Russian Duma Ratifies WTO Accession Accord

Russian lawmakers in the lower house of Parliament ratified Moscow’s WTO accession protocol on Tuesday, bringing the world’s largest economy outside the WTO one step closer toward becoming the global trade body’s 156th member.

The accord passed in the lower chamber, known as the State Duma, by a vote of 238-208, with one abstention and three not present. The accord next goes to the upper chamber of parliament for adoption, after which it will be sent to President Vladimir Putin for signature, both of which are largely seen by trade observers as formalities.

Moscow has a 23 July deadline to notify the global trade body that it has passed the deal. Thirty days after this notification, Russia’s WTO membership will be final.

Tuesday’s vote came on the heels on a Monday ruling by Russia’s Constitutional Court upholding the accession package’s consistency with Russian law. Opposition lawmakers from Communist and Just Russia parties had challenged the constitutionality of the accession protocol, claiming a breach in procedural issues surrounding the bill. Despite the protests, the court’s ruling was unanimous.

With the country expected to become a full WTO member by summer’s end, Russian officials have said that they will push strongly for their country’s interests once Moscow becomes part of the Geneva-based trade body.

Russia’s impending summer accession to the WTO follows a process that began in 1993. After completing the long series of negotiations with current members, Russia received its invitation to join the WTO at the trade body’s ministerial conference last December.

The nearly 700-page accord detailing the agreement between Russia and current WTO members reflected the difficulty of the accession process, the global trade body’s most complex to date.

The World Bank estimates that WTO membership will boost Russian economic growth by 3.3 percent in the medium term and as much as 11 percent in the long run.

Domestic divisions persist over accession benefits

Meanwhile, public opinion within Russia continues to appear divided over the benefits of WTO membership. Proponents of the accession cite stability and clarity in foreign trade regulation and improved quality of consumer goods and services due to increased competition as among the benefits of the move. Those in favour also contend that membership will improve Russia’s business climate and lead to greater foreign investment in domestic industry.

With the ratification deadline fast approaching, however, domestic dissent - both popular and political - has grown in recent months. Protesters gathered Tuesday outside the State Duma to lobby against the accord, which has also drawn criticism from Russia’s opposition parties, on the grounds that WTO accession could lead to a weakening of national sovereignty and harm to domestic industry.

US trade, human rights debate continues

With Russia’s WTO accession on the immediate horizon, US lawmakers have spent the last few months engaged in intense debate over whether to repeal the Jackson-Vanik amendment, a Cold War-era law denying most-favoured nation (MFN) status to countries with limited freedom of emigration. Though Washington has granted Moscow waivers from the amendment since the early 1990s, leaving the original legislation in place could put US exporters at a serious disadvantage to their foreign competitors, who unlike the US would immediately enjoy the benefits of Russia’s membership in the global trade body.

Debate in Washington surrounding the Jackson-Vanik repeal has centred around whether permanent normal trade relations (PNTR) should be established with Moscow at all - given that some lawmakers fear that the US could lose leverage with Russia in other policy areas - and, if so, should the removal of these trade restrictions be linked to a proposed bill that would sanction Russian officials for alleged human rights violations.

US lawmakers are currently divided on whether the trade and human rights bills should be linked, with Obama administration officials arguing against tying the two bills together.