,即对未解决的跨国界共同关切作出反应的单方面反制措施。因此,总的主题是根据共同关切原则的要求进行单边贸易制裁的可行性和后果,以确保遵守拟议的低碳技术传播叙述。在这方面有许多问题需要解决,这些问题将依次讨论。本章首先概述了对单边主义,特别是贸易制裁的效用的反对意见。就像国际法中许多有争议的领域一样,这种做法的支持者看到了制裁得到切实遵守的好处,而怀疑论者则认为制裁的威胁是合作的威慑。为了将这一原则置于辩论之中,有必要澄清它如何在将预期的挑战最小化的同时,将宣称的好处最大化。进一步,本章简要概述了国际法关于单方面行动,特别是第三方反措施的灰色地带,并讨论了该学说在这方面取得的进展。最后,关于贸易领域,应当指出,单方面制裁在多边制度中本质上是非法的,在受到挑战时,有一些途径使行动具有事后合法性。一个问题是,如果有的话,引入共同关注原则会带来什么额外的好处。另一个问题是,在当前互不信任和经济战的地缘政治现实中,是否应该重新考虑提出这种具有前瞻性的建议。详细讨论如下。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信