TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Jun15/03)
2 June 2015
Third World Network
Where are we heading at WTO, asks Indonesian envoy
Published in SUNS #8030 dated 29 May 2015
Geneva, 28 May (Chakravarthi Raghavan*) -- As efforts continue at
the World Trade Organisation (WTO) to draw up a post-Bali work programme
with a "re-calibrated" agenda to wind up the Doha Development
Round at the Nairobi Ministerial Conference in December, the Indonesian
envoy to the WTO, Ambassador Iman Pambagyo, has voiced the concerns
of developing countries on the process and the state of play.
In an op-ed under the title "WTO: Where are we Heading"
in the Indonesian daily Jakarta Post, and published as a "personal
view", the envoy, Iman Pambagyo, has voiced the concerns of trade
envoys of developing countries at the WTO over efforts to formulate
a post-Bali work programme in non-transparent consultations. Implicit
in the message of the op-ed is the view that APEC trade ministers
have been given an over-optimistic picture.
The article is reproduced below with acknowledgement:
APEC ministers responsible for trade have just completed a two-day
meeting in the resort area of Boracay, the Philippines, on May 24.
In keeping with a long tradition, the trade ministers discussed better
ways for APEC to strengthen its support for the multilateral trading
system and the World Trade Organization (WTO). The director- general
of the WTO, ambassador Roberto Azevedo, was invited to the meeting
and briefed ministers on the latest status of defining post-Bali work
programs and working toward a successful WTO Ministerial Conference
in Nairobi, Kenya, later this year.
It seems all critical issues under the Doha Development Agenda have
seen their respective comfortable landing zones, and ministers are
now looking into ways to nicely pack them all by July for a final
conclusion of the Doha negotiations in Nairobi.
[The APEC ministers issued a separate statement at Boracay on the
multilateral trading system: <http://www.apec.org/Meeting-Papers/Ministerial-Statements/Trade/2015_trade/2015_mts_standalone.aspx
SUNS]
Unfortunately, this is not the case. Developing countries' trade envoys
in Geneva have become more concerned these days that discussions on
such important issues have been kept behind closed doors in meetings
among the so-called G5-Plus countries - namely the US, the EU, China,
India, Brazil, Australia and Japan, with the director- general as
the chair. To make things even worse, the rest of the WTO members
could get information on what has been discussed only from some publications
such as the Washington Trade Daily and more recently, the Third World
Network's journal SUNS.
In its May 19 edition, SUNS reported how developed countries of the
G5 put pressure on China and India to agree to a much-lowered ambition
on market-liberalization of agricultural and industrial goods in a
clear attempt to set the scene so that flexibility sought by developing
countries would lose ground. Such a concerted effort by key developed
countries is pursued in the spirit of what the US called a "re-calibrated"
approach and the EU idea of a "simplified" approach to defining
post-Bali work programs, which should help concluding the Doha negotiations.
The report has raised even more concerns among developing countries
as it became much clearer that developed countries did practically
nothing to rectify the existing imbalances in global trade. These
rich countries are allowed to provide a huge amount of subsidies in
agriculture while developing countries needing to expand their support
to poor farmers and addressing rural poverty are prevented from doing
so by the existing agreements.
Developing countries also realize that with a much lowered ambition
on market access combined with no commitment to reducing domestic
subsidies, the developed countries will continue enjoying their unchallenged
muscle to access markets in developing countries with heavily subsidized
agriculture products.
Is this the terms on which developing countries will be willing to
conclude the Doha negotiations and allow developed countries to introduce
a new round of multilateral trade negotiations focusing purely on
commercial issues?
When WTO trade ministers agreed to launch the Doha Development Agenda
in 2001, it was understood that the agenda would be balanced: it will
further improve global trade by lowering barriers and rectify the
imbalances that have been in favour of rich countries, and at the
same time provide additional flexibility for developing countries
to address their development challenges.
This mandate has been reiterated by the 2004 July framework agreement,
the 2005 Hong Kong ministerial declaration and the 2008 revised draft
modalities in agricultural and industrial goods. While it is widely
understood that they are not cast in stone, developing countries believe
that the 2008 draft modalities provide the best basis to define a
roadmap to conclude the round, and they are willing to consider re-calibrating
these draft modalities to make them more relevant to the current dynamics
of the negotiations.
Ambassador Azevedo himself, as the Brazilian ambassador to the WTO,
wrote in 2012 that "the December 2008 draft modalities are the
basis for negotiations and represent the end-game in terms of the
landing zones of ambition. Any marginal adjustments in the level of
ambition of those texts may be assessed only in the context of the
overall balance of trade-off, bearing in mind that agriculture is
the engine of the round."
He went on to argue that "the draft modalities embody a delicate
balance achieved after 10 years of negotiations. This equilibrium
cannot be ignored, or we will need adjustments of the entire package
with horizontal repercussions. Such readjustments cannot entail additional
unilateral concessions from developing countries."
The questions the developing-country trade envoys have now are how
could a few developed countries working with the director-general
think that they could just focus on lowering the ambition on tariff
liberalization and getting rid of all other issues which could be
critical to developing countries? And do we abandon all the mandates
agreed by ministers just to conclude the round in December and praise
Africa as the land of the Doha conclusion?
It is obvious, however, that ministers from the developing world need
to insist strongly that the conversations in Geneva should be inclusive
and transparent, that flexibility for developing countries is a must
and that there is no need to rush to conclude the Doha Development
Agenda so long as there is no proper balance between improving the
global trade for all and leveling the playing field for developing
countries.
To countries like Indonesia and to members of a group of developing
countries known as the G33 with its 47 members, this would mean that
the group's proposals on agricultural special products and a special
safeguard mechanism should be accommodated as part of the Doha outcomes.
[* Chakravarthi Raghavan is the Editor-Emeritus of the SUNS. The article
can be found at: http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2015/05/27/insight-wto-where-are-we-heading.html#sthash.yDKcDuF1.dpuf]
+