World trade body must be transformed<\/p>\n
Hira P. Jhamtani, Board Member Institute for Global Justice,
\nJakarta<\/p>\n
The fourth ministerial conference of the World Trade
\nOrganization (WTO) will commence on Nov. 9, 2001 in Doha, Qatar,
\nwith civil society calling for democratization and a review of
\nthe multilateral trading body.<\/p>\n
A number of civil society groups have issued a statement
\nprotesting the lack of democratic process in the WTO, as
\nreflected in the steamrolling of a draft ministerial declaration
\nthat the majority of WTO members has not agreed upon.<\/p>\n
On Sept. 26, the WTO's General Council put forward a draft
\ndeclaration that was presented as a "clean text", putting
\nbrackets (indicating disagreement) only on two issues: investment
\nand competition policy.<\/p>\n
A number of developing and least-developed countries (LDCs)
\nhave criticized the draft as being imbalanced, as it did not
\ncontain strong statements on implementation issues -- the main
\nagenda items put forward by them.<\/p>\n
A second draft was released last weekend with few changes.
\nCivil society groups, among them Focus on the Global South in
\nThailand and Public Citizen in the U.S., stated that the second
\ndraft was met with "outrage by civil society and disbelief and
\nfrustration by developing countries and LDCs". This is because
\nthe tone again presumes a consensus on the future WTO agenda,
\nwhich does not exist.<\/p>\n
The main bone of contention is inclusion of new issues for
\nnegotiation in the draft declaration, such as investment,
\ncompetition policy, trade facilitation and transparency in
\ngovernment procurement, as put forward by developed or rich
\ncountries.<\/p>\n
New issues have constantly been put forward since the first
\nministerial meeting in Singapore, 1996. In 1999, these new issues
\nwere proposed to be negotiated as a package under the "new
\ncomprehensive round", together with social clauses and
\nenvironmental issues.<\/p>\n
Developing countries and LDCs, on the other hand, have
\nproposals to look at imbalance in WTO agreements and problems in
\nimplementation, including the reluctance of rich countries to
\nprovide market access for products from developing countries.<\/p>\n
As existing agreements already pose problems, new issues would
\ncreate additional burdens for poorer countries. The difference in
\nthe positions, as well as protests from civil society, led to the
\ncollapse of the third ministerial conference in Seattle, 1999.<\/p>\n
The 2001 draft declaration no longer incorporates the word
\n"new round". However, elements of a new round have been included
\nunder the point, "Organization of Work Program".<\/p>\n
These elements are: (a) negotiations to be completed at an
\nagreed date; (b) negotiations to be supervised by a Trade
\nNegotiations Committee, which will establish "appropriate
\nnegotiating mechanisms"; (c) The outcome of negotiations will be
\ntreated as parts of a single undertaking; (d) elements of the
\nwork program that do not involve negotiations are accorded high
\npriority. Reports of progress will be made to the 5th ministerial
\nconference.<\/p>\n
These elements, if agreed upon, would in effect start a new
\nround of negotiations, precisely what developing countries and
\nLDCs are objecting to.<\/p>\n
According to the statement of the civil society groups, the
\nsecond draft declaration (to be treated as a final draft) shows a
\nserious breach of democratic process, whereby months of repeated
\ninterventions by the majority of WTO members have been dismissed.<\/p>\n
The text does not reflect the deep disagreements among WTO
\nmembers about the organization's future agenda.<\/p>\n
For instance, since before the Seattle WTO ministerial talks,
\nmost developing country WTO members have demanded that the
\nexisting flaws and imbalances in the WTO be addressed, but the
\nU.S. has led unbending opposition to this "implementation
\nagenda."<\/p>\n
The European Union's push for expansion of WTO disciplines
\ninto new issues, such as investment, competition policy and
\nprocurement, has been resoundingly rejected by developing
\nnations. Many WTO members demand new negotiations on antidumping
\npolicy, but the U.S. has insisted the issue be off the table,
\nalthough that issue -- along with investment, competition,
\nprocurement and more -- is included as a topic for future
\nnegotiations in this latest text.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, the list of provisions, which developing-nation WTO
\nmembers have identified for urgent review and repair before any
\nWTO negotiations on new issues, is actually more watered down in
\nthe latest text.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, the civil society groups stated that under
\nexisting WTO agreements, the poorest countries' share of world
\ntrade had declined and many poor countries' development and
\nhealth policies had come under attack as violations of WTO rules.
\nThe new draft responds to these demands by effectively restating
\nthe U.S. hard-line position that none of these issues would be
\naddressed without further concessions by the developing
\ncountries.<\/p>\n
Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) also view the draft text
\nas ignoring the demands of the global civil society movement that
\nwere submitted after the Seattle ministerial talks.<\/p>\n
Through their "Our World Is Not for Sale: WTO-Shrink or Sink"
\ncampaign, a group of peasant farmers and fisherfolk, workers,
\nenvironmentalists and labor groups have for many months called
\nfor transformational change within the WTO. They consider the
\ndraft ministerial text has also ignored their calls. In their
\nstatement, NGOs from around the world called on their governments
\nto denounce this text as illegitimate and to oppose its being
\nmoved forward for use at the WTO Doha ministerial talks.<\/p>\n
According to Martin Khor of the Third World Network, accepting
\nthe text would mean giving more unprecedented rights to the large
\ncorporations of developed countries at the expense of space for
\ndomestic policy-making, and the rights of consumers, the public
\nand small or medium firms and farms and their employees.<\/p>\n
Finally, the global civil society movement stated that the
\nrecalcitrance of the WTO Secretariat and the few rich nations,
\nwhich have greatest pull on the WTO agenda to address the
\ndeveloping country and civil society demands, is pushing the Doha
\nministerial talks towards an outcome that may either spell
\ndisaster for the majority of its members or another Seattle: An
\noutright rejection of an invalid text.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/world-trade-body-must-be-transformed-1447899208",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}