Accepting that there is no simple solution to the problems and opportunities that come with international trade might help create a better WTO, says Robert Sturdy MEP
This week's WTO ministerial conference
has been a massive disappointment. However, this was expected for
quite some time and at several stages this week it looked like
the whole process was in danger of falling apart.
Many people would
say this is a good thing. The slogan that "no deal is better than a bad deal" has been put forward by a wide range of groups and is in some senses absolutely right.
A deal which hinders development in poor countries is
not in anyone's interest.
Ultimately it boils down to trying to marry political
concerns to those of trade.
This is not an exact science. That
is why I believe some of the aggressive campaigning that took place
in Hong Kong was unhelpful. "Down, down WTO" does not take us very far.
What those who see the WTO as the root of the problems
of economic imbalance in the world fail to account for is the fact that
the model of development we are witnessing is already underway: globalisation
is a reality.
However, this is not an excuse to not try to correct this
imbalance. Everyone is aware that rapid liberalisation is harmful
to fragile economies. However, the measures taken to deal with this are
necessarily complex because the issues they relate to are complicated.
One
of the most disappointing things I found in Hong Kong was the lack
of dialogue. The EU and US negotiators were unable to get their point of
view across effectively leading to mistrust which might or might not be
justified.
Among the rest of the delegates, NGOs and journalists
an "us and them" mentality prevailed. This does not take us very far either.
There weren't many open meetings between groups of different
standpoints and so the whole event degenerated into finger-pointing with
each side blaming the other for the lack of progress; between the EU, US,
Brazil and India as well as between free-marketeers and anti-globalisation
protestors.
The WTO has been improved by the increased participation
from developing country members but there is a danger that debate becomes
focussed on ideological arguments which bear little relation to what is
happening on the ground in the regions that everyone is trying to help.
More effort must be made to unblock negotiations by all
involved, rather than just blaming each other for the current stalemate
which is what happened this week in Hong Kong.
The stumbling blocks cited
by all the major players are the same ones that have been argued
over for the past 18 months at the headquarters of the WTO in Geneva. It
is difficult to see what will change this in 2006.
I remain hopeful that
progress will be made because the alternative if it is not is even
worse.
Countries will retreat into bilateral deals which are
often more harmful than the international ones sought through the WTO.
In
dispute settlements and discussions over intellectual property
rights the WTO is the best thing we've got.
However, these issues never
make it to the negotiating table because there is such difficulty
getting through the points already under discussion.
It is worth noting
that in a meeting where everyone seemed to be arguing about everything
there was agreement about the importance of the continuation of the round.
Globalisation is happening and the challenge for negotiators and policymakers
is to ensure that in this development round the billion people
who live on less than $1 a day are helped by international trade, not made
even poorer. Doing this, while ensuring continued growth will be difficult.
Accepting that there is no simple solution to the myriad
of problems and opportunities caused by the growth of international trade would be a good start in trying to create a better WTO.
· Robert Sturdy is the Conservative spokesman on international trade in the European parliament
