Was published
Advertising
The EU, a convinced defender of the commercial order on the basis of the rules, is attacked after his agreement with the United States, accused of betraying his obligations to the WTO and multimedia. But is it all?
At first glance, the August 21 Agreement violates the WTO Rules: the US president has unilateral preferences for US imports in the EU, which violates the principle of a rather preferred state (MEK).
“From the point of view of the Rules of the WTO, the agreement is a difference. We have quite clear rules, that is, the MEK principle: any advantage of the tariff provided to the WTO member should be extended to all the WTO members, ”said Eulien Blanquart from Julcart Julien Blancart.
However, using 0% of the responsibilities in the industrial products of the United States and some agricultural products, the EU actually offers an advantage that discriminates for its other international partners who do not benefit from their own access in the market.
The commission, however, indicates the exception to MEK in article 24 of the WTO, which allows free trading zones or temporary agreements, provided that they cover most transactions.
“The agreement is part of the efforts to relieve and reduce duties in mutual terms,” the EU high -ranking official said on August 21, noting a joint statement published by the United States and the EU, saying that the agreement is “the first step in the process that can be further expanded and further for their commercial and investment relations.”
Political impact
Blankvart emphasized, however, that the submitted framework agreement is currently only a political statement, and not a contract that is legally binding.
“At this stage, everything really depends on how this agreement brings into the final agreement between the EU and the United States and how it will be transferred to the WTO,” he said, adding: “There is no official text, its compatibility with the rules remains legally fragile.”
According to the lawyer, a member of the country of the WTO may decide to resort to the WTO dispute resolution tool and challenge his validity.
Nevertheless, this body was paralyzed since the United States refused to resume the orders of some of its judges.
Nevertheless, there may be a political impact on the EU, which is presented as a defender of multimedia.
“If it is not quite declared with the Rules of the WTO, it will be another blow to multiplicity,” Blancart said.