|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Mar26/09) Geneva, 9 Mar (D. Ravi Kanth) — Many members and coalitions at the World Trade Organization on 6 March appeared to cautiously welcome the draft text prepared by the chair of the Doha agriculture negotiations for the WTO’s upcoming 14th ministerial conference (MC14), barring opposition from the United States as well as the Cotton-Four (C4) countries most affected by US cotton subsidies, said people familiar with the development. At a meeting of the Doha agriculture negotiating body on 6 March, referred to as the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session (CoA-SS), the chair, Ambassador Ali Sarfraz Hussain of Pakistan, secured approval for the text (Job/AG/273/Rev.1) from many members and coalitions, said people familiar with the development. During the meeting, many members – including the European Union, China, India, Indonesia, and Brazil – and coalitions including the Cairns Group of farm-exporting countries; the G10 group of farm-defensive countries, such as Norway, Japan, Switzerland, and Chinese Taipei, among others; the African Group; the least-developed countries (LDCs) ; and the ACP (African, Caribbean, and Pacific) group – seemingly endorsed the revised draft text. Earlier, India was viewed as a major opponent of the draft text because it made no explicit mention of the unresolved and mandated issue of a permanent solution for public stockholding (PSH) programs for food security purposes in developing countries. Perhaps this is the first time since MC11 in Buenos Aires, Argentina in December 2017 that India has not submitted a proposal of its own to underscore that the permanent solution remains at the core of its agenda, said a former Indian farm trade negotiator. However, at the Buenos Aires meeting, the US reportedly killed the draft text finalised by the facilitator-minister, Amina Mohamed, the former Kenyan cabinet secretary. India appears to be lowering its ambitions on several major issues for the Yaounde meeting because of indirect pressure from Washington, the negotiator said. At the meeting on 6 March, India is understood to have said that it raised some questions regarding the mandate, adding that it still has those questions – without explaining what those questions are, said a participant, who asked not to be quoted. New Delhi apparently said that notwithstanding those questions, it is in a position to use the text for further work, the participant said. The text will now be forwarded to the General Council meeting scheduled to take place on 10-11 March to be debated once again. In all likelihood, the text will be “parachuted” to the Yaounde meeting, unless the US chooses to block the text at the General Council meeting, said several farm trade negotiators, who asked not to be quoted. US OPPOSITION At the meeting, a US farm trade official appears to have said that the text is not very helpful. The official apparently said no remedy is provided, adding that the problems it had raised continue to exist in the text. “I mean, whatever problems we had, the same problems exist.” The official asked somewhat rhetorically how progress can be made, adding that no new ideas have been given proper emphasis, said farm trade negotiators who were present at the meeting. However, the revised draft text (Job/AG/273/Rev.1) says in the operational paragraph that “the negotiations shall continue on the basis of Members’ existing and future contributions, including proposals on possible new approaches to advance the negotiations.” The US seemingly laid blame on including past decisions and declarations, telling the chair that if members have to work on the basis of those past decisions and declarations, then the same problems will again surface, the negotiators said. To recall, it is common knowledge that after securing the Trade Facilitation Agreement at the WTO’s 9th Ministerial Conference in Bali, Indonesia, in December 2013, the US conceded on the Bali “peace clause”, or the interim decision on public stockholding programs for food security. That decision was resurrected with more clarity about concluding the permanent solution at a General Council meeting in 2014, after India blocked the protocol to the Trade Facilitation Agreement. Yet, the US and other industrialized countries changed the course of the negotiations at the WTO’s 10th ministerial conference (MC10) in Nairobi, Kenya, in December 2015 by refusing to agree on the permanent solution, with the then-US Trade Representative Michael Froman having inserted a sentence in paragraph 30 of the Nairobi ministerial declaration: “We recognize that many Members reaffirm the Doha Development Agenda, and the Declarations and Decisions adopted at Doha and at the Ministerial Conferences held since then, and reaffirm their full commitment to conclude the DDA on that basis. Other Members do not reaffirm the Doha mandates, as they believe new approaches are necessary to achieve meaningful outcomes in multilateral negotiations. Members have different views on how to address the negotiations. We acknowledge the strong legal structure of this Organization.” The US repeatedly mentions the stalemate, although the chair has included a sentence in the preamble of the revised draft