Dispute settlement: A secondary priority?

No revival of the WTO can be complete without restoring its dispute settlement function. The US blocked appointments to the Appellate Body since 2016, citing concerns that long predate the first Trump administration. Chief among them is the US perception that the Appellate Body engaged in judicial outreach, unjustifiably filling in gaps left by ambiguous negotiating language.

The Appellate Body often had to navigate the "constructive ambiguity" used by negotiators to paper over disagreements. In trying to resolve disputes, it narrowed possible interpretations to a single one – often far removed from what US negotiators had agreed on.

This is a tough nut to crack, and one that should only be addressed after there is agreement on how to update and reform some of the other substantive disagreements on WTO governance. There is little point in debating how to interpret outdated or disputed rules before agreeing on what those rules should be.

Where to start the reform walk?

Rebuilding confidence in the WTO begins with dismantling the dysfunctional practices that have blocked and continue to block progress. A good first step would be rethinking the flawed interpretation of consensus as requiring unanimous support for any proposal seeking WTO approval.

One option could be establishing a double majority rule to ascertain "consensus". For instance, initiatives supported by at least 65% of WTO members representing 75% of world trade could be deemed as consensual.

Conclusion: A "whatever it takes" moment

On 26 July, 2012, Mario Draghi, then-President of the European Central Bank, successfully quelled a financial crisis by declaring, "The ECB is ready to do whatever it takes to preserve the euro. And believe me, it will be enough". Such was the strength of Draghi’s credibility and actions that his words became a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The WTO is at a "whatever it takes" moment. Management must step up. Countries that wish to preserve a cooperative trading environment – and avoid being forced to take sides in a fractured geoeconomic environment – must form a group of the like-minded and summon the courage to act.

If they don’t, a chaotic deals-based disorder will quickly replace the remnants of an already-eroding, dysfunctional rules-based system.