Alexander Shokhin, who leads the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, argues that Russia should remain in the World Trade Organization rather than pull out. He believes the country must rebuild key WTO institutions, including a functioning dispute resolution body, to restore balance and predictability in global trade. Shokhin shared this stance during a session at the Eastern Economic Forum titled The Greater Eurasian Partnership Pathways to Economic Development, a moment noted in coverage by a news outlet.
Shokhin acknowledged that there are voices within the State Duma that favor withdrawal, but he argued that maintaining membership is more beneficial for Russia’s economy and its long-term strategic interests. He stressed that the restoration of WTO structures is essential and he pointed to the current paralysis of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism, which has not operated for several years, attributing the blockage largely to actions taken by the United States. This perspective underscores a belief that reactivating the dispute system could reintroduce a formal, rules-based channel for handling trade frictions.
The Russian advocate suggested that many practical problems could be resolved through the WTO dispute resolution process. In particular, he highlighted potential improvements in areas such as climate policy alignment and energy sector coordination. By revitalizing the dispute settlement framework, he argued, member countries could pursue clearer, more predictable rules that would help ease tensions and foster cooperation on environmental and energy issues across the trading system.
In related remarks, Yi Xiaozhun, who previously served as a vice president of the World Trade Organization and as a deputy minister of commerce for China, warned that the ongoing conflict in Ukraine has already tightened the global supply of energy and food. He warned that such disruptions risk pushing the world toward a wider economic crisis that could resemble the scale of the financial turmoil seen in 2008. This warning emphasizes how intertwined trade, energy security, and food supplies have become in today’s global economy. At the same time, it serves as a reminder that multilateral mechanisms and collaborative policies remain crucial as nations navigate these pressures.
Overall, the discussion highlighted a central theme: macroeconomic stability and steady access to essential goods rely on robust, rules-based trade institutions. Proponents of staying within the WTO argue that reactivating and strengthening these institutions offers a path to reducing unilateral friction, stabilizing long-term planning for businesses, and aligning policy actions with common environmental and energy objectives. Detractors, meanwhile, contend that the global balance has shifted and that reform within and beyond the WTO will require persistent effort from all major economies. The broader takeaway is a reminder that international cooperation, even amid disagreement, often produces more predictable and manageable outcomes for trade, investment, and development across large regions. In this context, the debate continues as policymakers assess how best to balance national interests with the advantages of a rules-based, cooperative trading system.