STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

1

RBSMUN 2019

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

2

Table of Contents

1. Message from the Dais

2. Introduction to the Committee

3. Topic 1: The Consequence Of US Unilateralism In International Trade

• Introduction• History of Topic• Current Scenario

i) US China Trade War ii) Trump administration wanting to reform the global trade system iii) Trump administration threatening to with-draw from WTO iv) American unilateralism vs Eupopean multi-lateralism v) Crisis in global trade

• Bloc Positions i) USA ii) China iii) European Countries iv) Southeast Asian Countries

• Actions to be taken• Questions a Resolution Must Answer (QARMA)• Citations

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

3

4. Topic 2: The Future of The Doha Round

• Introduction• Timeline• Subjects covered by Doha Round and their aims

i) Agriculture ii) Non Agricultural Market Access iii) Trade Facilitation iv) Service v) Rules vi) The Environment vii) Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property

• Principles for Negotiation of the Doha Development Agenda

• Some Important Aspects i) India’s Market Price Support (MPS) For Cotton And Sugar ii) Bali Package (2013) iii) Nairobi Ministerial Declaration (2015)

• Current Situation• Countries and their Stances

i) China ii) India iii) Brazil iv) USA v) European Countries

• Questions a Resolution Must Answer (QARMA)• Citations

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

4

Message from the DaisHonorable delegates,

It is our great pleasure to welcome you all to RBSMUN 2019. We are eager to serve as the dais members of The World Trade Organization. At a time when the increasing unilateral trade measures are challenging the multilateral trade system, efforts need to be put in order to invigorate the universal, non-discrim-inatory and transparent multilateral trading agreements like the Doha Round.

The reforms made to the global trading system such as changes to the tariffs as well as non-tariff barriers, agricultural as well as non-agricultural market access and the special and differential treatment of certain nations has an impact on the people and the countries all over the world. Therefore, we hope that you come up with solutions that value humanity above greed, power and ego.

The topics that we are discussing this year are interconnected. If the Doha agreement fails then the multilateral trade agreements are also predestined to fail. Furthermore, powerful countries like the United States unilaterally impos-ing trade sanctions on WTO member nations and disregarding certain WTO rules is definitely not helping the multilateral trading agreements and the multilateral trading system as a whole. However, the delegates should under-stand that there is no strong opposition between defense of American interest and an open multilateral system.

Delegates, the future lies in our hands, we can bring the changes that we want and make our world a better place to live in. A challenging and intriguing com-mittee working towards opening trade for the benefit of all requires all of you to be enthusiastic, clever, thoughtful and diplomatic. But don’t worry because we will always be here to help out with all of your queries and concerns.

Be prepared to have an exhausting yet unforgettable and substantial experi-ence. We hope that you all are as excited as we are! Sincerely,Aarasi Shrestha (Chair)Pranush Maharjan ( Vice Chair)Reeti Shrestha (Moderator)

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

5

Introduction to the CommitteeThe successor to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), The World Trade Organization (WTO) was established on 1st January 1995. Since then it has helped to create a strong and prosperous international trading system, contributing to the global economic growth. WTO works towards conducting negotiations for international trade agreements, governing international trade, monitoring the application of WTO rules, ensuring the transparency of region-al as well as bilateral trade agreements, solving trade disputes among member nations and improving trading prospects of developing nations.

Being the only international organization dealing with global trade rules it covers about 98 percent of the world trade with 164 member nations. Over three-quarters of WTO members are developing or least-developed econo-mies. The “Special and differential treatment” provision gives these countries special rights. The main purpose of the latest round of negotiations, The Doha Round is to lower trade barriers and revised trade rules for boosting the eco-nomic growth of developing nations and having a better multilateral trading system as a whole. Moreover, WTO helps the producers of goods and services, exporters and importers as well as people of the WTO member countries to conduct their businesses smoothly. In the upcoming days, the trading system should be improved because inevitably, ineluctably, it must be improved.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

