OPEC Not Complying under the WTO - Term Paper Example

? OPEC not complying under the WTO The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) is a global organization which comprises of 11 participating countries which are known to be the largest oil producing nations in the world. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has been established as an intergovernmental organization. The organization was founded in the year 1960.The oil production of these countries accounts to almost one third of the aggregate global oil production. This mammoth production is equivalent to 75% of the total known oil reserves.1 The price mechanism of the international oil prices is largely influenced by the OPEC countries with the practice of negotiation among the member nations by setting export quotas for themselves. According to documents of the organization, the most important aim of the OPEC is to create the co-ordination of diverse petroleum policies as well as unification and diversification of different petroleum policies along with the member countries and also to set the determination of the most ideal means for preserving their interests, both individually as well as collectively.2 Also these policies and strategies have been established by the organization to create the need for securing a steady stream of income for these oil-producing countries.3 This steady level of income is also expected to produce an efficient economic as well as regulatory supply of oil and petroleum to consuming nations all over the world and a fair return of profit on their capital accumulation to those countries which are investing in petroleum industries of these nations.4In addition to this, OPEC has also suggested to ensure the aim of stabilization of prices of oil in global as well as nationwide oil markets. OPEC assumed a ‘Declaratory Statement of Petroleum Policy in Member Countries’ where it established “the inalienable right of all countries to exercise permanent sovereignty over their natural resources in the interest of their national development. Membership grew to ten by 1969”5 This policy has been established by the organization with a view regarding elimination of harmful as well as unnecessary fluctuations.6 Currently, OPEC’s membership is consisted of the eleven countries which are: “Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Qatar, Indonesia, Libya, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Algeria and Nigeria”.7 The first five nations are regarded as Founder Members, and the rest are recognized as Full Members (which have joined the OPEC between the time period of 1961 and 1971). In the year 1992, OPEC comprised thirteen nations as constituents. These included both Ecuador as well as Gabon.8 Pursuant to Statute of the OPEC, nations can become Full Members under the condition that these nations have a substantial amount of net exports of crude oil or petroleum and also possess alike interests to the member nations. For the purpose of obtaining membership of the organization, a country needs to be accepted by a majority number of 3/4 of the Full Members which include the agreement of all the five Founder Members.9 Under the “Uruguay Round Agreements”10, it has been suggested by the WTO that members are not allowed to impose export quotas on oil. Hence, while OPEC is an organization based on single product, WTO is a multilateral unit with a larger membership.11 Along with this, the OPEC’s policies in regard to price manipulation have been regarded as one of several most important factors in regard the strategy of establishing high gas prices in last few years. The amounts of this high gas prices are now comprised of average near about $2.20 per gallon.12 United States Senator Frank. R. Lautenberg in an official meeting commented that, “If you are part of a monopoly like OPEC you cannot belong to the World Trade Organization, which offers all kinds of commercial benefits.”13 On 8th July 2004 a report with the title ‘Busting Up the Cartel: The WTO Case Against OPEC’ was published from the office of the senator Frank Lautenberg in which it was stated that the countries belonging to both the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC or the Organization) abiding by the rules of the OPEC-dictated oil production quotas are violating the agreements of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). GATT promotes a common market policy.14 Thesis: If OPEC would come under the WTO it would be in violation of GATT Article XI quantitative restrictions. Body: Article XI details: Article XI of General Agreement on Trade and Tariff (GATT) has eliminated quotas on oil exports by the member countries of the OPEC.15 The OPEC’s agreement, which has been established for the purpose of limiting or restricting oil production by the member nations of the organization, is projecting such a kind of quantitative limit.16 This restriction has been established by the organization under the meaningful rules and regulations which have been established by the WTO. In this context, it has been opined by the organization that under the Article XI the following remark has been made: “No prohibitions or restrictions other than duties, taxes or other