
© World Trade Organization, Marrakesh Agreement April 1994
Successful multilateral negotiations are a balancing act between strategy, compromise, power relations, and perceived legitimacy.
Establishment of the WTO through the Marrakesh Agreement
April 15, 1994

Before the World Trade Organization (WTO) was established in 1995, international trade was regulated by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) of 1947. Originally, the creation of an International Trade Organization (ITO) was planned, but this did not come to fruition due to political resistance.
Although the GATT successfully reduced tariffs and liberalized trade, it had structural weaknesses. There was no permanent organization, and the focus was exclusively on trade in goods; services and intellectual property were not taken into account. In addition, the dispute settlement procedure was inefficient, which led to tensions, particularly in trade conflicts between the US, the EU, and emerging economies.
The Uruguay Round (1986–1994) therefore launched an ambitious reform project aimed at fundamentally modernizing trade rules and creating an institutional structure. After eight years of intensive negotiations, the agreement establishing the WTO was signed in Marrakesh on April 15, 1994, and the WTO officially began its work on January 1, 1995.
The WTO started with 123 member states and now comprises 166 countries, which account for around 98 percent of global trade in goods.
How does the WTO work?
Unlike other international organizations such as the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund (IMF), decision-making power within the WTO is not delegated to a board of directors or a single director. Instead, the WTO system is based on a multi-level decision-making process:
Ministerial Conference: The WTO’s highest decision-making body is the Ministerial Conference, which normally meets every two years. It sets the central guidelines for the global trading system and decides on key trade issues.
General Council: Between Ministerial Conferences, the General Council in Geneva takes over the day-to-day management of the WTO. This body meets regularly and acts in three different capacities:
-
- As the General Council: It coordinates the day-to-day work of the WTO, implements decisions of the Ministerial Conference, and monitors compliance with WTO rules.
- Dispute Settlement Body: It is responsible for the dispute settlement procedure and ensures that trade disputes between member states are resolved in accordance with WTO rules.
- Trade Policy Review Body: It regularly reviews the trade policies and practices of member states to ensure transparency and prevent distortions in international trade.
- Other bodies: In addition to the General Council, there are specialized committees that deal with specific trade issues. These include:
- The Council for Trade in Goods
- The Council for Trade in Services
- The Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)
In addition, there are numerous committees, working groups, and working parties that deal with issues such as the environment, development, and accession negotiations for new members.
This structure enables the WTO to efficiently manage a wide range of trade issues and ensure that decisions are made by consensus or through regulated procedures.

What is interesting from a negotiation perspective?
The agreement to establish the WTO offers exciting insights and inspiration for negotiators today:
Complex negotiations require strategy - not just patience
Multilateral negotiations such as the Uruguay Round (1986–1994) are often protracted, but a long duration alone does not automatically lead to better results. The 1994 Marrakesh Agreement was celebrated as a historic step forward in world trade, but many key issues—particularly in the area of agricultural subsidies—were not resolved but merely postponed. This later led to deadlocks in subsequent negotiations, such as the Doha Round. It is crucial for negotiators to bear in mind that protracted processes increase the risk of negotiation fatigue and inadequate compromises. A clear negotiation plan with defined interim goals, flexible adjustment mechanisms, and possible escalation steps can help to avoid deadlocks and achieve meaningful results.
Compromises only make sense if they are viable
The WTO could only be established through a series of compromises, but not all of these “deals” proved to be sustainable. For example, the TRIPS Agreement on patent protection was accepted by many developing countries as part of a comprehensive negotiation package that promised, among other things, better market access in industrialized countries. However, these expectations were not fully met, leading to tensions and calls for reform. It is therefore crucial for negotiators not only to make short-term compromises, but also to ensure long-term stability. Negotiation packages should be strategically designed to ensure the fairest possible balance of interests. Where possible, win-win solutions are more sustainable than purely political stopgap measures that later give rise to conflicts.
Using relationships and coalition building as bargaining power
During the Uruguay Round, industrialized nations dominated the negotiations, while developing countries were often put under pressure. It was only when developing countries organized themselves into groups such as the G77 and emerging economies took on a greater role in negotiating forums such as the G20 that they were able to significantly increase their negotiating power. For negotiators operating from a weaker position, it can therefore be crucial to form alliances. Strategic networking with other actors strengthens influence and increases the chances of asserting one’s own interests. In multilateral negotiations, forming the right coalition can often be the deciding factor for successful outcomes.
Negotiations require social legitimacy and clear implementation mechanisms
The establishment of the WTO was a diplomatic success, but its long-term acceptance suffered from a lack of social legitimacy. Issues such as labor rights, environmental protection, and social justice were hardly addressed in the WTO agreements, which later led to massive protests (for example, during the Ministerial Conference in Seattle in 1999). Another problem was evident in the functioning of the WTO dispute settlement system, which has become increasingly incapacitated since 2018 due to the US blockade on the appointment of new judges, making it difficult to enforce international trade rules. The lesson here is clear: an agreement is only as effective as its political support and institutional implementation mechanisms. Negotiators should involve social and political actors at an early stage and ensure that agreements reached can also be enforced.
Successful multilateral negotiations are a balancing act between strategy, compromise, power relations, and perceived legitimacy. The WTO negotiations show that long-term stability can only be achieved if the results of negotiations are well thought out, realistically implementable, and supported by a broad base.

Sources & Further information
- https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2024/760443/EPRS_BRI(2024)760443_EN.pdf
- https://www.fedlex.admin.ch/eli/cc/1995/2117_2117_2117/de
- https://www.srf.ch/news/wirtschaft/25-jahre-wto-im-jubilaeumsjahr-vor-dem-abgrund
- https://www.trade.gov/trade-guide-marrakesh-agreement-establishing-wto
- https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/zahlen-und-fakten/globalisierung/52802/wto-world-trade-organization/
- https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org2_e.htm
- https://www.bakom.admin.ch/bakom/de/home/das-bakom/internationale-aktivitaeten/taetigkeiten-des-bakom-in-internationalen-organisationen/welthandelsorganisation.html