Abstract:The original General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947) was written with a broadly worded national security exception. This national security exception was copied into the founding agreements of today’s World Trade Organization (WTO). The exception allows a contracting party, under certain specified circumstances, to take “any action which it considers necessary for the protection of its essential security interests” notwithstanding other WTO commitments. Despite the national security exception’s potential as an almost total escape clause from WTO commitments, it was rarely invoked and even more rarely adjudicated. That is, until now. Over the past five years, a number of WTO members—including the United States—have invoked the national security exception as a defense to alleged violations of WTO commitments. Additionally, in 2019 and 2020, the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) interpreted the scope of the national security exception for the first time in two landmark decisions: Russia – Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit and Saudi Arabia – Measures Concerning the Protection of Intellectual Property. This Note analyzes the Russia and Saudi Arabia decisions and explores what they mean for future applications of the national security exception in WTO law. It suggests that despite the common approach applied in the Russia and Saudi Arabia cases, the future direction of the WTO’s national security exception is far from clear. Within the Russia and Saudi Arabia decisions lie significant ambiguities that will condition both the future use and adjudication of the national security exception. This Note uses the United States’ invocation of the national security exception to defend its Section 232 steel and aluminum tariffs to demonstrate the variety of outcomes that could result from future application of the Russia/Saudi Arabia decisions. With the collision between national security and trade showing no signs of abating, navigating the jurisprudential ambiguities of the national security exception will be a critical task for the WTO.

International Trade Dispute Settlement and Protection of National Security Interests——from the Perspective of GATT Article XXI

Trade Multilateralism and U.S. National Security: The Making of the GATT Security Exception

The Unsettled Governance of the Dual-Use Items under Article XXI(b)(ii) GATT: A New Battleground for WTO Security Exceptions

On the Trade Dispute Derived from the Hidden Trouble of the Security of GMOs and the Countermeasures of China

The National Security Exception at the WTO: Should It Just Be a Matter of When Members Can Avail of It? What About How ?

The Legal Analysis on GATT Article 20 Invoked in China's Export Restriction Measures on Various Raw Materials

Reconsideration of Applicability of Article XX in GATT:From the Perspective of the Relationship Between GATT 1994 and Other Multilateral Trade Agreements in Goods

The First WTO's Ruling on National Security Exception: Balancing Interests or Opening Pandora's Box?

A Positive Study of Dispute Settlements Involving China Since Its Accession to the WTO

The Determination of “Basic Security Interests” in the WTO Security Exception Clause

On Examination of Domestic Laws in the WTO Dispute of Settlement

Technical Barriers and Trade Protection

Lessons from the Case of Restrictive Exportation of Raw Materials and Reflections on the WTO Exception Rules

THE NATIONAL SECURITY EXCEPTION IN WTO LAW: EMERGING JURISPRUDENCE AND FUTURE DIRECTION

Study on the Relations Between Export Restrictions and the Multilateral Trade System

Some Rational Thoughts on the Sino-US Steel Dispute

The Exception on Exhaustible Natural Resources under the WTO Context

China'S Experience in Dealing with Wto Dispute Settlement: A Chinese Perspective

Intellectual Property Rights Disputes and U.S.-China Bilateral Intra-industry Trade:An Empirical Analysis

On Domestic Regulation of International Service Trade

Trade and Morality:A Legal Analysis of Sino-US Disputes on Cultural Products