Final answer:
Under strict liability, product safety is the key focus rather than the actions of the manufacturer or supplier. Per WTO rules, countries can set their own safety standards, but these must apply equally to domestic and imported goods and be scientifically justified. Although protectionism argues for self-reliance, strategic stockpiling and judicious use of imports could be a better approach.
Step-by-step explanation:
Under the doctrine of strict liability, the principal consideration is the safety of a product, not the conduct of the manufacturer or supplier of the goods. When discussing the legitimacy of imposing higher safety standards on imported goods than those existing in the foreign country where the goods were produced, it is crucial to consider the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The WTO allows countries to set their product safety standards, but these standards must be the same for both domestic products and imported products, and they must be based on scientific evidence.
The national interest argument for protectionism suggests that relying too heavily on imported goods for key products can make a nation vulnerable if supplies are cut off. However, rather than restricting foreign supplies, it might be more strategic to stockpile resources and use foreign supplies when available to avoid dependency. This approach can balance the needs for safety, availability of products, and national security.