Correcting Misperceptions
Article Summary and Author Biography
If trade talks were founded on a rational analysis of economic interests, they would be much easier to conduct and conclude. But most are not, and the Doha Round is no different. The key to ensuring that something worthwhile does emerge from it is to distinguish narrow political agendas from the broader public interest.
PETER D. SUTHERLAND is Chairman of BP p.l.c. and of the Advisory Board
on the Future of the World Trade Organization. He was Director-General of the General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade from 1993 to 1995 and the founding Director-General
of the WTO.
WINDING UP, WINDING DOWN
Concluding multilateral trade negotiations has never been easy (I still bear the scars from the end of the Uruguay Round), and the Doha Round will be no different. Much depends on the compatibility among negotiators, between the dossiers they negotiate and their real commercial interests, and among an ever-widening circle of stakeholders. Separating politics from true economic interest is nearly impossible, and yet it must be done if Doha is to achieve something worthwhile and especially its development goals.
Perhaps the Doha Development Agenda was launched at the wrong time, with the wrong agenda, and partly for the wrong reasons. That question is for the history books. In the meantime, the ministerial conference of the World Trade Organization in December will determine whether something valuable can be secured from the initiative. I believe such an outcome is possible, but to achieve it many governments will have to display an uncommon measure of will and foresight.
One trusts that WTO members will finally do the right thing because they know that a failure of the Doha Round would do much damage. That such failure would hinder growth and development is self-evident, but it would also do long-term damage to the notion of multilateralism. There is also a more down-to-earth cause for hope: the changing geopolitics of international trade negotiations. More than two years ago, the WTO ministerial conference in Cancún failed, not only because of differences over substance but also because of inadequate negotiating structures and poor chemistry among participants. Just prior to that meeting and since, new groups better suited to multilateral negotiations have emerged informally within the WTO.
Furthermore, for many months now, government ministers have taken the lead in the negotiations. This is an appropriate development as the talks have moved away from preparatory phases to actual deal-making. It is especially appropriate since the process is designed to extract from states new commitments that will require significant domestic reform. These will have to be defended in national legislatures.
Yet, although the geopolitics may be changing, a vision supporting an ambitious result to the Doha Round is still lacking. In particular, there is no credible consensus view of how trade reform can inspire development.
THE OLD GUARD
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.