TWN Info Service on UN Sustainable Development (Oct20/08)
28 October 2020
Third World Network

US opposes SDG Trade Monitor portal at WTO budget meeting
Published in SUNS #9218 dated 26 October 2020

Washington DC, 23 Oct (D. Ravi Kanth) – The United States has opposed a new portal launched by the World Trade Organization, the International Trade Centre (ITC), and UNCTAD for collating the latest progress made in achieving the trade-related United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), on grounds that decisions made at the UN are not relevant for the WTO, trade officials told the SUNS.

The new portal was launched on World Statistics Day on 20 October (the portal can be accessed at: http://sdgtrade.org).

The portal “allows users to conduct customized analysis of trade-related SDG indicators, with the objective of improving understanding of the relationship between trade and development of the SDG agenda and highlighting the latest state of play in achieving the relevant SDG targets.”

At a time when the chair of the Doha Rules negotiations, Ambassador Santiago Wills from Colombia, has accelerated the fisheries subsidies negotiations under the mandate of the UN SDG 14.6, the largest member is now challenging the SDG-related portal, exposing the apparent double standards it adopts in advancing the fisheries subsidies negotiations, said an official, who preferred not to be quoted.

During the WTO’s Committee on Budget, Finance, and Administration (CBFA) meeting on 22 October, a US official severely chastised the new portal, saying that it may not be an issue for the CBFA to discuss, as it may not have emerged from the administration of the WTO, said people familiar with the development.

The US official sought to know the decision-making process that took place and the necessary budget allocations that were made for the portal, said a participant, who preferred not to be quoted.

The US official said “our specific concern is that the SDG conversations and the debate that took place in the UN was very detailed and complex,” the person said.

Criticizing the WTO’s decision to launch the portal, the US official said, “we had concerns about the decisions made in one organization (UN) based on its (own) decision-making process (that) are being applied to a different organization with its own-decision making process.”

“We are concerned then (when the SDGs were negotiated) that the WTO was referenced in the SDG process and we know that all SDGs were not individually agreed to,” the US official said, according to another person who was present at the meeting.

The US official said that the WTO would actively undermine the concerns it had in that process, suggesting that it wants to know if the “decision-makers had given any thought to the implications of this initiative and will the WTO agenda be agreed in the UN as many saw it in the last discussion,” the participant said.

More disturbingly, the US official said the WTO’s action to launch the portal “would disregard the outcome that was achieved in the communication on the SDGs,” said another participant, who asked not to be quoted.

Further, the involvement of the ITC – whose budget is largely funded by the WTO from its annual budget – in launching the new portal for collating the progress in the trade-related SDGs and how it would fit into their agenda, is more troubling, the US official said at the CBFA meeting.

Expressing alarm over the portal, the US official said that “the statements in the UN clearly show that it is for the national governments to monitor and track the SDG goals that were agreed to in the UN system,” the participant said.

In response to the US concerns on the portal, the chair of the CBFA, Ambassador Manuel A. J. Teehankee from the Philippines, said that he would get the issue examined by the Secretariat.

At the CBFA meeting, the US also raised numerous questions about the budget for 2021/2022, the management of trust funds, internal oversight, and how the office of internal oversight conducts its business, among others, said participants familiar with the development.

INDIA’S STATEMENT AT CBFA MEETING

At the CBFA meeting, India took the floor on two different issues, one concerning the diversity in the WTO secretariat in terms of staff, and more importantly, its earlier suggestion for a voluntary cut in the budget for the WTO secretariat, said an Asian participant, who asked not to be quoted.

On the first item about the diversity of staff in the WTO Secretariat, India said that while it acknowledges the need for the highest possible standards in the recruitment of the staff, the diversification of the staff should remain a long-term objective of the WTO’s recruitment policy.

The staffing pattern at the WTO “still remains skewed in favour of a handful of members,” said India, arguing that “only 5 countries – constituting only 3% of the membership – account for 50% of the total staff strength.”

Unfortunately, this pattern remained unchanged since 1995, India argued, suggesting that “developed country members” have dominated the WTO’s staffing pattern for the past 20 years.

Moreover, “the staff representation of many members, including India, has remained stagnant in the past 25 years,” India said, pointing out that “India’s share in the total WTO Staff in 1995 was 2.2% and now it is 2.1%.”

Even in the professional staff, said India, it’s share has gone down from 4.1% in 1995 to 3.5% in 2019.

“Even smaller countries, with significantly smaller populations have more staff in the Secretariat than India, the world’s second most populous country, whose professionals have made a mark across the world with their skills and talent,” India said.

Despite considerable interest of Indians and other developing country candidates to work at the WTO Secretariat, with the highest number of applicants coming from India in 2019, there has been little or no change, India argued.

More disturbingly, while “developing countries and LDCs that account for more than 3/4 th of the WTO membership account for only 30% of the staff,” the developed countries, constituting less than 1/4 th of the membership, account for 70% of the staff, India pointed out.

It is well-known that the WTO officials drawn from the developed countries choose to apply their specific experiences and world-view that fails to appreciate the problems faced by the developing countries as well as the least-developed countries, said a participant, who asked not to be quoted.

In short, “select Developed Countries continue to enjoy some kind of Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT) in recruitment at the WTO, but often the narrative is to accuse and defame the developing countries for their legitimate S&DT entitlements in WTO agreements,” India said at the meeting.

India called for more credible “measures and active efforts to increase the diversity of the Secretariat.”

The Indian official, however, commended the WTO secretariat for achieving an impressive gender balance in staffing, with 54.7% of the staff being women in 2019, compared to their share of 31% in 1995.

Against the backdrop of appointing the first woman Director-General this year, India said that “history will be made and a new glass-ceiling would be broken.”

Meanwhile, under the agenda item of “other business” at the CBFA meeting, India came back to its earlier suggestion made at the WTO General Council meeting on 13 October about a cut in the budget for the WTO Secretariat, saying that “austerity begins at home, and for India, the WTO is home.”

India clarified its earlier suggestion for a voluntary “cut for the Secretariat in annual budget for 2021 or 2022, in solidarity with members who are battling a grave economic situation brought about by COVID-19.”

In response to the CBFA chair’s comment that India would make a “popular” proposal, India said “the global economy is battling a significant recession and WTO members across the developed and developing world are experiencing significant budgetary constraints”.

At a time when all national governments and international organizations are compelled to “apply economy measures”, India explained that the member contributions have remained the same over the years, “due to WTO’s zero nominal growth budget, [and] the currency depreciation has in fact increased the nominal contributions for many members.”

Significantly, India said that the “WTO budget is by and large the budget of the Secretariat,” as “the major chunk of the budgetary expenditure is on the salaries of the staff and establishment charges.”

The WTO’s budget also “does not constitute any significant program-related expenditures for welfare or developmental projects, as in the case of many UN bodies.”

“Therefore, $200 million budget, more or less just to run the secretariat, needs considerable justification, especially during the times of economic hardship and austerity,” India said, arguing “that there is scope for rationalization.”

India said that its suggestion for the cut in the budget for the Secretariat will not adversely impact the technical assistance programs for the developing and least-developed countries.

“That is not our intention or interest,” India emphasized.

India said that “the savings resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, for instance, as detailed in the Third Quarterly Expenditure Report (Q3) should be re-allocated in such a way that TA [technical assistance] programmes continue to receive the funding they deserve.”

India emphasized that its “recommendation, at this stage, is only a suggestion to the Secretariat,” arguing that it looks forward for constructive engagement with Members on this issue.