The director common of the WTO: “We are seeing the worst disruption of global trade since the world wars” | Economy | EUROtoday

Rousseau selected Lake Geneva, Switzerland, to inform in certainly one of his books that his excellent society was Sparta: small, extreme, self-sufficient, patriotic and insolently non-cosmopolitan and non-commercial. Mary Shelley locked herself in a villa subsequent to that lake to conceive on a legendary evening Frankensteinin regards to the penalties of the dearth of limits in science. Nabokov spent lengthy durations in a small resort on this space, discreet and stylish, and right here he wrote Ada or the ardordazzling novel about ardour. On the banks of the Lemán can also be the headquarters of the World Trade Organization (WTO), one of many multilateral establishments most punished by a shake-up of the worldwide order that could be a mixture of Rousseau, Shelley and Nabokov: a world through which extremely populism grows and the regulation of the jungle prevails, through which applied sciences resembling synthetic intelligence are each a chance and a menace, and through which the neo-imperialist passions of the United States are able to beginning a warfare that shrouds in a thick fog of uncertainty future situations. The Nigerian Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Ogwashi-Ukwu, 71 years outdated), director common of the WTO, receives EL PAÍS and different European newspapers grouped within the LENA alliance in Geneva, and opinions this period that she prefers to name “of disruption” fairly than of dysfunction. In nearly an hour of dialog, Okonjo-Iweala manages to not say the phrase “Trump” in a room bathed in uninteresting gentle, with the Swiss mountains nonetheless coated in snow and the well-known lake behind the home windows.

Ask. 2025 was a yr of radical adjustments in international commerce, with tariff will increase and nice uncertainty because of Trump’s insurance policies. What awaits us in 2026?

Answer. Multilateralism is in disaster. It’s not simply international commerce: your complete system, primarily based on guidelines created 80 years in the past, is being challenged. You must ask your self what has labored effectively all these years. The international order introduced a interval of peace and prosperity; Trade has contributed, it has generated interdependencies, it has allowed 1.5 billion folks to be lifted out of maximum poverty. It is obvious that not all international locations have benefited equally. But the WTO has generated a set of predictable, credible and steady guidelines. Now we should make sure that the system is extra agile, that it adjusts to the adjustments which can be coming, for instance to synthetic intelligence, that enables us to take care of the challenges and alternatives that know-how, the surroundings, and commerce in providers will generate.

P. And what hasn’t labored? Because it’s the losers of globalization and the technological revolution who’re the protagonists of the brand new period of dysfunction.

R. You name it the period of dysfunction; I choose to name it disruption. This just isn’t radically new: we have now already seen different comparable episodes prior to now. There is gigantic uncertainty, that’s evident. We are usually not comfy with what is going on, it’s clear. But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of nations proceed to take care of commerce relations regardless of the disruption, the dysfunction; It does not matter what we name it.

P. He has not included the phrase Trump in his evaluation even as soon as.

R. Our companion is the United States, not its president. Leaders change; WTO members stay. But the WTO just isn’t in danger: the concept of ​​globalization is in danger. We should transfer in the direction of what we name reglobalization: international commerce stays important, however it should be redesigned. The pandemic taught us the vulnerabilities related to provide chains. Now we’re seeing the identical factor with uncommon earths. It is senseless for the worldwide economic system to depend upon China, on simply a few international locations. These dependencies should be prevented. The identical occurs with renewables: we have now the know-how to transform 60% of photo voltaic vitality into clear vitality, however we have now solely made 2% of the investments.

P. What would be the influence of the warfare in Iran and the vitality disaster? Is a recession coming?

R. The influence on world commerce will likely be vital, however will depend upon the length of the warfare. If we face a brief warfare, there will likely be a shock to the markets, but when the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz lasts three months or perhaps a yr, the influence can be larger or a lot larger. We can now speak about a big influence as a result of the vitality disaster has been transferred to costs, to the buying energy of customers. Traffic in all forms of items, not simply oil and fuel, has been affected. Freight transportation prices are rising. Our fashions already present vital results.

P. How lengthy will the warfare final?

R. Economists work right here, not navy analysts: truthfully, we do not know. The most we are able to do is level out attainable situations. And map the harm: the international locations most depending on vitality imports, resembling these in Europe and people in Southeast Asia, are going to endure probably the most, and Russia is the nation that good points probably the most as a result of vitality costs rise and sanctions are lifted.

P. Have the United States and Israel violated worldwide regulation in Iran?

R. I’m not going to touch upon it. It does not belong to me.

P. Are we seeing the worst international commerce disaster?

R. We are seeing one thing historic: it’s the worst disruption of worldwide commerce for the reason that world wars, or one of many worst. And we’re verifying that we have now a resilient system, which withstands the influence, however it isn’t a sturdy system: we should reform it for future shocks.

P. The United States and the EU reached a commerce settlement in Scotland. Does it adjust to WTO necessities?

R. That pact just isn’t inside the WTO system. It is a bilateral settlement. It just isn’t even a commerce settlement correctly: it contains problems with safety, investments, and vitality purchases.

P. Will it’s revered after the ruling of the United States Supreme Court?

R. We reside in an period of great uncertainty, however I’d say that in the long run these agreements will likely be fulfilled.

P. The United States has threatened Spain with a commerce embargo over its place on Iran or protection spending. Do you see it attainable for this menace to be substantiated?

R. We would like that to not occur: we would like that commerce relations had been dealt with based on WTO guidelines. But clearly we can’t management what the United States or Spain will do: the one factor I can let you know is that dialogue is the easiest way to resolve discrepancies.

P. The European Commission has simply authorised the commercial acceleration regulation. Is that industrial coverage or is it protectionism?

R. Europe has at all times been a agency supporter of the multilateral system. As Macron says, the EU desires to guard with out falling into protectionism. That does not appear straightforward. But WTO guidelines supply loopholes to keep away from protectionism.

P. Is China’s business overcapacity dangerous to the remainder of the world?

R. Last yr, China amassed a huge commerce surplus, exceeding $1 trillion. And the primary two months of 2026 proceed on that path. This imbalance is detrimental to the world economic system: the Chinese development mannequin primarily based on exports of the final 40 years can’t work for the subsequent 40 years. China has to stimulate consumption, inner demand; It has to import extra and it has to cut back its dependence on exports in order that this overcapacity is absorbed internally, no less than partially.