ABSTRACT
The problem of non-reciprocal treatment of developing countries in international trade is construed mostly in the framework of the question: would non-reciprocal or reciprocal treatment be more beneficial for developing countries? Developing countries must not do anything incompatible with their needs in the fields of development, finance, and commerce. There are many economists arguing that unilateral trade liberalization is always or nearly always beneficial to a country's economy, and that the arguments advanced in favour of reciprocity are no longer valid. Though formal or substantive reciprocity are no requirements of general international law or conditions of validity for international treaties, the analysis of state practice shows that reciprocity is a basic element of public international law. The anticipation of reciprocity or mutuality of advantages works as a motivating force behind the formation and fulfillment in good faith of international arrangements. The element of reciprocity works as a constructive, mitigating and stabilizing force behind the totality of international law.
