Export Controls and Securitization of Economic Policy: Comparative Analysis of the Practice of the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia
{"title":"Export Controls and Securitization of Economic Policy: Comparative Analysis of the Practice of the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia","authors":"O. Hrynkiv","doi":"10.54648/trad2022026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"National security rhetoric has gained prominence due to increasingly pervasive digitalization, the emergence of cutting-edge technologies, and developments in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Increased reliance on these areas fuels industrial development but also renders national economies vulnerable to foreign interference. Ultimately, the current wave of technological development with its potential threats intensifies competition between states and redefines their economic and military advantages over potential global rivals. Against this background, certain states have expanded the scope of their export control regimes by extending the lists of controlled items and/or imposing ‘catch-all’ control. Used in conjunction with economic sanctions, weaponized tariffs, and extensive investment screening mechanisms aimed to protect national security interests, such measures go beyond conventional non-proliferation purposes to address economic security, technological supremacy, and human rights concerns for which those states are willing to sacrifice the economic efficiency that accompanies trade liberalization. Using the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia as case studies, this article discusses to which extent different export control objectives of these international actors have been securitized. Securitization of certain states’ interests is inevitable, even if not desirable. Yet, this article argues that international law can be managed to control and limit the level of securitization of domestic policies in order to strengthen the international legal system as a whole.\nexport controls, national security, economic security, securitization, emerging technologies, technological supremacy","PeriodicalId":46019,"journal":{"name":"Journal of World Trade","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of World Trade","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/trad2022026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
National security rhetoric has gained prominence due to increasingly pervasive digitalization, the emergence of cutting-edge technologies, and developments in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Increased reliance on these areas fuels industrial development but also renders national economies vulnerable to foreign interference. Ultimately, the current wave of technological development with its potential threats intensifies competition between states and redefines their economic and military advantages over potential global rivals. Against this background, certain states have expanded the scope of their export control regimes by extending the lists of controlled items and/or imposing ‘catch-all’ control. Used in conjunction with economic sanctions, weaponized tariffs, and extensive investment screening mechanisms aimed to protect national security interests, such measures go beyond conventional non-proliferation purposes to address economic security, technological supremacy, and human rights concerns for which those states are willing to sacrifice the economic efficiency that accompanies trade liberalization. Using the United States, the European Union, China, and Russia as case studies, this article discusses to which extent different export control objectives of these international actors have been securitized. Securitization of certain states’ interests is inevitable, even if not desirable. Yet, this article argues that international law can be managed to control and limit the level of securitization of domestic policies in order to strengthen the international legal system as a whole.
export controls, national security, economic security, securitization, emerging technologies, technological supremacy
期刊介绍:
Far and away the most thought-provoking and informative journal in its field, the Journal of World Trade sets the agenda for both scholarship and policy initiatives in this most critical area of international relations. It is the only journal which deals authoritatively with the most crucial issues affecting world trade today.