To start with, it should be stated that the World Trade Organization (WTO) is an umbrella organization, which oversees all the trade agreements negotiated under General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Moreover, this organization is responsible for administering the single dispute settlement procedure and evaluating the trade policies and practices. While discussing the WTO, it should be emphasized that this organization is a major player in the field of global governance. Menon Nirmala in the article "WTO Panel Decides Against U.S. in Meat-Labeling Dispute" (2014) discusses the practical actions of this organization. This article shows that in some cases, changes, incorporated by the WTO, do not have a positive result.
The author depicts how "the U.S. has lost a key round at the World Trade Organization" (Nirmala, 2014). Mexico and Canada were against this new rule, which concerned the origin of meat products. The U.S. Department of Agriculture enacted a new rule after WTO and emphasized that the previous version was discriminating one. This dispute was resolved with the help of the WTO as it has narrow economic mandate to liberalize trade, in order to capture the efficiency gains that such liberalization is thought to bring. It tends to focus on and prioritize the goal of economic efficiency, at the expense of goals and objectives which fall outside its mandate. The WTO is the most secure of the major institutions in terms of its perceived legitimacy. U.S. lawmakers tried to change the rule and warned about the toll of retaliation. The main reason of the U.S. opposition to the new rules incorporation is additional drive-up costs for the industry. Unlike the U.S., Canadian government agrees to the innovative WTO rules. If the countries fail in settling this issue, it may end up in a trade war.
This article is tightly connected with the WTO. It is worth mentioning that from the liberal viewpoint, the WTO facilitates global trade liberalization by deterring non-compliance with the help of the WTO rules, imposing multilateral legal pressure in states to prevent reneging on their commitments. Theoretically, the WTO brings benefits to all its parties and acts within the liberal laws; however, in practice it turns out that this organization is not always beneficial for all the parties. And the situation with the new rules incorporation just confirms it.
From my personal viewpoint the WTO is tightly connected with the issues of globalization and free trade. There exists a general consideration that the WTO provides benefits to all the parties of the trading process. However, in reality, it turns out that this organization promotes developed industrialized countries, which exploit the working force and natural resources of poor developing countries. It should be explained that the WTO is the central organization of globalization. And the main trend of globalization is increasing the wealth using developed and developing countries. To my way of thinking, the processes of globalization maintain and reflect unequal relations and exchange between the developed industrialized countries and developing countries, which do everything possible to achieve economic well-being. The article confirms that the WTO does not act in accordance to the rules, and in some cases its changes bring additional costs and other negative consequences. This organization is beneficial for wealthy countries only. In most cases, this organization is just a tool, with the help of which strong countries exploit the periphery ones. In other words, it means that the WTO is interconnected with the notion of economic expansionism. Moreover, it signifies that the WTO makes use of developing countries as a cheap working power and does not take into account their needs. I want to note that theoretically, the WTO is essential for the world’s poorest countries. However, the close research of the issue shows that it is not true and that this organization worsens the situation only.