| Doha should inspire more confidence
By Supachai Panitchpakdi
Published: June 30 2004 21:34 | Last Updated: June 30 2004 21:34 Critics of the Doha development agenda who suggest these trade negotiations hold little potential benefit for poor nations bring to mind the old adage that one should not make the perfect the enemy of the good. These critics, including Joseph Stiglitz on these pages (June 21), believe we should immediately redress the distortions and inequities in the trading system, that developing countries should not be bound by international trading rules, and that the game is somehow rigged against the developing countries. I hold many of these people in the very highest esteem. I have shared their frustration at the inability of member governments of the World Trade Organisation to reach their interim deadlines during this round. But we part company when they suggest the Doha talks are merely an agenda for rich countries. This is a critical time for the WTO and the global trading system. We need to reach a framework agreement by the end of this month for agriculture (including a cut in cotton subsidies), industrial product market access and trade facilitation. We need to spell out the most effective route to early agreement in trade in services and "special and differential treatment" for developing countries. In the weeks that remain all governments must be engaged and must be prepared to compromise. Agreement this month would put the negotiations squarely back on track. Failure would consign them to the sidelines for some time. Such an outcome would be unfortunate for the rich countries, but they have the resources to maintain the status quo. Developing countries have no such luxury. Time for a true development trade round The disparity between a true development agenda and what has evolved since Doha is glaring, writes Joseph Stiglitz When development advocates state that no agreement is better than a bad agreement, they appear to suggest developing countries are not capable of protecting their own interests at the negotiating table. But the large number of developing countries participating in these negotiations makes it impossible that an agreement could be reached that fails adequately to address developing countries' concerns. Perhaps we will not reach agreement at the end of the month. There are sharp differences across a range of issues. But to walk away and start again would be self-defeating. Our members have shown courage recently in taking difficult political decisions that have significant potential benefits for developing countries. The pledge by the European Union and the US to do away with subsidised agricultural export programmes is a good example. Provided a balance can be struck on the framework agreement by the end of July - an attainable goal - these two powers are committed to abolishing the most trade-distorting subsidies. We are on the verge of a historic breakthrough and the primary beneficiaries live in developing countries. We are also addressing, in both agriculture and non-agricultural market access, the problem of tariff escalation. Under this system, coffee beans and raw timber can be imported duty-free, while processed coffee and wooden tables are priced out of the market by prohibitive tariffs. Such a system weighs disproportionately on developing countries that are trying to
encourage the manufacture of higher-value products. In the area of services, developing countries are pressing hard to reduce barriers in sectors where they hold competitive advantage, such as maritime and construction services. Critics have raised concerns about the fairness of the WTO system and the need for more transparency in the negotiating process. But, as we have seen in Cancún, developing countries play a more active role in negotiating the future rules of this organisation than ever before. I have no doubt the future rules will be more balanced, but balance does not mean having rules that apply to developed countries while developing countries are exempt. The way to ensure balance and equity is to tailor rules to suit various levels of development. The concept of special and differential treatment is woven into every element of our negotiations and governments have agreed in principle to 28 specific SDT proposals. I hope this month we can agree on how to resolve outstanding issues. I understand the frustration of those who believe we move too slowly to resolve some of the most pressing commercial problems of our day. But this is the nature of decision-making by consensus - the only way the WTO decides matters of importance. It is vital to keep in mind that we have not yet concluded our work. An outcome of great benefit for developing countries is within our reach. As the Brazilians are fond of saying: "Everything ends well and if things aren't going well, it only means they haven't yet ended." The writer is WTO director-general | 
