Show simple item record

[journal article]

dc.contributor.authorKerremans, Bartde
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-22T12:36:25Z
dc.date.available2022-06-22T12:36:25Z
dc.date.issued2022de
dc.identifier.issn2183-2463de
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/79670
dc.description.abstractIn 2019, the Appellate Body (AB) of the World Trade Organization’s Dispute Settlement System (WTO-DSS) lost its quorum. Instead of the required minimum number of three members, the AB’s membership fell to one member only as the US under Donald Trump blocked the appointment of new members upon the expiry of the terms of two incumbent ones. The AB's paralysis produced a high level of shock in the EU. In this article, we take a closer look at the US's decision to paralyze the WTO's AB and the EU's reaction to it. Its point is that it will not be easy to get the US back on board as the factors that drove its decision predate the Trump era. Long before Trump, the tradeoff upon which the US based its acceptance of the WTO-DSS unraveled. For US policy makers, the EU is partly to blame for this as it undermined the system's prompt compliance assumption. More important even is the claim that the system's AB created new obligations for the WTO members to the point where the acceptance of some WTO rules - notably regarding trade remedies - became politically unsustainable in the US itself.de
dc.languageende
dc.subject.ddcInternationale Beziehungende
dc.subject.ddcInternational relationsen
dc.subject.ddcWirtschaftde
dc.subject.ddcEconomicsen
dc.subject.otherWorld Trade Organization; trade disputes; trade remedies; transatlantic relationsde
dc.titleDivergence Across the Atlantic? US Skepticism Meets the EU and the WTO's Appellate Bodyde
dc.description.reviewbegutachtet (peer reviewed)de
dc.description.reviewpeer revieweden
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/4983de
dc.source.journalPolitics and Governance
dc.source.volume10de
dc.publisher.countryPRTde
dc.source.issue2de
dc.subject.classozinternationale Beziehungen, Entwicklungspolitikde
dc.subject.classozInternational Relations, International Politics, Foreign Affairs, Development Policyen
dc.subject.classozWirtschaftspolitikde
dc.subject.classozEconomic Policyen
dc.subject.thesozWTOde
dc.subject.thesozWTOen
dc.subject.thesozUSAde
dc.subject.thesozUnited States of Americaen
dc.subject.thesozEUde
dc.subject.thesozEUen
dc.subject.thesoztransatlantische Beziehungende
dc.subject.thesoztransatlantic relationsen
dc.subject.thesozinternationale Wirtschaftsbeziehungende
dc.subject.thesozinternational economic relationsen
dc.subject.thesozHandelde
dc.subject.thesozcommerceen
dc.subject.thesozKonfliktde
dc.subject.thesozconflicten
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Namensnennung 4.0de
dc.rights.licenceCreative Commons - Attribution 4.0en
internal.statusformal und inhaltlich fertig erschlossende
internal.identifier.thesoz10047851
internal.identifier.thesoz10041244
internal.identifier.thesoz10041441
internal.identifier.thesoz10039289
internal.identifier.thesoz10037393
internal.identifier.thesoz10037339
internal.identifier.thesoz10036275
dc.type.stockarticlede
dc.type.documentZeitschriftenartikelde
dc.type.documentjournal articleen
dc.source.pageinfo208-218de
internal.identifier.classoz10505
internal.identifier.classoz1090302
internal.identifier.journal787
internal.identifier.document32
internal.identifier.ddc327
internal.identifier.ddc330
dc.source.issuetopicOut With the Old, In With the New? Explaining Changing EU-US Relationsde
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.17645/pag.v10i2.4983de
dc.description.pubstatusVeröffentlichungsversionde
dc.description.pubstatusPublished Versionen
internal.identifier.licence16
internal.identifier.pubstatus1
internal.identifier.review1
internal.dda.referencehttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/oai/@@oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/4983
ssoar.urn.registrationfalsede


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record