By Ranjit Dev Raj
BANGKOK, Feb 18 (IPS) - A 'Bangkok spirit' of concessions for the developing world was discernible here Friday on the eve of the end of the UNCTAD X conference, but uncertainty prevailed over the fate of contentious issues in the final documents it will produce Saturday.
"We hope to have the two texts without brackets tomorrow. Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed," said Habib Ouane, spokesperson for the week-long conference, which is billed as the first major trade and economic summit of the new millennium.
The same blocs of trade interests at last year's world trade talks in Seattle have been at work -- and in tough negotiations -- this week. For instance, the least developed countries and trade giants United States and some members of the European Union differ on the scope of market access to be given in to LDCs.
As in the Seattle talks, agricultural subsidies are a bone of contention between the developing world and the industrialised countries and also between the EU and the US.
The UNCTAD X's final documents, a Bangkok Declaration and a Plan of Action for the organisation, are not trade agreements.
But the negotiations of the text of the documents have highlighted some of the most difficult trade and development issues of the day, and government delegations especially of industrialised nations are wary of agreeing to anything that might hurt their positions in future negotiations.
So far, accepted for inclusion in the declaration is the ideal that: "For the international community, just as for each and every national society, the ultimate test lies in the way it treats the weaker members of the commmunity."
But addressing a press conference, European Commissioner Poul Nielson said it was best that UNCTAD restricted itself to its mandate although the "timing and deliberations" of the Bangkok conference were such as to raise optimism about putting WTO "back on track."
Nelson also reposed faith in the WTO at the plenary, where he referred to the EU's "commitment to the need for a comprehensive round of multilateral trade negotiations to ensure further trade liberalisation, provide rules to ensure a predictable economic environment and better integrate the developing countries in the world economy."
On the other hand, Nielson indicated that the EU preferred to deal bilaterally rather than multilaterally. "I find it ironic that issues on which we deal constructively, bilaterally, turn contentious at multilateral conferences and become pieces moved around on a chess board."
He listed the issues as those pertaining to good governance, poverty eradication, respect for the environment and regard for the social and gender aspects of development and said they were vital to sustainable development.
Ouane said explicit references to governance both in the preamble and in the body of the draft plan of action were proving to be "stumbling blocks", but was hopeful of a compromise Friday night.
The bracketed paragraph on this issue says: "Democracy, rule of law, transparent and accountable governance and administration, including combating and eliminating corruption - a global phenomenon, affecting both developed and developing countries - are indispensable foundations for the realisation of people-centred sustainable development."
It also says: "Human rights and fundamental freedoms with the right to development as an integral part must be promoted and protected. Macroeconomic stability has proved to be an important element for economic growth and the alleviation of poverty."
Another thorny issue was whether the plan of action would ask UNCTAD to look into full, quota and duty-free, market access for the world's 48 LDCs. Such access is what these countries want, but the European Union wants to quality the scope of access to "essentially all" instead of "all" LDC exports.
Activists here have said 'essentially all' is 'essentially nothing' because the limitation would allow importing countries to select which items to leave out.
Indeed, Ouane said the negotiations on this subject have had to be less ambitious concerning commitments by the industrialised countries to greater market access for LDCs.
Netherlands minister for development cooperation Eveline Herfkens told IPS there was considerable opposition from several members in the European Union to access to all LDC exports, "especially those in the northern half."
Herfkens said her country was prepared to remove trade barriers on it own, but could not act independently of the EU. Still, there were signs that most members were falling in line and in fact "falling southwards" she said.
She said while she was encouraged by the degree of genuine communication, especially bilateral, at the conference, "everything depended on the degree to which the United States can agree to anything."
Especially difficult was the question of removing subsidies in agriculture, which many developed countries are stiffly opposed to but was finding increasing resistance from EU countries in the northern region.
The plea here from the "vested interests", said Ouane, was that agricultural subsidies was already the subject of discussion at WTO and should no longer be tackled in the UNCTAD documents.
But Swedish Minister for Trade Leif Pagrotsky said: "We (developed countries) need to be consistent. We are not credible if we are selective in the areas we want."
Under discussion is whether the plan of action should say that "further support for agricultural production, investment and exports" in developed countries "may have" or "has" negative effects on "many" developing countries' export and production capacity.
According to Ouane, the plea here was that agriculture was already the subject of negotiations at the WTO and therefore could not be taken up at UNCTAD.
Nielson said the EU should be judged by what other big players in the market such as the United States and Japan have offered. "Comparison is the name of the game in the market," he said.
But Herfkens disagrees. "We should not wait for others to act," she said, adding that agricultural protectionism by OECD countries alone cost developing countries 20 billion U.S. dollars in income annually.
"The wealthy nations have been slow to implement the agreements made in 1994. This enormously frustrates the developing countries. The competitive advantage of the richer WTO members over the poorer are enormous: information, technology and good infrastructure," she said.
Ouane said strong opposition to the term "new financial architecture," frequently used at the conference by not only experts and NGOs but heads of UN agencies and multilateral institutions, has resulted in its replacement by the phrase "reform of financial institutions."
But according to him, for UNCTAD itself the draft plan still holds out the promise of a greater role for it in finance, an area in which the body's entry has been strongly opposed by vested interests.
"If adopted, this would be a major step forward in UNCTAD's role in supporting development activity through the use of its regular analyses of finance and trade," Ouane said.
He said UNCTAD will now concentrate on the important area of implementation. "The time has come to address serious concerns -- it will not be business as usual anymore," he said.:
