|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Aug23/07) Jaipur, 23 Aug (D. Ravi Kanth) — The G20 trade and investment ministerial summit in Jaipur, India, is unlikely to reach a consensus on “geopolitical” issues after major Western countries apparently rejected the proposed language by India on this sensitive issue which stems from the war launched by Russia against Ukraine, said people familiar with the development. In a separate but significant development at the meeting of chief negotiators/sherpas of the G20 member countries on 22 August, it has become somewhat apparent that the United States is distancing itself from the rules-based multilateral trading system, said participants familiar with the discussions. Significantly, several officials tasked with finalizing the negotiating text on 23 August said that the US seems opposed to including any language that would explicitly refer to “WTO-inconsistent” measures in the section on WTO reforms, said people, who asked not to be identified. In response to the above issue, the spokesperson for the United States Trade Representative (USTR), Mr Sam Michel, said that the US rejects the above assessment that Washington is distancing itself from the WTO. Later, the spokesperson for the USTR said that the above assertion “is absolutely incorrect.” “We have never distanced ourselves from the multilateral rules-based trading system.” “On the contrary,” he said, “we are strong supporters of it and we remain deeply committed to multilateral institutions, including the WTO.” Mr Michel added: “Our focus is making sure the WTO works for all Members and addresses the needs that our people face, and this view is shared by members.” WTO REFORMS Among the four issues emphasized by the Indian trade minister, Mr Piyush Goyal, the topic of WTO reforms has assumed considerable importance during the discussions. Within the issue of WTO reforms, the issue of the dispute settlement system (DSS), particularly the restoration of the two-stage system in which the Appellate Body remains the final adjudicator of trade disputes, remained the core issue. Yet, the final language that is being worked out on the DSS apparently does not even mention the restoration of the two-stage system and also the Appellate Body, said several sherpas who spoke to the SUNS. It appears that due to pressure from a major industrialized country, the language on the DSS is weakened considerably, reducing the WTO’s binding enforcement mechanism, in which rulings issued by the Appellate Body are expected to be fully implemented, is now on the verge of becoming a proverbial “vegetable”, said participants, who preferred not to be identified. The final draft, which is yet to be issued by the Indian presidency at the time of writing, in no way reflects the repeated calls by around 130 countries to expeditiously fill the seven vacancies in the Appellate Body. The Indian trade minister told reporters that the restoration of the two-stage dispute settlement system is a key priority for New Delhi. According to the negotiators, the US seemed unwilling to let the WTO’s enforcement function, which was largely negotiated by the US during the Uruguay Round negotiations that ended in December 1993, play its central role any longer. Washington seems somewhat determined to return to good faith consultations and disputes resolved by parties through enhanced mediation, said sherpas, who asked not to be identified. Although the Indian trade minister emphasized the importance of arriving at decisions through the principle of consensus-based decision-making as enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement, the prospects for the continuation of a consensus-based decision-making system appear to be chipped away at the margins. Incidentally, the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) trade ministers’ declaration issued on 7 August called for the restoration of the two-stage dispute settlement system, as well as strengthening the S&DT (special and differential treatment) provisions. S&DT At a press conference with reporters, the Indian trade minister Mr Goyal said that the Marrakesh Agreement, which led to the establishment of the WTO in 1995 after more than seven years of “hard” Uruguay Round negotiations (1986-93) in which the US secured maximum gains through a brand new agreement on intellectual property rights, services, and even in agriculture, provided for flexibilities to countries according to their differing levels of development. Mr Goyal mistakenly mentioned the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), which is a core element of the Paris Climate Change Agreement of 2015, to indicate the importance and significance of special and differential treatment (S&DT) which has come under assault after the Trump administration refused to recognize it. JSIs Another important development at the Jaipur meeting was on the issue of the Joint Statement Initiatives (JSIs) involving the non-mandated plurilateral negotiations on digital trade, disciplines for micro, small, and medium enterprises (MSMEs), investment facilitation, and trade and gender. During the past several G20 meetings, the issue of JSIs, which has been steadfastly opposed by India and South Africa, was kept out of the final text. Even the G20 trade ministerial declaration issued in Bali last year, without mentioning the controversial plurilateral JSIs, said, “we recognize the need to promote value addition through sustainable and inclusive investment in highly productive sectors such as downstream manufacturing, digital trade, and services and to foster linkages between foreign investors and local enterprises, particularly MSMEs.” Under the Indonesian Presidency of the G20, an initiative to hold “discussions on policy coherence between trade, investment and industry, and to continue addressing industry-related issues in the broader G20 process, as appropriate,” will be continued. Yet, at the Jaipur meeting, several industrialized countries apparently ensured that the Bali language is set aside and instead brought back the language agreed in Sorrento under the Italian G20 Presidency during the COVID-19 pandemic that referred to plurilateral negotiations. Apparently, the Jaipur text mentions “plurilateral” though, in the same breadth, it also mentions objections raised by several developing countries to “plurilateral”, said sherpas, who asked not to be identified. The language on JSIs being treated as “plurilateral” may seem like a gain for the major industrialized countries, said sherpas, who preferred not to be quoted. TRADE & ENVIRONMENT Even though the Jaipur text does not include language on the controversial carbon border adjustment measures that are about to be unilaterally implemented by the European Union and to be closely followed by the US, there is mention of continuing the discussions on environmental “sustainability” issues, said sherpas, who asked not to be quoted. Despite these varying developments at the Jaipur meeting, the Indian trade minister repeatedly described the trade ministerial summit as a “historical” event under the Indian Presidency. On the same day that India conducted its first solar mission on the Moon, the Indian minister said New Delhi has become “the voice of Global South.” Yet, the Jaipur text seems to be far away from ensuring that the “rules-based, non-discriminatory, free, fair, open, inclusive, equitable, sustainable and transparent multilateral trading system (MTS), with the WTO at its core, is indispensable to advancing our shared objectives of inclusive growth, innovation, job creation, and sustainable development,” as set out in the Bali leaders’ declaration last year. +
|
||
