Doha Development Round - Research Paper Example

Introduction Doha Development Round is one of the most important steps towards ensuring that there is a systematic withdrawal of trade barriers underWTO platform. Started in November 2001, this round of negotiations is focused on varied issues such as agricultural subsidies, tariff and non-tariff barriers etc. What is however important to understand that Doha Rounds have clearly marked a distinction between the developed and developing countries with clearly identified priorities of each block. There is even a rift between the EU and US regarding the issue of agricultural subsidies to be given. What is however, important to argue is whether alongside the lines of politics and diplomacy, is there any sigh of relief for Poor of the world who may benefit from the decisions to be taken at Doha Round with strong consequences for the future of the world’s poor. The myriad relationships between the developed and developing world is such a common bone of content that there always emerge a distinctive position of the relative actors on the world scene. Whether its poor of the world or riches of the world, the policy making issues are always remained titled towards comprehensively deciding the overall beneficiaries of such negotiations and policy making. What is however, remain constant during such efforts is the fear that such policies may not result into the welfare of the poor of the world due to exploitative powers of the developed countries. This research paper will attempt to argue as to whether there is a conscious disregard for the definite affects of the policies emerging as a result of the Doha Round on the poor of the world. Doha Rounds November 2001 declaration at Doha Qatar mandated the negotiations on the range of subjects including agricultural subsidies, significant market access to new markets of the world, gradual phasing out of the export subsidies, services as well as market access for the non-agricultural products. What is also important to note that Doha Rounds entered into the negotiations on the trade related intellectual property rights especially within the sphere of the Public health? What is also however; important to note that most of these negotiations which took place over the period of time met with strong resistance from outside pressure groups besides failing to find agreement between the participants on different issues. The issues like agricultural subsidies as well as intellectual property rights remained the most heatedly discussed issues with strong disagreements between India, US as well as Japan. The collapse of the negotiations was mostly associated with the Special Safeguard mechanism which was basically aimed at protecting the poor farmers from the developing countries. India, US and China failed to reconcile their differences on deciding the threshold levels for triggering the special safeguard mechanism which could be triggered in case of price fall beyond a certain threshold level or increase in the imports. Different rounds of negotiations only proved as widening the gap between the priorities of the member States rather than providing a solution for the overall issues faced by the world at large. The failure of the member States to come to a conclusion is also indicating towards the overall attitude in providing solutions to the poor of the world rather these negotiations are mired with the internal conflicts of the member States themselves. Developed and Developing World Different studies clearly indicated a more diluted views and policies on the poor of the world. The relative ambiguities between the developed and developing countries therefore hinder the process of concessions to be given to the developing countries. It is because of this reason that it is often argued that the Doha Round is mainly advocating the South- South trade liberalization rather than South-North trade liberalization. (Francois, Meijl and Tongeren). Poor of the world are largely associated with the agriculture as their only source of income thus the phasing of the export subsidies as well as granting of agriculture subsidies along with the triggering of the special safeguard mechanism are some of the issues which may not be entirely in favor of the poor of the world. The various processes outlined in the negotiations therefore are mostly driven by the commercial interests of the member States rather than having the developmental aspects as largely perceived. Such conflicts therefore restrict both the regional as well as global integration of the developing countries hence poor of the world. (Senona). The political agitation that emerged as a result of the negotiations and various rounds of talks, most of the developing countries also adapted an stance which further lengthened the process of negotiations rather than achieving a consenus on the different issues. (Jeffrey J. Schott). This indicates that the overall attitude of the developed as well as developing countries to the whole issue of providing relief to the poor of the world was mired in the mist of political negotiations as well as diplomatic talks rather than agreeing on framing definite policy frameworks which can provide benefits to the member States as well as the Poor of the world at large. Studies and simulation models also tend to indicate the results which are mostly inclined towards the fact that the chief beneficiaries out of the Doha Rounds will be the farmers and producers of US rather than their counterparts in developing countries. (Stokes). Stokes while arguing the case for winners and losers of the Doha Round further argues that the real value of the Doha Rounds was not successfully derived due to the overall lax attitude of the member States in advocating the case of market liberalization. This argument may also seem plausible