uk

Article

Strategic trade alignment and sovereign flexibility: Azerbaijan’s WTO accession dilemma in a shifting global order

Elshan Orujov
Abstract

Azerbaijan’s potential accession to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) was highly relevant, as it reflected the broader challenge of reconciling economic modernisation with the preservation of sovereignty in a rapidly shifting global and regional context. The purpose of this study was to explore Azerbaijan’s path towards WTO accession as a case study of how emerging economies sought to reconcile multilateral trade commitments with the protection of Azerbaijan’s strategic sectors. The research employed a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative analysis of trade and political economy documentation with comparative benchmarking against post-Soviet states that had already undertaken accession. The findings showed that WTO membership held the potential to promote long-term diversification of the Azerbaijan’s economy, strengthen investor confidence, and enhance transparency in regulatory frameworks. However, accession commitments were also likely to limit the government’s capacity to apply protective measures in sensitive sectors, particularly agriculture, energy, and services. The analysis revealed that Azerbaijan’s accession choices were not exclusively economic; they were shaped by evolving regional alliances, fluctuations in hydrocarbon markets, and pressures from global trade liberalisation. To capture these tensions, the study proposed the conceptual framework of “strategic trade alignment and sovereign flexibility”, which explained Azerbaijan’s cautious stance in negotiations. The results of the research could be applied by trade negotiators in formulating strategies for accession that achieve integration into the global economy while maintaining adaptive governance mechanisms

Keywords

trade policy; economic sovereignty; post-Soviet integration; regional economic shifts; strategic dilemma

Download article

Received 17.07.2025, Revised 14.11.2025, Accepted 23.12.2025 Published 29.12.2025

Retrieved from Vol. 12, No. 2, 2025

Suggested citation

Orujov, E. (2025). Strategic trade alignment and sovereign flexibility: Azerbaijan’s WTO accession dilemma in a shifting global order. Economics, Entrepreneurship, Management, 12(2), 30-40. https://doi.org/10.56318/eem2025.02.030

https://doi.org/10.56318/eem2025.02.030

Pages 30-40

References

  1. Abdullayev, K., Aliyeva, A., Ibrahimova, K., Badalova, S., & Hajizada, S. (2024). Current trends in digital transformation and their impact on the national economy. Scientific Bulletin of Mukachevo State University. Series “Economics”, 11(1), 9-18. doi: 10.52566/msu-econ1.2024.09.
  2. Arveladze, G., & Smeets, M. (2017). Georgia’s post-accession structural reform challenges (WTO Staff Working Paper No. ERSD-2017/10). Geneva: World Trade Organization.
  3. Auty, R.M. (2001). Resource abundance and economic development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  4. Bacchus, J. (2024). Trade links: New rules for a new world. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Baccini, L., & Urpelainen, J. (2014). Cutting the Gordian knot of economic reform: When and how international institutions help. Princeton: Princeton University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199388998.001.0001.
  6. Brander, J.A., & Spencer, B.J. (1985). Export subsidies and international market share rivalry. Journal of International Economics, 18(1-2), 83-100. doi: 10.1016/0022-1996(85)90006-6.
  7. Cadier, D., & Brunet, L.-C. (Eds.). (2014). The geopolitics of Eurasian economic integration. London: LSE IDEAS.
  8. Center for Analysis of Economic Reforms and Communication. (2024). Export review. Azerbaijan. Retrieved from https://ereforms.gov.az.
  9. Chang, H.J. (2002). Kicking away the ladder: Development strategy in historical perspective. London: Anthem Press.
  10. Drábek, Z. (2024). Is the WTO terminally ill? Threats to the international trading system. Asia and the Global Economy, 4(1), article number 100078. doi: 10.1016/j.aglobe.2024.100078.
  11. Dragneva, R., & Wolczuk, K. (2017). The Eurasian Economic Union: Deals, rules and the exercise of power. London: Chatham House.
  12. Gelb, A. (2010). Economic diversification in resource rich countries (Working Paper No. 101310). Washington: Center for Global Development Working Paper.
  13. Hausmann, R., Hwang, J., & Rodrik, D. (2007). What you export matters. Journal of Economic Growth, 12(1), 1-25. doi: 10.1007/s10887-006-9009-4.
  14. Hoekman, B., & Mavroidis, P.C. (2015). Embracing diversity: Plurilateral agreements and the trading system. World Trade Review, 14(1), 101-116. doi:10.1017/S1474745614000378.
  15. Kaufmann, D., Kraay, A., & Mastruzzi, M. (2023). The Worldwide Governance Indicators: Methodology and analytical issues. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi: 10.1017/S1876404511200046.
  16. Keohane, R.O. (2002). Ironies of sovereignty: The European Union and the United States. Journal of Common Market Studies, 40(4), 743-765. doi: 10.1111/1468-5965.00396.
  17. Nahmadova, F. (2023). Azerbaijan’s integration in the BRI Middle Corridor: Is WTO accession needed? (Paper No. 110331). Munich: Munich Personal RePEc Archive
  18. Neset, S., Aydin, M., Ergun, A., Giragosian, R., Kakachia, K., & Strand, A. (2023). Changing geopolitics of the South Caucasus after the Second Karabakh War: Prospect for regional cooperation and/or rivalry (CMI Report 2023:4). Bergen: Chr. Michelsen Institute.
  19. OECD. (2023). OECD governance indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing.
  20. Orujov, E. (2025). Azerbaijan’s path to World Trade Organization membership: Current issues and future perspectives. Silk Road Journal, 1, 97-110. doi: 10.30546/SI.2025.1.5.032.
  21. Rodrik, D. (2018). What do trade agreements really do? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(2), 73-90. doi: 10.1257/jep.32.2.73.
  22. State Statistical Committee of the Republic of Azerbaijan. (n.d.). The foreign trade of Azerbaijan. Retrieved from https://www.stat.gov.az.
  23. Strategic Roadmap for development of logistics and trade in the Republic of Azerbaijan. (2017). Retrieved from https://ereforms.gov.az.
  24. UNCTAD. (2023). Foreign Direct Investment Statistics for Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan. Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
  25. Wilkinson, R. (2013). The WTO. Crisis and the governance of global trade. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203607725.
  26. World Bank. (2016). Georgia: Trade Policy Review and Economic Performance Post-WTO Accession. Washington, DC: World Bank.
  27. World Bank. (2023a). Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$), Kyrgyz Republic. Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org.
  28. World Bank. (2023b). World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS): Azerbaijan. Retrieved from https://wits.worldbank.org.
  29. World Bank. (2024). GDP growth (annual %), Kyrgyz Republic. Retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org.
  30. World Integrated Trade Solution. (2022). Kyrgyz Republic trade indicators. Retrieved from https://wits.worldbank.org.
  31. World Trade Organization. (2021). Trade policy review: Kyrgyz Republic. doi: 10.30875/9789287051059.
  32. World Trade Organization. (2023a). Annual report 2023. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org.
  33. World Trade Organization. (2023b). Post-accession performance data for Georgia, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan. Geneva: WTO Secretariat.
  34. World Trade Organization. (n.d.a). Current status of WTO accessions. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org.
  35. World Trade Organization. (n.d.b) Azerbaijan. Retrieved from https://www.wto.org.
  36. WTO Notifications Portal. (n.d.a). Georgia member profile. Retrieved from https://notifications.wto.org.
  37. WTO Notifications Portal. (n.d.b). Kazakhstan member profile. Retrieved from https://notifications.wto.org.
  38. WTO Notifications Portal. (n.d.c). Kyrgyz Republic member profile. Retrieved from https://notifications.wto.org.