2004•Research Explorer (The University of Manchester)Open access

Test of Multilateralism in International Trade: U.S. Steel Safeguards

Yong‐Shik Lee

Open full text 2 citations

Abstract

The highly publicized safeguard measures applied by the United States to an array of steel products in 2002 became one of the biggest and the most controversial trade disputes in recent history. Virtually all major trading nations in the world, including European Communities, Japan, China, Brazil, Korea, New Zealand, Switzerland and Norway were the direct parties to this dispute with the United States. The contentious legal grounds of the U.S. safeguard measures as well as the lack of adequate consultations between the United States and its trading counterparts have brought the international community close to a full-scale trade war. This paper considers the important legal issues debated in U.S. Steel Safeguards and discusses how the multilateral framework in the international trading system affected resolution of this case. It also draws lessons for the future application of trade measures such as safeguards under the multilateral framework of international trading system.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The highly publicized safeguard measures applied by the United States to an array of steel products in 2002 became one of the biggest and the most controversial trade disputes in recent history. Virtually all major trading nations in the world, including European Communities, Japan, China, Brazil, Korea, New Zealand, Switzerland and Norway were the direct parties to this dispute with the United States. The contentious legal grounds of the U.S. safeguard measures as well as the lack of adequate consultations between the United States and its trading counterparts have brought the international community close to a full-scale trade war. This paper considers the important legal issues debated in U.S. Steel Safeguards and discusses how the multilateral framework in the international trading system affected resolution of this case. It also draws lessons for the future application of trade measures such as safeguards under the multilateral framework of international trading system.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 2 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The highly publicized safeguard measures applied by the United States to an array of steel products in 2002 became one of the biggest and the most controversial trade disputes in recent history. Virtually all major trading nations in the world, including European Communities, Japan, China, Brazil, Korea, New Zealand, Switzerland and Norway were the direct parties to this dispute with the United States. The contentious legal grounds of the U.S. safeguard measures as well as the lack of adequate consultations between the United States and its trading counterparts have brought the international community close to a full-scale trade war. This paper considers the important legal issues debated in U.S. Steel Safeguards and discusses how the multilateral framework in the international trading system affected resolution of this case. It also draws lessons for the future application of trade measures such as safeguards under the multilateral framework of international trading system.

Key concepts: Multilateralism, International trade, Safeguard, Test (biology), International economics, Scale (ratio), Political science, Business

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Test of Multilateralism in International Trade: U.S. Steel Safeguards — Research Paper | ScholarLens