Abstract There is a widespread sense among international economic lawyers that the most-favored-nation obligation, as the expression of a nondiscrimination norm is fundamental for international trade law. But ought they adorn MFN with its normative halo? This article studies the historical emergence of the MFN-as-fundamental mythology. It shows that this mythology is the outcome of three controversial projects over the course of the twentieth century. Embedded historically, they reveal that much less than nondiscrimination, MFN has historically been the vector for drawing the boundaries across which discrimination operates, whether between imperial powers and colonies, or between the West and the East. It is only out of a relatively recent, and intellectually radical turn that MFN became synonymous with the very idea of a universalist, nondiscrimination-centric, international trade law. But that intellectual universe—ordoliberalism—now being past us, this Article asks what account can we offer of alternative norms that have structured international trade law.
Sannoy Das (2026) studied this question.