charges, whether made effective through quotas, import or export licenses or other measures, shall be instituted or maintained by any contracting party on the importation of any product of the territory of any other contracting party or on the exportation or sale for export of any product destined for the territory of any other contracting party”.17 However, this provision has been interpreted by the WTO in a report in 1988 in regard to the Japan’s “anticompetitive semi-conductor practices”.18 In this context the international organization has opined the following: “This wording indicated clearly that any measure instituted or maintained by a contracting party which restricted the exportation or sale for export of products was covered by this provision, irrespective of the legal status of the measure”.19 Under the rules and regulations set by the WTO, the President has been suggested to consult with member nations of the OPEC. It has also been argued that when a satisfactory resolution has not been attained within 60 days, the international organization would then ask for a panel which would be established for the purpose of calling together to judge the concerned dispute.20 Again under rules and regulations established by the WTO, there are large numbers of exceptions in regard to the Article XI for the purpose of conservation as well as preservation of national resources. This article has been established by the international trade organization along with policies for international agreements in relation to commodities.21 On the contrary, these exceptions of the organization do not apply at the time when different restrictions would incorporate a disguised restriction or rule on international trade. In this context, the actions taken by the OPEC have clearly constituted such type of restrictions on the member countries of the OPEC.22 Undeniably, the OPEC’s stated goal has been a price target; rather than establishment of conservation. Different merchandise agreements have to be provided as well as permitted by the WTO member nations.23 The OPEC, in this regard has not even endeavored to propose the cartel agreement in relation to such a process.24 This cartel is creating significant amount of negative impacts upon the development as well as growth process of countries across the globe which are reducing the demand for these resources as well.25 Significant changes in the prices of oil and petroleum resources are creating significant amount of negative effects on the purchasing capacity of international as well as national buyers.26 The two oil price shocks in the past have proven that the oil price movements matter27. Hence, people and business organizations that are producing different goods and services with the help of these natural resources are facing significant reduction in the production of those and services.28 Hence, the level of income generation is also getting reduced and therefore people are getting forced to change their pattern for oil demand.29 These reductions are also creating significant negative impacts on the relationship among these countries which are producing oil and countries which are the largest demanders of oil and other natural resources produced and sold by OPEC. Also these frequent price changes by the OPEC and violation of different norms or laws, rules and regulations which are implemented by the international organizations, such as the WTO, are forcing non oil-producing countries to make technological improvements.30 These technological improvements are creating significant amounts of effect on the process of development of production of other resources, such as fossil fuel, air energy, solar energy etc. These resources are regarded as renewable resources which can be reproduced after these are used. Hence, the demand for the oil and petroleum resources is getting reduced and thus these production houses across the globe are reducing their degree of dependence on the supply level of OPEC which found it difficult to maintain the soaring price.31 Also, the rise in oil price hampered the employment scenario in industrial nations and this in turn reduced total demand including that of oil.32 In accordance with this the violation of the Article XI and Japanese semiconductors is analyzed in the following section which has hampered the US semiconductor sector. Article XI and Japan semiconductors In 1986, Japan entered into an Arrangement Concerning Trade in semi-conductor products with the United States. The European Communities (ECs) challenged Japan’s action in the agreement of 198633. It was discovered by a panel of three experts that in the agreement, regulation of exports which limits the quantity of exports below a certain minimum price level were not in agreement with the Article XI of GATT34. The experts also found inconsistency with the GATT Article XI in terms of measures taken by the Japanese government in order to protect the exports of the semiconductors with the help of illegally binding guidance from the administration. They also found that this agreement did not reflect Japan’s endeavor to market access to foreign semiconductors but have instead discriminated in favor of the US products.35 According to the European