IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/111027.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Separating the political from the economic: the Russia–traffic in transit panel report

Author

Listed:
  • Crivelli, Pramila
  • Pinchis-paulsen, Mona

Abstract

This paper reviews the World Trade Organization (WTO) Panel Report Russia – Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit of April 2019. It constitutes the first attempt to disentangle the legal and political aspects related to the invoked essential security interests from the economic considerations underlying the measures imposed on the transit through Russia of goods exported from Ukraine to the Republic of Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. One the one hand, the panel’s interpretation of Article XXI of the GATT denies Members unilateral determination over security exceptions. It further enables a pathway for future WTO panels to review possible abuses of security exceptions – a growing concern due to the rising complexity of transnational economic relations. On the other hand, our economic analysis suggests a stricter assessment of Russia’s transit restrictions was necessary. In particular, it argues that the panel adopted a circular assessment when considering the plausibility of whether Russia implemented its measures for the protection of its essential security interests at a time of emergency in international relations. Ultimately, although the panel’s focus on finding a diplomatic and legal path forward failed economic scrutiny a legal assessment argues that the panel’s findings fit the legal design of Article XXI:b of the GATT.

Suggested Citation

  • Crivelli, Pramila & Pinchis-paulsen, Mona, 2021. "Separating the political from the economic: the Russia–traffic in transit panel report," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111027, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:111027
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/111027/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Irwin,Douglas A. & Mavroidis,Petros C. & Sykes,Alan O., 2008. "The Genesis of the GATT," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521515610, July.
    2. Van den Bossche,Peter & Zdouc,Werner, 2017. "The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107157989, December.
    3. Van den Bossche,Peter & Zdouc,Werner, 2017. "The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781316610527, Enero-Abr.
    4. McKenzie,Francine, 2020. "GATT and Global Order in the Postwar Era," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108494892, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis & Douglas R. Nelson, 2023. "Geopolitical competition, globalisation and WTO reform," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(5), pages 1163-1188, May.
    2. Pinchis-Paulsen, Mona Paulsen & Saggi, Kamal & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2024. "The National Security Exception at the WTO: should it just be a matter of when members can avail of it? What about how?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121352, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robert Wolfe, 2022. "Is using trade policy for foreign policy a “SNO job”? On linkage, friend-shoring and the challenges for multilateralism," RSCAS Working Papers 2022/74, European University Institute.
    2. Petros C. Mavroidis & Merit E. Janow, 2017. "Free Markets, State Involvement, and the WTO: Chinese State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) in the Ring," RSCAS Working Papers 2017/13, European University Institute.
    3. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W., 2012. "The economics of trade agreements in the linear Cournot delocation model," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 32-46.
    4. Nelson, Douglas R., 2015. "Prospects for Constitutionalization of the WTO," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 135-153, January.
    5. Bojan Obrenovic & Danijela Godinic & Mato Njavro, 2024. "Sustaining company performance during the war-induced crisis using sourcing capability and substitute input," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(12), pages 30001-30026, December.
    6. Mrázová, Monika & Vines, David & Zissimos, Ben, 2013. "Is the GATT/WTO's Article XXIV bad?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 216-232.
    7. Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A & Bown,Chad P. & Crowley,Meredith A, 2016. "The empirical landscape of trade policy," Policy Research Working Paper Series 7620, The World Bank.
    8. Nelson, Douglas, 2021. "How Do You Solve a Problem Like Maria? US – Countervailing Measures (China) (21.5)," World Trade Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(4), pages 556-565, October.
    9. Aaronson Susan Ariel & Abouharb M. Rodwan & Daniel Wang K., 2015. "The Liberal Illusion Is Not a Complete Delusion: The WTO Helps Member States Keep the Peace Only When It Increases Trade," Global Economy Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 15(4), pages 455-484, December.
    10. Henrik Horn & Petros C. Mavroidis, 2011. "To B(TA) or Not to B(TA)? On the Legality and Desirability of Border Tax Adjustments from a Trade Perspective," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(11), pages 1911-1937, November.
    11. Kyle Bagwell & Chad P. Bown & Robert W. Staiger, 2016. "Is the WTO Passé?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(4), pages 1125-1231, December.
    12. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5l6uh8ogmqildh09h2q4h0h8h is not listed on IDEAS
    13. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/5l6uh8ogmqildh09h2q4h0h8h is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Bernard M. Hoekman & Petros C. Mavroidis & Douglas R. Nelson, 2023. "Geopolitical competition, globalisation and WTO reform," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(5), pages 1163-1188, May.
    15. Bown, Chad P., 2014. "Trade policy instruments over time," Policy Research Working Paper Series 6757, The World Bank.
    16. Pinchis-Paulsen, Mona Paulsen & Saggi, Kamal & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2024. "The National Security Exception at the WTO: should it just be a matter of when members can avail of it? What about how?," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121352, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Staiger, Robert & Bagwell, Kyle & Bown, Chad, 2015. "Is the WTO Passé?," CEPR Discussion Papers 10672, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Karmakar Suparna, 2009. "Developing Countries in the 21st Century WTO: New Contours of India's Global Engagement," The Law and Development Review, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-27, January.
    19. Petros C. Mavroidis & Kamal Saggi, 2018. "What is not so Cool about US–COOL Regulations? A critical analysis of the Appellate Body’s ruling on US–COOL," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kamal Saggi (ed.), Economic Analysis of the Rules and Regulations of the World Trade Organization, chapter 19, pages 433-454, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    20. Horn, Henrik & Mavroidis, Petros C., 2008. "The Permissible Reach of National Environmental Policies," Working Paper Series 739, Research Institute of Industrial Economics, revised 20 Jun 2008.
    21. David De Remer, 2013. "Domestic Policy Coordination in Imperfectly Competitive Markets," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2013-46, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    22. David De Remer, 2013. "The Evolution of International Subsidy Rules," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2013-45, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    WTO; dispute settlement; national security; transit; trade barriers; Russia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L81 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Retail and Wholesale Trade; e-Commerce

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:111027. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.