Bittersweet for the South

 
Published: Thursday 15 January 2004

Bittersweet for the South

FRANCESCO SINDICO, FRANK BIERMANN

The results of the fifth ministerial conference of the wto have been described in many ways. Some consider the meeting as a total failure, while others maintain that it has only been an impasse; some hail it as a victory of their interests, while others look at it as a useful wake-up call. Quite unusually, national governments view the conference as a setback -- this is the claim of the final ministerial statement adapted at the conference.

The conference was undeniably a setback. It is important to ask, and understand: why couldn't an agreement be reached? There were three interrelated factors that determined the outcome: the failure to level the playing field, the controversial nature of the issues that were being negotiated, and the developing countries' alliance.

What are the implications of the Cancun failure for the future of the developing countries? At a glance, it may seem to be victory of the developing countries; but a comprehensive analysis shows that their success is rather bittersweet. Not to have reached a multilateral agreement will most likely foster bilateral negotiations on many sensitive issues that have been discussed in Cancun. Bilateral agreements are risky for developing countries, because it is difficult for them to reach an equitable compromise between taking and giving. The level playing field, which is a delicate problem within the wto, will turn out to be an even bigger problem in bilateral negotiations. The setback will be positive only if the developing countries manage to strengthen their alliances and not become the hostages of the industrialised countries in bilateral trade agreements.

Hence, developing countries now have two options. Firstly, they could reinitiate negotiations within the wto. Cancun has demonstrated that the developing nations can work together, as they have a common negotiation strategy. Now they need to shift from their obstructive tactic, which has fulfilled its goal by stopping wto negotiations, to a more positive, proposal-oriented negotiation strategy. After Cancun, leading regional countries such as Brazil and India have the chance to finally sit at the same table with industrialised countries.

The second option is a more disruptive one. If the wto has failed to deliver and if the Doha principles (incorporated to ensure global development) will not be followed, then it is time to shift negotiations from the wto to new forums. Why should environmental or social concerns be dealt with within a trading system? The argument that the wto is already there and that it has a strong dispute-settlement system is clearly not strong enough to completely disregard an alternative establishment. The wto is what its member states want it to be. Therefore, its failure is related to political will.

It seems that in the long-term, the second option is the most desirable one for developing countries to adopt. But realistically speaking, the first option will be the best for the short-term. Cancun has shown the world that developing countries can play an active, positive and powerful role in the international community. Now it is important for them to show that they can really, and willingly, form a coalition to negotiate together.

Frank Biermann is the head of the Department of Environmental Policy Analysis, Institute for Environmental Studies, the Vrije Universiteit, the Netherlands. Francesco Sindico is a fellow there 12jav.net12jav.net

Subscribe to Daily Newsletter :

Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.