Mona Paulsen
@monapaulsen.bsky.social
4.6K followers 960 following 1.6K posts
Assistant Professor in International Economic Law, LSE Law School. Specialisation in international trade law and economic security, in addition to research and teaching interests in international investment law, international development, and IPE.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Happy to share my publication, The Past, Present, and Potential of Economic Security, in 50 Yale Journal of International Law 222 (Summer 2025), now available on Hein Online (DM if you cannot access through your local libraries). My thanks to the student editors who worked hard on this publication.
Reposted by Mona Paulsen
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Such a hard, abstract question! I've been trying to answer it as fairly and squarely as possible. But it's incredibly difficult when the proposed regulation suggests contradictory objectives -- both WTO renegotiation TRQ in schedules and these efforts to 'ringfence' steel from like-minded Members.
Reposted by Mona Paulsen
theglobeandmail.com
After Carney and Trump's meeting at the White House, Canadian and U.S. officials have been tasked with "quickly" reaching agreements on steel, aluminum and energy before moving on to other trade issues. This is what U.S. tariffs currently look like for Canada: www.theglobeandmail.com/world/articl...
monapaulsen.bsky.social
And if so, it runs afoul of MFN, which remains at the heart of tariff bindings, which makes me question the intersection of any non-binding understanding with the Americans. To this, I question the approach to a broader arrangement for managing global overcapacity, akin to building on sand.
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Just to clarify my quick reaction to the legality of the EU's new steel measure. Renegotiating tariffs pursuant to Art XXVIII GATT procedures is not illegal -- indeed, it's an efficient way to address changed circumstances. Is it a sound basis for selective discrimination? No.
monapaulsen.bsky.social
USA - historicised; "great again"; controls; bargains; property protection (Made in USA); unicorns.

China - catch-up; "powering the future"; energy infrastructure; technocratic; controlled innovation; high-tech ecosystem; process knowledge
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Reading competing assessments of China's and the US' growth strategies, both analytical camps code their economic challenges with different language; share concerns for the sustainability of domestic protectionism and self-sufficiency. Uncertain futures.

Some examples below, just while reading...
Reposted by Mona Paulsen
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Honestly, we know the likely outcome of any diplomacy between Trump and Meloni might be something like, "go ahead and build more in the US to avoid the tariffs."

Making the Commission's next move slippery...
monapaulsen.bsky.social
While the Trump admin equates U.S. security with economic competitiveness (simultaneously blurring leverage, cronyism, and restoration), the means to these objectives all defy economic growth, creating more harm than good. But if just future-proofing the military, could have imagined less challenge.
Alanis Morissette And Isnt It Ironic Dont You Think GIF
ALT: Alanis Morissette And Isnt It Ironic Dont You Think GIF
media.tenor.com
monapaulsen.bsky.social
On October 11, 2025, my family will run in the #RBCRacefortheKids to raise funds for the Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH), as they need new child cancer-fighting facilities.

If you have £5 to spare, I would be grateful if you could help GOSH. Please see the link: race.gosh.org/fundraisers/...
Mona Paulsen
I’m joining the race to help beat childhood cancer by taking part in GOSH family fun run and festival, RBC Race for the Kids. The money raised from this event will help build the Children’s Cancer Cen...
race.gosh.org
Reposted by Mona Paulsen
alanbeattie.bsky.social
My Trade Secrets today. Trump has annoyed farmers by provoking China to block their exports while bailing out Argentina, home of their rivals.

Are the farmers right to feel betrayed? Is a pitchfork rebellion against his tariffs coming? Will farm country turn against Trump?

Answers: no, no and no.
Don’t expect a farmers’ revolt to moderate Trump’s tariff campaign
[FREE TO READ] US agricultural exporters could see the trade war coming — and voted for him anyway
on.ft.com
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Remember, Brazil and the US are in consultations for the tariffs at the WTO too...
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Third, we have yet to see how securitisation of trade will structure commercial considerations of private (tech) firms. Opaque, unbound, growing, it occurs simultaneously to the Trump administration building of Fortress USA, Inc. blurring responsibilities of private/public and state/commercial.
monapaulsen.bsky.social
Second, it's the context that matters, which has spillover effects into bindingness and transparency. To act quickly, we see the US pursue a never-ending story that bypasses checks and balances. So it's not the abstract notion of security, but the woolly means it perpetuatally cloaks assessment.
monapaulsen.bsky.social
I'd tease out a couple of points. First, the demand on governments to consider foreign policy/defence in coordination is not new, but it may be that we are seeking a ramp up of non-governmental folks (incl. firms and economists!) having to balance efficiency with security to new heights since 1990s.
simonlester.com
New IELP post from me: "Beware the 'Securitization' of Trade Policy"

tl;dr: Security issues have always been part of trade policy discussions, but things have ratcheted up recently. I'm concerned that people are getting security wrong, which has negative implications for making good trade policy.
Beware the "Securitization" of Trade Policy
In recent years, U.S. trade policy has seen a creeping takeover by "security" concerns. The precise scope of these concerns is unclear, but they appear to cover both the traditional aspects of militar...
ielp.worldtradelaw.net
Reposted by Mona Paulsen
Reposted by Mona Paulsen
monapaulsen.bsky.social
And one of the largest lumber councils in BC have this when you visit their site: