Late last year, it seemed like the case was going to be off the table until the WTO makes its next official announcement on the matter.

However, it seems the dispute could flare up again much earlier, because the European Union appears unwilling to wait out the indefinite settlement process.

A note on the WTO’s website makes no secret of the fact that a resolution could be a long way off: “Given the ongoing lack of agreement among WTO members regarding the filling of Appellate Body vacancies, there is no Appellate Body Division available at the current time to deal with the appeal.”

At least three judges are needed for the Appellate Body to function properly, but the United States has for years been blocking the appointment of new judges to replace those who retired or quit, thereby leaving the entire dispute settlement process in disarray.

Does that mean the EU can simply take matters into its own hands? No, but that is exactly what it is doing by threatening Indonesia with “countermeasures,” for which it has “at this stage identified steel and stainless steel products,” according to an EU Commission announcement on a consultation process.

The obvious risk here is a tit-for-tat leading to a dispute between the EU and Indonesia that could grow much larger than the initial case.

The EU may well be frustrated with the stalled WTO process in this matter, but Jakarta is playing by the rules as it claims its right to lodge an appeal. The Appellate Body issue is not Indonesia’s fault.

The EU cannot bypass the WTO process just because there is a problem with its enforcement. The WTO principles still stand.

Admittedly, flouting those principles would be in keeping with recent tradition, given that countries around the world have begun to treat trade as a matter of national security rather than international cooperation.

Recent bans on the import or use of products from TikTok, Huawei, Micron and more have all been justified in the name of national security, without convincing evidence, as have controls on the export of microchips and the materials used in their production.

All of those measures run counter to WTO principles, and the invoked argument of national security is usually just a pretext used by governments to gain or maintain a competitive or strategic advantage.

The same goes for unilateral trade sanctions imposed by some countries on others, and sometimes even on target third parties, countries or private companies, that maintain trade relations with the sanctioned party.

The EU itself has instigated trade bans and sanctions, so it is hardly in a position to lecture others on free-trade principles, no matter how protectionist Indonesia’s ore export ban is.

The reality is that all countries care about fair trade only where it serves their interests, and they object to it where it runs counter to their interests. Free trade is a collective action problem, and the WTO was built to solve it.

Therefore, the WTO process must be respected, whether the EU likes it or not. Instead of putting pressure on Indonesia, which is acting in line with the WTO process, Brussels might want to talk to the US, which has been hindering that process from working smoothly ever since Barack Obama’s administration.

The US has demanded WTO reform, and once that discussion begins, Jakarta should speak up, together with other emerging economies, to ensure any future WTO framework respects their legitimate desire to build downstream industries, even if that means curbing exports of raw commodities.

The more the WTO is sidelined, the more countries will look to regional trade blocks instead, which will further fragment global trade. We need the WTO more than ever.