Journal of Strategic Trade Control fr Australia’s defense export control regime and critical technologies In 2023, Australia entered its second statutory review of export control legislation, an ongoing process since the unimplemented findings of the 2018 review, which declared the legislative framework no longer fit for purpose. A key finding of the 2018 review underscored the inadequacy of the existing legislative regime in addressing critical technologies, such as artificial intelligence. This paper proposes a strategic approach for Australia to enhance its defense export controls by drawing insights from other export control systems that have tackled similar issues. Through adept adaption of existing legislation and exploration of alternative strategies for regulating critical military technologies, this study aims to bring about concise and meaningful updates. The primary focus of the analysis centers on the challenges posed by emerging and disruptive technologies (EDT). Specifically, it seeks to highlight the novel characteristics of EDT and their potential military applications, necessitating specific consideration in the design of an export control regime. Furthermore, the paper aims to explore feasible enhancements to Australia’s domestic regulation, addressing existing gaps. These proposed reforms could assist in harmonizing Australia’s controls with those of the European Union (EU) and the United States (US), fostering global consistency in export control models. By identifying methods to enhance export control regimes of countries that play middling roles in the global defense export markets, such as Australia, this paper outlines a pathway for Australia's legislative evolution while contributing valuable insights to reflect upon the efficacy and influence of EU and US models in achieving global non-proliferation objectives. Wed, 21 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0100 Kazakhstan’s law “On control of specific goods”: balancing economic development goals and international non-proliferation obligations This article examines how Kazakhstan’s 2022 strategic trade control (STC) law, “On control of specific goods”, which replaces the 2007 law “On export controls”, balances the country’s economic development goals with the fulfillment of its international non-proliferation obligations. The article demonstrates how microeconomic policy instruments, such as various types of licensing, and reduction in the asymmetry of information tools, such as a catch-all clause, end-user certification, and Internal Compliance Program (ICP), are used to achieve regulatory compliance. Overall, the new law introduces comprehensive STCs that are more in line with international best practices. The new STC law will likely improve Kazakhstan’s position in the Peddling Peril Index (PPI). However, it is also important for the government to receive industry feedback on how well the new law minimizes associated industry compliance costs and promotes stated economic development goals. Fri, 23 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0200 EU strategic trade controls and sanctions: are we talking about the same thing? Strategic trade controls and sanctions might sometimes be considered interchangeable terms or concepts due to the fact that both are instruments that are used to interfere in international trade for political reasons. On the one hand, sanctions are usually an instrument that states use to exert pressure on one another, often regardless of the intended uses of the goods transferred; on the other, strategic trade controls focus on the potential end use of items and may pursue diverse objectives, from the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction to the protection of cultural goods. This contribution investigates the relationship between strategic trade controls (or export controls) and sanctions (or restrictive measures). The article analyses their respective scopes, objectives, decision-making processes, implementation, lifting and revision procedures, and prosecution of violations within the European Union. Furthermore, the contribution specifically outlines the competences granted to the Union with regard to export controls and sanctions, as well as their evolution over time. The article concludes that strategic trade controls and sanctions are not synonymous. It specifies their peculiarities, their differences and similarities in light of the scopes, objectives, and procedures that the research has identified. Finally, based on this categorization, the article establishes general trends and principles. Fri, 26 May 2023 00:00:00 +0200 The Extraterritorial Reach of US Export Control Law In recent years, the United States (US) has dramatically expanded a set of extraterritorial rules, known as the ‘foreign direct product rules’. The rules subject certain items to the jurisdiction of the Export Administration Regulations that are produced outside the US with the use of specific types of US technology, software, or equipment, but contain no US-origin content and are traded between parties outside the US without ever touching US territory. As such extraterritorial rules may breach other States’ sovereign rights, they are only permissible under international law when there is a genuine nexus between the regulating State and the object of regulation. This article argues that, in principle, the foreign direct product rules do not breach international law as US national security concerns, in principle, can justify the rules under the protective principle. The US should, however, better substantiate its decisions to exert its extraterritorial legislative powers to increase acceptance of the rules among affected states. Tue, 18 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0200