No deal better than bad deal: Indian trade experts

New Delhi: Indian trade experts are unanimous that no deal at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) augurs better for India than a bad deal but developed nations will continue to put pressure on developing countries to open up their markets. Indian experts are unanimous that reaching a deal at the WTO would not have been easy given the fact that issues from earlier rounds have not been resolved even as new issues have come up. An important factor for the stalemate is that developing nations have understood the rules of the game and cannot come to grips with distortions being forced into the global trading system, felt analysts. Former Indian foreign secretary Muchkund Dubey said: “Now that the WTO talks have collapsed, major economic powers will give sops to poor countries and try to split their ranks. One such bait is the - trade for aid initiative - because many countries badly need aid. Pressure on developing countries will increase because of the trade talks collapse.” Abhijit Das, Senior Trade Officer, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) agreed that missed deadlines, roadblocks and delays are not unusual in trade negotiations. He added: “We have seen delays in negotiations at Uruguay as well as at Montreal. But Doha is different. Why? The reason is that there is a cohesion amongst developing countries and the Group of 33 has decided to mutually accommodate the interests of developing countries.” The experts were expressing their views at a panel discussion organised by Centre for Trade and Development (CENTAD) - an outfit by British charity Oxfam - on The Doha Impasse: Which way are we headed? - in New Delhi on Tuesday. The event had been planned after Indian trade minister Kamal Nath had walked out of the WTO talks in Geneva in early July citing non cooperation from developed countries. Manab Majumdar, Team Leader, WTO and FTA division, Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI) had a word of caution. He said people should not get hyper about the so-called collapse of the Doha round because is it not dead as yet. “A rule-based multilateral trading system is the best bet for world trade and for India. But we should not rush in merely to strike a deal. If the Doha round resumes we have to be careful about protecting our rights over NAMA (non agricultural market access) and real market access,” Majumdar added. Panelists also debated over issues that the WTO was supposed to tackle including removing distortions in the trading system and eliminating tariffs. Biswajit Dhar, head WTO Centre, Indian Institute of Foreign Trade, was critical of the WTO and added: “In the negotiations over formula, we have forgotten the bigger picture of global trading. Tariffs might have come down but non tariff barriers have increased, so we are where we were. Subsidies are still there and the level-playing field is non existent.” He also expressed concern that many figures being debated in WTO have been cooked up by the developed world. Giving an example Dhar stressed: “The subsidy notifications given by the US to WTO have smaller figures than figures given by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). This means that the developing countries have all through been fighting for reducing subsidies which are anyway less than the real subsidies.” The panelists also setting out a roadmap for Indian negotiators in case WTO talks resume. Das added: “We have to be careful about legal niceties in the documents, should not get hurried into signing a deal and have to ensure that we gain in agricultural subsidies if we give into US demands on services. Also our negotiators will have to overcome fatigue in these prolonged discussions and debates and not give in.” Dubey added that if the talks have to be successful, developed countries will have to be flexible in their approach and a measure of discipline has to be brought in the negotiations. He added that the WTO will also have to scrutinize bilateral deals within a specific timeframe that might undermine global trade rules.

User comments

There are no comments

 Printable version