Minimal headway

The 8th MC began in Geneva to discuss various general issues in its three working sessions namely: Importance of the multilateral trading system and the WTO, Trade and Development, and the Doha Development Agenda. However, there was no clarity on the core issues of Doha, namely Agriculture, NAMA and Services, and no timetable in respect of concluding the Doha Round. In addition to the three working sessions, there were the usual Opening and Closing Plenary Sessions. There were several other issues on the table including accession of Russia, Samoa and Montenegro, issues related to LDCs such as extension of transition time for accession to TRIPS and Services Commitments waiver, E-commerce issues etc.

On the eve of the eighth MC, most groupings issued statements, which reiterated their positions. The G20 and G33 group of developing countries reiterated their positions on various issues in agriculture, namely the need to do away with domestic support and export subsidies, the importance of special products and the need for a special safeguard mechanism (SSM) to protect the livelihoods of the poor dependent on agriculture. The G20 statement emphasized the importance of the work done so far and suggested that the 10 years of negotiating history must be preserved. They also expressed concern over private standards and food labelling resorted to by developed countries, which was against WTO guidelines. In addition, a group of 100 developing countries issued a communique expressing their disappointment with the impasse in the Doha Round. To quote from their Ministerial Declaration,

“The Doha Round needs to be concluded, “bearing fully in mind the membership’s commitment to the core principles of the DDA, viz. the development mandate, single undertaking, decision making based on multilateral consensus and progress made and a bottom up approach that is inclusive and transparent.

We are disappointed at the impasse in the Doha Round. We are willing to look at different approaches that are constructive to resolving the impasse. However, we do not support the adoption of a plurilateral approach to concluding the Round or parts of it, because it goes against the principles of multilateralism and inclusiveness. Therefore, any fresh approach has to be a multilateral consensus-based one, firmly anchored within the Doha Mandate.”

Interestingly, a group of 22 developed and developing countries including the USA, EC, Australia, Mexico, Thailand and Singapore took a ‘pledge against protectionism’ and appealed for a standstill of applied tariffs and no new protectionist measures to be applied in the trade of goods and services.

Issues at the Eighth MC

The issues at the 8th MC were not new and the positions of various countries were reiterated even before the MC began. In the Plenary session, most delegations outlined their known positions and lamented the lack of progress. Most developing countries reiterated the need to focus on the development agenda and the single undertaking (which basically says that nothing is decided till everything is decided), while developed countries wanted to explore new methods like plurilateral approaches.

Even so, negotiations continued in many areas such as TRIPS and issues related to LDCs. There were seven texts adopted which related to:

* extending the moratorium on TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints;

* extending the moratorium on E-commerce duties;

* the work programme on small vulnerable economies;

* extension of transition period of Least Developed Countries (LDCs) concerning the TRIPS Agreement;

* streamlining LDC accession procedures;

* an LDC services waiver;

* the fourth appraisal of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism.

The Chairman of the General Council presented his closing statement in two parts, of which the first part included ‘Elements of Political Guidance’ and the second part underlined the continued importance of the WTO in an atmosphere of increasing protectionism. The first part however proved somewhat contentious, with many developing countries questioning the Elements of Political Guidance as an attempt to influence the negotiating process unfairly.

Interestingly, the DG, WTO, Pascal Lamy, in a report to the Ministers a month before the MC8 was to begin, had admitted that there was an impasse in the negotiations. He underlined that the most evident differences were in the area of market access in the non-agricultural or industrial sector (or NAMA). He also informed that, while there were differences in other important areas of Agriculture, Rules (Anti-Dumping, Subsidies and Safeguards) and Services, much work had also been done, which needed to be built on. Some of the areas where constructive work was possible were: Trade Facilitation, a package for the LDCs including a mechanism to monitor special and differential treatment, fisheries subsidies and environmental goods and services.

Most civil society groups and NGOs were critical of the WTO and the Doha Round on the grounds that there was no serious discussion on the real problems facing the world, namely food security, jobs, assistance to those affected by the financial crisis and sustainable development.

Conclusion

The eighth MC ended without much movement on any of the main issues. Even before the MC began, most Members knew that this was not really a negotiating ministerial and it was more to reiterate known positions and try to see if some fresh approaches might work, without compromising on the ‘single undertaking’. Even though the DG, WTO, Pascal Lamy tried to talk up the outcomes on issues such as special treatment of LDCs and movement on Government Procurement, most of the Ministers who spoke at the closing plenary only reiterated their known positions. While everyone agreed on the need to move forward, no one knew how to do so. Perhaps the only bright spot in the 8th MC was the accession of Russia to the WTO after 18 long years of negotiations. With such a low bar of expectations, the road ahead was not really clear. To make matters worse, the global economy had slowed down and the temptation to resort to protectionist measures was high. With this background, the best credit to the WTO was that there was no roll back of the commitments already made. Further, the dispute settlement mechanism continued its job and ensured that trade disputes were handled fairly and transparently.

The writer is Additional Chief Secretary, Department of Mass Education Extension and Library Services and Department of Cooperation, Government of West Bengal.