Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
CHAPTER 16
International Ethics and Law
Chapter Goals
Globalization is now a fact. By globalization, one means the breaking down of national boundaries and
rules to allow free interchange around the world of people, businesses, goods, services, investments,
communications, and ideas. The world really is becoming one world. One can’t stop it; therefore,
everyone needs to understand it—both its benefits and its challenges. The materials in this chapter are
intended to explore and illustrate the fact of globalization and then start the investigation into the ethical
and legal issues raised by globalization.
Chapter Learning Objectives
1. Discuss the role of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in reducing global trade barriers.
2. Compare and contrast an American firm’s social responsibility to its host country with its social
responsibility to its home country.
3. Discuss the interrelationship of religion, culture, and legal rules with comparisons to American and
Islamic viewpoints.
4. Evaluate arguments in favor of global social responsibility standards.
5. Describe the basic forms of global business expansion.
6. Compare and contrast treaties, custom, and comity and give illustrations of each.
7. Describe examples of the law governing international business in sales of goods, trade in-services,
and employment.
8. Identify and describe the four main forms of intellectual property covered in the text and the
international agreements that govern them.
9. Discuss how and why nations regulate imports and exports.
10. Describe the purposes and effects of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS).
11. Identify and evaluate the means for resolving international disputes.
12. Explain the act of state doctrine.
13. Describe the doctrine of sovereign immunity and its exceptions as codified under the Foreign
Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA).
14. Discuss the recent use of the Foreign Tort Claims Act against corporate defendants.
15. Identify some challenges to the enforcement of foreign judgments.
Chapter Outline
I. Introduction
The process of globalization is the breaking down of national boundaries and rules to allow free
interchange around the world— the free interchange of people, communications, services, goods,
businesses, investments, and ideas. Evidence of the global economy is everywhere. For example, if a
person travels the world, he or she can readily access automated teller machines (ATMs) for local
currency that will be instantaneously debited from his or her domestic bank account.
But how is business practice affected by this networked global economy? Which laws govern company
behavior? As firms become companies of the world, rather than of one nation, difficult issues of ethics
and law arise.
II. The International Environment
Ever since Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations in 1776, many have argued that it is axiomatic that a
decrease in trade barriers between any number of countries will stimulate the total world economy, not
simply the economies of the countries involved in the specific trade agreement. Belief in this principle is
affirmed each time a new nation joins the World Trade Organization (WTO). With the addition of six new
countries in 2012 and 2013, including Russia, 159 countries are members. A fundamental principle set
forth in the preamble to the 1994 Marrakesh Agreement, which established the WTO effective January 1,
1995, is that “substantial reduction of tariffs and other barriers to trade” will contribute to the objectives of
“raising standards of living, ensuring full
Member countries in the WTO represent a diverse array of the world’s governments: from communist to
socialist to capitalist, from Buddhist to Jewish to Christian to Muslim, and from all points around the globe.
Thus, belief in the benefits of decreasing trade barriers is widely shared in the international community.
A. Trade Agreements
The desire to reach a common legal ground in international business is not a recent development. As
early as 1778, U.S. commercial treaties have regulated shipping and trading rights and rules between
U.S. citizens and those of other countries. Such agreements can be relatively simple—involving only
two countries and only a few commodities—or more complex, multilateral agreements involving three
or more countries and broad areas of their trading relationships, such as the North American Free
Trade Agreement (NAFTA) among Canada, the United States, and Mexico. The more countries
involved and the more topics on the table, the more complex the agreement. The WTO is the
prototypical multilateral agreement. The vast majority of countries are members and conceivably any
trade-related topic could become a topic for negotiation. In principle, the greatest economic stimulation
would come from involving the maximum number of state actors and addressing the universe of
possible trade issues. As a practical matter, that ideal may be very difficult to effectuate, as was
manifestly illustrated by the WTO negotiations which concluded in December 2013.
Those negotiations, known as the Doha Round after the city in Qatar where the round was initiated,
began in 2001 and collapsed in 2008. Sticking points included the continuation of substantial
agricultural subsidies for farmers in the United States and Europe, which negatively impact the
competitive strength of agricultural products originating in other countries, and the relatively high
import tariffs on manufactured goods imposed by some emerging economies, such as China and
India.
