Export Controls and Securitization of Economic Policy: Comparative Analysis of the Practice of the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia

IF 1.1 4区 社会学 Q3 ECONOMICS
O. Hrynkiv
{"title":"Export Controls and Securitization of Economic Policy: Comparative Analysis of the Practice of the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia","authors":"O. Hrynkiv","doi":"10.54648/trad2022026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"National security rhetoric has gained prominence due to increasingly pervasive digitalization, the emergence of cutting-edge technologies, and developments in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Increased reliance on these areas fuels industrial development but also renders national economies vulnerable to foreign interference. Ultimately, the current wave of technological development with its potential threats intensifies competition between states and redefines their economic and military advantages over potential global rivals. Against this background, certain states have expanded the scope of their export control regimes by extending the lists of controlled items and/or imposing ‘catch-all’ control. Used in conjunction with economic sanctions, weaponized tariffs, and extensive investment screening mechanisms aimed to protect national security interests, such measures go beyond conventional non-proliferation purposes to address economic security, technological supremacy, and human rights concerns for which those states are willing to sacrifice the economic efficiency that accompanies trade liberalization. Using the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia as case studies, this article discusses to which extent different export control objectives of these international actors have been securitized. Securitization of certain states’ interests is inevitable, even if not desirable. Yet, this article argues that international law can be managed to control and limit the level of securitization of domestic policies in order to strengthen the international legal system as a whole.\nexport controls, national security, economic security, securitization, emerging technologies, technological supremacy","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Trade","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2022026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

National security rhetoric has gained prominence due to increasingly pervasive digitalization, the emergence of cutting-edge technologies, and developments in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Increased reliance on these areas fuels industrial development but also renders national economies vulnerable to foreign interference. Ultimately, the current wave of technological development with its potential threats intensifies competition between states and redefines their economic and military advantages over potential global rivals. Against this background, certain states have expanded the scope of their export control regimes by extending the lists of controlled items and/or imposing ‘catch-all’ control. Used in conjunction with economic sanctions, weaponized tariffs, and extensive investment screening mechanisms aimed to protect national security interests, such measures go beyond conventional non-proliferation purposes to address economic security, technological supremacy, and human rights concerns for which those states are willing to sacrifice the economic efficiency that accompanies trade liberalization. Using the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia as case studies, this article discusses to which extent different export control objectives of these international actors have been securitized. Securitization of certain states’ interests is inevitable, even if not desirable. Yet, this article argues that international law can be managed to control and limit the level of securitization of domestic policies in order to strengthen the international legal system as a whole. export controls, national security, economic security, securitization, emerging technologies, technological supremacy
出口管制与经济政策证券化——美国、欧盟、中国和俄罗斯实践的比较分析
由于数字化的日益普及、尖端技术的出现以及人工智能和机器学习的发展,国家安全修辞得到了重视。对这些领域的日益依赖推动了工业发展,但也使国家经济容易受到外国干涉。最终,当前的技术发展浪潮及其潜在威胁加剧了国家之间的竞争,并重新定义了它们相对于全球潜在对手的经济和军事优势。在此背景下,某些国家扩大了其出口管制制度的范围,扩大了管制物品清单和/或实行“全面”管制。这些措施与旨在保护国家安全利益的经济制裁、武器化关税和广泛的投资筛选机制一起使用,超越了传统的不扩散目的,解决了经济安全、技术优势和人权问题,这些国家愿意为此牺牲伴随贸易自由化而来的经济效率。本文以美国、欧盟、中国和俄罗斯为例,讨论了这些国际参与者的不同出口管制目标在多大程度上被证券化。某些国家的利益证券化是不可避免的,即使不可取。然而,本文认为,国际法可以设法控制和限制国内政策的证券化水平,以加强整个国际法律体系。出口管制,国家安全,经济安全,证券化,新兴技术,技术优势
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
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Far and away the most thought-provoking and informative journal in its field, the Journal of World Trade sets the agenda for both scholarship and policy initiatives in this most critical area of international relations. It is the only journal which deals authoritatively with the most crucial issues affecting world trade today.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信