One of the profound insight of the political economy of the world trade system is the understanding of the role played by the multilateral system for helping governments to resist the pressure of domestic lobbies. Everybody knows for example that most governments would be unable to cut even partially agricultural subsidies if they could not invoke vis-a-vis their lobbies their international obligations.
This kind of mechanism is completely missing in the context of the security of oil platforms. Most international maritime conventions apply primarily or exclusively to accidents involving vessels such as tankers. They do not apply to accidents involving oil platforms, like the Deepwater Horizon spill. In other words, there is no global convention governing this issue.
Therefore, one is not surprised to hear president Obama talking about the “cozy relationship” between the oil industry and the federal institutions in charge of supervising the security of oil platforms. One technology that could have been useful in the Deepwater case is an acoustic valve to shut off the well by remote control in an emergency. Such devices are required by Brazil and Norway, but not by the United States, where the oil industry successfully resisted a proposal years ago to require its use.
A global convention such as the WTO agreement imposing precise and uniform security obligations on oil platforms in most coastal states, is perhaps the best mechanism to put an end to this “cozy relationship.” Moreover, this is once again an opportunity to remember the sometimes hidden benefits of a multilateral system. In the case of subsidies for example, it is almost impossible to obtain meaningful control only through regional agreements involving a few countries.
