New York Times | Editorial | November 9, 2001
Trade ministers from 142 nations will meet in Doha, Qatar, today for a conference of the World Trade Organization. Their agenda is much the same as the ill-fated ministerial meeting in Seattle in 1999, when attempts to bridge the gap between poor and wealthy countries' priorities blew up in a cloud of tear gas. The whole world has an interest in seeing this gathering turn out better. With the world's terrorized economy stuck at a standstill, the time is ripe for a cooperative, international push for growth through trade.
The ministers' goal in Qatar is to launch a new set of comprehensive trade negotiations. During the original Uruguay Round, which led to the creation of the W.T.O., rich countries pledged to open their markets to textiles, crops and other basic exports from the developing world. There has been some progress in that area, but arcane customs rules, unnecessary red tape, stingy quotas and anti-dumping programs still keep poor nations' exports out of wealthy markets. Now protectionist politicians are trying to erect more barriers by exploiting concerns about border security and food safety.
Wealthy nations have their own set of favorite trade issues. The United States wants more protection against theft of intellectual property. American negotiators also want their trading partners to end protectionism in the sale of services, like long-distance phone calls and insurance policies. An increasingly powerful cadre of medium-size economies like those of Brazil, Egypt and Mexico are insisting that faster fulfillment of commitments from the Uruguay Round come first. Several nations also want concessions on drug patents. India, suddenly a critical ally for the West, has vowed to block a new round of talks unless they focus on helping poor countries.
There is a chance of progress this time around, since the W.T.O.'s members have agreed to a draft proposal that could lead to some smart compromises on key issues. The United States and the European Union appear willing to put aside their many trans-Atlantic trade spats to focus on broader topics. Though Japan has sandbagged on the crucial question of farm trade, this time the overall mood is optimistic.
Another failure would be disastrous. If these talks break up without starting a new round of trade negotiations, poor countries could, with some justification, give up their hopes that a global trading system will lead to open markets for their products. After just six years, the W.T.O. could find itself eclipsed by regional trading blocs in Asia, Europe and North and South America.
Failure in Qatar would harm more than just the prospects for freer trade. It would endanger the very existence of an inclusive, consensus-driven organization in which 142 countries have a meaningful stake. That would hurt international rapport when it is needed most. The United States must do everything it can to keep the world at the negotiating table.
Copyright 2001 The New York Times CompanyNew York Times:
