WTO Ministerial Section • Volume 5 • Number 37 • 30th October 2001

New Ministerial Text To Hand Ministers A Challenge In Doha

Do More

See also

WTO General Council Chair Stuart Harbinson on 27 October released the second draft Ministerial Declaration in the leadup to the fourth WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, from 9-13 November. The text was accompanied by draft Decisions on Implementation and Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) and Health / Access to Medicines. Ministers will have their work cut out for them in Doha, as many areas remain contentious and a number of developing countries have pointed out that the new texts fall far short of expectations.

The draft Ministerial Declaration represents the culmination of months of discussions led by Harbinson and WTO Director-General Mike Moore in an effort to draw convergence between Members’ views on a host of areas that could be up for negotiation or review at the conclusion of the Doha Ministerial. It replaces a former draft released on 26 September (see BRIDGES Weekly, 2 October 2001) and is expected to be the draft that is handed to ministers at that gathering.

Initial reactions to the documents have been less than fully supportive. While US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick said the revised draft "makes additional progress towards a successful launch of negotiations at Doha, although we still have much work to do," an EC representative said on 28 October "I can hardly say I’m very optimistic". Developing countries have for the most part condemned the text. One representative from an Asian country said that he would not recommend acceptance of the new texts’ provisions. Others have expressed both "shock" and "profound disappointment" with the new formulations. Most delegations are preparing a formal response for the next General Council session on 31 October, at which point sources indicate the texts are likely to be highly criticised by developing countries and Least-Developed Country Members.

Civil society groups have also been critical. Martin Khor of Third World Network called the revised draft "worse than the first." Alexandra Wandel of Friends of the Earth Europe said the text offers "nothing on development, nothing on equity and nothing on the environment or sustainability. Anyone wondering about the real motives of the EU and the US would be well advised to watch developments in Doha: in the WTO it’s still business-as-usual." According to Someshwar Singh from the South Centre, "all that talk of a ‘Development Round’ seems to have suddenly fizzled out."

Delicate Balance on Agriculture

The text on agriculture in the draft Declaration is unchanged from an initial wording released by Harbinson on 12 October (see BRIDGES Weekly, 9 October 2001). Described by one trade official as a ‘balance of unhappiness,’ no one Member is completely happy with the initial formulation, but most have said it could serve as a ‘basis’ for discussions. For many Members, particularly the EC, agriculture remains a ‘make-or-break’ concern for the Ministerial.

2-stage environment process endorsed

Also deemed by many as a ‘make-or-break’ issue for the Ministerial talks, environment has emerged as a major area of contention between the EC — supported to varying degrees by Norway, Switzerland, and Eastern European countries — on one side, and most other Members on the other. The EC group is pushing to have negotiations on a range of environmental issues such as the precautionary principle and ecolabelling initiated at Doha, while the rest of the Membership remains opposed to these.

Harbinson’s new draft aims at a middle ground between these two camps, and has put forward a proposal to initiate a two-stage process at Doha. In the first stage, which would last until the Fifth Ministerial Conference in 2003, the WTO’s Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) would identify any need to clarify relevant WTO rules. In the second stage, the CTE would report to the Fifth Ministerial and make recommendations on the possibility of launching negotiations on areas previously studied.

The Harbinson text has kept reference in the preambular section both to sustainable development and the right of Members, under WTO rules, to take measures to uphold and enforce the levels of health, safety, and environmental protection they deem appropriate. Language committing the CTE and CTD to act as forums to identify and debate environmental and developmental aspects of the (potential) negotiations has also been held over from the prior draft.

Negotiations in new issues counter developing country interests

The so-called ‘new’ or ‘Singapore’ issues (brought forward at the 1996 Ministerial in Singapore) of Investment, Competition, Transparency in Government Procurement, and Trade Facilitation have all emerged as areas for eventual negotiation under the revised draft. The new issues are supported mainly by the EC and other developed countries, who want to launch negotiations in these areas soon as possible. Developing countries, and in particular the Like-Minded Group including India, Pakistan, and Malaysia, oppose any adoption of these areas as negotiating items, arguing that developing countries are simply not ready to engage in talks that could bring new commitments when previous imbalances (i.e. implementation) remain unaddressed.

"We have been clearly pointing out that we are not in a position to commence negotiations in any one of these four areas, said Indian Ambassador Srinivasan Narayanan at a General Council session earlier this month. "My minister was asked to accept a non-prejudicial study programme with a clear stipulation that negotiations will commence in these areas only when there is explicit consensus," he said.

Harbinson’s original text had put forward two options for both Investment and Competition: either countries could choose to enter negotiations in each or to undertake further analytical work. The revised draft now would commit Members to negotiations on possible multilateral frameworks on investment and on competition after the Fifth Ministerial Conference, with the proviso that Members could opt out of negotiations, with the ability to opt in to the agreements at a later time.

On other issues, the latest draft has included a new paragraph (35) on Least-Developed Countries (LDCs), which inter alia would commit Members to the objective of duty-free, quota-free market access for products originating from LDCs. It has also kept intact language that would "clarify and improve" WTO rules on anti-dumping, an issue that has been resisted vehemently by the US.

Copies of all documents relevant to the Ministerial process are accessible on the ICTSD website at: http://www.ictsd.org.

More comprehensive examinations of the draft Declaration and related texts will be available shortly in the next (October) issue of BRIDGES Between Trade and Sustainable Development, ICTSD’s monthly newsletter, available at http://www.ictsd.org/monthly/index.htm.

"Doha: a shade worse than Seattle?," SOUTH CENTRE, 30 October 2001; "New draft declaration will finesse difficult issues," INSIDE US TRADE, 26 October 2001; "Envoys narrow differences on WTO agenda," FT, 29 October 2001; "Study process, no negotiations on industrial tariffs, says Africa," MARTIN KHOR, 26 October 2001; "Trade Ministers face tough task at WTO," REUTERS, 28 October 2001; ICTSD Internal Files.