The headlines always cry, "Doha Development Round in Crisis", "Make or Break Meeting Looms", this time they will be correct. For up to 5 days, key Trade Ministers from the U.S., EU, Brazil and India will meet in Germany to try and stitch together an understanding that may, at long last, see the Doha round conclude. If they fail, it’s hard to see how, given the U.S. election and expiry of Trade Promotion authority, the legislative tool the U.S. Administration uses to negotiate a deal, how a deal can be reached next year. Not impossible but very, very difficult. This legislation allows the U.S. Congress to vote up or down a trade package and prevents special interest amendments that could unpick the delicate balance needed to win the support of the other 140 nations involved in the negotiations at the World Trade Organisation.

As always, it’s agriculture that is causing the most difficulties, but even here there is a slight glimmer of hope and compromise emerging. Basically, the U.S. has to give a little more by cutting domestic support, subsidies. The Europeans, Japanese, Koreans and Nordics need to provide more market access. The devilish detail will be in the definition and depth of what is sadly called, ‘sensitive and special products’. For some, that means rice, others - dairy, coffee, cotton and sugar. Some extra space to phase in the openings may work but for many countries these are the key objectives that make the round worthwhile and give meaning to the title, ‘Development round’. Frustration that these key sectors were not addressed substantially for 50 years and progress was glacial, caused the formation of the group of 20 developing countries, lead by Brazil and India. They, too, have differences. Brazil wants open agricultural markets; India is more defensive for its farmers, fearing wholesale competition, despite its long term benefits, will cause massive social unrest. They do need more space, they need extra time to systematically step in their openings.

The European Union has, for the first time, accepted that agricultural support should be decoupled from production, that’s to support farmers, not farming. They have exclusions but there is progress. Commentators ought not to dismiss France, President Sarkozy will have a majority in his Parliament and the authority to make changes, and while he has said that France will never betray her farmers, he is not reported as saying, as was a former President, that there can be no change, no deal, that means the EU goes beyond its present reform programme that works its way through until 2013. Negotiators have had another firm signal from the leaders of the G8, the top industrialised economies. WTO Director-General, Pascal Lamy, made his case at the meeting as I did at a similar meeting in Genoa, which I firmly believe was central in launching the round in Doha.

Even if the big players reach a general agreement, the deal is not done, there’s over 100 other member nations of the WTO who need to be convinced their interests, and fears are covered. Despite the popular view that the WTO is undemocratic, the show runs by consensus, thus any country can veto any agreement. Ensuring everyone has an advantage and can manage change, which is never politically popular, is the challenge. Herein lies the fundamental weakness of the international architecture of the great institutions, the WTO, World Bank, IMF and other UN development agencies. Coherence between them is poor.

We can learn from the European Union which has substantial financial resources it can direct to member nations as they join the EU and/or restructure. Billions of dollars have been paid out to assist the poorer EU members in their day, Spain, Ireland, Portugal to integrate into the wider European Union. The Director-General of the WTO has not the power or resources, for example say, to a Caribbean nation, 80% of whose exports are bananas which enjoy a high-priced, privileged position in the European market, "Here’s a fund to re-adjust your economy, because eventually bananas can go into Europe from Central America at a quarter of the price."

Here’s further good news, the able, new President of the World Bank, Bob Zoellick, was the U.S. Trade Representative, is close to Pascal Lamy - if they can put global institutional resources alongside the short term adjustment costs to developing countries, then we could have a deal that will return more to developing countries than any other agreement in history.

If anyone can navigate the way through institutional self-interest and harness the many committed people in the World Bank to assist the Doha round, and then steer the other UN agencies for a common focus, it’s Bob Zoellick. There is a deal there, I can smell it, alas, that’s also what I said on Day Two of the failed Ministerial meeting in Seattle.