| |
| When this is printed, the outcome of the Cancun ministerial meeting would have been known. From the reports so far, not much can be expected. |
| |
| Yet at the meeting in Doha, a last minute deal was struck, reportedly after the US had exercised pressure on some reluctant countries. A similar outcome cannot be ruled out this time too. While the basic issues are simple, they get buried under a whole lot of details and the story of combat. |
| |
| The negotiators feel like gladiators, love to strike poses, take stances and enjoy the fun of verbal and intellectual combat. The end result however can be the nature of international trading regime, which is not a laughing matter for most people and for some is of vital importance. |
| |
| The first thing we should note is that a fair trading system is in the interest of all countries. It is good for all consumers. Also a multilateral system such as the WTO is the best bet and most likely to get us a fair trading arrangement. |
| |
| While all countries seem to agree to the desirability of fair trade, they all wish it to be a little bit unfair in their favour. And that is what all the hoopla and negotiations are about. The negotiators often are driven by their short-term political concerns and try to protect a handful of producers at the cost of a vast number of consumers. |
| |
| They get tempted to rig the rules and blatantly follow double standards. Let me illustrate this with the example of negotiations on agricultural trade. |
| |
| The problems in agricultural trade liberalisation are the following. Some of the developed countries, notably USA, EU and Japan protect their own agriculture for the sake of a handful of farmers, about 3 per cent of their workers. They spend vast sums of money to support their farmers, more than $250 billion a year. |
| |
| As a consequence they have large surpluses in some commodities which they export and depress world prices. The farmers in other exporting countries who produce the same commodities get a lower price and many of these are in developing countries. |
| |
| Of course, people in importing countries gain as they get these goods at lower prices. The rich countries can afford to support their farmers as they are rich and the farmers are few. |
| |
On the other hand, in developing countries the bulk of the population (more than two-thirds in India) is engaged in agriculture. So any disruption can have a large impact on the welfare of these people, many of whom are engaged in
|
