Wto Accession at Any Cost

The World Trade Organization’s (WTO) goal of liberalizing multilateral trade does not exist in a vacuum; that is to say, liberalizing trade is not an end in itself. The preamble to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (“Marrakesh Agreement”), explicitly states that “[t]he Parties to this Agreement, recognizing that their relations in the field of trade and economic [endeavor] should be conducted with a view to raising standards of living, ensuring full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income and effective demand.” The belief that a liberal trade regime will confer these benefits upon those who become members has long propelled the multilateral trade regime’s persistent objective of increasing its membership. The trade organization to which members are acceding has changed significantly. Observers note that the creation of the WTO in 1994 represented a shift from a multilateral trading system based on diplomacy under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) regime to one that operates under the rule of law. Despite this perceived tectonic shift in the nature of the regime to a more rulebased system, the accession process for applicant states under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreement remains relatively vague and leaves little guidance as to the terms for admission. The increase in membership rules and the absence of guidance on attaining membership have caused the accession process to evolve into a time-consuming and complex negotiation. This absence also allows current member states to require applicants to adopt two types of accession measures: 1) commitments in a variety of areas not contemplated under the Multilateral Agreements, called “WTO-plus” obligations; and 2) commitments contemplated under the Agreements, but are harsher in nature, called “WTO-minus” obligations. These obligations become a part of a country’s Protocol of Accession and can be enforced through the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body. The ability of member states to negotiate both types of terms with applicants has implications in the context of accession for the lesserand least-developed