FB   
 
Powered bysps
        Society for Policy Studies
 
 

 
India's Surrender at Nairobi
Updated:Jan 11, 2016
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 
By Seema Sengupta
 
The 10th World Trade Organization (WTO) ministerial meeting held at Nairobi last year has exposed the glaring chinks in Narendra Modi government’s diplomatic armory. 
 
And Indian interlocutors returning empty handed from the conference virtually puts to rest a long-trumpeted propaganda of Modi being an invincible policy manipulator, adept at the cut and thrust of international diplomacy. Had it not been for Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s magnanimity of helping Modi erect the façade of a statesman in Lahore on Christmas Day, India’s overambitious premier would have been in the headlines for colluding with the rich nations in undermining the country’s trade interests. 
 
Indeed, Modi’s government has let the prosperous countries have their way by compromising on the Doha mandates. Clearly team Modi is bereft of that strong will and wherewithal, necessary to deftly handle sophisticated trade negotiations. And yet, this is the same Modi who drew flak from the US and other western powers for insisting on WTO accommodating India’s food security concerns before taking any decision on trade facilitation agreement at 2014 Bali conference. While US Secretary of State John Kerry criticized Indian intransigence in no uncertain words, Dave Camp, Chairman of the chief tax-writing committee (Ways and Means) of the US House of Representatives termed such actions as completely unacceptable and something, which put into doubt New Delhi’s credibility as a responsible trading partner. And House Ways and Means’ Trade Subcommittee Chairman Devin Nunes went a step further, accusing India of betraying the developed nations’ trust. 
 
“It is one thing for a country to be a tough negotiator. It is entirely another to agree to a deal with your trading partners and then just simply walk away months later, insisting instead on one-sided changes” asserted Nunes, adding, India runs the risk of losing international goodwill. Many in India who lauded Modi’s dogged determination to safeguard national interest at Bali believed, he is one political executive who will not only not succumb to US diktat on trade, commerce and security related issues, but will steadfastly refuse to subscribe to what is known as “Washington consensus” whereby smaller powers are required to align their policies with that of America’s strategic geopolitical-cum-economic interests.
 
If the primary responsibility of Modi’s government is to the poorest people of the country — as the Indian premier boldly put across the message to Kerry in August 2014 — what made India’s arguably most popular political figure in recent times, abandon his strong nationalistic stand and start behaving obsequiously in a year’s time? 
 
Government sources reveal Commerce Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, invitee to the select group of countries which negotiated the final text of the Nairobi agreement, capitulated after Modi refused to give permission to the Indian delegation to seek amendment to the Nairobi ministerial declaration or block it as a last resort. To be fair, an outspoken Sitharaman and her team did put up a gallant fight for the cause of Indian farmers’ rights and national food sovereignty, before being fettered by the highest political leadership’s invisible guidance midway. No wonder why a subdued Sitharaman expressed her “deep disappointment” at India’s red lines being breached without any reaffirmation of the Doha Development Agenda in the final ministerial agreement. 
 
Indeed, no concrete agreement on a special safeguards mechanism to protect farmers in the developing world against sudden import surges could be reached and neither did the final declaration mention any short deadline for a permanent solution on public stockholding for food security purposes. A mere promise to negotiate an unspecified safeguard mechanism for developing countries was the icing on the cake. Besides, new issues like competition policy, government procurement and investments are now open for future negotiations. Does Modi realize that by preventing Sitharaman to go her predecessors Murasoli Maran, Kamal Nath or even Arun Jaitley’s way of not ceding ground to countries discreetly encouraging ultra-protectionist and trade-distorting policies and actions, he has only ensured that India will pay a far heavier price in future negotiations? What prevented India from using export competition pact and export subsidy issues as bargaining chips in Nairobi? How is it that the Indian leadership failed to gauge the rich nations’ mood even though they have openly pronounced, prior to the Nairobi meet, the world must have the courage to look, think and act beyond Doha? Was Modi not aware that the developed world has always maintained that countries like India and China cannot ask for concessions envisaged in the Doha mandate? And at the end of the day, rich nations’ representatives were able to drive a wedge by pitting the least developed and vulnerable countries against developing world’s frontline economies. 
 
Unfortunately, Modi, like his western counterparts, believes that state support is killing Indian farmers as heavy subsidy has created a massively distorted domestic farm market. Modi, says sources close to him, is confident that Indian farmers if unshackled can compete successfully on the world stage. But then, Modi needs to be reminded that while there is a need to introduce domestic reforms in farm sector unilaterally, the government must not surrender its existing flexibility to formulate public policies favorable to poor farmers and consumers. 
As rightly pointed out by eminent Indian geneticist M.S. Swaminathan, the Nairobi meet output failed to differentiate farmers in poor nations, taking to agriculture for livelihood security, from those in industrialized countries, to whom farming is a profitable business model. Worse still, Swaminathan predicts WTO Nairobi will exacerbate food insecurity instead of fulfilling United Nations’ zero-hunger goal.
 
Arab News, January 11, 2016
 
 
 
 
Print
Share
  
increase Font size decrease Font size
 

Disclaimer: South Asia Monitor does not accept responsibility for the views or ideology expressed in any article, signed or unsigned, which appears on its site. What it does accept is responsibility for giving it a chance to appear and enter the public discourse.
Comments (Total Comments 0) Post Comments Post Comment
Review
 
 
 
 
spotlight image Relations between India and Morocco go back a millennium with the first recorded links dating to the 14th century, when the famous traveller and writer from Tangier, Ibn Batuta, travelled to India.
 
read-more
Stepping up action against terrorists attacking India, President Donald Trump's Administration has declared Hizb-ul Mujahideen (HM) a “global terrorist organisation” in an attempt to choke off financial and other support to it.
 
read-more
On 14 August 1947 Pakistan, consisting of East and West Pakistan, celebrated its independence. The 14th was chosen for the ceremony because Lord Mountbatten who came to Karachi as the Chief Guest had to later leave for Delhi where ot the midnight stroke India was to declare its independence.
 
read-more
The Doklam stand-off and a variety recent opinion pieces in magazines and newspapers draws attention to the poor state of defence policy preparedness and the lack of meaningful higher defence control in India. 
 
read-more
The two ideologically divergent ruling partners - the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) - in Jammu and Kashmir are headed for a showdown as the debate over the abrogation of Article 35A of the Constitution of India heats up.
 
read-more
At the root of the present Doklam crisis is China’s intrusion into Bhutanese territory for its road building projects. These connectivity projects are integral to President Xi Jinping’s dream project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). India and Bhutan were the only two countries that did not participate in the first forum
 
read-more
It wasn’t so long ago that the whole world watched as Donald Trump sashayed on to the Riyadh red carpet and stole the show with his tough talk on Iranian-sponsored terrorism.
 
read-more
A vehicular attack to maximise casualties and spread panic is now a well-tested terrorist strategy in European cities.
 
read-more
It is a privilege to be invited to this most prestigious of law schools in the country, more so for someone not formally lettered in the discipline of law. I thank the Director and the faculty for this honour.
 
read-more
Column-image

As talk of war and violence -- all that Mahatma Gandhi stood against -- gains prominence across the world, a Gandhian scholar has urged that the teachings of the apostle of non-violence be taken to the classroom.

 
Column-image

Interview with Hudson Institute’s Aparna Pande, whose book From Chanakya to Modi: Evolution of India’s Foreign Policy, was released on June 17.

 
Column-image

This is the continuing amazing spiritual journey of a Muslim man from Kerala who plunged into Vedic religion after a chance encounter with a Hindu mystic under a jackfruit tree in the backyard of his house when he was just nine. It is a story w...

 
Column-image

History is told by the victors but in our modern age, even contemporary events get - or are given - a slant, where some contributors soon get eclipsed from the narrative or their images tarnished.

 
Column-image

Humans have long had a fear of malignant supernatural beings but there may be times when even the latter cannot compare with the sheer evil and destructiveness mortals may be capable of. But then seeking to enable the end of the world due to it...

 
Subscribe to our newsletter
Archive