Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
The World Trade Organization headquarters in Geneva.
Viewpoint: US reversal on e-commerce rules will hurt global consumers
What are data flows and why are they important?
Technology firms gather a lot of information on our daily online activities such as whether we like a Facebook post, someone else likes our Facebook post, or how much time we spend browsing websites for a new pair of shoes. They use that information to improve their services, to give us recommended posts or websites based on our preferences.
The internet is designed as a seamless web, so your data can flow around the world. So a US or Chinese internet company with operations in Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand might choose to have a single data center for Southeast Asia in one of those countries that collects data from all three. That is the most cost-effective and secure set-up.
However, there has been a trend, especially among developing countries, to establish so-called data localization requirements that prohibit the transfer of their citizens’ data to another country.
Why is that?
There are multiple arguments given, but I think the main driver is economic. Countries increasingly see data as a new resource to exploit. They believe that a data center set up within their borders will be a source of new jobs and investment.
But they often dress up the requirements as being about law enforcement or national security, saying that if law enforcement needs access to their citizens’ data, it needs to be close by for easy access, which technically is not really the case.
How do restrictions on data flows affect companies and consumers?
Data localization rules can function as a type of trade barrier. Smaller companies might not be able to afford the investment of building a data center in a new market. Even larger companies might decide it doesn’t make economic sense to do so and decide to steer clear of a market with that requirement.
Ultimately, the consumer and digital inclusiveness will suffer. The classic example is the consumer in Africa, where people have come to rely on phone-based payment services. So if a small country in Africa imposes a data localization requirement, Apple Pay and other providers might opt to suspend operations there, depriving users of their services.
Why did the USTR reverse its position on this issue?
It's purely political. Lawmakers such as Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) who have been advocating tougher regulation on big technology firms have been pressing USTR to abandon attempts to enshrine protections for e-commerce in international trade agreements. They argue that making binding commitments to foreign governments limits the space for domestic policy debate on big tech.
Similarly, labor groups and associations of domestically focused manufacturers such as the Coalition for a Prosperous America have opposed US attempts to push for free data flows because they fear that whatever foreign governments ask for in return may hurt workers and companies in the US.
What has been the reaction to this move by USTR?
Anti-trade US lawmakers and advocates are obviously very happy. Warren responded by saying that USTR had rejected the efforts by big tech lobbyists to use trade deals to thwart regulation.
But the reversal of a longstanding US position came as a shock to other members of Congress, the US business community, and several countries that have been key US partners on digital trade priorities. A long list of tech and non-tech business groups issued statements and sent letters condemning the action.
So, what happens next?
The e-commerce discussions track at the WTO will continue but is not likely to achieve much, at least in the near term. The US reversal on data flows will probably affect the positions of other countries, including some that had moved away from data localization requirements. India, for example, recently significantly revised its policies to allow most data to freely transfer across borders. In the aftermath of the US reversal, reports in Indian media suggested India might follow suit.
Meanwhile, US protests over the USTR move prompted the White House to convene an interagency process with the National Security Council, State Department, and Commerce Department to discuss the issue. USTR is coming under some pressure to change its position on data flows at the WTO, or at least moderate it, but it’s not clear whether that’s really possible. Consultations may continue for some time and fail to reach any conclusion.
Edited by Jonathan House, senior editor at Eurasia Group.
Crisis at the WTO: Fixing a broken dispute system
The appeals body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) is like the Supreme Court for global trade. But it’s fundamentally broken: it hasn’t been able to hear any cases or issue decisions since 2019.
The US has blocked new appointments of WTO appeals judges under the Obama, Trump and Biden administrations, complaining that the organization’s rules have hurt US jobs and industry while it lets China protect its massive domestic market from foreign competition. Until WTO reform happens, the US says, it will block any new judges from sitting on the appeals bench.
Without a minimum of three appeals judges, the WTO can’t resolve disputes. And that’s a major problem for the world’s only international organization dealing with the rules of trade between nations. But there may be hope in sight.
On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala said she is hopeful the dispute settlement impasse will be resolved by the WTO's 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) in February 2024.
“[The United States] are not the only ones who have problems with the system. Developing countries also find it difficult to access,” Okonjo-Iweala says, “So let’s take all these complaints, reform system, and make it useful for everyone.”
Watch the full interview: World trade at risk without globalization, warns WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld or on US public television. Check local listings.
Africa's economy could rival China or India, says WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
The African continent has a population of 1.4 billion people, but it imports more than 90% of its medicines and 90% of its vaccines. WTO Director General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala says the time has come to open up the continent to globalization and encourage businesses to invest in African countries.
On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, Okonjo-Iweala makes the case for decentralizing and diversifying global trade to open up new markets, bring Global South countries into the mainstream of the world economy, and reduce reliance on any one country for crucial goods and services.
Africa hasn’t yet globalized, but when it does fully integrate into the world economy, it could create a domestic market of over a billion people that rivals that of China and India.
“Africa has about 3% of world trade, and that’s too small,” Okonjo-Iweala says. “When, not if, that experiment really gets going of Africans integrating better with themselves and trading, that is automatically very attractive for trade for the world.”
Watch the full interview: World trade at risk without globalization, warns WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld or on US public television. Check local listings.
- G20 achieves consensus, but stays cool on climate and Ukraine ›
- The Graphic Truth: Russia vs. US trade ties in Africa ›
- What Africa has to say about climate change ›
- Putin hosts Africa summit ›
- Viewpoint: Is China the only reason the US cares about Africa? ›
- Women in power — the World Trade Organization's Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala ›
- Why Africa's power partnership with the World Bank should attract investors - GZERO Media ›
World trade at risk without globalization, warns WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer sits down with WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala to talk about world trade, the complicated business of moving goods and services across borders around the world.
Global trade hit a staggering $32 trillion in 2022 and the World Trade Organization oversees 98% of it. It’s an international institution that doesn’t normally make headlines, but has a massive role in almost every aspect of your daily life—from the food you eat, to the clothes you wear, to the cars you drive, to the phone you’re probably using to watch this video.
The WTO is the referee of global trade, a place for countries to negotiate agreements and resolve disputes. But it’s also received criticism for being too slow to adapt to the modern economy and for favoring wealthy nations over countries in the Global South.
Okonjo-Iweala has been pushing members to recommit to the principles of globalization and invest in developing economies.
“It's not right that 10 countries export 80% of the vaccines in the world,” Okonjo-Iweala says, “It's too concentrated.”
She argues that by decentralizing and diversifying global supply chains, we can make the global economy more resilient, reduce monopolies, and bring countries left on the margins of world trade into the mainstream.
Watch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld and on US public television. Check local listings.
- Episode 4: Broken (supply) chains ›
- US-China communications brighten over trade ›
- Climate change trade wars ›
- Hard Numbers: German far right comes up short, Ukraine dreams of drones, a space rock arrives on earth, world trade slows ›
- Women in power — the World Trade Organization's Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala ›
- What Africa has to say about climate change ›
- The Graphic Truth: Has climate change hurt or helped farmers? ›
- Crisis at the WTO: Fixing a broken dispute system - GZERO Media ›
Ian Explains: What is the World Trade Organization?
You probably don’t spend a ton of time thinking about the World Trade Organization (WTO), but it has a huge role in almost every aspect of your daily life—from your morning Brazil-roasted coffee to the Chinese-made smartphone you’re probably using to watch this video.
The WTO is an international organization that deals with the complicated business of moving goods and services across borders. It’s kind of like the referee for global trade, setting the rules and providing a forum for countries to negotiate agreements and resolve disputes. It’s why you can buy avocados from Mexico, clothes from Vietnam, or cars from Korea in the United States without a second thought.
Global trade ballooned to a staggering $32 trillion in 2022 and the WTO oversees 98% of it.
The WTO has been a force for globalization. It’s opened up new markets, lowered tariffs, and lifted millions out of poverty, but it’s also received criticism for favoring wealthy nations and exacerbating global inequality. Not to mention a broken dispute settlement system that’s made resolving international trade conflict virtually impossible.
On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer dives into the history of the WTO, why the US is blocking appointments of WTO judges, and what all of this has to do with Japanese octopus.
Watch the full interview: World trade at risk without globalization, warns WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
Watch the upcoming episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer on US public television this weekend (check local listing) and at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld.
