This article challenges the widely held view that WTO Members are not permitted to impose trade restrictions on other WTO Members in the form of countermeasures for breaches of international law. It cautions that this generally held view has wider implications for international law and multilateralism because countermeasures are a significant means of enforcing and preserving the normative integrity of international obligations outside the WTO, including erga omnes and erga omnes partes obligations. Arguments supporting their ‘displacement’ must be based on clear evidence, which this article shows to be lacking. This article also attempts to allay the (understandable but perhaps exaggerated) concern that such countermeasures might undermine the predictability of the WTO system. Trade countermeasures for breaches of extra-WTO obligations are subject to stringent conditions under customary international law and to judicial scrutiny by means of WTO adjudication, both of which minimise the space for abuse and the risk of unpredictability.

本文对普遍持有的观点提出质疑，即不允许世贸组织成员以违反国际法的反措施的形式对其他世贸组织成员施加贸易限制。它告诫说，这种普遍持有的观点对国际法和多边主义具有更广泛的影响，因为反措施是执行和维护 WTO 以外的国际义务的规范完整性的重要手段，包括erga omnes和erga omnes partes义务。支持他们“流离失所”的论据必须基于明确的证据，而本文表明缺乏这些证据。本文还试图减轻这种反措施可能会破坏 WTO 体系的可预测性的（可以理解但也许是夸大的）担忧。针对违反世贸组织外义务的贸易反措施受制于习惯国际法的严格条件，并通过世贸组织的裁决接受司法审查，这两者都最大限度地减少了滥用的空间和不可预测的风险。