The Arab League Boycott and WTO Accession: Can Foreign Policy Excuse Discriminatory Sanctions?

E. Kontorovich
{"title":"The Arab League Boycott and WTO Accession: Can Foreign Policy Excuse Discriminatory Sanctions?","authors":"E. Kontorovich","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.406780","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The central principle of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, now incorporated into the rules of the World Trade Organization, is the prohibition of discriminatory restrictions on international trade. However, some scholars contend that GATT applies only to trade restrictions adopted to protect domestic industry from foreign competition or for other economic purposes, and not to restrictions adopted for non-economic foreign policy reasons. While this purported foreign policy exception has been endorsed by the Restatement, it has received little critical attention from commentators. Recent developments in the WTO have made the legitimacy of the exception a matter of pressing concern not just to scholars of international trade law but to the free trade system itself. Saudi Arabia is expected to be admitted into the organization in the next few years. However, Saudi Arabia maintains a total boycott of Israel and a secondary and tertiary boycott of firms and individuals in the United States and elsewhere that trade with Israel. The boycott is part of the Arab League Boycott of Israel. This Article uses the occasion of Saudi Arabia's accession bid to examine the unresolved issue of whether GATT applies to trade restrictions imposed for purely foreign policy purposes. It finds that such an exception would be inconsistent with the language, structure, usage, purpose, and history of GATT. This in turn shows that Saudi Arabia's secondary and tertiary boycott violates WTO rules. Thus the accession of nations, like Saudi Arabia, that maintain the secondary and tertiary prongs of the Arab League Boycott would undermine the WTO's commitment to free trade and injure existing members. The Article concludes that these harms could not be redressed within the WTO framework, and thus the best way to avoid them is to condition accession on a termination of the secondary and tertiary boycott.","PeriodicalId":87172,"journal":{"name":"Chicago journal of international law","volume":"60 1","pages":"283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chicago journal of international law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.406780","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The central principle of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, now incorporated into the rules of the World Trade Organization, is the prohibition of discriminatory restrictions on international trade. However, some scholars contend that GATT applies only to trade restrictions adopted to protect domestic industry from foreign competition or for other economic purposes, and not to restrictions adopted for non-economic foreign policy reasons. While this purported foreign policy exception has been endorsed by the Restatement, it has received little critical attention from commentators. Recent developments in the WTO have made the legitimacy of the exception a matter of pressing concern not just to scholars of international trade law but to the free trade system itself. Saudi Arabia is expected to be admitted into the organization in the next few years. However, Saudi Arabia maintains a total boycott of Israel and a secondary and tertiary boycott of firms and individuals in the United States and elsewhere that trade with Israel. The boycott is part of the Arab League Boycott of Israel. This Article uses the occasion of Saudi Arabia's accession bid to examine the unresolved issue of whether GATT applies to trade restrictions imposed for purely foreign policy purposes. It finds that such an exception would be inconsistent with the language, structure, usage, purpose, and history of GATT. This in turn shows that Saudi Arabia's secondary and tertiary boycott violates WTO rules. Thus the accession of nations, like Saudi Arabia, that maintain the secondary and tertiary prongs of the Arab League Boycott would undermine the WTO's commitment to free trade and injure existing members. The Article concludes that these harms could not be redressed within the WTO framework, and thus the best way to avoid them is to condition accession on a termination of the secondary and tertiary boycott.
阿拉伯联盟抵制和加入世贸组织:外交政策能成为歧视性制裁的借口吗?
现已纳入世界贸易组织规则的《关税及贸易总协定》的中心原则是禁止对国际贸易实行歧视性限制。然而,一些学者认为,关贸总协定只适用于为保护国内产业免受外国竞争或出于其他经济目的而采取的贸易限制,而不适用于出于非经济外交政策原因而采取的限制。虽然这一所谓的外交政策例外得到了《重述》的认可,但它几乎没有受到评论人士的批评。世贸组织最近的事态发展使例外的合法性不仅成为国际贸易法学者迫切关注的问题,而且成为自由贸易体系本身迫切关注的问题。沙特阿拉伯预计将在未来几年内加入该组织。然而,沙特阿拉伯坚持全面抵制以色列,并对美国和其他地方与以色列进行贸易的公司和个人进行二级和三级抵制。这次抵制是阿拉伯联盟抵制以色列的一部分。本文以沙特阿拉伯申请加入为契机,考察关贸总协定是否适用于纯粹出于外交政策目的而实施的贸易限制这一尚未解决的问题。它认为这种例外将与GATT的语言、结构、用法、目的和历史不一致。这反过来表明沙特阿拉伯的二级和三级抵制违反了WTO规则。因此,像沙特阿拉伯这样坚持阿拉伯联盟抵制的第二和第三部分的国家加入世贸组织,将破坏世贸组织对自由贸易的承诺,损害现有成员国的利益。本文的结论是,这些损害无法在WTO框架内得到纠正,因此避免这些损害的最佳途径是以终止二级和三级抵制为条件加入。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信