The Hindu Business Line : Re-starting WTO negotiations

THERE HAS BEEN a flurry of activity to get the negotiations re-started at the World Trade Organisation so that the end-2004 deadline for the Doha Round can be kept. Players as important as the US Trade Representative, Mr Robert Zoellick, the EU Trade Commissioner, Mr Pascal Lamy, and the G-20 (Brazil and India included) have been making the right noises to get things moving once again in Geneva. Mr Zoellick, supported by the EU, even suggested a mini-ministerial, or a "high-level General Council meeting", this summer to agree on a negotiations framework. A good idea, but with a slim chance of getting the negotiations process off the ground because a ministerial cannot succeed unless the spadework is done by the official negotiators.

Indeed, matters are finely drawn with just about four months available for achieving any concrete progress in the negotiations to make the Doha Round deadline. The new chairman of the WTO Committee on Agriculture, New Zealand's Timothy Grosser, has called a meeting beginning March 22 which, in effect, will be the first formal negotiating session after the Cancun fiasco. The new negotiating positions are expected to be laid out at the meet, followed by the real bargaining. Everything will have to be completed before the August holidays because after that the EU will be busy appointing a new commission and the US with the presidential elections.

But are there any new negotiating positions for the principal players that offer hope for the Doha Round? The focus is on agriculture, and the US, the EU and G-20 have made statements though not adding up to much. Mr Zoellick has made some apparent "concessions" — to "eliminate the subsidy element of export credits" and surplus disposal in the guise of food aid — but been careful enough to tie them with what the EU can offer in, say, eliminating export subsidies. The EU has been quick to put the ball back in the court of countries such as the US, Canada and Australia. Obviously, none of the developed players wants to yield ground, not the least because of the pressure from lobbies at home. Even so, it is only fair to point out that, for the first time, Mr Lamy has indicated that the EU is prepared to consider the elimination of farm export subsidies if that would get the negotiations restarted.

The G-20 and the Cairns Group of agricultural exporters have stuck to their positions on elimination of export subsidies and scaling down domestic support to farmers. The problems of the US and the EU can be gauged by the support the Cairns Group has extended to the demand that developing countries be granted "special flexibility" that allows them "to take into account the particular challenges they face, such as food and livelihood security and rural development". As for New Delhi, an effort was reportedly made during Mr Zoellick's recent visit to reposition India's negotiating stance — to agree to the broad framework approach as opposed to proceeding directly to a discussion on modalities. While such flexibility is welcome, hopefully, the basic objectives of protecting the Indian farmer, and getting the US and the EU to reduce farm subsidies will not be lost sight of.