6

Topic 1: The Consequences

of US Unilateralism

in International

Trade

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

7

Introduction“Unilateralism”, refers to a tendency to opt out of a multilateral framework (whether existing or proposed) or to act alone in addressing a particular global or regional challenge rather than choosing to participate in collective action.” Countries act out of multilateral framework because they do not wish to sub-ject themselves to the generalized principles of conduct or they may find such principles inimical to their national interests. Unilateralism has had a long history in the United States. However, this issue has become more heated after Donald Trump became the President.The Trump administration has already withdrawn from and come after various international organizations and multilateral agreements. If Trump continues this, there are going to be insinuations for both the United States and the inter-national system. Burning bridges with traditional allies increases the isolation of the US and undermines its global leadership.More importantly, his unilateral decisions like trade wars and excessive sanc-tions puts the primacy of the US dollar in the global financial in danger. Na-tions around the world increasingly believe they should be less dependent or even less integrated in the American financial system, which ultimately would weaken the US dollar. Initial steps in that direction is visible, especially follow-ing the US sanctions on Iran and Turkey as well as the trade war with China. Hence, the Trump administration’s approach to international diplomacy in-creases the risk of miscalculations and is reminiscent of the post- 9/11 mentality of the Bush administration which believed that the unilateral use of force and coercion is a better approach than diplomacy for achieving US objectives.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

8

HistoryThere is of course no doubt that unilateralism has a long past in American His-tory. Debate over unilateralism became heated during the administration of President George W. Bush, the concept has a long history in U.S. foreign policy. Its root traces to Christian Right influence on US foreign policy after WWII es-pecially over US policy on China. It was the ideological basis for the Cold War with a self-righteous Superpower leading subservient allies who did not have the wherewithal to resist it. It has continued after the end of the Cold War even as allies attempt to assert increasing independence with the disappearance of perceived Soviet threat. The huge power differential between the US as the sole remaining superpower and its former subservient allies gave the US a nat-ural claim and privilege to unilateralism. Since the end of the Cold War, many of America’s close allies have complained about the rise of American unilater-alism due to the tendency of Washington making decisions without much re-gard for the welfares, opinions or views of its own allies or the rest of the world.If history is any guide, then past trade wars have led to deep economic disor-der. In particular the US Smoot-Hawley tariffs enacted in 1930 are thought to have inspired a trade war, and led to a massive decline in global trade.As one study points out, world trade fell by 66% from 1929 to 1934, while US ex-ports and imports to and from Europe each also fell by about two-thirds. The trade restrictions America imposed on Cuba and Iran violated interna-tional law and therefore offended its allies. In 1959 The United States began imposing economic penalties on Cuba as the new regime in Cuba increased its trade with the Soviet Union, nationalized American-owned properties, and hiked taxes on U.S. imports. After reducing Cuban sugar imports, Washington introduced a ban on nearly all U.S. exports to Cuba The imposition of the U.S. economic blockade of Cuba constituted an illegal act. Various provisions of US law direct or permit unilateral measures against other countries to counter perceived unfairness of the other countries’ laws, policies, and practices. The initial legal authority for such action was Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (the `` 1974 Act”). Section 301 and its related provisions were amended by the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (“the 1988 Act”), and later by the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994. The 1988 Act supported the 1974 Act and added “Super 301,” “Special 301,” and special provi-sions appropriate for telecommunications products and government procure-ment.In June 1997, President of the US’s Export Council in the Department of Com-merce issued a report. It intends to improve the procedures for invoking eco-nomic sanctions. In September 1999, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) finalized a review report titled “Overview and Analysis of the Economic Impact of US Sanctions with Respect to India and Pakistan.” The report studied the impact of unilateral economic sanctions imposed by the US government on India and Pakistan (study conducted in May 1998).

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

9

Current Scenario I) US-China Trade Wars:

USA and China, the world’s two largest economies wrangle for global influence has given rise to concerns all over the world.

US President Donald Trump has been dissatisfied with the trading prac-tices of China even before he took office in 2016. In 2018, the US imposed three rounds of tariffs on more than $250bn worth of Chinese goods. China hit back by imposing tariffs ranging from 5% to 25% on $110bn of US prod-ucts including chemicals, coal and medical equipment. A treaty agreed last December collapsed and in May the US raised tariffs on $200bn of Chinese products to 25% from 10%. Again China hit back with tariff on $60bn of US goods. The US began planning to hit an additional $300bn of Chinese goods but, at the G20 in Japan in June, The president of USA, Donald Trump called that off and said he would continue to negotiate with Beijing for the moment.

Tariffs imposed on Chinese goods, in theory, make US-made products cheaper than imported ones, and encourage consumers to buy American. They are also

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

10

increasingly seen as a negotiation tactic in the trade war.

