The Fifth World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial Conference came to an end in Cancún, Mexico, September 14. However, the ‘endgame’ was not the result WTO members had hoped for.
The Cancún summit closed with no consensus on key items on its agenda. Members failed to bridge their differences. Divisions amongst members proved too deep.
“There were fundamental differences over key issues”. The Director-General of the Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery (RNM), Ambassador Dr. Richard Bernal, made these remarks, September 14, at the close of the Cancún summit. ‘Singapore issues’ were the central stumbling blocks.
Even a proposal put forward by the EU to ‘unbundle’ the issues did not garner support from developing countries. Meeting with the Conference Chair, September 14, they rejected the proposal. In reference to the lack of concessions in priority areas of importance to them Ambassador Bernal said developing countries could not accept the unbundling of the ‘Singapore issues’ as proposed because “this would impose additional commitments at a time when offers from developed countries, particularly in agriculture did not go far enough”.
Agricultural trade reform remains the centre-piece of global trade talks. Reaching agreement on a basic framework for reforming farm trade was critical for progress at the Cancún summit. Caribbean countries were key supporters of the Alliance for Special Products and Special Safeguard Mechanism, that emerged September 9. The Alliance called on the WTO to reflect the concerns of developing country “small scale” farmers.
Differences in agriculture were, however, pervasive and a sticking point. This issue, along with cotton subsidies, had dominated the first two days of summit talks. Wide gaps in agriculture contributed heavily to the failure to attain consensus. Members, in general, were not agreed with central elements of the agriculture draft, circulated September 13. The G-22 and the US/EU proposals/positions on a revised version of the agriculture text in the Draft Declaration remained apart, September 14.
“However Caribbean countries also emphasized that the Draft Declaration did too little on special and differential treatment (S&DT) for developing countries, maintenance of preferences, small developing economies and trade capacity building”, said Ambassador Bernal. The Chair of the Development Working Group, Mukhisa Kituyi, had himself expressed frustration over the lack of development concerns in the draft.
At the start of the Cancún summit’s final phase, Mexican Foreign Minister and Chair of the Ministerial Conference, Luis Ernesto Derbez, released the revised Draft Declaration, compiled from texts provided by the various “facilitators”, at a brief meeting of heads of delegations, midday September 13.
It would prove to be a text which was unrelentingly criticized by WTO members. The RNM head confirmed that the proposals in agriculture and ‘Singapore issues’ were contentious, in meetings September 13 and into the early morning September 14.
In meetings reconvened mid-afternoon September 14 the position of country groupings was that they could not reconcile on the ‘Singapore issues’. While some were pressing for a ‘minimalist’ approach for ‘Singapore issues’, others were steadfast in their refusal to launch negotiations on any element of the issues.
It was at this point, mid-afternoon September 14, that Chair Derbez – not without controversy – called off the Ministerial talks. Despite what he characterized as “considerable movement in consultations” Derbez cited an inability to find a way to reconcile “entrenched positions” on the ‘Singapore issues’.
Recriminations were fast in coming at the close of the summit and in its aftermath. Some top developed country negotiators have accused certain delegations of ‘spending too much time pontificating’. “I do not agree; such assessments are misplaced”, said RNM chief Bernal, “certain actions taken by developing countries in negotiations at Cancún were not at cross-purposes with safeguarding issues of key strategic and national import to them”.
A spokesman for United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has underscored ‘developing countries found their collective voice in international trade negotiations’. “I share this sentiment”, the RNM Director-General said.
He highlighted, “the fact is developing countries were a potent force, they ‘came into their own’ at the Cancún summit. Despite formidable odds, they had the ability to build effective coalitions/alliances. They proved to be united, keenly aware of their strategy and positions – well prepared, willing and able to hold their ground; not capitulating in the face of relentless pressure”.
The Ambassador remarked “the Caribbean Ministers and their Delegations, present at the Cancún summit, must also be lauded for their contribution, technical competence and their fidelity to advancing a common regional position. This successful cooperative effort is a hallmark of efficacious inter-governmental processes in the Caribbean. It is also a result of the wide-ranging preparatory consultations, which the RNM spearheaded, in the months leading up to and at Cancún”.
He extended his commendation to Hon. Clement Rohee, Minister of Foreign Trade and International Cooperation, Guyana and CARICOM Ministerial Spokesperson for WTO issues, for the sterling leadership he provided in his capacity as facilitator for the Working Group on Miscellaneous Issues.
For some, the collapse of the Fifth WTO Ministerial Conference is reminiscent of the breakdown in WTO Ministerial talks four years ago in Seattle. However, the reasons cited for the failure of each respective Ministerial are different, as is the degree. What is common between the two failed Ministerials is that the outlook is bleak.
Both the US and EU lead trade negotiators have gone on record noting their displeasure with the WTO’s decision-making structure. They have characterized the institution as having become too ‘unwieldy’ to deliver results.
EU Trade Commissioner, Pascal Lamy, in a ‘news release’, circulated September 15, remarked “the procedures and rules of this organization have not supported the weight of the task….the decision-making needs to be revamped”. It appears proposals for overhaul would be directed at the consensus-driven approach of the WTO.
“These sentiments would appear to suggest the credibility of the WTO has been undermined”, said Ambassador Bernal. “I would not be so bellicose; now is not the time for finger-pointing or threats. Developing countries have sent a strong and unambiguous message at Cancún – they are prepared and in a position to safeguard their interests and articulate their objectives”, he opined.
The failure to reach consensus on a framework is – however – a significant setback, a grave blow for the 148-member WTO and the multilateral trading system which it spearheads.
While negotiations at the Cancún summit have broken down and uncertainty set in over how Geneva-based talks will continue, developed and developing country members expressed their commitment to pressing ahead with the Doha round in some form.
A statement issued by Ministers at the summit’s end calls on “officials to continue working on outstanding issues with a renewed sense of urgency and purpose and taking fully into account all the views we have expressed in this Conference”.
The statement stressed “notwithstanding this setback, we reaffirm all our Doha Declarations and Decisions and recommit ourselves to working to implement them fully and faithfully”.
In a joint statement issued by Caribbean delegates to the press, September 14, they concluded “Caribbean delegations share the general sense of disappointment at the limited achievements of the Conference in spite of the best efforts of the hosts. They look forward, however, to their continuing active role in the process to advance the development interests of the region”.
WTO member ministers have asked the General Council Chair and the WTO Director-General to convene a General Council meeting of senior officials no later than December 15, 2003 to take necessary action.
CRNM-PR21/03
Contact:
Nand C. Bardouille, Tel: (246) 430-1678
nand.bardouille@crnm.org
http://www.crnm.org
