My argument, which Mr. Liu apparently refuses to acknowledge as relevant, is that broad consensus among nations on policy issues is typically narrow in scope. Even the ambitious Uruguay Round, extending the negotiations into new spheres, relied conceptually on market-opening measures as the framework for the final package of agreements. In this context, Mr. Liu is unfair and quite incorrect in comparing the WTO to the League of Nations. It also was not effective in carrying out its goals. This again, I argue, is the result of its narrow, consensual focus.
Any member is free to leave the organization for any reason at any time.
Mr. Liu may disagree with the mandate, but he cannot deny that the member nations freely adhere to it. He should also wonder why every other country not in the WTO seems so eager to get in. What is surely frustrating for WTO critics is that governments continue to remain in the WTO, even those who may be sympathetic to Mr. Liu's agenda. So far, the US has used this tool more than any other nation. These are my sentiments exactly.