Another impediment to its conclusion was the dramatic change in the global trading environment over
the thirteen years the negotiations continued. Not only have major industrialized countries suffered
substantial recessions, but emerging economies began contributing dramatically to the global growth
in gross domestic product (GDP)—accounting for two-thirds of it in 2008. Both realities have
contributed to a shift in the economic balance of power. The December 2013 agreement reflects a
substantially modified agenda compared to that envisioned in 2001 and focuses primarily on the
streamlining of international customs rules and procedures
Regional trade agreements do seem to be on the rise. As of this writing, the United States is
negotiating two major regional compacts: one with the European Union (the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership or TTIP) and the other with 11 countries circling the Pacific (the Trans-Pacific
Partnership or TPP). Successful conclusions to either or both would certainly lead to a decrease in
trade barriers for the participants, but perhaps not for nonparticipants. Two points are worthy of note.
The first is that the negotiating focus of both the TTIP and the TPP is on reducing nontariff barriers,
particularly by promoting regulatory convergence through the adoption of common standards on such
wide-ranging issues as food safety, government procurement rules, restrictions on state-owned
enterprises, licensing standards, Internet freedom, and the protection of intellectual property, as well as
labor and environmental standards. The second noteworthy point is that none of the major emerging
economies—Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC)—are participants of either of these nascent
regional compacts.
B. European Union
One of the most well-known, and most developed, trade agreements is that of the European Union. It
is also quite significant because the EU is the United States’ largest trading partner, and vice versa.
The EU is made up of 28 member countries, with five candidate countries: Montenegro, Serbia,
Macedonia, Turkey, and Iceland. The EU population far surpasses the United States’ (508 million
compared with 316 million, as of this writing) and its combined gross domestic product is roughly
equivalent to that of the United States’ GDP (both just under $16 trillion).
When the financial crisis that began in 2008 spread around the world through the web of global
financial and economic ties, not only were weak banks revealed, but also weak countries. The very
success of the EU in increasing trade and other economic ties among its member countries became a
weakness: The economically weaker countries acted as a further drag on the stronger economies.
Some of the strongest economic ties in the European Union are those that link the 17 countries that
have adopted the euro as their common currency. In the usual course, as a national economy
deteriorates, its currency is devalued in relation to other currencies and the economic hardship stays
primarily a domestic problem. However, within the Eurozone, for example, Greece’s currency can’t fall
to reflect the degree of its economic difficulties because the value of the euro is tied to perceptions of
the total group of Eurozone countries. But when the world sees weakness not just in Greece, but also
in Spain, Portugal, Ireland, and Italy, even the economically strong Eurozone countries suffer the
downward revaluation of the currency. If the stronger economies do not have faith in future change,
and cannot compel such change as a condition of their support, they may determine that the better
choice for the long run is to abandon the euro. That step could lead to the disintegration of the
European Union itself.
III. Globalization and Countervailing Forces
Understanding what globalization is not may be as important as knowing what it is: It is not
homogenization. The goal is not to make us all the same. But the goals do include increased choice
through the sharing of diversity, as well as appropriate protection of historical, social, and cultural
identities.
What has also become clear is that the process of globalization has not been uniformly beneficial. One
reason for disparate results may be whether the local government develops in tandem with the economy
and is able to and does capture an appropriate portion of the wealth created to put to use on behalf of its
population.
IV. The Intercultural Environment: Ethics Across International Borders
The September 11, 2001 World Trade Center attack focused light on ethical and legal tensions between
the American and Islamic cultures. America’s long presence in Iraq and Afghanistan kept these cultural
divisions in the public eye. The public protests of the Arab Spring in 2011, however, may have
demonstrated that Islamic cultures are no more homogeneous than America’s. Many issues triggering the
protests—such as human-rights violations, unemployment, and extreme poverty—are issues about which
the American public could be sympathetic.
Religion often provides the foundation for a culture’s ethical structure. Thus, two countries with different
religious heritages are likely to have divergent ethical and legal norms. For example, separation of church
and state is a basic legal precept in the United States. By contrast, in Islamic countries, religion is the
basis for many legal, as well as ethical, standards.