mainly due to the political backlash that was witnessed in the developing countries as it is largely believed that the trade liberalization will only benefit the developed countries mainly America and as such negotiations on issues like Agriculture will further push the poor of the world into the vicious circle of the poverty. Farm production versus manufacturing goods The dominant view in US is the view that the manufacturing goods shall be the center of negotiations whereas the farm production and agricultural subsidies shall be the domestic issue of US. It is now therefore argued that though the intended aim of the Doha rounds was to allow poor of the world to gain an easy access to the markets of the world however, after considerable period of time what has emerged is the fact that the rich nations of the world will enormously benefit from the Doha Rounds. (The New York Times). The major issue which remained conflicting among the countries such as India and US and as more emphasis was on balancing the act between the developing and developed countries in terms of agriculture and manufacturing goods. Developing countries, historically, remained the net exporters of the agriculture products with US being the major buyer whereas the developed world remained net exporter of the manufactured and value-added goods. Allowing subsidies to the farmers in US will therefore further increase the competition for the poor farmers from the developing world whereas incentivizing American farmers will mean a further shrinking market for the poor. It is because of this reason that Joseph Stiglitz argue that the post Doha trading regime will be a costly option for the developing countries. (Stiglitz and Charlton). Stiglitz and Charlton further argue that the aid alongside the trade will be a balanced mix that developed world can offer to the developing world rather than forcing them to compete on comodities which were traditionally considered as the core competencies of the developing countries. The resentment that is being shown by the developing and developed world therefore is misdirected as rather than solving the problems of the poor of the world, developed world is pushing them to boundaries where economic subjugation may result into marginalization of poor. Negotiations Doha Round was considered as the development round because it was framed as a definite reply from WTO to its critics and as largely labeled as a step which will further improve the conditions of the poor of the world. However, over the period of time, Doha Rounds have proved nothing more than futile attempts to find agreement on the most fundamental issues which WTO attempted to answer. The result acrimony between the member States and non-agreement on the key issues over the period of time has resulted into vanishing of hope for the poor of the world. What is also significant to note that amid such acrimonious disagreements, the actual aim of the Rounds proved futile as developed countries attempted to dominate the poor world in order to gain more market space. The failure of the negotiation process itself is an indication of the relative seriousness of the riches of the world in solving the problems of the poor of the world and as such the attitude adapted by the developing countries like India, on the other hand, also shows a very regional and nationalistic approach in addressing the trade liberalization issues. (Judis) The apparent conflict between the overall promise of the different proposals in what they intend to deliver and what they actually deliver is something which needs to be addressed in order to truly allow WTO to achieve its objective of true trade liberalization through lesser barriers to trade thus creating an environment where the distribution of the liberalization benefits will be just and proportional. Conclusion Doha Rounds started in November 2001 with the promise that the most important but unresolved issues will be settled in order to provide more space for trade liberalization. This trade liberalization was supposed to provide benefits to the poor of the world however, blatant failure of the negotiation process indicate that the member States may have their own regional and nationalistic agendas rather than fighting for a common cause of trade liberalization and providing poor of the world a new hope. The various proposals forwarded for the resolutions did not served the purpose as the gap between the actual promise of such proposals and their real execution marked a real difference. The traditional debate of rich versus poor as well as developed and underdeveloped countries tend to clearly indicate a possible disregard for the positive affects of policies made as a result of Doha Rounds on the poor of the world. What emerged is nothing more than a mere attempt to spend time on issues which may very well defy the very purpose of the Doha Rounds and will not serve the purpose of improving the lives of the poor of the world. Works Cited 1. Francois, Joseph, Hans van Meijl and Frank van Tongeren. "Trade liberalization in the Doha Development Round." Economic Policy 20.42 (2005): 349-391. 2. Jeffrey J. Schott. "Reviving the Doha Round." 2004. Peterson Institute of International Economics. 11 November 2009 . 3. Judis, John. "The WTO Miscalculates: Trade Imbalance." 2006. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 11 October 2009 . 4. Senona, Joseph M. "EPAs and the Doha Round: development or discontent." Journal of International Trade Law and Policy 8.1 (2009): 60-83. 5. Stiglitz, Joseph E. and Andrew Charlton. "Aid for trade." International Journal of Development Issues 5.2 (2006): 1-41. 6. Stokes, Bruce. "Dohas Winners and Losers." 2006. National Journal. 11 November 2009 . 7. The New York Times. "What Development Round?" 2007. The New York Times. 11 November 2009 . Read More