{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014418125643666324, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.394736842105263, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Of the Inequals of the Uruguay Round

Ten years ago, the TRIPs Agreement set a distinct tone in international law by requiring members to prioritize international trade obligations as a means to achieve national goals. Within the next five years, the AIDS crisis highlighted that compromising pressing national responsibilities - like a looming public health crisis - to fulfill international obligations may, in fact, detrimentally affect international trade. Meanwhile, access to medication continues to be an unresolved issue even as we celebrate the tenth anniversary of TRIPs and the end of the transitional period. This Article suggests that the success of TRIPs depends on its ability to address national responsibilities that impedes members from fulfilling international obligations. In this context, the Article analyzes policy options embraced by countries like India, which prioritized national responsibilities in its quest to appear on the global trade map.