The International Monetary Fund says an escalation of the tit-for-tat tariffs could cut off 0.5% off global growth by 2020. Morgan Stanley (An American multinational investment bank and financial services company) estimates that a full-blown escalation of the trade dispute could knock 0.81 percentage points off global gross domestic product. The bank said most of the effect from tariff hikes on growth would probably be seen in 2019.

US companies have urged Trump to end the trade war, which has resulted in higher retail prices for consumers, and has hurt American farmers because of retaliatory tariffs from China. For example, the shipments of soybeans, the most valuable US farm export, to top buyer China sank. On July 2019, the Trump administration unveiled a $16bn package of subsidies aimed at helping farm-ers across the country. Democrats criticized the move, saying farmers needed fair trade instead of a bailout. Similarly, China’s industrial profits have been in decline since the second half of last year, with many firms putting off business decisions and scaling back manufacturing investment due to the fear of trade war. Therefore, China’s industrial profits fall 3.1 per cent in June. The US ban on Huawei is one of the most heated topic in US-China trade ne-gotiations. Huawei, the world’s largest telecommunications equipment maker was placed on a US blacklist in May. US companies were banned from selling most parts and components to Huawei without special licenses due to nation-al security concerns. However, Trump said last month that sales of less crit-ical components could resume as he sought to restart trade talks with Bei-jing. Hence, Trade war is coming down to US easing up on Huawei and China buying agricultural products. However, hurdles still persist on multiple fronts. Many lawmakers still strongly oppose any relief for Huawei, seeing it as a major threat to national security due to the report that Huawei secretly helped build North Korea’s cell phone network, potentially in violation of sanctions aimed at pressuring the regime to stop developing nuclear weapons. But Huawei has said that it has “no business presence” in North Korea. Zhengfei, CEO of Hua-wei thinks that Trump is only using Huawei to put pressure on the Chinese government.

II) Trump administration wanting to reform the global trade system:

The President of the United States of America, Donald J. Trump coincided with the implementation of an aggressive US trade policy putting “America First” and backed by the use of unilateral trade sanctions by the US disobeying the World Trade Organization. The US unilateralism consists of three basic views:The US will ignore any WTO decision with which it disagrees;The US will unilaterally impose trade sanctions on WTO member nations with-out first consulting with or fulfilling any of the requirements of the WTO; andThe US will follow the law of the WTO or disregard it totally depending on whether it suits US needs, reducing the WTO to a mere instrumentality for US

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

11

purposes. These situations have isolated US and from its allies and provoked powerful competitors, such as China, into retaliating on its own unilateral terms. US uni-lateralism threatens to undermine the relevance of WTO and to bring the world into a dangerous new era catastrophic world economy. Recently, The Trump administration is demanded that the World Trade Orga-nization update its definitions of “developing country” status and remove the advantageous treatment that ranking brings to nations like China which is cur-rently in a trade war with the US. Trump says that 7 out of the 10 wealthiest countries in the world are classified as developing countries. If it doesn’t get the change it wants, the administration said, it is willing to go it alone and will not apply that status to countries within the WTO it believes no longer qualify for special treatment.

III) Trump administration threatening to withdraw from WTO:

For the nations that prefer multilaterally negotiated solutions over “American solutions”, the accelerating US withdrawal from multilateral treaties and insti-tutions is a serious problem.

Since President Trump took office, the American criticism on the UN, WTO and NATO have been constant, with even some hints of the US leaving them. US is threatening to withdraw from the organization even though America was instrumental in creating it in 1995 and has benefited greatly from its existence. Under President Trump, America has already exited the UN Educational, Scien-tific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), as well as several multilateral treaties such as the Paris Agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), or the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA).

Based on a zero-sum conception of international relations, President Trump only looks after what he perceives to be the immediate interests of the US in all fields, including climate, security and especially trade. The Trump administration is also eroding W.T.O. rules by apparently violating them. It is invoking national security to apply punitive tariffs such as levies on steel — a move that China, the European Union and others are challenging.

IV) American Unilateralism VS European multilateralism:

Now that the US cannot be expected to lead a rules-based order, is it time for the EU to fill that void and propel multilateral approaches to all these challeng-es?

