"NOW WHAT ?"

Last week’s informal mini-Ministerial meeting of about 50 Trade Ministers failed to bridge the differences amongst members of the World Trade Organisation enough to offer hope, that ‘one last push’ could conclude the much delayed Doha Development Round. This was not a formal meeting of all member nations but it was hoped Ministers would find some closer understandings. Alas, that did not happen. There is a standoff, again.

Because of a broader membership and the welcome solidarity of developing countries, the big guys can no longer reach an agreement and ram it through. But unless they agree, there can be no agreement anywhere. Some say it doesn’t matter if things stall for another few years. The ‘disputes system’ alone uniquely provided by the WTO is reason enough to justify the WTO’s existence, and they say in the end there’s no alternative. There are alternatives - an inferior, potentially dangerous route - that of "coalitions of the willing", regional and bilateral roads, and that road’s well-travelled with dozens of deals in negotiation at the moment. None have a legal disputes resolution system, most avoid tough issues like agriculture, most are not interested in poor customers like Africa, most have conflicting rules of origin, many don’t create new jobs or wealth but simply create trade distortion. Most put more power in the hands of the big players and we know from history that if politicians have levers, they eventually will use them. And, if momentum is lost and the WTO becomes a League of Nations, who’s to say the disputes system won’t be eventually overwhelmed and discredited. Governments often use the disputes system knowing they are wrong to appease special interests and then attack the WTO.

The Round has not failed yet, no trade round has ever failed or come in on time. Earlier Ministerial meetings in Seattle, Montreal, Brussels, later Cancun and Hong Kong also failed. Unlike Ministerial meetings of Labour, Health, Environment, and often Foreign Affairs, communiqués coming out of meetings are so crafted as to mean anything to everyone so therefore, no failure. In trade, because of the World Trade Organisation, final agreements, once ratified by parliaments, are binding and then tested by a unique binding disputes mechanism. It’s very real, that’s why it’s hard negotiations and eventually works.

It’s tougher being a Trade Minister now than in my time, negotiations with domestic interests are often more difficult than differences between nations. It’s no good telling Ambassadors in Geneva to work harder in Geneva, or giving the Director-General of the WTO an impossible task of inventing a common position where no common position exists. He must try and will, but the Director-General cannot impose solutions on sovereign governments. Leaders must lead and take risks.

Elections loom in France and the U.S. Congress in November this year. But the votes are in protection, those who have privilege and subsidies seldom give them up without a fight. In our new telecratic online world, Ministers have their pressure groups looking over their shoulders 24/7 and many play and pay them. Hundreds of new pressure groups have emerged, suggesting they are the true representatives of the people not governments. The collapse of technology costs relative to income means the true entry costs of becoming an NGO (Non Government Organisation) are minimal. However it’s the old, sophisticated, organised special interests who have grazed off the taxpayer for several generations in rich countries who know electorate by electorate how to mobilise to make life difficult for governments. Essentially things will not move until the Europeans offer more specific market access for agricultural products, and the U.S. slashes domestic support for its privileged growers, and that dangerous word "sensitive" products is clearly defined. What if it’s all rice, sugar, coffee, cotton or dairy? And then developing countries have to make some openings. Who goes first, who turns over their cards first? 150 nations cannot turn their cards over simultaneously. Now it will be up to the Director-General of the World Trade Organisation to do some shuttle diplomacy to broker an understanding between the major players.

The great Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, "Cowardice asks the question – is it safe? Expediency asks the question – is it politic? Vanity asks the question – is it popular? But conscience asks the question – is it right?" This Doha Development deal is right and history should curse those who see further delay as success, they now risk the whole proposition of the multilateral system that has rewarded its participants with the most dramatic advances in living standards in history!