Reading: Islamic Law: Myths and Realities
A. Laws and Social Norms Regarding Free Speech
Standards for appropriate speech are regulated both by societal norms and, in many cases, by local
law. The bounds of free speech vary considerably from country to country. The Internet magnifies the
issue because its inherent nature allows speech to flow freely divorced from political boundaries.
Because service providers such as Google, Facebook, and Twitter store the speech of others on their
servers, one issue is whether such a provider can, should, or must remove content that is offensive to
portions of its audience, particularly after the provider has been notified of the specific content found
objectionable. Perhaps even more challenging are requests from governments for service providers to
turn over information revealing the identity of the content poster. For example, France has antihate
laws that proscribe anti-Semitic speech.
B. Social Responsibility to Host Country
When doing business abroad, does a firm have social responsibilities to the host country beyond those
required by the market and the law of that country? This issue has arisen in many contexts, including
factory labor conditions. Not infrequently, corporations have been chastised for allowing working
conditions in their foreign operations or in their suppliers’ plants that Western cultures consider
substandard. Such sweatshops pose a host of commercial, economic, ethical, political, and social
questions.
Traditionally, free-market economists have believed that sweatshops are necessary and beneficial.
Sweatshops allow the economies of developing countries to improve because their export sectors
expand and consumers in global markets are better off because they pay less for the products they
buy. This faith in the market is based on the concept of comparative advantage: that developing
countries typically have a comparative competitive advantage in cheap labor while developed
countries have comparative advantages in such things as an educated workforce, manufacturing
infrastructure and expertise, certain particularly well-developed industries, and so on.
These economists argue that sweatshops have been an element of every developed country’s
transformation from an agrarian society to an urban-based, highly industrialized economy. If poor
countries want to develop, a sweatshop stage is necessary, they say. The expected progression holds
that, as exports from a developing country rise, its local economy grows, generating funds that can be
used in part to increase the overall standard of living and to invest in education and infrastructure,
which, in turn, will allow the country to compete on other bases.
Other economists disagree that all developing countries must necessarily endure a sweatshop phase.
A pure free market, or hands-off economy, does not exist either in industrialized countries or in the
developing world. Governments often play a role in creating comparative advantages.
C. Social Responsibility to Home Country?
Social responsibility to a home country might necessitate operating in accord with the values of one’s
home country even when doing business abroad. Microsoft and other U.S. companies, for example,
have had difficulties with software piracy in foreign countries.
The United States exports its values structure in a variety of ways, including through the extraterritorial
application of its laws. When the U.S. Supreme Court declared that antidiscrimination provisions of
U.S. statutes such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not apply extraterritorially, Congress
reversed the decision with its 1991 Amendments to Title VII.
Extraterritorial application is considered essential because over five million Americans work abroad.
Accordingly, American firms that do not maintain certain Title VII standards abroad may be subject to
liability in the United States. Compliance with American civil rights laws is not required, however, where
doing so would violate the host country’s laws.
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA)
For years, U.S. firms have dealt with bribery issues in America and abroad. Congress has
attempted to respond harshly to corruption in other governments and to support U.S. firms that do
not participate in foreign corruption. The FCPA prohibits businesses from making certain payments
or gifts to government officials for the purpose of influencing business decisions. In recent years the
United States has stepped up its enforcement of the FCPA, both through criminal suits brought by
the Department of Justice and through civil cases brought by the Securities Exchange Commission.
Some critics argue that the FCPA unduly restricts American companies operating abroad and
prevents them from competing effectively. However, the biggest settlements under the FCPA have
actually been paid by foreign companies, a consequence of the Act’s application to any company
that has securities listed on a U.S. stock exchange or does business in the United States. Others
argue the United States should not use foreign trade to unilaterally impose its sense of morality
around the globe.
D. Social Responsibility to Humanity?
Are we evolving toward a set of common international ethical standards that can be supported and
implemented globally? Not only are businesses interacting with stakeholders of ever more diverse
nationalities (investors/owners/ shareholders, customers/clients, suppliers, general citizenry impacted
by business decisions), but the cultural identity of businesses themselves may be unclear. There is
growing evidence of voluntary international cooperation to establish acceptable business practices,
such as the establishment of October 14 as World Standards Day to honor the work of many
nongovernmental international bodies that have established a wide range of voluntary standards
addressing global production and trade.
Practicing Ethics: Individual Social Responsibility to Humanity?
V. Law Governing Cross-Border Business
All businesses follow the laws of the countries in which they are physically present and operating. Foreign
firms often wish to establish operations in the United States, in part because Americans are more inclined
to buy goods made in this country. Doing business in the United States brings with it the requirement to
comply with U.S. laws and regulations. Conversely, when U.S. businesses operate abroad, they are
required to follow the law of the host country.
Businesses may also be required, even in their foreign operations, to continue to follow certain laws of
their home country. Interestingly, although there is a presumption against the extraterritorial application of
U.S. criminal law, where Congress has clearly indicated an intent to cover actions outside of the United
States, U.S. citizens can be held accountable in America for their criminal actions abroad. Finally,
businesses operating across national borders will also be subject to international law.
A. Forms of Global Business Expansion
Multinational enterprise (MNE)
The term multinational enterprise traditionally refers to a company that conducts business in more
than one country. Any of the following operations, except for a direct contract with a foreign
purchaser, may qualify company as an MNE.
Direct Contract
A firm may expand its business across territorial borders using a variety of methods. The simplest,
from a contractual perspective, occurs where a firm in one country enters an agreement with a
person in another country. For example, a firm may contract to sell its product to a purchaser in
another country. This is called a direct sale to a foreign purchaser. The parties simply agree on the
terms of the sale and record them in a contract.
Where the contract is silent as to a term of the sale, the law that will apply to the missing term will
be the law specified in the contract; where none is specified, the applicable law will depend on the
country in which the court is located. Some courts will employ the vesting of rights doctrine,
applying the law of the jurisdiction in which the rights in the contract vested. Other courts may apply
the most significant relationship doctrine, applying the law of the jurisdiction that has the most
significant relationship to the contract and the parties. Finally, some courts will apply the
governmental interest doctrine, applying the law of the jurisdiction that has the greatest interest in
the issue’s outcome.
The seller should and usually does require an irrevocable letter of credit, which the buyer obtains
from a bank after paying that amount to the bank (or securing that amount of credit). The bank then
promises to pay the seller the contract amount after conforming goods have been shipped. The
seller is protected because the buyer has already provided adequate funds for the purchase,
confirmed by a bank. The buyer is protected because the funds are not turned over to the seller
until it has been determined that the goods conform to the contract. It is important to the buyer,
however, that the letter of credit be specific as to the conformance of the goods because the bank
will only ensure that the goods conform to the letter of credit and not to the contract itself.
Foreign Representation
A second type of foreign expansion is a sale through a distributor, agent, or other type of
representative in the foreign country. A firm may decide to sell through an agent—that is, the firm
hires an individual who will remain permanently in the foreign country, negotiate contracts, and
assist in the performance of the contracts. Agents are generally compensated on a commission
basis. On the other hand, the firm may act through a representative, who may solicit and take
orders but, unlike an agent, may not enter into contracts on behalf of the firm.
Distributors purchase goods from the seller, then negotiate sales to foreign buyers on their own
behalf. Exclusive dealing agreements with distributors, where a distributor agrees to sell only the
goods of one manufacturer and the manufacturer agrees to sell only to that distributor in a
particular geographic area, are generally not allowed abroad, although they often are legal in the
United States.
Export trading companies specialize in acting as the intermediary between a domestic business
and foreign purchasers. The trading company will take title to the goods being sold and then
complete the sale in the foreign country. Export management companies, on the other hand,
merely manage the sale but do not take title to the goods; consequently, they do not share any of
the risk associated with the sale.
Joint Venture
Foreign expansion may also occur through a joint venture agreement between two or more parties.
This type of agreement usually covers one or several specific projects and is in effect for a specific
period.
Branch Office or Subsidiary
A branch office is simply an extension of a foreign corporation into the host country. A subsidiary is
a legally separate entity formed under the laws of the host country and substantially owned by the
foreign parent company. The distinction between a subsidiary, which is a legal entity separate from
its foreign parent, and a branch office, which is not, has a number of ramifications. Indeed, the
parent company is legally liable for all obligations of a branch office. In contrast, when a subsidiary
is sued, the parent company is not generally liable.
Licensing
Where a company has no interest in commencing operations in a foreign country but instead
merely wants to have its product or name in that market, the company may decide to license the
rights to the name or to manufacture the product to a company in the target market.
Franchising
In a franchise agreement the franchisee pays the franchisor for a license to use trademarks,
formulas, and other trade secrets. The difference between a franchising agreement and a licensing
contract is that a franchise agreement is usually made up of a number of licensing arrangements,
as well as other obligations.
VI. Foundations of International Law
The source of law applicable to an international dispute depends in part on the issue involved. In general,
private parties are free to form agreements in whatever manner they wish. The parties to the agreement
can determine, for instance, which nation’s law will govern the contract, where disagreements in
connection with the contract will be settled, and even in which language the transactions will be made.
This is referred to as the private law of contracts. Whenever the parties to a transaction from different
jurisdictions are involved in a lawsuit, the court will start by looking at the agreement of the parties
themselves to resolve these issues. Where the contract is silent as to the choice of law, jurisdiction, and
other questions, the court must decide. Generally, the law of the jurisdiction in which the transaction
occurred is applied.
Public law, on the other hand, includes those rules of each nation that regulate the contractual agreement
between the parties—for instance, import and export taxes, safety standards, and packaging
requirements. In addition, public law regulates the relationships among nations.
Public law derives from a number of sources. The most familiar source of international public law is a
treaty or convention. Some treaties and conventions are self-executing, which means that once a country
has ratified them, a business can rely on and directly enforce treaty terms in court. The United Nations
Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) is an example of a self-executing
convention. On the other hand, some treaties and conventions apply only to government signatories and
not directly to private parties. Such a convention may, for example, require an adopting country such as
the United States to amend its domestic law to accomplish the purposes of the convention.
Public law is also found in international custom or generally accepted principles of law. These terms refer
to practices that are commonly accepted as appropriate business or commercial practices among nations.
A custom is derived from consistent behavior over time that is accepted as binding by the countries that
engage in that behavior.
Piracy on the High Seas
In recent years events off the coast of Somalia have raised public awareness of modern-day piracy.
One might think that the international law against piracy would be clear given that piracy has
existed as a threat to security since well before Britain’s Royal Navy returned to port in 1718 with
the severed head of Blackbeard. A 2010 federal case in Virginia, as well as attempts to prosecute
raiders in other countries, suggested otherwise. What is clear is that generally accepted principles
of international law give any country the right to capture pirates on the high seas. U.S. law merely
states that “whoever on the high seas, commits the crime of piracy as defined by the law of
nations... shall be imprisoned for life.”
The Virginia court had before it several Somali men who by skiff had approached a U.S.
amphibious dock landing ship in the Gulf of Aden in the early morning hours of July 7, 2010. The
U.S. government argued that piracy under the law of nations does not require the active taking of
property and that any unauthorized armed assault or direct violent act on the high seas is enough.
The defense argued the charge could not stand because the defendants “did not board, take
control, or otherwise rob the USS Ashland.” Relying on an 1820 U.S. Supreme Court decision
defining piracy as robbery on the high seas and holding that contemporary international law is
unsettled on the definition of piracy, the court dismissed the piracy charge.
The case was appealed, as was a later federal district court opinion that upheld piracy charges
against five other men who attacked another U.S. vessel off the coast of Somalia. Those
defendants were sentenced to life in prison plus 80 years for piracy. The Fourth Circuit affirmed the
latter sentences, vacated the USS Ashland decision, and held that the 1820 decision did not
foreclose conduct other than robbery, including acts of violence committed for private ends against
persons on the high seas, from qualifying as piracy.
A. Development of Customs
Historically, merchants followed certain accepted customs or principles in connection with the sale of
goods. These customs or manners of dealing between merchants were often recognized and applied
in court decisions and later in the United States became codified in the Uniform Commercial Code
(UCC) Article 2 that regulates the sale of goods generally as well as sales between merchants. In the
international legal arena customary practices are still evolving. However, the European Union in 1998
established minimum standards for the protection of personal data. Any country receiving information
from an EU country must comply with those standards.
Two factors are used to determine whether an international custom exists t: (1) consistency and
repetition of the the action or decision and (2) recognition by nations that this custom is binding. The
first merely holds that the action or decision must be accepted by a number of nations for a time long
enough to establish uniformity of application. The second dictates that the custom be accepted as
binding by nations observing it. If the custom is accepted as merely persuasive, it does not rise to the
level of a generally accepted principle of law. Generally, once a contract has been created it is
enforceable according to its terms by all parties to the contract.
Legal Briefcase: Transatlantic Financing Corporation v. United States 363 F.2d 312 (D.C. Cir.
1996)
B. Comity
The unique aspect of public international law is that countries are generally not subject to law in the
international arena unless they consent to such jurisdiction. A country is not bound by international
custom unless it has traditionally participated in that custom. Prior judicial decisions are only
persuasive if a country is convinced by and accepts these decisions as precedent. Comity is the
concept that countries should abide by treaties, international custom, and other sources of
international direction because that is the civil way to engage in relationships. International law is an
attempt to prevent chaos in the international arena through the application of universal or widely held
principles. Comity is the means by which those principles are encouraged. The concept of comity also
includes the respect one country gives to the actions another country takes in its own territory.
VII. Regulation of International Trade
There is no such thing as one body of international law per se that regulates international contracts and
trade. Instead, a contract between firms in different countries may be subject to the laws of one country or
the other, depending on (1) whether it is a sales contract subject to the U.N. CISG, (2) whether the
contract itself stipulates the applicable law and forum in which a dispute will be heard, and (3) the rules
regarding conflict of laws in each jurisdiction.
In addition, every country has domestic laws that regulate business conducted within its borders and that
sometimes regulate its domestic firms outside of its borders. These laws govern the areas of
employment-related activities and discrimination, product liability, intellectual property, antitrust and trade
practices, and import taxes, to name a few.
A. U.N. Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)
In 1988, 10 nations signed and became bound by the U.N. Convention on Contracts for the
International Sale of Goods. At this writing, the CISG is enforceable in 77 nations. The CISG applies to
contracts between parties of countries that have signed the convention and provides uniform rules for
the sale of goods. The CISG contains rules regarding the interpretation of contracts and negotiations
and the form of contracts. Many obligations of the parties are enunciated by the CISG. For instance,
the seller is required to deliver the goods and any documents relating to the goods, as well as to make
sure that the goods conform to the contract terms. The buyer, on the other hand, is required to pay the
contract price and to accept delivery of the goods.
The Convention, however, does not answer all questions that might arise in a transaction. For
instance, questions of a contract’s validity are left to national law. Under American law, an enforceable
contract requires five elements—capacity to enter the contract, offer and acceptance of the terms of
the contract, consideration for the promises in the contract, genuineness of assent, and legality of
purpose of the contract. Countries with civil law systems do not, however, require consideration for
a valid contract.
B. International Trade in Services
Services, as opposed to goods, are the largest component of the world’s gross domestic product
accounting for 63.4 percent in 2012. In the United States, this percentage is even higher—services
were 79.7 percent of gross national product (GNP) in 2012. The popular press continues to report on
the “outsourcing” and “offshoring” of U.S. service-sector jobs. Outsourcing generally refers to the
contracting by U.S. companies of such services as call centers, accounting, and customer services to
foreign companies located in low-wage markets.
Offshoring refers to U.S. companies setting up their own offices in foreign low-wage markets to
perform services previously done by U.S. employees. Economists argue about whether the net effect
on jobs in the United States is negative (through the direct loss of jobs) or positive (through corporate
and consumer cost savings that permit job growth in the United States).
Although international trade in goods has been the subject of international agreement since shortly
after WWII, until 1994 no similar agreement existed covering international trade in services. This was
remedied with the creation of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), which is now one
of the foundation agreements along with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) to which
all member countries of the World Trade Organization (WTO) must subscribe.
The GATS agreement, still in its infancy, sets forth the general principles for the future of trade in
services across borders, but at this time requires very little of member countries in moving toward the
realization of those principles.
Two important general principles that govern international services negotiations are: most
favored nation status where WTO members get treatment by the host country no less favorable than
that given to suppliers from any other country, whether or not the other country is a member of the
WTO; and national treatment which calls for a comparison of the treatment accorded to suppliers from
WTO member countries with the treatment accorded to domestic suppliers.