Economic Committee, the system of Third country monitoring with respect to export restrictions was mismatched with the necessities of Article XI36. In the first case it was identified that the arrangement proposed to raise the value of the Japanese exports artificially with the help of government intervention. It was reflected in the Japanese position paper where it was clear that the Japanese authorities had emphasized on the accomplishment of more severe export licensing policies in order to make exports above the general costs37. This effect of the licensing system was not only recognized by the EEC but it was almost a universal phenomenon which was recognized by the countries like Australia, Canada, Hong Kong and United States of course as mentioned earlier38. In 1987, in a report to the President of USA, the Semi-conductor industry association stated that pricing and the supply of the key semiconductor products have been disrupted by the Japanese government through checks in production and with the help of floor price measures. These policies have given rise to artificially high prices and very limited supply for the US semi-conductor users. There was no relevance between Article XI and Japan’s restrictions on exports below the cost. The fact was that violating the Article XI controls with price and quantitative effects had been adopted in order to squeeze down the semi-conductor exports.39 In reply Japan stated that its ‘monitoring was mere watching’40 and its communication to the industry were of advisory in nature and were not legally binding. Ultimately Japan declared that its efforts were only to meet the requests of the manufacturers in order to line up their production levels reflecting ‘real demand’ and avoidance of dumping41. They did not want to restrict exports. Thus based on the Japan’s perspective in the semi conductor industry it was found that OPEC’s methods were also likely to be inconsistent with Article XI. Several tactics are followed by OPEC in order to influence the oil market. This has been clear to the general public and they realize that OPEC’s conjecture is more restrictive and controlling than the Japanese control of exports in semi-conductor trade42. Comparison with the Japanese semiconductor trading pattern can be well justified with the tactics of OPEC’s cutting down of production levels in time of declining oil prices.43. The US government threatened the Japanese to set up the cartel which was against the interest of the American consumers and was against the anti-dumping law. Similarly OPEC’s behavior in this respect is also similar as there is always a chance of deceit in a cartel formation in order to benefit the cheating producers and consumers.44 OPEC Exceptions - analysis Nature of OPEC’s collaboration with the WTO The nature of relation between OPEC and WTO can be said to be that of hostility. The establishment of OPEC was made in Baghdad in 1960s with invitation of ‘Iran, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Venezuela’. On the other hand the creation of WTO is solely responsible to the efforts from the US administration with support from the United Kingdom. It has been already specified that seven countries of OPEC has been members of WTO.45 The WTO ministerial conference since its origin in the year 1995 has been hosted in Qatar. Qatar is a member of both the WTO and OPEC. The new round of round of trade negotiations have been hosted in Doha and have been named after this city. In general OPEC has dominated at various organs of the WTO such as the Committee on Trade and the Environment (CTE), and the Committee on Trade and Development (COMTD). The members of WTO exempt its members from using export restrictions through individually or through collaboration with the other countries. On the other hand OPEC demands the same.46 A fact is that an OPEC-cum-WTO member country if imposes restrictions on exports then it could be fully in agreement with the decision of OPEC and can infringe the rules of WTO simultaneously. According to informational material of the organization, OPEC Member Countries are required to meet at a “biannual OPEC Conference”47 for the purpose of directing and joining their petroleum policies to promote steadiness as well as accord in the global oil market. These Conferences are operated on the basis of agreement and votes by each member.48 More generally: the Member Nations regard the current situation as well as predictions of market fundamentals, like rate of economic growth, demand and supply scenarios of petroleum etc. These nations consider those changes which might be made in different petroleum policies. For instance, in previous conferences, the member countries have agreed in variation to raise as well as lower their combined oil production to maintain stability of prices along with steady supplies of oil resources to demanders in short, medium as well as longer term.49 OPEC’s strategy of upper limit on crude oil manufacture or the output restrictions of each OPEC Member Nations are observed to set forward in official quotas of OPEC quotas.50 Approximately 2/3 of the world’s verified crude oil reserves have been owned by the OPEC member countries which are controlling