Yes or No and what do you base your position on?
If you are wrong, then so am I. More importantly, I believe there is enough evidence to argue either way, but in terms of the use of most favored nation status, the poorer nations get more from the appointment. The changes in global markets have made a big difference for so many countries, both large and small. While it has been good for richer countries who did not like to pay specific fees and taxes for access to countries, I think lowering of barriers and having a place to appeal decisions and bring unfair practices to light has been better for poorer countries who before did not have such an equal playing field. They may not always win, but they bring the problems into the light and force changes in the way the bigger countries deal with smaller, developing countries. Also having Most Favored Nation designation was a signal to foreign investors that the country was willing to accept the fair trade practices required by the WTO. FDI went up in those countries. China ...
A discussion of the writer's view about the WTO's usefulness to both richer and poor nations in its membership. Some support references are included.