Instead of hard negotiations to find convergence on the final numbers for tariff and subsidy cuts for Doha agricultural products and tariff cuts for industrial products, the first day was spent on political statements and mild mutual recriminations.
The industrialised countries, including the United States, the European Union members and Japan, pointed the finger at the emerging economies such as India, China, Brazil and Argentina to either deliver through new market access in agriculture, market-opening for industrial goods and services or risk undermining the ministerial meeting.
"To have a meaningful outcome from a development agenda, we have to secure new meaningful access in agriculture, Nama (non-agricultural market access) and services, especially from the rapidly emerging economies," said US Trade Representative Ambassador Susan Schwab.
In similar vein, EU trade commissioner Peter Mandelson said only a few developing countries must have to cut their industrial tariffs using the coefficients but "we have no idea in Nama which products will be sheltered".
"This has left us with far too little clarity as to what exactly we can expect to gain from the Round" and "we need bankable assurances that flexibilities will not shelter entire sectors," he added.
More From This Section
In sharp opposition, India, China, Argentina and Brazil said the real hurdle to arrive at the modalities is created by "asymmetrical balance" created between the two revised draft texts in agriculture and Nama, particularly non-agricultural market access.
Several trade ministers said they would oppose the anti-concentration provision in the Nama negotiations tooth and nail because it completely curtails their freedom to avail of flexibilities.