Symbolic Power in the World Trade Organization. By Matthew Eagleton-Pierce

Abstract

Linguistic definitions play a key role in trade law. Although some1 may argue that ambiguity has consistently played a constructive function in the GATT system, it is also true that it often lies at the core of the most politically-charged trade disputes. True to this history, struggles over terminology and classificatory schemes are at the heart of most substantive deadlocks in negotiations of the Doha Development Agenda. Disagreement on the scope of ‘general exceptions’, ‘boxes of subsidies’, ‘policy space’, ‘development’, ‘market economy’, ‘reciprocity’, and ‘special and differential treatment’ create an unstable common ground for negotiations. Matthew Eagleton-Pierce, a lecturer in International Relations at the University of Exeter, argues that this linguistic gap channels more than [just?] uncertainty in International Trade Law. It is a space where ‘symbolic power’ resides in a subtle dispute over the control of the international trading system. It seems remarkable to this reviewer that, despite so many thorough studies of power relations in international trade, a new perspective on ‘power at the WTO’ can prove to be so uncommonly revealing. Utilizing an interdisciplinary approach, ‘Symbolic Power in the World Trade Organization’ combines concepts of International Relations theory and Semiotics to explain the delicate but powerful ways through which political language reflects and constitutes power in international trade.