So far, Europe’s leaders had been too preoccupied with their respective do-mestic concerns — Brexit, rising populist sentiments — to focus on reforming

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

12

the global trading system. But America’s latest tariffs on China will hurt Europe, too, given Europe’s links with the Chinese economy. Hence, the EU, for its part, clearly has a strong multilateral bent, but it is weakened by internal divisions. If it were to overcome them, it could be the defender of multilateralism that the world might be needing.

Like the United States, Europe is concerned about some of China’s restrictive practices — for example, the fact that China limits foreign investment in its financial services, energy and communications sectors. But unlike the United States, the European Union isn’t caught up in a great-power rivalry with China, and it is less concerned about the security implications of, say, China’s efforts to develop semiconductors and aircraft.

V) Crisis in global trade:

A trade war, initiated by the United States, would do serious damage to the global economy as protectionist actions escalate. Countries imposing tar-iffs and countries subject to tariffs would have economic disadvantage, while countries on the sidelines would experience collateral damage. If tariffs remain in place, losses in economic output would be permanent, as distorted price sig-nals would prevent the specialization that maximizes global productivity.

The probability of an all-out trade war, while still relatively low, is increasing. China and the United States have the most at stake, and it is in their best inter-ests to reach an agreement that addresses key issues such as market access, intellectual property rights, and joint-venture technology transfer.Critics widely condemn Trump’s approach as inherently damaging, based on flawed economics, leading only to protectionism and a potential trade war, and otherwise undermining the rules-based system built around the World Trade Organization (WTO). The 1930s descent into global protectionism provides the cautionary frame of reference.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

13

Bloc PositionsI) USA:

The introduction of Donald J. Trump government has brought the adoption of an aggressive US trade policy of putting “America First” backed by the use of unilateral trade sanctions by the US in defiance of the World Trade Organi-zation. The Trump Administration intends to enter into new trade deals that favor US interests and to withdraw from unfavorable trade agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership or to pressure its trading partners to renegotiate unfavorable pacts such as the North American Free Trade Agreement. It could be justified as the revival of economic nationalism that would promote US in-terests in trade at the expense of trading partners, if necessary. US unilateralism threatens to undermine and reduce the WTO to irrelevance and to bring the world into a dangerous new era of economic nationalism and protectionism that can have catastrophic effects on the world economy.

II) China:

The trade war between the United States and China entered a more dangerous phase on Monday 5th August,2019 as Beijing allowed its currency to weaken, Chinese enterprises stopped making new purchases of American farm goods and President Trump’s Treasury Department formally labeled China a currency manipulator. The People’s Bank of China, took steps on Sunday to limit the im-pact of Mr. Trump’s next round of tariffs by letting its currency weaken past the psychologically important point of 7 renminbi to the American dollar for the first time in more than a decade. The weaker currency can make goods cheaper to sell abroad, allowing businesses and consumers to help offset the additional tar-iffs Mr. Trump plans to impose on the 1ST September 2019. It also harms Amer-ican exporters that are trying to compete with China. Chinese officials said the move came in response to market forces, which have reacted to Mr. Trump’s tariff threats by pushing the value of the currency down. In an unusually blunt state-ment, the central bank put the blame for the currency fall on Mr. Trump’s “uni-lateralism and trade protectionism measures and the imposition of increased tariffs on China.” Chinese enterprises also halted new purchases of American agricultural goods in response to Mr. Trump’s decision to impose more tariffs.

III) European Countries:

The economic consequences of the trade uncertainties set by Washington could result in many number of ways in which the current U.S.-EU trade dis-pute could play out over the next few years; in virtually all of them, however, the bilateral trading relationship and indeed the global trading order will have worsened the outcomes will surely depend not only on Washington’s actions, but those of the European Union as well. The EU has responded to the U.S. imposition of tariffs on EU exports of steel and aluminum in three ways – filing a dispute settlement case in the WTO, applying rebalancing tariffs under Ar-

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

14

ticle XVIII of the WTO’s General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and readying safeguard actions against a possible surge in steel and aluminum imports that have been deflected from the U.S. market. But the EU’s deepest concern is for the threatened use of Section 232, to levy high tariffs on imports of cars and car parts (where the EU’s exports to the United States are €50 billion, versus €6.4 billion of steel and aluminum trade, where there is no global over capacity, and where EU companies have invested heavily in the United States, and indeed export considerable amounts from there.)

