This is a very timely book in three major respects. The first is that this book is derived from papers presented at a conferenceFootnote ¹ that was concerned with politics and international economic law (IEL), that took place in Washington, DC, in the period immediately after the last US election cycle − one in which IEL figured heavily in the campaign rhetoric of both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.Footnote ² The papers of the conference were written or prepared during that pre-election period and then completed and edited in the initial post-election period, during which the world watched to see whether the rhetoric would translate into protectionist policies. Those chapters remain trenchant today as the current election cycle appears also to be producing its fair share of rhetoric on IEL.Footnote ³

The second reason the book is timely is that it was created during the early days of the Global Financial Crisis (GFC). At that point, it was unclear which economic systems would suffer most, how the crises would spread, and which policies and institutions, if any, would be effective in tackling the different components of the GFC. The book chapters that focus on the GFC reflect those uncertainties. While one would like to have thought that by now we would have answers to the questions raised, that does not seem to be the case given the resilience and constantly changing nature of the GFC. As such, these thoughtful chapters continue to remain important as policy makers struggle to handle the ever-changing faces of the different, yet connected, financial crises that today make up this enduring GFC.

The third reason the book is timely is that it was created during the period in which observers of the WTO's Doha Round were shocked that the Round had made so little progress. Unfortunately, the political analyses in the book that focused on the Round continue to be relevant as it moves into its second decade, with the idea of a single undertaking appearing ever more unlikely and as multilateralism slowly but surely is replaced by increasing and deeper regional trade agreements (RTAs).

In addition to its direct relevance to events today, the book also has a timeless quality as it considers the role of politics across much of the very large IEL field. The volume, however, is well organized to bring order out of that potential chaos. Tomer Broude, Amy Porges, and Marc Busch have done an excellent job dividing the world of politics and international economic law into five discrete and meaningful sections, analyzing the role of politics in the areas of trade, investment, finance, dispute settlement, and foreign policy. But, to an inevitable extent for such a volume derived from a conference, the disparate approaches, although nicely contained by the editors' structure, still range widely across the IEL universe. In part that is a result of the editors' and conference organizers' permission, no doubt as a concession to the irresistible force of the authors' independence, that each author could define for themselves what is meant by ‘politics’.Footnote ⁴ The end result is a collection, as noted above, of piquant works, but one which does not necessarily deliver a solid story across the entire length of the book. This may reflect the realities of politics, for politics follows its own unpredictable path, subject to many competing and contradictory forces. The best one can hope for is indeed what is presented in this collection − with chapters providing a series of ‘snap shots’ of the impact and role played by politics on the different parts of IEL, such as within state foreign policies, the WTO, the EU, United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL), the various RTAs and bilateral investment treaties (BITs), and even between and among international institutions or agreements. More specifically, those ‘snap shots’ occur at all levels of governance. For example, Meredith Lewis' approach considers the role of politics in the creation and implementation of bilateral agreements between states, while Perry Bechky considers divestment politics at the municipal and sub-federal levels.

More generally, the book raises one of the central issues within IEL − the balance between politics and law. When first created, the WTO was hailed for moving away from the diplomatic/political GATT system to more of a rules-based legal regime, though the story is a little more complex, and politics and diplomacy continue to work off of each other.Footnote ⁵ In other areas of IEL, there is also an ongoing balancing act between politics and law. For example, with respect to international investment law there are similar tensions, ones apparent in Axel Berg's chapter on Chinese investment treaties. Berg notes that even as there are moves towards a more legal approach by China and its investment-treaty partners, not far from the surface are ongoing political tensions as China considers such treaties with more politically complex partners such as the United States. Similarly, in the financial sector, in Douglas Arner's chapter he argues, among other things, that it is likely that ‘the existing regime will be reformed to some extent and reaffirmed through increased legalization’.

Another broad theme in any book discussing politics and IEL is that much of the politics encountered reflect emotional protectionism and antipathy to foreigners. This exists across all areas of IEL. Indeed, Yvonne Lee's chapter on the politics associated with sovereign wealth funds clearly shows the relevant politics in that case reflects those fears. While politics is something we tend to associate with policy makers, at the institutional and state level, it nonetheless reflects human passions and imaginations, and as such the role of specific individuals in the creation of political environments can be significant. This aspect of politics was raised in a few of the chapters − both directly and indirectly. Directly it was raised as an issue in Kimberlee Weatherall's chapter on US preferential trade agreements, where, among other things, she noted that the individual and personal interests of US stakeholders and officials play a role in the creation of US policy. Indirectly, the psychological role of individuals was the undercurrent and background to Busch and Krzysztof Pelc's work on the use of judicial economy by the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body (DSB). After all, it is the individuals on the DSB panels who are the ones that will respond to signals from third parties to the disputes suggesting judicial economy is warranted. Interestingly, despite these few examples, the role of individuals and indeed even of specific politicians was typically absent from most of the chapters. Of course, the chapters are legal analyses and as such the role of individuals is less present, especially as the role of the individual is muted in IEL which typically concerns state parties and international governmental organizations. That oversight or omission is unfortunate, given politics is the underlying subject of the book, a subject inexorably tied to individuals and their emotions and behaviors.

Finally, although I am a former editor of two ASIL IELG conference books and that I was involved in the ASIL IELG's move from student run journals to such edited collections,Footnote ⁶ I have concerns about this format for presentation of scholarly work. In particular, there is a concern that the scholarly benefit from these works is going to be largely unavailable to most researchers and policy makers if the papers are only to be available in print or electronic book format. Electronic database access, free or not, is not yet standard for such works, undermining the impact this scholarship can have among policy makers and scholars, especially those in the developing world. Ironically, this book review is more likely to be widely available, but it cannot, of course, convey the many insights that are to be found in the book.