Bridges • Volume 14 • Number 2 • May 2010

What Ambition for Doha?

After the March stock-taking showed no clear way out of the current impasse, the level of ambition of the Doha negotiations is emerging as the latest flashpoint.

Discuss this articleShare your views with other visitors, and read what they have to say

Wrapping up the stock-taking week in March, WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy indicated that the membership was “not where we wanted to be by now.” The goal of concluding the negotiations this year was quietly buried, and no new deadline was set. The WTO chief nevertheless stressed that all countries remained “very much committed to the mandate of the round and to its successful conclusion.”

He also said that the stock-taking had showed a “commitment to now start working towards weaving all strings of the negotiations into an overall package.” This is likely to happen in small informal gatherings between senior negotiators, such as the one recently held in Paris. While arguably necessary, meetings of this type tend to be viewed with some suspicion due to their exclusive and non-transparent nature (see page 2).

According to Mr Lamy, Members generally agree that future negotiations should “build on what is already on the table in the shape of chairs’ texts.” However, this general agreement does not include the United States, which has spent the last few months hammering home just one key message: there will be no deal unless large emerging economies improve market access commitments well beyond what the current chairs’ texts would deliver.

As the progress reports prepared for the meeting show quite clearly, the negotiations have largely been treading water since the last serious push for a breakthrough collapsed in July 2008. Many a delegate noted ruefully that there was nothing to take stock of (see page 5).

A sense of urgency remains conspicuously lacking in the hallowed halls of the WTO. Farm talks will only pick up in the third week of May, with yet more discussions on the technicalities of scheduling commitments and some informal consultations on outstanding substantive issues. Such consultations failed to shift positions prior to the stock-taking and there is no indication of prospects being markedly rosier now.

Faced with another potential stalemate, what could be done? Some see a way out of the impasse through refocusing the negotiations on a development-oriented smaller package, deliverable in the short term, that could build trust and confidence in the multilateral trading system and thus contribute to more conducive atmospherics for tackling the headline issues when the time is ripe (see page 8). The ‘early harvest’ approach did not gain traction with the stock-takers.

Ambition on Agriculture Must Remain High, Cairns Group Warns

“Concluding the Doha Development Agenda must remain the top priority of WTO Members,” trade ministers of the 19-strong Cairns Group of agricultural exporters declared at the close of their annual meeting in April.

“It is essential that the round delivers on the reforms needed in agriculture, including the elimination of all forms of export subsidies by 2013, substantial reductions and disciplines on domestic support, and substantial improvements in market access. There can be no weakening of ambition on these issues. Development is central to this round and the outcome should accurately reflect this development mandate,” the final communiqué stated.

Ministers said they remained “determined to reach an ambitious and balanced outcome in the agriculture negotiations, in line with the agreed mandate. To achieve that goal, we will continue our efforts, at both the technical and political levels, to resolve the outstanding issues so that the round can be concluded as soon as possible.”

Testing the Waters

Although not officially announced, the once-a-month capital-based senior officials’ meetings in Geneva were suspended after the March stock-taking. However, Director-General Lamy stressed that that “smaller groups in variable geometry and bilateral contacts remain necessary and essential - within specific areas as well as on a horizontal level.”

In late April, such a meeting took place in Paris, where WTO ambassadors and senior officials from Brazil, China, the EU, India and the US reportedly failed to find a way to provide momentum to the struggling round. Little is known about the substance of the five-party talks except that Brazil, China and India expressed concern over discussing gaps in positions in such a limited setting. The Paris meeting was called by the United States’ new WTO ambassador Michael Punke.

According to Washington Trade Daily, the EU will convene a more representative gathering on 19 May. In addition to the Paris five, participants are expected to include capital-based senior officials from all major coalitions in the Doha talks, i.e. the G-20, G-33 and G-10 farm groupings, the NAMA-11, least-developed countries, the Cotton-4 and the ACP group.

G-20: Greater Level of Ambition Needed to Make Agreement Feasible

The next opportunities to tackle the Doha Round at the political level will come at the margins of the OECD Council in late May, the APEC trade ministers’ meeting in the first week of June and, most importantly, at the G-20 major economies summit, which will be held in Toronto from 26-28 June.

In anticipation of the meeting, the heads of state of Canada, France, South Korea, the UK and the US wrote a letter to other G-20 leaders on what the group should focus on. Most of the three-page missive dealt with strengthening the global financial system, with the WTO negotiations accounting for precisely 61 words:

“With regard to Doha, we need to determine whether we can achieve the greater level of ambition necessary to make an agreement feasible. Since last summer, a number of countries have engaged directly with each other to advance this goal. To reach a successful outcome we must give political impetus to our negotiators, which should also be reflected in national actions.”

The five signatories also stressed the need to “resist protectionist pressures, and to promote liberalisation of trade and investment through the national reduction of barriers, as well as through bilateral and regional negotiations.”

EU trade commissioner Karel de Gucht has suggested a redefinition the round’s objectives. He sees two options: either countries set ‘new, ambitious goals’ for the talks, such as the elimination of tariffs on climate-friendly goods, or they shift focus to a ‘Doha light’. Mr de Gucht explained that the latter would essentially mean less market opening for agricultural products.

DG Lamy, however, cautioned that changing the goalposts at this stage would be counter-productive. Finding a new balance would not only be ‘horribly complex’, he said, but also “politically unpalatable for developing countries who want fairer trade.” The combative WTO chief insisted that concluding the round this year was still ‘perfectly doable’, but acknowledged that much would depend on domestic politics. “That’s the question mark.”

An Indian negotiator was more pessimistic: “The potential for resolution of the Doha Round is nil. And if it isn’t happening this year, I don’t see it happening before 2014.”