|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Sep25/13) WTO:
Plurilaterals are not a "panacea" for trade problems, warns
Brazil Geneva, 17 Sep (D. Ravi Kanth) -- The World Trade Organization's annual Public Forum began on 15 September, with Brazil's trade envoy taking the center stage on the complex nature of ongoing WTO trade negotiations. In what seemed like a tutorial for senior representatives of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Brazil's trade envoy to the WTO, Ambassador Guilherme de Aguiar Patriota, offered a comprehensive picture of global trade negotiations and their evolution since the Second World War. Asked by the moderator about the evolution of conversations around multilateralism and plurilateralism, and whether there is any change in tone, Ambassador Patriota acknowledged that "there are changes all over, not just in tone". "I think there are changes in reality worldwide," he said, while informing the ICC representative about the "association between trade and peace, which is also an association between rules and peace." He said that a multilaterally agreed and enforceable system of rules for international trade brought the kind of "certainty" that the private sector so avidly seeks, informing the audience that "what we have here at the WTO is precisely such a system." When the ICC representative emphasized the link between trade and peace, the Brazilian trade envoy responded: "The association between trade and peace was established before World War II," adding that "the beggar-thy neighbour policies of the 30s were largely considered one of the important causes of friction between states that led to the war". Rules were established thereafter so that everyone could have the required predictability for doing business and states could commercially relate with one another in a coherent and cooperative manner. He observed that trade "sits at the interface between peace, security and development", saying that the rules- based system can and should also be tweaked to make it more supportive of sustainable development, and to address climate and other social and economic goals of the international community. Ambassador Patriota underlined that the option for members to negotiate agreements in a plurilateral format is not new nor extraneous to the WTO, as the Marrakesh Agreement clearly foresees such possibility, on condition that such agreements are duly incorporated into the multilateral legal framework by agreement of all members. He underscored that this option is "built into the system; it is embedded in the existing rules." Addressing what appeared to be irrational exuberance over plurilateral negotiations as building blocks, the Brazilian trade envoy noted that members can negotiate plurilateral agreements within the WTO, but not to the detriment of the system's multilateral nature. "I think we all agree that the acquis of the WTO, built over a period of eight decades, is important because national laws mirror what was negotiated here and govern trade worldwide." He said that "the issue of whether negotiations should be plurilateral or not, within a system that is multilateral, is a matter of substance, balance and fairness" and "depends on what is being discussed and how." He underscored the need for "flexibility" within the system on an equitable basis and geared towards the higher development goals of all members. More importantly, "the system has to evolve, but this should go hand in hand with a review of the existing commitments and obligations in order to free up space for developing country members, in particular, to pursue their legitimate social, economic and industrial national objectives," the Brazilian trade envoy said, adding that "many of these commitments and obligations are currently being set aside or neglected as countries have gone their own way in the last couple of years." Without naming the countries that are imposing unilateral tariffs, Ambassador Patriota said that such measures pose a threat to the future of an organization and system that has largely served the interest of peaceful economic relations amongst states. He asked rhetorically, "how do you respond to these disruptive trends?" He answered, "you re-examine and update the existing rulebook", possibly introducing more flexibilities into it, not just to accommodate the challenging new developments to do with the digital economy, green transitions or oversupply, but also equally to free up space for the global South to adopt the kinds of policies that will accelerate their national development in meaningful ways. PLURILATERALS Against this backdrop, Ambassador Patriota said that he reckons "plurilaterals are not a panacea, but can be a pathway to be explored within the rules", as highlighted in the recent BRICS New Delhi Declaration. He informed the ICC that when governments negotiate at the WTO, an inter-governmental body, they do so also on behalf of their private sector and other lobbies. In short, the Brazilian trade envoy said, "the stronger the system, the multilaterally agreed rules, the more stable they are, the more enforceable they are," the better for all, including business. But "right now they're not fully enforceable because the dispute settlement system of which I'm currently the chair is no longer in a position to issue final decisions." Conversely, he said, "the weaker the system, the more the business and private sector will be beholden to what's currently a great power competition amongst the major trading partners, bearing the costs as geostrategic considerations overtake efficiency and cooperation." Meanwhile, the WTO Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, touted the impressive growth in global trade in services of 4.8 percent and how it can power the future. Painting a rather rosy picture of global trade in services, she claimed that it is the driver of global trade and the dynamic component of world trade in 2026. Without naming the United States, the DG admitted that "the global trade rules are under challenge; global trade is experiencing problems such as it has never seen." During the opening session, there was hardly any discussion of unilateral tariffs and trade measures imposed by the Trump administration, said several people who asked not to be identified. +
|
||
