The Hindu Business Line : Doha ambushed

The collapse of the mini-Ministerial WTO meeting in Geneva after nine days of intense negotiations only confirms that the spirit of development co-operation in the international community is not what it should be if multilateral trade organisations such as the one in Geneva are to continue to function effectively. The Commerce Minister, Mr Kamal Nath, summed up the substance of the deliberations succinctly when he said that while such countries as the US were trying to get the best commercial deal, economies like India and China were fighting to protect the livelihood of their farmers.

This is clearly indicated by the nature of the principal stumbling block of the talks, which had nothing to do with farm or industrial tariffs but related to safeguard measures for farmers in the developing world. Interestingly, at least on the face of it, there was a convergence of views on the subjects of farm subsidies and non-agriculture market access (NAMA) issues, differences over which had plagued the Doha Round negotiations over the past eight years. Indeed, the “breakthrough” in these areas was considered so important that an overall agreement at the end of the meeting seemed very much on the cards. But, as so often happens in such negotiations, the real, unpublicised “ambush points” were kept for the closing stages, and the very first one succeeding in undoing all the “progress” made over the past week. Among these issues, the two in the forefront were special safeguard measures for developing countries in the event of a surge in imports and US cotton subsidies affecting mainly some African economies. That the first of these would derail the entire negotiations underscores the fact that there is as yet no meaningful consensus on the “development orientation” of the Doha Round, which is unfortunate because it is precisely this dimension that sets it apart from all previous efforts to liberalise multilateral trade.

On the face of it, the gaps between the sets of figures — relating to the “triggers” for the safeguard mechanism to be activated following an upsurge in imports — advanced by the opposing sides ultimately proved unbridgeable, which should not have been the case had a more considerate, historically-oriented approach to development been pursued by the US and other countries. As has been suggested, in view of the difficulties and as an alternative, the figures could have been avoided and the stipulation of “demonstrable harm” employed, which would have left remedies to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Given the election season that lies ahead for countries such as India and the US, there is now little chance of the Doha Round being resurrected till at least the end of next year. Even then, there may be little progress unless the development concerns of the Round are given due importance.

Related Stories:
WTO meet on services crucial to Indian exports
Stumbling over substance
WTO asks US to reduce trade barriers