The International Herald Tribune | By Ernesto Zedillo | May 30, 2003
The new American doctrine of preemption has resulted in two regime changes for the price of one, the first in Iraq, the second in the international order itself. We do not yet have a new international system; instead we have international disorder. The Group of Eight summit meeting next week in Evian, France, will offer them an opportunity to halt the slide into further disorder.
During the Cold War, the U.S. response to the Soviet Union was to build an international order with two pillars. One pillar security was based on military deterrence and containment. The other pillar prosperity was based on multilateral institutions, democracy and open trade. It was supported by a multilateral system of cooperation and rule-based political and economic institutions, with the United Nations as its centerpiece. In the past two years that second pillar has become shaky. The multilateral trading system could become the battleground for unsettled geopolitical disputes, with disastrous consequences. The biggest risk and the biggest opportunity is the Doha round of global trade liberalization talks. Failure to push the talks forward will seriously undermine confidence in the multilateral system.
The Doha process was heralded with great fanfare as the "global development round." This was supposed to mean that at last negotiators would tackle the issues of greatest interest to developing countries. Chief among these were the need to resolve and implement leftover issues of the previous round, including trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights and access to essential medicines; the removal of remaining barriers to nonagricultural products; and, of course, the liberalization of agricultural trade.
At the WTO meeting in November 2001, all members reaffirmed the right to grant compulsory licenses to generic manufacturers. This helped to clarify the situation of developing countries that have the capacity to manufacture pharmaceuticals, such as Brazil and India. But it left out the poorest countries that lack pharmaceutical industries, such as sub-Saharan African nations.
The special Doha Declaration on trade-related intellectual property rights committed WTO members to find a solution for these countries before the end of 2002. The deadline was missed. A compromise crafted carefully over several months was in the end rejected by the United States. Since then, attempts to resolve the deadlock have failed.
For the United States, the cost of this stance an erosion of U.S. leadership and the poisoning of the Doha process will be far higher than any possible benefits. Even worse, it is undercutting the diplomatic and humanitarian value of President George W. Bush's proposal to provide an additional $2 billion a year to fight AIDS in Africa, a significant example of international cooperation.
On the issue of agricultural protectionism, too, the deadline for reaching a settlement was missed. High subsidies in rich countries have hampered agricultural growth in the developing world. The subsidies have also aggravated poverty problems. Members of the WTO agreed to commit to a framework for agriculture negotiations by March 31, but it proved impossible to bridge the gulf between the EU and U.S. positions.
Equally dire are the talks on the third issue, provisions that are supposed to give developing countries special rights and enable developed countries to give them preferential treatment. It was agreed at Doha that the provisions would be reviewed to make them stronger, more precise and more effective. Yet the third deadline for the negotiations was missed on Feb. 10, and there is now little or no hope for any significant progress before the next ministerial meeting.
The Doha deadlock must be broken, not only because the Doha round's goals are important in themselves, but also because failure to move forward will throw more gasoline on the already fierce fire of trade disputes and flagrant abuse of trade safeguards by both developed and developing countries. Saving the Doha round will take much more than the hard work of WTO negotiators and ambassadors in Geneva. The issue must go the highest political levels.
G-8 leaders will have an opportunity to repair the present international disorder at their summit in Evian. The United States and France carry the main burden of responsibility, given the importance and complexity of the agricultural issue.
President Jacques Chirac can show that his stated commitment to multilateralism is sincere by abandoning his opposition to Europe's agricultural reform. Similarly, Bush could become more open to compromise on the key Doha issues. That would be a meaningful step toward restoring the right kind of U.S. international leadership.
*
The writer, a former president of Mexico, directs the Yale Center for the Study of Globalization.The International Herald Tribune:
