Neither Here Nor There - Countries that are Neither Developing Nor Developed in the WTO : Geographic Differentiation as Applied to Russia and the WTO

There are countries that do not fall under the prevailing definitions of developed and developing country that are employed by the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO fails to take into account the special circumstances and needs of these countries. While such special circumstances and needs are diverse, this Article focuses on one facet: sub-national geographic differential development. Geographic differentiation means that some countries, often the biggest non-developed countries, include regions that are highly developed, and some that are, in significant respects, economically less developed. Certainly there are other scenarios where countries may fall between the developed and the developing world. This demonstrates that the WTO definitions of development are arbitrary and that classification of countries in this way does not take into account their individuality. Given the large number of developing countries it is inconceivable that these countries would be similar or should be treated the same within the trade context. Perhaps a development policy that is more reflective of the differences among developing countries would be more successful. The Proposal in this Article regarding geographic differentiation concerns just one facet of the diversity that could be taken into account to produce a better development policy, both in terms of effectiveness and in terms of economic efficiencies. This Article's examination of the international trade system's development policy offers a proposal to resolve the issue of differential geographic development. The Proposal should be applicable within any trade and development policy, such as those developed over the course of the WTO Doha trade negotiations. The adoptability of the Proposal stems from the fact that it does not advocate a radical departure from current development policy, but instead recommends how development policies could be refined to be more effective. Despite the fact that this Article's Proposal advocates a very modest change to the present WTO treatment of development, in so doing it will provide a critique of some of the underlying fundamental issues of international trade development policy. Additionally, this Article and its accompanying Proposal will contribute to the resolution of the many problems associated with Russian WTO membership accession. Indeed, the issue of geographic differential development first arose in the context of analyzing the issues that Russia will face over the next few years as it seeks membership in the WTO. Russia is a country that is neither clearly a developing country, nor a developed country. Accordingly, this Article will use Russian examples to highlight the problems and benefits associated with geographic differential development and the Proposal to resolve that phenomena. The Proposal calls into question the idea of treating states such as Russia and India as interchangeable units. It raises serious questions related to the following development policy issues: graduation of countries from developing to developed country status; the relationship of islands of prosperity with surrounding less developed regions; and issues of regionalism and federalism. This Article also considers the Proposal's applicability to disadvantaged regions in the developed world. Additionally, this Article discusses the real-world problems that would arise as a result of implementation of this Proposal. Potential problems include execution issues and derivative consequences on the domestic politics of the subject countries. Finally, this Proposal is not just confined to the ivory tower of academia; it is pragmatically relevant to the accession of Russia to the WTO