|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (May22/17) Geneva, 18 May (D. Ravi Kanth) – Attempts are apparently underway to blame the developing countries if major outcomes on the WTO’s response to the pandemic, fisheries subsidies, agriculture, WTO reforms, and several other difficult issues are not achieved at the World Trade Organization’s 12th ministerial conference (MC12), scheduled for 12-15 June, said people familiar with the development. As the WTO Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, appears to be ratcheting-up pressure on the developing countries to fall in line with her demands to produce results, using the apparent pretext of what outside commentators are saying about the likely failure of MC12, the ground is being prepared as to whom should be blamed if things don’t go according to her plan, said people, who asked not to be quoted. The DG on 17 May convened two “green room” meetings, one on agriculture and the other on fisheries subsidies, in which divisions came to the fore on several issues in both areas, said people, who preferred not to be quoted. Trade envoys from 14 select countries apparently remained sharply divided on the agricultural deliverables for MC12, with unbridgeable divisions on the controversial draft Doha agriculture text, with the Director-General apparently having suggested the need for a simplified text, said people, who preferred not to be quoted. The trade envoys of the United States, the European Union, Canada, Australia, India, South Africa, Brazil, Uruguay, Jamaica, Egypt, and several other countries took part in the “green room” meeting on agriculture. The “green room” meeting on agriculture is the second closed-door meeting to take place in just a matter of seven days, with the DG seeming to have made little progress in bridging the gaps over the controversial draft text (TN/AG/50) issued last November by the chair of the Doha agriculture negotiations, Ambassador Gloria Abraham Peralta of Costa Rica, said people familiar with the development. However, three members of the Cairns Group of farm-exporting countries – Australia, Brazil, and Uruguay – are understood to have made clear that they will not accept any simplified text other than what is currently on the table since November last year, said people, who asked not to be quoted. The three Cairns Group members severely opposed the permanent solution for public stockholding (PSH) programs for food security, as demanded by a large majority of developing and least-developed countries. The three countries, who had vehemently opposed the permanent solution for the past many months, said that if there is any move to include the issue at the eleventh hour, they would also bring in the issues of domestic support and market access as possible deliverables, said people, who preferred not to be quoted. There is still no consensus on the issue of treating the chair’s draft text as a basis for the negotiations because of its alleged “bias” against low-income and resource-poor farmers in developing countries, said people who asked not to be quoted. The Doha agriculture chair, Ambassador Peralta, was present at the “green room” meeting. She remained silent when the DG said that some countries appear determined not to treat the text as a basis for any negotiations at this juncture. At the meeting, Indonesia announced that it would submit by Thursday the G-33’s revised proposal, which is co-sponsored by the African Group and several other countries, said people who asked not to be quoted. Given the opposition to the United Kingdom’s proposal on food security, which is supported by 30 countries, including the United States and the EU, the DG has proposed a small group of five or six countries to be led by Jamaica. This small group of countries is to work out a proposal on food security by Friday, but it remains to be seen whether it would garner consensus, as several countries, including India and Indonesia among others remained silent on the issue, said people, preferring not to be identified. Ms Okonjo-Iweala suggested that members work on a work program for the negotiations, on food security, and the need to remove export restrictions on foodstuff procured by the World Food Programme (WFP), SUNS was told. Without naming India, Australia criticized a “big country” for having imposed a ban on the exports of wheat, suggesting that the decision has flared up wheat prices in the international market, said people who asked not to be quoted. India apparently responded by saying that it takes note of the criticism leveled against the government’s decision on wheat. India apparently assured the least-developed countries (LDCs) at their retreat on 16 May that New Delhi would continue with government-to-government wheat sales, particularly for the LDCs and vulnerable countries, said people, who asked not to be quoted. In a notification issued by its director-general of foreign trade on 13 May, India stated that: (1) “whereas, there is a sudden spike in the global prices of wheat arising out of many factors, as a result of which food security of India, neighbouring and other vulnerable countries is it risk”; and (2) “whereas, the government of India is committed to providing for the food security requirements of India, neighbouring and other vulnerable developing countries which are adversely affected by the sudden changes in the global market for wheat and are unable to access adequate wheat supplies”. “Therefore,” according to the Indian notification, “in order to manage the overall food security of the country and to support the needs of the neighbours and other vulnerable countries,” the rules on the export policy on wheat are amended. However, India argued that the export of wheat shall be allowed under the following conditions: A. As a transitional arrangement, export will be allowed in case of shipments where Irrevocable Letter of Credit (ICLC) has been issued on or before the date of the Notification, subject to submission of documentary evidence as prescribed; or B. Export will also be allowed on the basis of permission granted by the Indian government to other countries to meet their food security needs and based on the request of their governments. Consequently, the “export of wheat” is “prohibited” with immediate effect except for shipments fulfilling the conditions as mentioned above, said India. India has already challenged the criticisms by the G-7 countries against New Delhi’s prohibition on wheat exports, saying that it is going to continue with wheat exports to vulnerable countries regardless of the indefinite prohibition. Apparently, the US and its allies are reportedly planning to raise the wheat issue at the UN Security Council in New York on 18 May. “GREEN ROOM” ON FISHERIES SUBSIDIES In a separate “green room” meeting convened by the DG on fisheries subsidies on 17 May, the chair of the Doha Rules negotiations, Ambassador Santiago Wills of Colombia, apparently criticized some developing countries for going back on the draft textual proposals contained in document WT/MIN(21)/W/5, said people, who asked not to be quoted. Apparently, trade envoys from some developing countries, who took part in the meeting, seemed somewhat surprised at the chair’s “finger-pointing” on various elements concerning the special and differential treatment (S&DT) provisions in Article 5.4 (of the draft text) on the subsidies that are contributing to overcapacity and overfishing, said people, who asked not to be quoted. The chair appears to have been upset at the developing countries for raising questions all over again on the issues that apparently were addressed in the draft text, said a person, who asked not to be quoted. The draft text on fisheries subsidies seems to be tilted in favour of the developed countries who are mainly responsible for the problem of overcapacity and overfishing that has led to the global depletion of fish stocks. Yet, the developing countries are being told not to raise their concerns, the person said. HOW SHOULD MINISTERS BEHAVE AT DAVOS MEETING? Ahead of the Davos mini-ministerial meeting on 25 May, the DG on 17 May told trade envoys from select countries to inform their ministers that they should not come with written statements, said people familiar with the development. Instead, she said that ministers must engage in frank discussions about the state of play on the deliverables for MC12. In what seemed like a “tutorial session” with countries that are going to participate in the Davos mini-ministerial meeting, the DG said she will offer her frank assessment about the seemingly difficult situation in accomplishing the proposed deliverables such as an agreement on fisheries subsidies, the WTO’s response to the pandemic, a work program on agriculture, development issues, and other major issues, said people familiar with the informal meeting. More than 20 countries are expected to participate in the Davos meeting, including the US Trade Representative Ambassador Katherine Tai and the EU Trade Commissioner among others. Ms Okonjo-Iweala apparently said that she will let trade ministers know that the WTO is not doing well and that commentators have already declared MC12 as a member-driven failure, said people, who preferred not to be quoted. However, she is understood to have said that she is confident of accomplishing at least two deliverables out of five at MC12, though she did not indicate what these two deliverables are. In short, with less than four weeks left before MC12, pressure is mounting on the developing countries to eschew their concerns so that the DG can claim a big victory at MC12, said a trade envoy, who preferred not to be quoted.
|
||
