About Ana Peres

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far Ana Peres has created 6 blog entries.

All roads lead to Geneva: Insights from MC14

From 26 March to the early hours of 30 March 2026, ministers from WTO Members met in Yaoundé, Cameroon, for the 14th WTO Ministerial Conference. The goal was to review the past two years of negotiations and deliver outcomes on the MC14 agenda. Coined the Reform Ministerial, most discussions focused on the WTO's future amidst existing challenges and opportunities. And because it was held in an African country, the MC14 strongly emphasised development-related issues. However, the current geopolitical context affected expectations for MC14, resulting in broad and vague ministerial documents and declarations. WTO negotiations depend on what WTO Members can agree on by consensus. Conflicting interests and diverging interpretations of even cornerstone rules, such as the most-favoured-nation (MFN) principle, made significant progress difficult. MC 14 outcomes MC14 outcomes were reached in advance and only formalised in Yaoundé. WTO Members agreed to continue negotiating fisheries subsidies, with a goal to achieve a comprehensive Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies (AFS2) during MC15. Since AFS1 entered into force on 15 September 2025, Members have until September 2029 to adopt AFS2. Failure to do so will result in the current agreement being terminated (unless the General Council decides otherwise). Ministers also adopted two decisions on [...]

By |2026-03-31T14:30:54+01:0031 March 2026|Blog, International Trade|0 Comments
Read More

Chasing Windmills: Trump’s Brazil tariffs and the Latin American ‘backyard illusion’

On 30 July, President Trump issued an executive order raising tariffs on Brazilian goods by 40%, totalling 50% when added to the 10% baseline announced in April. Invoking emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and the National Emergencies Act (NEA), the justification wasn’t an economic threat, but Brazil’s domestic legal actions, particularly Supreme Court measures against the spread of misinformation in social media platforms and the trial of former president Jair Bolsonaro, accused of undermining Brazilian democracy. This represents economic coercion, violating the principle of non-intervention, which prohibits interference in the domestic affairs of sovereign states, and WTO rules. The blog focuses on how these trade tariffs are a tool to achieve geopolitical goals in the pursuit of hegemonic leadership. The executive order targeting Brazil breaches US obligations in the GATT: Article II:1(b), which binds it to agreed maximum tariff rates, and Article I:1 (most-favoured-nation treatment), which requires equal treatment of all WTO members. It doesn’t meet the requirements of a national security exception under Article XXI as interpreted by WTO jurisprudence. The measure also breaches Article 23 of the DSU, which prohibits unilateral trade retaliation. More than violating such commitments, the US administration is subverting [...]

By |2026-03-04T14:50:27+00:001 August 2025|Blog, UK - Non EU|0 Comments
Read More

The UK-US ‘geopolitical’ deal: A dangerous precedent for the UK and the world

We are living in a geopolitical world. While states may cloak their actions in legal justifications or economic reasoning, trade has become a tool to assert power, control narratives, and forge alliances. Trade deals are being designed to reduce vulnerabilities, not barriers. The recently announced US-UK deal is not a traditional trade agreement but a ‘geopolitical’ deal strongly reflecting the US’s geopolitical rivalry against China. Lacking the legally binding nature of international agreements, the deal sidesteps legal frameworks and instead stakes its importance on strategic alignment. As such, it signals a broader shift in how the US, which has its global leadership threatened by the rise of China as a superpower, now uses trade policy: not as a matter of market efficiency or legal commitments, but as an instrument of geopolitical influence and national security. Furthermore, the deal clearly shows the second Trump administration’s strong intention to force trade partners to collude with the US to squeeze China from global supply chains. Securitising supply chains At face value, the deal includes a few economic concessions, conditional on fulfilling security-related requirements. For example, the US has agreed to reduce tariffs on British steel, aluminium, and automobiles. In return, the UK will [...]

By , |2025-05-14T09:49:44+01:0014 May 2025|Blog, International Trade, UK - Non EU|0 Comments
Read More

Do developing countries have a say? What the green subsidies race tells us about the future of geoeconomics.

Ana Peres is a Lecturer in Law at the University of Sussex and a member of the UKTPO. Lawyers, economists and political scientists are increasingly using a new term to frame discussions on current trade relations and policies: geoeconomics. This means that countries are intervening in strategic economic sectors not primarily for profit but to ensure autonomy, build resilient supply chains and secure access to valuable capabilities. Such approach contrasts with the ideals of free trade, market access and interdependence that shaped international trade for decades. These traditional ideals, even when supported by a so-called ‘rules-based system’, always posed challenges for developing countries to meet their objectives. So, what does geoeconomics mean for developing countries? Unfortunately, it threatens to sideline them even more. Consider one of the main areas where geoeconomic strategies are at play: the development of clean technologies. Governments are implementing industrial policies to secure access to critical raw materials, an input for electric batteries, and to protect domestic production of electric vehicles (EVs). Such policies often require substantial subsidies. Recent discussions at the WTO Public Forum highlighted that a clear distinction between “bad” and “good” subsidies is not only desirable but essential to deal with many of the new [...]

By |2024-11-19T11:41:21+00:0027 September 2024|UK - Non EU, UK- EU|0 Comments
Read More

BP 78 – Reflections on MC13: The present and future of the WTO

Download Briefing Paper 78 Briefing Paper 78 - March 2024Ana Peres Key points Introduction MC13 Outcomes Changing identity: A new normative framework for the multilateral trade regime The present and future of the WTO Key points The outcomes of the latest WTO Ministerial Conference (MC13) were modest, given the ambitious negotiating agenda and the lack of interest of key trade players in furthering multilateral trade rules. MC13 thus underscores the need to rethink the identity of the WTO to reflect how and why its Members negotiate to further trade cooperation in a divided world. MC13 also emphasises that ministerial conferences are only the tip of the iceberg of WTO negotiations. Consequently, instead of looking ahead to MC14 to make progress on trade issues, the focus should be on the current day-to-day work of delegates in Geneva. Introduction From 26 February to the early hours of 2 March 2024, ministers from all WTO Members met in Abu Dhabi to take stock of the past two years of negotiations and agree on the items in the MC13 agenda. Despite the high level of ambition, expectations were low given the current geopolitical context permeated by wars, trade tensions, inward-looking policies and [...]

By |2025-12-12T10:44:39+00:0022 March 2024|Comments Off on BP 78 – Reflections on MC13: The present and future of the WTO
Read More

Our home

University of Sussex Logo

© 2024 UK Trade Policy Observatory

Site by: Phipps Design

Go to Top