Problem Areas
When the ongoing Doha Round of talks broke down in July,
2008, two issues that were identified as the deal breakers were the special
safeguard mechanism for protecting developing country farmers and the sectoral
negotiations on NAMA apart from a new element of global economic recession and
taking Least Developed Countries (LDCs) on board on all WTO issues. While the US and some food exporting countries wanted to allow developing countries to increase tariffs beyond
ceiling levels only when import surges were very high, India and other developing countries wanted lower trigger points. In the discussions
related to eliminating tariffs in certain identified industrial sectors, while
the US wants to make participation mandatory by linking it to other
flexibilities including lower reduction in average tariffs, India and some other countries wanted it to be strictly voluntary.
What are the possibilities of the outstanding issues to be
settled.
Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM)
When the tug of war was going on between the developed and
the developing countries in July last in Geneva, with the developing countries,
mainly India pitching for 110% surge being the trigger point to apply SSM, the
developed countries, mainly the US, wanted it to be at 140-150% surge. Then
Pascal Lamy had suggested the figure of 120%, as a compromise point, to which
neither bloc agreed. When confronted with the question that the SSM should be
made more easily implementable with developing countries getting to control the
impact of sudden agricultural import surges, Pascal Lamy said, Everyone
is clear that developing country farmers should be shielded from big import
surges. Everyone is equally clear that exporters including many in other
developing countries should not have normal trade flows disrupted by
injudicious use of a safeguard. These two points are acceptable to everyone.
The question is how that should be accomplished. We have a bit more work to do
on the architecture including how to ensure that the SSM can be employed
easily, but not abusively and on the numbers. But negotiators are working on
this and a solution would be found.
Sectoral Negotiations
India and other developing countries have been insisting on sectoral
negotiations, so that some agreements are arrived at which will provide the
negotiations with some notable gains for all concerned. However, the developed
countries are not keen on that at all. In any case, any meaningful discussion
and agreement on this important aspect cannot be ignored for long.
LDCs on Board in WTO
Another important issue in the WTO and Doha Round has been
the interests of Least Developed Countries (LDCs). It has generally been
believed that the interests of LDCs have not been taken care of. When this
point was brought to the attention of Pascal Lamy, he said, The issue
of LDCs may not get much attention in newspapers, but in WTO, these issues are
on the front line. LDCs have already succeeded in making the case for much of what
they originally sought-this is why they are the most vocal about concluding the
Round. LDCs are not required to reduce tariffs or subsidies, nor to make offers
in services. We know the LDCs will receive duty-free, quota-free treatment in
development countries for at least 97 per cent of their exports. We know that
in cotton-a product of considerable interest for many LDCs-subsidies will be
cut even more de4ply and faster than for other agricultural products in
developed countries and that exports to those countries will be duty-free and
quota-free,. LDCs would like the cotton issue resoled and agreement implemented
right away. These questions would be taken care of.
Economic Slowdown and Doha Round
It is a
matter of fact that with the global economic slowdown, there has been a growing
proclivity for protectionism, which has also cast its shadow on the Doha Round
and that with this, WTO negotiations could take a back seat. In fact, once the
protectionism takes over, Doha Round and all that noble principles on which WTO
is founded would get a severe beating. However, Pascal Lamy does not
agree with that. He said, The recession has made concluding the Round more
difficult in some ways, but also more imperative to contribute to growth and
;thus to development. He said, The reason we have not been able to conclude
the Round is because we have a long list of 20 complicated topics on the
negotiating table and we have over 100 members participating actively. This is
without precedent. Moreover , many of the areas where convergence is needed are
complex and politically very sensitive. Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) is
one, the sectorals another, but so too are fisheries subsidies, Mode 4,
anti-dumping or trade and environment. But these difficulties are not insurmountable.
We can get to deal with leadership, flexibility and a sense of common
endeavour, which are at the heart of multilateralism.
