The Director General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Roberto Azevedo, was in New Delhi this week to kick-start his bilateral engagements with member countries to take forward the progress achieved in Geneva over the last few weeks and successfully conclude the Bali Ministerial meeting in December 2013.
Interestingly, this was the first time a director general (DG) of the WTO made India his first stop for a bilateral discussion. He will certainly be following this up with several other bilateral meetings in the next few weeks. The Doha Round that was launched in November 2001, has been steered by several DGs.
Of these, Pascal Lamy had the longest stint of eight years as head of the Geneva-based multilateral organisation. What is interesting is the new style that Azevedo brings to this job. In his meeting with the industry it was clear that he believed in a direct approach. There was no beating about the bush. It is, therefore, important to look at the messages he conveyed in a bid to achieve success at Bali.
First was an admission. Multilateralism is at a crossroads and, therefore, it is important to have a productive ministerial meeting in December. He urged industry to support governments to find a balance in their negotiating position. He also urged governments to be practical in their approach to the negotiations. He was clear that the Bali Ministerial would be the first step towards an agenda that member countries will define for the WTO to deliver on areas of interest for developing and developed countries.
Second was an expectation that countries will not dig in their heels on issues and would be willing to look at a compromise that more or less addresses their concerns. This was in the context of the G-33 proposal on food security of which India has been a strong advocate. The WTO DG pointed out that when the G-33 group of countries put forward this proposal it had been turned down as a deal-breaker for Bali. But over the last few weeks a consensus seems to be emerging that while the real issue can be debated later, Bali could deliver a peace clause that will allow developing countries such as India to continue government purchases to support the public distribution system for the poor.
The peace clause, as he pointed out, will certainly be a worthwhile achievement. G-33 countries such as India should view the in-principle agreement on the peace clause as a win, given the strong resistance it has faced in the past.
News reports suggest that India's Commerce Minister Anand Sharma was inclined to give this proposal a favourable nod. The commerce minister was quoted as saying that "you don't do negotiations with a tight list and say this is the final list. I don't want any ambiguity on food security. Its legitimacy has been appreciated, and the negotiators will find an acceptable solution to that."
Third was the new WTO DG's approach to industry. In his meeting with the Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), he recognised the need for a partnership between industry and the WTO. He was willing to team up with the CII for joint reports and look at ways to make the partnership more meaningful. This move signals a change from the approach adopted by his predecessors and is welcome since it can help make the negotiating process more inclusive for stakeholders beyond the government.
Trade facilitation, as the DG pointed out, remains an important deliverable at Bali. As of now all countries seem to be in favour of having a good trade facilitation text agreed at the ministerial meeting.
One area, however, needs more attention - development. The issue of development is critical for least-developed countries that make up a large portion of the membership. Countries will have to quickly come up with reasonable proposals to ensure that the development pillar is adequately addressed at Bali.
The DG's visit to India has brought new hope for the multilateral system. He will now have to convert this hope into reality by getting the large players to build the required consensus on issues.
The writer is Principal Adviser at APJ-SLG Law Offices
Disclaimer: These are personal views of the writer. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of www.business-standard.com or the Business Standard newspaper