text by incorporating the following language: “Noting with concern the limited progress achieved to date on several negotiating issues, and acknowledging the significant divergences on negotiating approaches and on possible outcomes across areas of the negotiations, and the need to address the existing stalemate in these negotiations.” COTTON-FOUR The C4 countries – Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali, and Chad – seem to have expressed sharp concern at the meeting about not addressing the cotton issue, which has been “hanging fire” since the WTO’s sixth ministerial conference in Hong Kong-China in December 2005, said people familiar with the development. To recall, paragraph 11 of the Hong Kong ministerial declaration stated explicitly: “We recall the mandate given by the Members in the Decision adopted by the General Council on 1 August 2004 to address cotton ambitiously, expeditiously and specifically, within the agriculture negotiations in relation to all trade-distorting policies affecting the sector in all three pillars of market access, domestic support and export competition, as specified in the Doha text and the July 2004 Framework text.” The C4 countries pointed out at the meeting that the latest revised draft text ought to have mentioned the urgent need to address the problem of trade-distorting domestic subsidies, which are being provided largely by the US, said farm trade negotiators who asked not to be quoted. Instead of addressing the systemic issues raised by the C4 countries, the WTO Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, seems to be engaging FIFA (Federation Internationale de Football Association) to host a show, along with other proposed fashion shows, as part of the development assistance component, said a C4 negotiator who asked not to be quoted. The DG, given her World Bank background, seemingly reckons that trade issues can be addressed with investments, said another farm trade negotiator. Ahead of MC14 later this month, the DG signed a memorandum of understanding with the European Investment Bank (EIB) “to enhance sustainable trade and investment worldwide” in an alleged attempt to secure support for the controversial Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement (IFDA), which has been opposed by India since 2017, said people familiar with the development. REVISED DRAFT The revised draft “Declaration on Agriculture, Trade and Global Food Security” is as follows: “The Ministerial Conference, Recognizing the role that the WTO Agreement on Agriculture has played since 1995, and continues to play, in supporting global trade in agricultural products and food security; Recalling the long-term objective of establishing a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system and of providing for substantial progressive reductions in agricultural support and protection, in line with Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture; Recalling previous Ministerial Decisions and Declarations; Recalling that special and differential treatment for developing country Members, including Least Developed Countries, is an integral part of the agriculture negotiations; Recognizing the urgent need to strengthen global food security, particularly for developing country Members, including Least Developed Countries and net food-importing developing countries; and the role that the reform of agricultural trade can play in responding to the challenges facing agricultural production and trade, including price volatility, extreme weather events and exposure to global shocks and crises; Noting the heightened vulnerabilities of farmers, particularly smallholder farmers, and rural communities, requiring urgent, balanced, and development-oriented responses; Noting with concern the limited progress achieved to date on several negotiating issues, and acknowledging the significant divergences on negotiating approaches and on possible outcomes across areas of the negotiations, and the need to address the existing stalemate in these negotiations; Considering the above, the Ministerial Conference: 1. Commits to engaging constructively, transparently and inclusively to fulfil the objective of establishing a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system and to deliver outcomes that, inter alia, strengthen global food security. 2. Commits to revitalizing the agriculture negotiations pursuant to Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture, and subsequent Ministerial Decisions and Declarations. 3. Agrees that the negotiations shall continue on the basis of Members’ existing and future contributions, including proposals on possible new approaches to advance the negotiations. 4. Requests the CoA-SS Chair, in consultation with Members, to promptly establish following this Conference a calendar of meetings and milestones in the negotiations, and invites senior officials to meet periodically after MC14 to review progress and provide guidance on the way forward, as needed. 5. Invites Members and the relevant international organizations to continue supporting the participation of developing country Members, including Least Developed Countries, in the negotiations, including through technical assistance and capacity-building initiatives.” +
|
||
