Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Free Trade vs. Protectionism: What Impact did Section 201 Steel Safeguard Measures have on the US & Global Steel Markets, and What Lessons can be Learned

Free Trade vs. Protectionism: What Impact did Section 201 Steel Safeguard Measures have on the US... Legal Issues of Economic Integration 32(3): 235­247, 2005. © 2005 Kluwer Law International. Free Tradethe Netherlands. Printed in vs. Protectionism By * 1. Introduction On 5 March 2002, US President George W. Bush announced the decision to impose definitive safeguard measures on imports of certain steel products (`Section 201 or Steel Safeguard Measures').1 This decision was seen by many of the United States' trading partners to be contrary to the notion of free trade and illegal pursuant to the rules agreed under the World Trade Organisation (`WTO'). What triggered the relatively drastic safeguard measures? What impact did the safeguard measures have on the global and US steel market? Were they appropriate measures and did they meet the objective? This article will take a closer look at the specific Steel Safeguard Measures and address these questions. In doing so, I will highlight some of the problems with safeguard measures and their legitimacy under WTO rules in this increasingly globalised and integrated free trading world. 2. Run-up to Section 201 Implementation Just months before the Steel Safeguard Measures were imposed, Andrew G. Sharkey, President and CEO of the American Iron and Steel Institute, stated that: `In the wake of the http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Legal Issues of Economic Integration Kluwer Law International

Free Trade vs. Protectionism: What Impact did Section 201 Steel Safeguard Measures have on the US & Global Steel Markets, and What Lessons can be Learned

Legal Issues of Economic Integration , Volume 32 (3) – Aug 1, 2005

Loading next page...
 
/lp/kluwer-law-international/free-trade-vs-protectionism-what-impact-did-section-201-steel-yRJ4IY40jT

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Kluwer Law International
Copyright
Copyright © Kluwer Law International
ISSN
0377-0915
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Legal Issues of Economic Integration 32(3): 235­247, 2005. © 2005 Kluwer Law International. Free Tradethe Netherlands. Printed in vs. Protectionism By * 1. Introduction On 5 March 2002, US President George W. Bush announced the decision to impose definitive safeguard measures on imports of certain steel products (`Section 201 or Steel Safeguard Measures').1 This decision was seen by many of the United States' trading partners to be contrary to the notion of free trade and illegal pursuant to the rules agreed under the World Trade Organisation (`WTO'). What triggered the relatively drastic safeguard measures? What impact did the safeguard measures have on the global and US steel market? Were they appropriate measures and did they meet the objective? This article will take a closer look at the specific Steel Safeguard Measures and address these questions. In doing so, I will highlight some of the problems with safeguard measures and their legitimacy under WTO rules in this increasingly globalised and integrated free trading world. 2. Run-up to Section 201 Implementation Just months before the Steel Safeguard Measures were imposed, Andrew G. Sharkey, President and CEO of the American Iron and Steel Institute, stated that: `In the wake of the

Journal

Legal Issues of Economic IntegrationKluwer Law International

Published: Aug 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.