US against WTO Secretariat Defending Pillars of WTO Agreement like MFN

[ABS News Service/11.11.2026]

The United States and several other members criticized the World Trade Organization Secretariat for taking positions on issues falling outside its remit at a discussion this week on the WTO reform track on foundational issues.

Several trade envoys cited concrete examples of how the Secretariat had been taking positions on issues, some of which are still under negotiation, said a trade envoy who asked not to be quoted.

Several members suggested that the Secretariat’s role should remain strictly neutral and within the purview of Article VI of the Marrakesh Agreement, cautioning against any overstepping of the mandate enshrined in the provision.

Several members stressed that the Secretariat was required to remain “neutral”, while clarifying that neutrality did not mean it should remain silent or dumb, said a participant who asked not to be quoted.

The United States highlighted what it viewed as the Secretariat’s overreach beyond its mandate and cited several examples. In a detailed critique, Washington explained what the Secretariat could and could not do, said a trade envoy familiar with the discussions.

The United States earlier introduced the issue of Secretariat neutrality in its proposal WT/GC/W/998. Washington stated:

“To ensure Secretariat neutrality, Members should consider how to end the practice of the Secretariat drafting reports that make substantive assessments of Members' policies, or that push certain policy preferences, without Members' approval. Regarding the Secretariat's external communications (e.g., press, social media, and the WTO website), Members should consider whether Secretariat staff should be given specific guidance to avoid making substantive judgments or interpreting or pronouncing on Members' obligations. Members should also consider providing formal guidance that Secretariat staff should always establish that any views they express – whether as panelists, drafters, or in social media – do not represent the views of the WTO or WTO Members.”

China: Importance of Neutrality

According to China, “neutrality is an important principle that staff of international organizations should observe in discharging their duties,” suggesting that Secretariat neutrality should be safeguarded along at least two dimensions.

China said “the Secretariat should be protected from improper external pressure in carrying out its duties,” while stressing that “the Secretariat’s actions should not compromise the proper discharge of its responsibility, including the Secretariat’s actions should not be directed by their preferences.”

More importantly, “neutrality must be ensured in the discharge of responsibilities,” China said, arguing that “the core of ‘neutrality’ should not come at the expense of the Secretariat’s ability to fulfill its duties.”

China pointed out that “the Secretariat’s objective and impartial work in trade policy review and monitoring, carried out under existing mandates, is essential to transparency and the effective functioning of the rules-based multilateral trading system.”

As regards concerns about the Secretariat’s work, China argued that “specific concern should be examined on a case-by-case basis, without putting labels.”

Elaborating on these concerns, China cautioned that “members could identify and discuss specific concerns in relation to the operation of the Secretariat, but these discussions should not indiscriminately be labeled as ‘lack of neutrality’.”

Beijing emphasized that “care is needed in the role of Secretariat in supporting members’ deliberation and discussion of WTO reform.”

On the issue of technical support, China said that while “the Secretariat may provide factual stocktaking and analysis based on primary sources, such as trade data,” the “Secretariat should not introduce analysis by external organization, or present them as factual basis for so called evidence-based discussion.”

China said the Secretariat must “avoid diagnosis of challenge or gap”, as it “should be member-driven.”

Lastly, China warned that “the Secretariat staff should not prejudge or advocate views on specific direction of Reform.”

The United Kingdom also stressed the importance of the Secretariat remaining neutral, said a person familiar with the discussions who asked not to be quoted.

Mexico, however, apparently argued that individual instances of “too much” should not be treated as evidence of patterns or structural or intentional problems. The Secretariat, Mexico suggested, generally acted properly, and individual issues could simply be corrected without creating the impression that the organization had a non-neutral Secretariat.

Separately, WTO Director General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has appointed a former European Union trade envoy to the WTO as her senior advisor. Former EU trade envoy Joao Aguiar Machado announced yesterday that he has accepted the position.

“I am grateful to the Director-General for her trust and look forward to supporting her efforts to reform the multilateral trading system for the benefit of all WTO members,” he wrote, adding that “at a time when the multilateral trading systems faces significant challenges, the work of the WTO is more important than ever.”