III) Countries in Southeast Asia:

Over the last decade, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has emerged as one of the world’s fastest growing markets. However, despite its expansive growth, the emerging markets evolving from its neighbor China means very little attention has been paid to the bloc. Most recently as China finds itself caught in a trade war with the US, there’s a question as to whether Southeast Asia is going to feel any of the impact from the fallout while it will undoubtedly have an impact on Asian markets, there is a question as to wheth-er the fall out will be entirely negative. “There may be, for example, a redistri-bution of trade and investment activities throughout the region, potentially benefiting the technology sectors in Taiwan and Korea, as well as the man-ufacturing companies in Malaysia and Vietnam,” says Virginie Maisonneuve, CIO of Eastspring Investments, the Asian asset management arm of Pruden-tial. In a recent poll of more than 1,000 experts, analysts and business leaders found that over 55% believed that Southeast Asia would experience moderate to strong growth in 2019. In fact, only about 20% of respondents to the survey thought the region would experience an economic downturn, with the pessi-mism most pronounced in Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. While the results might be surprising to some, it’s thought the positivism could stem from China looking to trade with their Asian neighbors more as a result of the US-China trade war.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

15

Action TakenTrade act 1974: (Section 301):

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 (as amended) is the principal United States statute designed to address foreign unfair practices affecting United States exports of goods and services, and to achieve improved intellectual property protection as well as equitable rules for investment abroad.’ From the United States perspective, Section 301 has been successful in opening markets to Unit-ed States exporters and investors around the world. Unfortunately, it is also one of the most controversial pieces of United States trade legislation. The conse-quences of Section 301 laws for the multilateral trading system has been the object of various complaints by United States trading partners who have point-ed out the contradictions inherent in a law aimed at opening markets which is based on the threat of closing the United States market. Another criticism to Section 301 is that it forces United States trading partners to negotiate even where they have not violated specific international rules. Furthermore, the Unit-ed States has described Section 301 as a means of securing broad trade liberal-ization, which is justified by the weakness of the dispute settlement procedure and by the inadequate scope of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Ultimately, the Act does not contain very substantial modifications to Section 301 as it stands to date. Although it is clear now that Section 301 will not be eliminated, there is still debate on whether and how GATT’s applicability and the establishment of a more legal-based multilateral dispute settlement mechanism, addressing former weaknesses, will preclude the United States from further unilateral use of Section 301. Most recently the United States of America has used this clause as a mean to introduce unprecedented amount of tariffs on Chinese products as a result of suspected theft of intellectual US property via cyber theft and economic espionage.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

16

Questions a Resolution Must Answer (QARMA):1. How to solve the on-going US-China trade war?2. Actions to be taken by WTO for breaking its rules. 3. What should be done about Trump’s unilateralist ap-

proach?4. How to solve the crisis in global trade caused due to unilat-

eralism?5. Should the global trade system be reformed?6. What should be done for the countries that experience col-

lateral economic damage due to the trade wars between other countries?

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

17

Citations “American unilateralism vs. European multilateralism: the world is watching.” Vocal Europe, 26july2018. https://www.vocaleurope.eu/american-unilateralism-vs-european-multilater-alism-the-world-is-watching/

“A quick guide to the US-China trade war. ”BBC News. BBC, 2 sept 2019. https://www.bbc.com/news/business-45899310.

“China’s industrial profits fall 3.1 per cent in June as trade war bites” South China Morning Post, 29 july 2019. https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3020334/chinas-in-dustrial-profits-fall-31-cent-june-fears-trade-war

“China-US trade talks reportedly slow to a standstill over Huawei.” CNBC.CNBC LLC, 17 july 2019. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/17/china-us-trade-talks-reportedly-slow-to-a-standstill-over-huawei.html

Daniel C. K. Chow .“United States Unilateralism and the World Trade Organi-zation.” SSRN, 10 july 2018. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3210584.

David M. Malone and Yuen Foong Khong. “Unilateralism and U.S. Foreign Pol-icy: International Perspectives.” Lynne Rienner,https://www.rienner.com/uploads/47d82b1257af.pdf

Henry C.K. Liu . “US Unilateralism.” global research .GlobalResearch.ca, 1 July 2006. https://www.globalresearch.ca/us-unilateralism/3089 .

“Kosovo conflict.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc, https://www.britannica.com/event/Kosovo-conflict .

“Kyoto protocol.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc, https://www.britannica.com/event/Kyoto-Protocol .