almost about 1/3 of present global oil production51. Recently, OPEC’s production quotas of crude oil production has been attempted to preserve a world price among $22 and $28 per barrel52. The ‘price band system’ of OPEC has been distinct in this particular range of prices. This has been explained by the “U.S. Department of Energy”53 as follows: “OPEC collects pricing data on a “basket”: of seven crude oils, including Algeria’s Saharan Blend, Indonesian Minas, Nigerian Bonny Light, Saudi Arabia Arab Dubai Fateh, Venezuela Tia Juana and Mexico Isthmus (a non-OPEC oil). The OPEC price – which was introduced on January 1, 1987 – is an arithmetic average of these oils. OPEC uses this price to monitor world oil market conditions…..”54 Agreements of WTO: Substantive Obligations as well as Dispute Settlement Procedures: The WTO was set up on January 1, 1995. The organization has been set up following the force of the “Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO Agreement)”55. The conditions of the WTO Agreement membership on the receipt of the “WTO multilateral trade agreements”, which exclusively included the “General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade” in 1994 and the “Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU)”56. These agreements have been approved as well as implemented by the Congress in the “the Uruguay Round Agreements Act” and have been pursuant to the accelerated legislative procedures in relation to different trade agreements containing “Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988”57. In order to carry on the trade flow smoothly and to mitigate the problems of solving the trade quarrels WTO follow certain procedures which fall under the Dispute settlement paradigm. WTO identifies the disturbance or a dispute arises when a member government thinks that any other government violating the agreement or the commitment which has been established between them in WTO. The agreements between the member countries are generally the outcome of the negotiations occurring among them. The member government has the final accountability of reconciling the disputes through the Dispute Settlement Body.58 OPEC’s Exceptions to GATT or WTO Obligations: The GATT responsibility has been relevant to the possible case against the associated nations of the cartel created by the OPEC. This fact is located in the Article XI where a general obligation has been mentioned by the WTO regarding imposition of quantitative restrictions on imports and exports of goods and services from or to member countries of the WTO. Article XI:1 has revealed the fact that no restrictions or prohibitions, except from ‘duties, taxes or other charges’, whether made efficient with the help of import and/or export quotas, import and/or export licenses and other measures.59 These facts have been expected to get instituted or monitored by contracting party of any country on the importation of goods and services of the territory. Also these policies have been implemented of other different contracting party and/or on the policy of exportation or allocation and distribution of export of products which have been destined for the territory of any other contracting party. Member nations have been permitted to differ from the general prohibition or restriction under Article XI:2. Whenever Article XI is brought up in discussion the issue is more or less its extent or applicability and not the ‘substance’.60 This prohibition has been allowed when measures taken by the organization are necessary for providing respite from the serious scarcity and/or excess. These are also necessary when these are designed for applying standards, rules, and regulations for categorization and grading, or advertising and sales of commodities which are globally marketed. In addition to this fact, the Article XIII in the GATT 1994, which required various types of quantitative restrictions, has been imposed by these institutions on the non-discretionary manner.61 There has been two most important exceptions which could be invoked in potential manner by OPEC members when faced with a challenge by the WTO under the Article XI:1 which addresses energy pricing measures.62 The GATT Article XXI has contained an exception in relation to national security, which has provided that no acts in the GATT will be construed for the purpose of putting off any contracting side or country from adopting any type of measure which it deems essential for the protection of its essential security interests, in certain defined circumstances, including actions taken in time of war or other emergencies in international relations.63 Given the fact that crude oil is debatably supposed to be important to the financial protection of many of the OPEC countries. In light of recent actions in the Middle East, it is probable that if threatened OPEC members would react then the latest production limitations and quotas are an answer to either the war in Iraq, or other crisis in international relations that validate the national security exception.64 However, OPEC did not raise this case before, and it is a weak one at best. However in case Iraq plans to remain a member of OPEC cartel, then it would need to make up the gap