- World Trade Organization - GZERO Media ›
- Women in power — the World Trade Organization's Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala ›
- Hard Numbers: GDP wars, WTO rules in Beijing’s favor, Africans support Chinese engagement, China winning 5G battle ›
- The Graphic Truth: Russia vs. US trade ties in Africa ›
- Graphic Truth: Who Wins From A US-China Trade War? ›
- Crisis at the WTO: Fixing a broken dispute system - GZERO Media ›
What We're Watching: Australia-China row escalates, COVAX falling behind, Mexico's crackdown on "foreign agents"
Australia takes China to the WTO: Amid a deepening diplomatic and trade dispute with China, Australia has upped the ante by taking its case to the World Trade Organization to probe what it calls China's "discriminatory [trade] actions." The complaint relates to Beijing's decision to slap an 80 percent tariff on Australian barley, which has been pummeling Australian growers and producers. (China accuses Australia of "dumping" barley at a discounted rate; Australia says that's nonsense.) Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has sparred with Beijing over a range of issues, such as human rights, national security, and telecommunications. But what irked the Chinese the most was when Australia led the charge in calling for a global investigation into China's handling of the pandemic earlier this year, which prompted Beijing to slap tariffs on a host of Australian goods including wine, beef, barley, and coal that threaten about $20 billion worth of Australian exports. While the WTO filing is mostly symbolic, and the dispute could take years to adjudicate, the move is a significant escalation — and a risky one for Australia, which relies on China for 30 percent of its annual exports.
COVAX coming up short: Past pandemics have created a scramble for vaccines and relief supplies, and people in poor countries are often the last to get help. Created by the World Health Organization, the vaccines alliance GAVI, and the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, the COVAX project was designed to provide global equal access to vaccines as they are developed. Unfortunately, lack of adequate international support is crippling its chances of success. Short on funding, COVAX hasn't yet come close to locking up the 2 billion doses it hopes to provide by the end of next year. According to Arnaud Bernaert, who heads global health for the World Economic Forum, about 75 percent of the 12 billion doses expected to be produced globally by the end of 2021 have already been purchased by wealthy countries. Beyond the question of fairness, if COVID lingers in the developing world well into next year, it will continue to pose risks of again crossing borders.
Mexico targets US Drug Enforcement Agency : Mexico's parliament has passed a new law that aims to curtail the activities of foreign law enforcement agents operating in the country. Although it doesn't mention the US Drug Enforcement Administration by name, the law is viewed as a sharp rebuke of the DEA, active in Mexico for decades but often criticized for not sharing information with local security forces. DEA agents will now be required to share their findings with the Mexican government. What's more, this development also means that American agents will no longer have immunity from prosecution. The move — backed by President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, or AMLO — comes amid strained US-Mexico ties over the recent high-profile arrest of former Mexican defense chief Salvador Cienfuegos Zepeda at Los Angeles airport over alleged drug charges. (Though the general was soon released after corruption and drug charges were dropped when AMLO threatened to expel all DEA agents from Mexico.) As the Mexicans play hardball, we're watching to see how the Americans might react.
No, don’t abolish the WTO. Reform it.
Have you ever read a major op-Ed and thought to yourself, "no! no! no! That's just not right!" Us too. That's why we're launching a new series called The Red Pen, where Ian Bremmer and the crew at Eurasia Group will pick apart the argument in a major opinion piece. Right, left, Republican, Democrat, American, Global — we aren't particular. We just want to keep writers honest. This week, we take the red pen to Senator Josh Hawley's Times op-ed calling for the end of the WTO. No, Josh, killing the WTO isn't a good idea — but reforming it is. Watch the video here, and stay in the red with us!
All-powerful WTO operating against US interests? Hardly. The WTO remains a forum of nation states, with most decisions made by consensus. It's an arbiter, not a manager.
Don't blame the WTO for all the US economy's ills—globalization, tech advancements, and innovation have done as much to disrupt American industries as free trade.
The WTO and GATT did fuel free trade. Average tariff levels fell by 50% from 1947 to 1996 and 20% from 1996 to 2018, while the US created millions of new jobs.
Frustration with China is valid, and change is necessary. But reform, not abandonment, is the solution. Withdrawing from the world is costly, and we will invariably get pulled back in.
The US certainly defends itself … it has brought more cases before the WTO than any other country and won the vast majority of them.
—With research by Henry Rome, Robert Kahn and Caitlin Dean