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

18

Topic 2: The Future of The Doha Round

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

19

IntroductionThe Doha Round, also known as the Doha Development Agenda was officially launched on November 2001, at the WTO’s Fourth Ministerial Conference held in Doha, Qatar. It covers about 20 areas of trade like agriculture, market access for nonagricultural products, services trade, and certain intellectual property issues. At the launch of the Doha round negotiators had agreed to work on the principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.

One of the major goals of the Round is to improve market access and enable the developing countries to increase their share in global trade. The Round was scheduled to complete in 2005 by the Sixth Ministerial Conference (MC6). How-ever, by MC6 which was held in Hong Kong in December 2005, it was clear that the Round could not be completed within the set timeframe.

Timeline1997-2000Talks start in agriculture, services and intellectual property2001Doha Development Agenda launched2003Cancun ministerial mid-term review: no agreement 2004“Framework” agreed (August)2005Further agreement in Hong Kong Ministerial Conference (December)2008The July 2008 package : attempt to break deadlock, some differences nar-rowed2008Revised draft modalities in agriculture and non-agriculture products2013Round-the-clock consultations produce ‘Bali Package’2015WTO members secure “historic” Nairobi Package for Africa and the world2017Eleventh Ministerial Conference (MC11) was held in Buenos, Argentina

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

20

Some Subjects Covered By The Doha Round And Their AimsI) Agriculture:Eliminating the export subsidies, increasing the market access and solving the issues of developing countries.

II) Non- Agricultural market access (NAMA): Reducing tariffs as well as non-tariff barriers especially on products of export interest to the developing countries.

III) Trade facilitation:Making the customs procedures easier for better trade of goods.

IV) Services: - Each government having the right to decide the sectors and extent to which it wants to open to foreign companies. -To open, improve and clarify the rules on regulations, the poorest countries and flexibilities.

V) Rules: Improving the disciplines under the Anti-Dumping and Subsidies agree-ments and the WTO disciplines on fisheries subsidies, considering the impor-tance of this sector to developing nations.

VI) The Environment: Establishing coherence between the trade rules and the environment rules.

VII) Trade-related aspects of intellectual property: Promoting both access to existing medicines and research and development into new medicines and facilitating the protection of wines and spirits in par-ticipating countries.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

21

Principles for negotiation of the Doha Development Agenda1. Single Undertaking (nothing is agreed until everything is agreed)2. The negotiations are open to WTO members as well as to observer gov-

ernments, however, the decisions on conclusions can be taken only by the members

3. Transparency in negotiations4. Special and differential treatment for developing and least-developed

countries5. Ensure that sustainable development is appropriately reflected6. Elements of the work program which do not involve negotiations are also

given a high priority

Some important aspectsI) India’s Market Price Support (MPS) for cotton and sugar:

According to the US, India was substantially under-reporting the value of its market price support (MPS) for cotton. On 2015/2016 India reported to WTO, 1.2 billion rupees in MPS for cotton but the US estimated India’s support at over 504 billion rupees. The WTO spending limits on cotton support is fixed at 10% of the total value of overall production. Hence, this level of support would indi-cate that India was exceeding this limit set by the WTO.

Similarly, Australia claims that India has provided support for sugarcane vastly in excess of its WTO spending limits, which is also fixed at 10% of the total val-ue of production. Furthermore, countries such as Brazil and Guatemala are also upset with the Indian government’s subsidies to its sugarcane farmers as the subsidies are inconsistent with global trade rules and have implications for both prices and trade in the global market.

II) Bali Package (2013): The Ninth Ministerial Conference (MC9) at Bali, Indonesia on December 2013 concluded and adopted the Agreement on Trade Facilitation.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

22

Nairobi Ministerial Declaration (2015):The 2015 ministerial decision worked for improving the administration of tariff rate quotas (TRQs). It made some progress on certain issues like: a commit-ment by the developed countries to eliminate export subsidies in agriculture.

Current SituationThe Doha Development Agenda is facing a ‘make or break’ situation.After the Nairobi Ministerial meeting, ministers were divided on the issue of the future of the Doha round and how to revive the multilateral trading system. Whether the multilateral negotiations will survive or will be replaced completely by a series of regional and bilateral agreements will depend upon the method and attitude adopted as well as the commitment displayed by the member coun-tries to the negotiations.Doha’s failure to maintain economic relations and in-ternational security could have huge consequences.

