[asia-apec 1830] The Meaning of Doha

[Anuradha Mittal]

The Meaning of Doha

By Walden Bello, Focus on the Global South, 
and Anuradha Mittal, Food First

------------------------------------

The results of the WTO Ministerial in Doha, Qatar, have 
elicited some confusion among many of those following the events.

A New Round?

Something was launched at Doha, but to call it a "round" of 
trade negotiations might be stretching the concept of a round.  A 
round means negotiations on a broad range of issues directed at trade 
liberalization.  What was agreed at Doha were: a) negotiations to 
clarify or revise some existing agreements, e.g., anti-dumping rules; 
and b) eventual negotiations for new agreements, e.g., transparency 
in government procurement, investment, and competition policy. 

Getting immediate negotiations going on investment, 
competition policy, government procurement and trade facilitation was 
at the top of the agenda of the trading powers in Doha.  They fell 
short of this objective, being able to secure a commitment for 
negotiations on these issues only after the fifth ministerial in 
2003, and only with a "written consensus" from member countries.

Doha and the Developing Countries

What is clear is that, contrary to the claims of European 
Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy, Doha did not launch a "development 
round."  The key points of the Doha Declaration, in fact, contradict 
the interests of the developing countries.  For example,

- There is only a perfunctory acknowledgement of the need to review 
implementation issues, which was the key agenda of the developing 
countries coming into Doha;
- The language on the phasing out of agricultural subsidies is 
watered down owing to the strong objections of the European Union;
- There is no commitment to an early phase-out of textile and garment 
quotas because of the strong resistance of the United States;
- The demand for a "development box" to promote food security and 
development which was being pushed by a number of developing 
countries was completely ignored;
- There is no commitment to change the wording of the TRIPs 
(Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights) agreement to accommodate 
developing countries' overriding of patents for public health 
purposes;
- There is no commitment to change the TRIPs agreement to outlaw 
biopiracy and patents on life, which was a key developing country 
concern coming into Doha;
- The declaration eliminates the reference in the draft to the 
International Labor Organization (ILO) being the appropriate forum 
for addressing labor and trade issues, which leaves the door open for 
the WTO to assert its jurisdiction in an area where it has no 
authority or competence.

The resolution of the TRIPs and public health issue is being 
trumpeted as a victory for developing countries.  This is 
exaggerated.  While an attachment to the declaration does recognize 
that there is nothing in TRIPs that would prevent countries from 
taking measures to promote public health, there is no commitment to 
change the wording of the TRIPs agreement.  This is a serious flaw 
since TRIPs as it is currently written can serve as the basis for 
future legal challenges to countries that override patents in the 
interest of public health.

A Defeat for Democracy and Development

In fact, Doha was a defeat for the developing countries, 
notwithstanding the resistance they--and in particular, India--put up 
against arm-twisting, blackmail, and intimidation from the big 
trading powers.  Those of us in Doha were witness, as the Equations 
team puts it, "to the highhanded unethical negotiating practices of 
the developed countries - linking aid budgets and trade preferences 
to the trade positions of developing countries and targeting 
individual developing country negotiators."

Doha was a victory for the forces with a strong interest in 
subverting the interests of the developing countries that form the 
majority of the membership of the World Trade Organization by keeping 
the decision-making process non-transparent and undemocratic.

Why Doha will Backfire

This is why this victory may well be a Pyrrhic one for the big 
trading powers. The combination of developing country resentments 
inflamed by the Doha process, a deep global recession brought about 
by the indiscriminate locking together of economies by accelerated 
trade and financial liberalization, and reinvigorated civil society 
resistance to corporate driven globalization, cannot but erode the 
credibility and legitimacy of the institutional pillars of free trade 
like the WTO.

And without credibility and legitimacy, institutions, no matter how 
seemingly solid they may seem, eventually unravel.

At the conclusion of the Fourth Ministerial, Director General Mike 
Moore thanked the delegates for "saving the WTO."  The end result may 
well be, instead, the accelerated decline of the WTO.   

View photos of Anuradha Mittal, Walden Bello 
and others challenging the arm-twisting of the WTO:
http://www.foodfirst.org/progs/global/trade/wto2001/photos.html

News, Information and Criticism of the WTO Meeting can be found at:
http://www.foodfirst.org/progs/global/trade/wto2001/index.html

For more information, to order Food First Books,or to join our member-supported organization, go to:
http://www.foodfirst.org.  
Or send your tax-deductible check to:
Food First, 398 60th St. Oakland, CA 94618

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: asia-apec at jca.ax.apc.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxil2.aVxCnz
Or send an email to: fianusa-news-unsubscribe at igc.topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================