FB   
 
Powered bysps
        Society for Policy Studies
 
 

 
Nothing at Nairobi: WTO ministerial leaves India and developing countries in the lurch
Posted:Dec 20, 2015
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
By Seetha
 
So, finally all that the tenth ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) at Nairobi had to show for itself was that the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) or the Doha Round just narrowly escaped being junked altogether.
 
The ministerial declaration, adopted after some delay and amid much acrimony didn’t abandon the DDA (which was a real apprehension for India and other developing countries), but the reaffirmation was not unanimous.
 
The declaration noted that many members reaffirm the DDA while others do not but that “nevertheless, there remains a strong commitment of all Members to advance negotiations on the remaining Doha issues”. This is neither here nor there, especially when this statement is preceded by a mention that some members “believe new approaches are necessary to achieve meaningful negotiations” and that “members have different views on how to address the negotiations”.
 
This is the first ministerial declaration has acknowledged sharp differences on something so core – the very nature of a round. WTO ministerial declarations are always consensus documents and even one country can hold things up. Clearly, despite a day’s delay, there was no meeting ground at all between the developing countries (which wanted an unambiguous reaffirmation of the DDA) and the developed countries (which want the Doha Round to be scrapped and a new Round to be initiated, with new issues).
 
In fact, the Nairobi ministerial also leaves a window open for the inclusion of new issues – investment, competition, transparency in government procurement, to name just three – that developed countries have been pushing for and developing countries have been resisting. It doesn’t name these issues but there is a mention that some members “wish to identify and discuss other issues for negotiation; others do not. Any decision to launch negotiations multilaterally on such issues would need to be agreed by all Members.”
 
So much for all the hype about this being the first ministerial held in Africa and hence the importance of it delivering on the Doha Round and addressing issues of concern to developing countries. So much for all the talk about solidarity among developing countries making them a formidable bloc to reckon with. India has expressed its disappointment with the declaration.
 
What did the developing countries – especially India – get out of the ministerial? Of the six items of the so-called historic Nairobi package, two were of particular interest to India – a permanent solution to the issue of public stockholding for food security and special safeguard measure (SSM) to protect farmers from import surges. At various public fora and in interactions with the media in the run up to the ministerial, commerce minister Nirmala Sitharaman and commerce secretary Rita Teotia had indicated that India would play hard ball on these two issues.
They may have but it clearly didn’t yield results. On both issues, the ministerial decisions only kick the ball further. On public stockholding, the decision is to start serious efforts in various WTO to negotiate and adopt a permanent solution.
 
A quick recap on this issue. Countries can give subsidies and maintain buffer food stocks only up to a certain limit, since these are seen as distorting world trade in food grains. India and many developing countries are in danger of breaching this limit, which makes them liable to be taken to the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism. They have, therefore, been seeking more elbow room, something developed countries (who also heavily subsidise their agriculture) have been unwilling to give.
 
At the ninth ministerial in Bali in 2013, a peace clause was negotiated which said that countries in danger of breaching the WTO limits on subsidies would not be liable to any action till a permanent solution to the problem is worked out. This solution was to be worked out by 2017.
 
Initially, there was ambiguity about whether the peace clause would cease in that year, but last year India refused to agree to a protocol on a Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) till the peace clause was made indefinite – that is, till a permanent solution was found. This was agreed to in November 2014 and it was also decided that work on negotiating a permanent solution would begin. There has been no progress on that.
In the light of this, the Nairobi ministerial decision on public stockholding is akin to running in the same place. Bali promised a solution by 2017; two years have gone by with no movement.
 
Ditto for the ministerial decision on SSM. Here too, all that has been decided is that developing country members will have the right to have recourse to a SSM; the contours of any SSM are to be negotiated. This means there has been no progress on this from the Hong Kong ministerial in 2005.
 
One ministerial decision that is extremely detailed relates to export competition and it sets out conditions for provision of subsidies and credits for agricultural exports. On the face of it, this favours developing countries which get time till end 2018 to eliminate their export subsidy while developed countries have to eliminate theirs immediately. But experts on agricultural negotiations insist that the ministerial decision is riddled with provisions that give a lot of flexibility to the developed countries and reduce flexibilities available to the developing countries.
 
At a meeting on agriculture negotiations at Nairobi, Sitharaman had flagged the “sudden inexplicable zeal” to push export competition at the cost of other agriculture related issues and that new concepts and definitions were being introduced at a late stage which would require extensive domestic consultations. But clearly India’s objections were not taken seriously.
 
From a theoretical, market economy perspective, it may be possible to find fault with the stand taken by developing countries. But multilateral trade negotiations are not about theory; they are about bargaining to further national commercial and economic interests. Developed countries may slam developing countries for being protectionist but their protectionism is equally rigid and their economic clout enables them to bargain harder and more effectively. Nothing brings this out better than the Nairobi Declaration.
 
The very equivocal reaffirmation of the DDA may have saved the WTO for now, but the forced and very first compromise declaration does not augur well for its future.
 
First Post, December 21, 2015
 
 
 
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
Comments (Total Comments 0) Post Comments Post Comment
Review
 
 
 
 
China is yet to reciprocate to India’s territorial concerns on China-Pakistan Economic Corridor'
 
read-more
The possibility of a Taliban attack targeting Emirati officials is not going down well with analysts writes Monish Gulati
 
read-more
Since late 2015, cultural and political issues have strained relations between the two countries with anti-Indian sentiment growing amongst the government and people of Nepal, writes Dr. Binodkumar Singh for South Asia Monitor.  
 
read-more
A bunch of years ago, the problem was a declining state. Across swathes of social, economic and security interventions, the state was in retreat.  
 
read-more
spotlight image

It will also feature glimpses of Indian traditional, folk and tribal art such as Gond, Madhubani and Pattachitra paintings.

 
read-more
spotlight image So the lady’s not for turning. Well, we knew that, didn’t we? Brexit means Brexit, no “partial membership”, no “half-in, half-out”. This was the section of Theresa May’s speech most heavily briefed in advance – but still gloriously welcome to the hard Brexiteers when she finally uttered t
 
read-more
spotlight image It is unfortunate that Taiwan has a neighbor across the Taiwan Strait that wants to annex it, but, even more frustrating, Taiwanese also have to put up with people who echo China’s rhetoric and intended to intimidate Taiwanese into obedience.
 
read-more
Read the transcriipt of UN Secretary-General's End-of-Year Press Conference, held in New York on December 16, here...
 
read-more
spotlight image It is wrong to look only at Israel while fighting rages across the Middle East, writes the former Shin Bet chief.
 
read-more
When is a scam not a scam? The short answer obviously would be, when it is approved by the Government in power. But then, the question arises: Is that necessarily true?  
 
read-more
Column-image

What will be Pakistan's fate? Acts of commission or omission by itself, in/by neighbours, and superpowers far and near have led the nuclear-armed country at a strategic Asian crossroads to emerge as a serious regional and global concern whi...

 
Column-image

Some South African generals, allied with the British forces, sought segregation from the enlisted men, all blacks, after being taken prisoners of war. The surprised German commander told them firmly that they would have to share the same quarte...

 
Column-image

An aching sense of love, loss and yearning permeate this work of fiction which, however, reads like a personal narrative set in an intensely disruptive period of Indian history, and adds to the genre of partition literature, writes Ni...

 
Column-image

This is a path-breaking work on India's foreign policy since Narendra Modi became the Prime Minister in May 2014 and surprised everyone by taking virtual charge of the external affairs portfolio. A man who had been denied visa by some count...

 
Subscribe to our newsletter
Archive