WTO had to face more difficulties after the election of US President Donald Trump in November 2017, whose administration did not support multilateral trade negotiations, moved towards more protectionist policies unilaterally im-posing tariffs on steel and aluminum and started a bilateral trade dispute with China.

To solve some of the new trade issues in the wake of the Doha Round deadlock, trading partners have turned to bilateral free trade agreements or larger re-gional ones like the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pa-cific Partnership (CPTPP).

Even the EU, Canada, and other developed countries have put forward pro-posals to reform the WTO. On the other hand, there are still many developing countries from all regions who do not agree with the demise of the Round as well as the current proposals for WTO reform. Therefore, these members look forward to MC12 which is to be held in Astana, Kazakhstan on 2020.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

23

Countries and their StancesI) China, India and Brazil:The countries such as China, India and Brazil – have experienced tremendous economic expansion in recent decades and the emergence of their own pow-erful business actors, including globally competitive firms and Trade Negotia-tion Committee. Many of their corporations are now among the largest in the world. Examples abound: the world’s largest company is now Chinese (Petro-China), as are the two largest banks (the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China and China Construction Bank) and Chinese companies are becoming global leaders across a range of sectors (e.g., Huawei, China Mobile, Lenovo), as are Brazilian (e.g., Vale, Petrobras and Embraer) and Indian firms (e.g., Reliance, Infosys, Wipro, Mahindra and Tata). Companies from Brazil, India and China have been aggressive in expanding their international reach. These develop-ing countries have slowly followed a different approach of path to power in the World Trade Organization through their efforts in the Doha Development Agenda. Their stances and views over the past decade has played a vital role in restructuring the balance of power in the WTO with the power slowly shifting from The US and EU to the developing nations. As a result of this new structure, the 3 nations have been the voice of many developing nations which oppose the US-EU tariffs, agricultural subsidies, trade barriers, etc.

II) China:In manufacturing trade, China is a large supplier to all the major markets, and its presence has grown significantly over the course of the Doha Round nego-tiations. China now accounts for more than a fifth of total manufacturing im-ports. It’s rapidly growing economy has made it the center of many discussions in the DDA. Primarily focusing on the view that China has emerged as a new obstacle to the conclusion of the Doha Round talks due to its protected mar-kets and global trade dominance. The People’s Republic of China faces several issues on the anti-dumping agreement. Over the past years it has been both the victim of anti-dumping well as the abuser of anti-dumping measures. The country has followed up with a detailed plan of providing (Special and Differen-tial) S&D treatments for developing countries. Furthermore, China’s proposals in the DDA rules negotiations raise a wide variety of issues related to clarify-ing and improving WTO rules, mainly from an exporting country’s perspective. China currently faces several challenges in the rules negotiations such as: how to cooperate with the exporting countries group, whose goal is to clarify and improve current anti-dumping rules; how to continue to represent the inter-ests of developing and least-developed countries; and at the same time, how to achieve its agenda while satisfying the concerns of recalcitrant major devel-oped countries that want to preserve the basic concepts, principles, and effec-tiveness of the existing rules.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

24

III) India:India with a growing economy has been a backbone of the Doha Development Agenda. In the recent years, the country has shown great commitment towards the successful conclusion of the 2001 Doha Development Agenda. It has been repeatedly opposing towards the views rich countries to bring in new issues such as labor, environment, e-commerce investment and competition policy into the WTO which is projected to further stall the Doha Development Agen-da. Along with its neighboring country China, India has issued a joint paper to address the problems of extremely large agricultural subsidies provided by developed countries to farmers which amounts to $160 Billion. Furthermore as agreed per the Bali ministerial meeting, India has also been seeking concrete work plans on a special safeguard mechanism (SSM) for developing countries to protect their farmers from a spurt in imports, and on a permanent solution to the issue of its official grain procurement and food security in the country. Lastly, the country insisted on a permanent solution on public stockholding for food security although an interim solution was tabled during the Bali confer-ence. India has been the voice of hundreds of least developed as well as devel-oping countries in the Doha Development Agenda who seek to conclude the this work program in the most beneficial way possible.

