International Trade Daily | November 1, 2001 | By Daniel Pruzin
GENEVA--The chairman of the World Trade Organization's General Council Oct. 31 defended his efforts in drafting a declaration for the WTO's upcoming ministerial conference in Doha, Qatar, rejecting criticisms from some developing countries that their views have been marginalized in the process.
Speaking at a formal meeting of the WTO's General Council, Stuart Harbinson said he had no plans to hold further consultations on outstanding issues related to the draft text since there were slim prospects of reaching any agreements on these issues before Doha.
Harbinson circulated a second version Oct. 27 of his ministerial declaration, prepared in cooperation with WTO director-general Mike Moore, which sets out a "future work program" covering multilateral negotiations on issues such as industrial tariffs, antidumping/countervailing duty rules, trade facilitation, and transparency in government procurement.
The text also sets out the framework for continued negotiations on agricultural and services trade as well as possible negotiations on investment, competition policy and the environment. Separate draft ministerial decisions were also issued covering implementation as well as the issue of intellectual property rights, public health, and access to medicines.
The Hong Kong official, whose role as General Council chairman gave him a key role in the preparatory work for Doha, said that over 100 meetings have taken place since February among WTO members culminating in a draft declaration which he said represented his and Moore's "best judgment" as to what could be a basis for agreement by ministers.
"As far as the process in Geneva is concerned, it is our judgment that we have taken it as far as we possibly can, and that further consultations will not take us any closer to improving the texts," Harbinson said. "For the same reason ... I believe it would not help the process for delegations to engage in a substantive discussion in the General Council at this stage on specific portions of the text."
Africans Lead Attack
Speaking on behalf of the WTO's Africa Group, Zimbabwean ambassador Boniface Chidyausiku complained the Oct. 27 draft "does not reflect a sizeable number of the positions taken by African ministers and supported by a large number of developing countries which were discussed after the circulation of the first draft ministerial declaration."
The new draft "does not present options particularly on trade and investment and trade and competition policy," Chidyausiku noted, referring to the first draft where Harbinson set out two options calling either for a decision to launch negotiations on investment and competition policy (as favored by the European Union and Japan) or continuing ongoing study of the issues in the WTO's respective committees on investment and competition policy (as favored by most developing countries).
"Further, specific preference for the development of non-binding rules and/or general guidelines was expressed by a large number of developing countries on trade facilitation and transparency in government procurement. Again, the draft before us gives the wrong impression that delegations are agreed on the need to launch negotiations on binding rules in these areas."
Nigeria's deputy representative Matthew Ifeanyi Nwagwu issued a separate and more critical assessment, describing the revised declaration as "one-sided."
"The text generally accommodates in total the interests of developed countries while disregarding the concerns of the developing and least developed countries. It is empty of contents of the issues of interest to developing countries, including issues of implementation, special and differential treatment, LDC [least developed country] issues, subsidies and countervailing measures, and TRIPS and public health."
"It is rather unfortunate that the Chairman has decided to adopt this non-inclusive attitude by sidetracking the views of the developing and least developed countries," Nwagwu added. "Nigeria considers it a serious omission that the draft has not projected the crucial differences in our views."
Harbinson Downplays 'Crisis.'
Harbinson later told reporters that the claims developing country interests were marginalized in the declaration were without foundation.
"You have to recognize that we have been in a preparatory process which has been going on for months," he said. "Suddenly, everyone is confronted with the reality that this is it. It's not unusual that you have this sort of crisis-like situation because the reality hits you" that the ministerial is drawing close.
Harbinson also defended his decision not to hold any further talks in the run-up to Doha on altering the draft declaration. "This is the end of the process in Geneva," the Hong Kong official said. "There's not more I can do, quite frankly. If I were to start looking at one part of the text again, I would have to look at the rest. We just don't have the time ... there are sensitive issues out there, but these are issues only ministers can deal with."
Several officials came to Harbinson's defense in response to the criticisms from African countries. "The biggest winners in the second draft are developing countries and least developed countries," argued Sergio Marchi, Canada's ambassador to the WTO, citing "much broader and more specific language" on special and differential treatment and technical cooperation and capacity-building for the WTO's poorer members. "This is a genuine attempt to make the round more focused on the development and growth agenda."
One trade official said developing countries would be foolish to reject the draft text as well as the separate decision on implementation, where some 100 demands related to problems developing countries face in complying with existing WTO agreements and ensuring more flexible terms for poorer members will either be subject to a decision in Doha, be dealt with in the future negotiations, or be examined in further detail by WTO subsidiary bodies.
"The declaration is riddled with language in favor of developing countries," the official said. If the effort to accommodate their demands is rejected, "We might as well shut this place [the WTO] down and go home."
Some Developing Countries Positive
Some developing countries however adopted a more conciliatory tone in regards to the Harbinson text. Ambassador Munir Akram of Pakistan, whose country has long insisted that the implementation demands must be effectively addressed before it could agree to negotiations on new issues, said he was ready to accept the draft decision "without any further change."
"We hope that the Special session of the General Council, to resume tomorrow [Nov. 1], will adopt this package," Akram said.
The Pakistan ambassador also said that despite reservations about language in the draft ministerial declaration on issues such as labor, the environment, investment and competition policy, "my delegation is prepared to display some flexibility on these issues if our partners are ready to be responsive to our priorities ... for example, we would consider going along with some language on investment and competition policy so long as there is no commitment ab initio to negotiations."
Akram said Pakistan was also prepared to consider negotiations on transparency in government procurement and trade facilitation "provided that the result of neither of these negotiations will be juridical under the [WTO's] Dispute Settlement System."
EU 'Sadly Disappointed.'
The European Union's ambassador to the WTO, Carlo Trojan, said Brussels was "sadly disappointed" with the Harbinson text, adding that he was "unhappy--even upset--that some of our major concerns fail to be addressed in any meaningful way in this revised draft."
Many observers say the EU is perhaps in the toughest position going into Doha since its hopes of launching a broad-based trade round have been essentially dashed by the Harbinson text. The ambiguous language concerning negotiations on investment and competition policy, the absence of any commitment to negotiate on trade and environment, and provisions on export subsidies and non-trade concerns for agriculture were all problem areas for Brussels, Trojan said.
"On the environment--politically a very sensitive issue for us--we went out of our way to provide all necessary braces and belts to our partners," Trojan declared. "The only braces left are the ones I put on this morning. ... All that is on offer in the draft declaration is a continuation of the CTE (the WTO's Committee on Trade and Environment) working program with a fig leaf so small--on a remote possibility of negotiations--that it borders on indecency."
"I think I could not put it more clearly that the environment approach falls far short of what would be acceptable to the EU in an overall package," he warned.
On agriculture, the "present text is, as you know, not acceptable to us on two accounts: the stated objectives on export subsidies and the cursory treatment of [non-trade barriers]," Trojan added. The Harbinson text calls for the eventual phase-out of export subsidies (Brussels says it is wiling to reduce, but not eliminate, such subsidies) and affirms that non-trade concerns will be taken into account in the negotiations, as stated in the WTO's Agreement on Agriculture.
Trojan also described the Harbinson text on investment and competition policy as a "big disappointment. ... The text is both unclear and ambiguous. I would have thought that following our consultations it would have been possible to have an up-front decision on the modalities of participation in negotiations on a multilateral framework for negotiations."
Copyright c 2001 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Washington D.C.International Trade Daily:
