|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Nov25/05) Geneva, 5 Nov (D. Ravi Kanth) — Trade envoys appeared to remain divided over changing the World Trade Organization’s consensus-based decision-making principle during a meeting convened on 4 November by the facilitator overseeing the reform discussions. According to people familiar with the development, these continued divergences, which have considerably hardened members’ positions in recent days, are making it difficult to submit any credible reform proposals for the WTO’s 14th ministerial conference (MC14), scheduled to be held in Yaounde, Cameroon, in the last week of March next year. However, several sources said the prospects for the conference now hang in the balance due to ongoing political turmoil in the host country. During the meeting on 4 November, trade envoys pushed back against the talking points and summary of the recent consultations provided by the facilitator, Ambassador Petter Olberg of Norway. They raised questions about several observations that he made in his email to members and expressed concerns about a lack of transparency in his approach to the reform process. Trade envoys largely stuck to their established positions, said people who asked not to be quoted. A large number, including the Russian Federation, reportedly stated that they would never agree to any change to the existing consensus-based decision-making principle as enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement. In contrast, a group referred to by WTO Director-General Ms. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala as the “Friends of the System” or “middle-income group countries” attempted to advance changes while insisting that they respect the consensus principle, one trade envoy said. The envoy suggested that the “Friends of the System” alluded to some countries using the consensus principle as a hostage to block decisions based on their national interests. Another trade envoy said that a member of the “Friends of the System” group floated the concept of “flexible multilateralism,” which was not clearly explained. This concept was met with scorn by some members; one trade envoy said that the proponents of changing the consensus principle are seemingly attempting to wear out members by repeatedly bringing up the issue despite continued rejection. Given the continued differences, the facilitator informed members that he would submit a report on the discussions. Privately, several members argued that the consensus issue is being used as a proverbial “red herring” by the “Friends of the System” group and the DG to avoid addressing the core issues, such as restoring the two-tier dispute settlement system. They also accused the proponents of shifting the focus from the unresolved mandated issues to legitimizing the plurilateral initiatives at any cost. Furthermore, these members are also seeking to introduce “differentiation” among developing countries for availing of special and differential treatment, said people familiar with the development. Although the discussions on WTO reform seem far from converging on any of the controversial issues, several countries appear to be sharply concerned by the remarks made by Ms. Okonjo-Iweala last week. She stated, “We (members) need to reform some of the ways we do business like our consensus decision-making system which is practised as unanimity – everyone has to agree – so it really slows down decision-making.” These comments, made at a meeting in Saudi Arabia, have caused consternation among members. “Development has been quietly downgraded while selective reform agendas are being rushed through,” said one trade envoy. “It’s the one issue where most Members actually converge, yet somehow it’s the only one treated as expendable.” Another trade envoy, who asked not to be identified, said that there is a perception that the head of the member- driven global trade body is increasingly aligning her positions with a small group of countries seeking to change the consensus principle, despite firm opposition from a majority of members. Several delegates privately questioned whether the current reform process can produce any credible outcome, pointing to the growing opacity of the discussions, reliance on constantly shifting small-group configurations, and the increasing influence of the facilitator’s seemingly personal interpretations over the official record. “This process was designed to fail,” said another trade envoy. “With no transparency, revolving-door small groups, and a facilitator who keeps rewriting the record, objectivity has gone out the window.” +
|
||