in production quota. The nation would also like to enjoy the benefits of price rise.65 Second, OPEC countries may try to appeal to the Article XX universal exceptions, which allow Members to inflict otherwise GATT-incompatible steps that accomplish spelled out public policy measures. Specifically, OPEC countries may attempt to call upon either Article XX(h), which allows for GATT contradictory measures where there is a intergovernmental66 commodities agreement, or Article XX(g), which permits conflicting measures with respect to “exhaustible natural resources”.67 However, these measures cannot be raised if they are useful in a manner which would comprise a measure of random or indefensible favoritism between countries where the same circumstances prevail, or are a veiled restriction on international trade.68 Dispute resolution OPEC’s policy of raising the level of violation of policies and restrictions set by the WTO are also creating greatest amount of economic as well as law and trade related impacts. These are in effect hampering the growth related aspects of business organizations as well as countries across the globe. The violation of the rule which has been set by the WTO in October 1, 2004, has created significant negative impacts upon the development process of business organizations and developing countries of the world69. Although the WTO made a complain regarding the violation of this law, the dominance of the OPEC in regard to implementation of pricing policies of oil and other natural resources has been seen to be highly significant in modern times. These violations are creating negative effects on the international relations of countries with OPEC member nations .So in order to overcome the problem, non-multilateral path was adopted by the leading GATT/WTO members who were based on discrimination principles.70 The fact is that it will not be able to provide lasting solutions to the problem of the trading of energy .The multilateral system could not be treated as a vital tool in order to establish stability and international peace as there are so many countries possessing huge control over this vital commodity i.e, oil. The policy of regionalism cannot be an optimal solution in such a huge sensitive scenario. Within the multilateral system the leading WTO members should be searching for perfect solutions.71 In simple statement it can be said that the consumers demand a considerable amount of oil supply at a reasonable price and on the other hand the producers want their rights over this natural resource and expect a good generation of revenue from this. It can be said that if allowed, the WTO has within it the potential to address both these concerns with the right spirit. In order to achieve an optimal solution WTO should hinder and should rather make the entry of the non-WTO OPEC countries.72 This will not just bring more oil producers into the system but also will fetch gigantic profit amounts and benefits in terms of larger investments. It will also lead to the more integration and interconnection between the global economic system and better terms of access to market providing a competitive platform where the consumers will be gaining high incomes. In this way if the OPEC countries fall into the feet of WTO and try to minimize the rigidity in terms of exercising of the price regulation and may adopt the policy of minimum supply commitments at a predetermined price levels. This policy would be beneficial for both the parties.73 Again if OPEC undertakes the policy of minimum supply commitments then it also fulfils one of its basic agendum, that is, the stabilization of the prices in the international market with the view to eliminate the harmful fluctuations or volatility. Again by undertaking the policy of minimum supply commitments OPEC countries will also help to stabilize the world of which it is a direct beneficiary.74 At the same time it can be said that confidence and predictability to the market can be provided by the credible understanding of the suppliers. Also a favorable political atmosphere is absolutely essential for the smooth functioning of the business. These are the two of the most basic objectives of the WTO. Again the WTO on its part can adopt several measures in order to lessen the OPEC’s not unproven fears. Firstly the WTO can introduce an explicit understanding providing immunity to OPEC’s price supply management.75 Secondly if a restatement of the already existing international law can be made with the principles of national sovereignty then it can yield in confidence building mechanism without any cost to anybody. Although it is just a basic approach towards achieving stability but still more complex devise should be formulated and implemented in order to stabilize the situation. But it should be also mentioned here that any type of approach in this direction or in this path of thinking will definitely have the way out procedure of stabilization and also will have the thrust to transform the significance of the role of petroleum from the situation of exaggerated conflicts in international relations to a path of cooperative relation.76 Conclusion: OPEC is regarded by trade economists and researchers as the largest cartel in the history. This organization is creating significant impacts upon the production, allocation as well as distributional aspect of one of the most important natural resource of human life – oil and petroleum resources. These countries which constitute the OPEC are creating significant impacts upon the determination of prices of these resources and hence also on the amount of these resources demanded by the consumers all across the globe and also the amount of these resources supplied by these countries. OPEC member nations have strategically realized the fact that since the oil and petroleum resources are most required in every day life of human times in each and every work of their lives, and since these resources are in plenty of amounts in large number of areas of these member countries, therefore these products and services will be demanded by consumers across the globe at the largest possible amounts. This fact has been encouraging these countries, which are producing oil and petroleum resources, to raise the level of prices at each and every point of time. Oil prices are increasing in present times at rapid speed which are creating significant negative effects on the purchasing power of consumers of these natural resources. Since, large number of other products and services are also require these natural resources for production purposes, therefore, producers of these goods and services are also getting affected negatively and thus these producers are also increasing prices of these goods and services. This is creating double negative effects upon the purchasing power of these consumers. Again, in regard to international trade this greater rate of increase in prices of oil and petroleum products are creating significant amount of negative impacts upon the process of development of less-developed and developing countries. Also the sustainability of high rate of growth of developed countries of the world is also getting hampered to some significant level. These facts are in effect hampering the demand for these products worldwide by reducing the real income of people all over the world. Hence, the production level of these natural resources are also getting hampered and thus are further reducing the income level of these oil-producing countries. One of the most important relationship between these economic aspects and the violation of laws and regulations, which have been implemented by the WTO, is that OPEC being a monopolized organization is violating all these rules and regulations and laws which are creating greater negative effects upon the development process of international trade as well as upon the overall development of these countries as well. One of the most important aspect of this violation of global policies have been consistent with the fact that OPEC member countries are not at all concerned about global policies and strategies in relation to international laws, rules, and regulations. These laws, rules, and regulations are required for making international trade more and more effective in terms of lesser amounts of quotas and other types of restrictions in the process of development of rate of growth of goods and services, in general and oil and petroleum products, in particular all over the world. Greater amounts of restrictions hence are required to be imposed by the WTO and other countries on the operation as well as policies of affecting prices of these natural resources across the globe. One of the most important policies that the WTO is required to implement is related to the fact that the high level of dominance of the OPEC is terms of setting oil prices are effectively needed to be restricted by the organization. These strategic policies of affecting the prices of oil and other petroleum related products are required to be monitored by the international organization and also by other countries. This greater level of monitoring is also required to be effective in terms of implementation of much stricter policies and acts which will, in real terms, efficiently reduce the monopoly structure of the OPEC in respect to production, allocation, and distribution of these natural resources across the globe. Another important way out of reducing the level of dominance of the OPEC in respect to affecting the prices of natural resources is to initiate technological advancements in the process of production of these very natural resources in countries which are not the members of the OPEC. Specially, those countries are required to get selected in the process of making greater volume of technological advancements, such as India and China, where the level of production of these natural resources are expected to be higher. These countries are required to be given greater amounts of monetary as well as technological supports from the developed countries of the world and also from different international organizations, such as the WTO, for the purpose of produce greater amounts of oil and other natural resources. Along with this, greater technological advancements are also required to be implemented by these companies in order to produce greater level of impact upon the production of other relevant sources of energy, such as solar energy, air energy, biodiversity energy, fossil fuel etc. These resources are regarded by ecologists and environmental economists as renewable resources which are not scarce and which can be produced at lower cost. These increases in production of renewable natural resources are expected to reduce the level of demand for the oil and petroleum resource which are produced mainly by the OPEC countries. Hence, the chance of violation of policies, rules, laws, and regulations set and implemented by different international organizations, including the WTO, will be very difficult for OPEC. References 1. Desta, Melaku Geboye. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, the WTO, and Regional Trade Agreements. Journal of World Trade, (2003) 37.3 523-551, April 20, 2012 from: http://www.dundee.ac.uk/cepmlp/journal/html/Vol15/Vol15_4.pdf 2. Desta, Melaku Geboye, OPEC And The WTO: Petroleum As A Fuel For Cooperation In International Relations, MEES, XLVII, No. 10, April 20, 2012 from: http://www.mafhoum.com/press7/185E17.htm 3. Hende, Lode Van Den, Smith, Herbert and Jennifer Paterson, Export Restrictions on Raw Materials – WTO rules and remedies, Bloomberg Law Reports, 2009, April 20, 2012 from: http://www.herbertsmith.com/NR/rdonlyres/393EFC20-DB64-4FC1-8C0C-8BA85768092E/16346/ExportrestrictionsonrawmaterialsWTOrulesandremedie.pdf 4. About OPEC, OPEC, n.d., April 20, 2012 from: http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/press_room/178.htm 5. Button, Catherine, The power to Protect, Hart Publishing, 2004 6. Brief history of OPEC, OPEC, 2012, April 19, 2012 from: http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/about_us/24.htm 7. Busting Up The Cartel: The WTO Case Against OPEC, A REPORT FROM THE OFFICE OF SENATOR FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, n.d., April 19, 2012 from: http://lautenberg.senate.gov/documents/foreign/OPEC%20Memo.pdf 8. Carey, Tim. Cartel Price Controls vs. Free Trade: A Study of Proposals to Challenge OPEC's Influence in the Oil Market Through WTO Dispute Settlement, American University International Law Review, (2009) 24.5, pp. 785-812, April 28 from: http://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1104&context=auilr 9. Caves, Richard, E. et al., World Trade and Payments, USA: Pearson Education, 2010 10. Congressional Record, Government Printing Office, 2003 11. Clough, Mark “The WTO Dispute Settlement System—A Practitioner Perspective”, Fordham International Law Journal, (2000) 24.1, April 29, 2012 from: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1737&context=ilj 12. Dornbusch, Rudiger, et al., Macroeconomics, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2010 13. Dispute settlement. World Trade Organisation, n.d.. April 20, 2012 from:http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm#disputes 14. Feldman, Shai, After the War in Iraq, Sussex Academic Press, 2003 15. Joseph, Sarah. Blame it on the WTO? OUP, 2011 16. Wiener, Robert, “Lautenberg, Zimmer vie at Jewish forum”, NJJN, April 29, 2012 from: http://njjewishnews.com/njjn.com/103008/njLautenbergZimmerVie.html 17. JAPAN - TRADE IN SEMI-CONDUCTORS, WTO, 1988. April 28 from, http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/87semcdr.pdf 18. Mankiw, N. Gregory, Macroeconomics, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2011 19. Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Uruguay Round Agreement, WTO, 2012, April 29, 2012 from: http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/04-wto_e.htm 20. Member Countries of the OPEC, OPEC, 2012, April 19, 2012 from: http://www.opec.org/opec_web/en/about_us/25.htm 21. Musgrave, Richard A. and Musgrave, Peggy, B. Public Finance In Theory and Practice, USA: McGraw-Hill, 2011 22. Porges, Amelia. “Japan--Trade in Semi-Conductors. No. L/6309”, The American Journal of International Law, (1989) 83.2, pp. 388-94, p.388 23. Segell, Glen, Disarming Iraq. Glen Segell Publishers, 2004 24. Selivanova, Yulia. Regulation of Energy in International Trade Law, Kluwer Law International, 2011 25. Smeets, Maarten, Conflicting Goals: Economic Sanctions and the WTO, Global Dialogue, 2.3, April 21, 2012 from: http://www.worlddialogue.org/content.php?id=100 26. “SUV buyers Guide: Gas Prices, and how that should affect your decision”, Essortment, 2011, April 20, 2012 from: http://www.essortment.com/suv-buyers-guide-gas-prices-should-affect-decision-45509.html 27. Volokh Eugene VESOFT, THE SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRY AND FOREIGN COMPETITION (1988). April 28 from: http://www.adager.com/VeSoft/Semiconductor.html 28. Weiler, J.H.H. Choo, Sungjoon and Isabel Feichtner, “International and Regional Trade Law”, NYU, April 29, 2012 from: http://centers.law.nyu.edu/jeanmonnet/courses/wto/docs/Unit_V.-Quantitative_Restrictions_&_MEQR.pdf 29. Wilpert, Gregory, The Economics, Culture, and Politics of Oil in Venezuela, Venezuelanalysis, April 29, 2012 from: http://venezuelanalysis.com/analysis/74 30. WTO, LEGAL TEXTS: GATT 1947, 2012, April 20, 2012 from: http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/gatt47_01_e.htm 31. WTO, Dispute Settlement reports, Cambridge University Press, 2010 32. WTO, Dispute Settle Reports 2001, CUP, 2001 Read More