For the time being, thanks to the tough stand taken by India, new issues have been kept at bay, and issues of DDR are once again in focus
Dr Ashwani Mahajan
On the completion of World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11) at Buenos Aires, Argentina, India might have returned empty handed as permanent solution to the issue of Public Stock Holding remained illusive due to adamant attitude of the US, despite the fact that it was on the mandated agenda of the MC11. In the last Ministerial Conference, MC10, held at Nairobi in 2015, it was decided by all member countries unanimously that permanent solution would be found out on this issue by 2017. But the United States went back from its own promise and denied the solution and told clearly that it’s not ready to give permanent solution to PSH, at least this time, and by its adamancy over new issues, the US became instrumental in collapsing Buenos Aires MC11.
USA’s Wish List
From the very beginning, US made it very clear that this issue is not going to get resolved as their interest primarily is in fasttrack work programme on rule making in e-commerce, investment facilitation and also limiting fisheries subsidies for illegal and unreported fisheries. Out of these issues, only fisheries subsidy was part of Doha development Agenda. However, regarding fisheries subsidy India wanted that this issue should be sorted out in such a manner that interests of our traditional fishermen do not get hurt. It may be noted that so far as rules of WTO are concerned, unless there is an ‘explicit consensus’ among member countries about inclusion of one or more issues, the same can’t be done unless all members agree to the same. However, the US and other developed countries are able to get new issues included by way of pressure, lure or even ‘arm twisting’.
Indian Commerce Minister Suresh Prabhu, in his speech at Plenary session, made it very clear that the public food stock holding issue is very dear to India, as the same is not a matter of trade. It’s a matter of life of world’s more than 800 million people, a big proportion of whom live in India, suffering from hunger, whose food security depends upon public distribution system, based on stock of food maintained by the government. In his later speeches, he further stated that this issue is important for those poor children suffering from malnutrition, who are provided food by public programmes like ‘Anganwadis’. Our school going
children are provided mid-day meals in the schools, which fulfils their food needs and is associated with
increasing enrolment ratios and reducing drop-out ratios. He also said that improving food security is global goal, and India is committed to take care of the same.
Flowed Calculation
The most important thing is that the calculation of subsidy for public stock holdings for the nations is flawed. The WTO rules are circumvented by developed countries. For instance, US provides a total subsidy of more than 60,000 $US per farmer and still doesn’t face any hurdle and India which pays hardly 108 $US per farmer is being objected to and has to struggle for a solution. Reason is that, US and other developed countries have cleverly shifted their subsidies to green box, which they are legally not bound to reduce. Further, they are also allowed to give aggregate measure of support, which developing countries can’t. Adding insult to injury, the formula for calculating subsidy has been made such that 1986-88 prices are taken as reference prices. Thus according to this provision if during 1986-88 price of wheat was Rs 385 per quintal, and government is procuring wheat at a price of Rs 1600 per quintal, Rs 1215 would be considered as subsidy. From any angle this provision is highly absurd and ridiculous; still US is finding ways and means not to correct the same. Hence, we can understand that permanent solution to the issue of PSH is not any concession; it’s merely a correction of wrong done previously.
About e-commerce, India’s stand has been that it is an emerging area, and it can benefit the people in many ways, therefore, it should develop further. However, Shri Prabhu very rightly pointed out that “India”s view is that gains from e-commerce must not be confused with gains from negotiating binding rules in this area. It is for this reason that we support continuation of the 1998 Work Programme with its non-negotiating mandate.” India made it clear that including e-commerce, different issues could be discussed in WTO, however, for the same we need to follow a process, and can’t circumvent the defined procedures, to accommodate any one or more members. Moreover, constantly changing technology in e-commerce calls for a wait and watch policy, and we shouldn’t hurry to bring e-commerce on the table of WTO.
During MC11, Suresh Prabhu while addressing a press conference made it clear that it’s advisable to first conclude the agenda mandated in MC10 Nairobi and then move on to next issues. Since, there is a limited scope in WTO to discuss issues, old issues will die down if we burden WTO with new issues. And this can’t be allowed to happen.
Issue of development as underlined in Doha Development Round is important, and that is related to the issue of unjustified subsidies given by developed nations, and this can’t be sacrificed. Discussion on Doha Development Round is still pending, and we have to complete that first.
Fishery’s Subsidies
It was proposed to disallow subsidy for illegal and unreported fishing. The argument behind the proposal is sustainable fishing to avoid overfishing. However, India”s concern is that there is no mechanism of reporting of fishing by Indian traditional fishermen. Therefore, any agreement on Fishery’s Subsidies must take into the consideration the interests of traditional fishermen, whose livelihood primarily depends upon fishing.
Denial for solution on PSH, which was the primary concern of India for food security of her poor, under nourished and under privileged, due to adamant attitude of US, on the one hand and obvious opposition to the introduction of new issues by the majority of member countries, leading to inconclusive MC11, underlines the fact that Ministerial Conference at Buenos Aires has actually failed. We need to understand that on the one hand legitimate concerns of the developing countries like food security are not getting addressed and developed countries are trying to bind the developing countries in the web of rules in e-commerce, investment facilitation etc. to serve the interests of their companies. On the other hand indications from US’s Trump administration are clearly indicating at ‘America First’ with utter disregard for WTO rules. If this attitude of US continues, multilateral institutions like WTO may lose their legitimacy. Indian representatives at WTO negotiating table might be disappointed that they could not get a permanent solution at WTO, they should rather be proud of, for not getting cawed down by the developed countries, as they had to be satisfied with formation of a 70 countries’ group, who would discuss among themselves about how to go about finding a consensus among member countries to bring e-commerce under the WTO ambit. For the time being, thanks to tough stand taken by India, new issues have been kept at bay and issues of DDR are once again in focus. Though there is no guarantee whether or not they will be actually discussed, developing world has been able to put its point of view across.
(The writer is an Associate Professor at PGDAV College, University of Delhi)