IV) Brazil:One of the most striking aspects of the Brazilian economy is its high degree of income concentration. Despite the changes the Brazilian economy has faced in the last 20 years, ranging from the country’s re-democratization, trade liber-alization, hyperinflation, many currency changes, and finally, to the macroeco-nomic stabilization in the mid-1990s, the country still shows one of the worst patterns of income distribution in the world. In order to overcome these parities the Brazilian government has shown pretty promising efforts in the Doha De-velopment Round alongside China and India. Brazil has shown prompt leader-ship of the G-20 group (a group of developing countries from three continents of Latin America, Asia, and Africa) which possess aggressive agricultural views. The group mainly aims at achieving the three pillars of the agriculture man-date of the Doha Round: the access to markets (tariff reduction), the removal of subsidies on exports and the reduction of internal support subsidies (mainly on production). In coalition with this group Brazil also waged two high-profile and successful trade disputes against US and EU agricultural subsidies – the cotton and sugar cases– which helped to destabilize the traditional power structure at the WTO, bring an end to the US and EU cartel over agenda setting and com-promise brokering, and put their agricultural policies at the center of the Doha Round. These events have been widely hailed as a major victory for developing countries at the Doha Development Round.

V) United States of America:The trump government over the past few years has been showing minimal support towards the Doha development agenda due to 14 years of the round bearing very little fruit. The country has grown tired of trying to negotiate trade deals with the members of WTO (India, China, and Venezuela). The failure to come to common grounds has caused the USA to end the Doha rounds as

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

25

early as possible and to opt for a better approach rather than the rounds. The country has boasted over its humongous cotton production, Cotton farmers alone have received $10.7 Billion. This figure alone accounts for the 5th highest subsidies program in the US, with corn subsidies being the greatest (34 billion $) overall. All these forms of subsidies by the American government create an unfair market advantage for American farmers and promote American agricul-ture. On the other hand, it has created a lot of challenges for farmers in devel-oping countries (e.g.: India, Brazil, South Africa, etc) such as: inability to com-pete in global market, human resource, local goods and their products being wasted or sold at cheaper prices which causes them to face a huge amount of loss.

VI) European countries:Most European countries enjoy the agricultural subsidies provided by the Eu-ropean Union, it accounts for almost 40% of the famer’s profit. The EU spends a whooping $72 Billion in agricultural subsidies and allows its farmers to com-pete in the global market with large profits because the farmers are selling their goods at a relatively higher price than the cost of production. It has promoted the production of crops and grains in European countries such as France and Germany to tackle world hunger (especially in West African countries), Howev-er the African food market has suffered a great loss from these subsidies. The locally produced African food products as well as raw crops cost more than those imported from the European countries. This is mainly due lack of Africa’s ability to produce in comparison to the far developed production technology in Europe. Therefore, many African and Indian farmers have given up on agricul-ture due to their inability to compete as consumers choose cheaper European agricultural products over the locally produced ones. This is a classical example of how huge European agricultural subsidies and tariffs have created a huge trade barrier and market inequality for farmers in least developed and devel-oping countries.

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

26

Questions a Resolution Must Answer (QARMA):1. Will the Doha Round survive?2. If the Doha Round does not have a substitute then how to

prevent it from failing?3. If the Doha Round does not survive then what are the alter-

natives?4. How to tackle the obstacles in the way of achieving a better

trading system?5. How are the negotiations organized?6. Will the trade negotiations conclude within the set time-

frame? How?7. Does the negotiation take into account the special and dif-

ferential treatment of the developing and least developed countries?

STUDY GUIDE

WORLD TRADE ORGANISATION

27

CitationsElizabeth Morgan. “Whither the WTO Doha Development Round?” CARICOM Today, 21 December 2018. https://today.caricom.org/2019/03/01/whither-the-wto-doha-develop-ment-round/.

“The Path Forward on WTO Reform.” Chatham House, 16 September 2019. https://www.chathamhouse.org/expert/comment/path-forward-wto-reform.

“Why there’s an urgent need to revive the Doha round of trade talks.” The Conversation, 4 October 2016. https://theconversation.com/why-theres-an-urgent-need-to-revive-the-doha-round-of-trade-talks-66286.

“WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION-How the negotiations are organized.” World trade organization, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dda_e/work_organi_e.htm

“WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION-Kazakhstan to host WTO’s next Ministerial Conference.” World trade organization, 26 July 2018.https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news18_e/minis_26jul18_e.htm.

“WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION- the Doha round.” World trade organiza-tion, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dda_e/dda_e.hWtm

“WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION-Trade facilitation.” TO, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/tradfa_e.htm.