Developing and developed countries are divided over a proposal to eliminate agriculture subsidies and ensure a level playing field for agriculture exports under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) trade regime.
The rift surfaced during statements made by trade ministers and their representatives at the plenary session of the 10th WTO Ministerial Conference in Nairobi, Kenya yesterday.
The difference of opinions came to the fore over a proposal submitted to the WTO earlier to completely eliminate subsidies on the export of agricultural products.
Least Developed Countries (LDCs) favour the removal of subsidies, as they have declared on many earlier occasions.
The issue was not tabled for negotiation as of noon yesterday, but representatives of the European Union and Brazil raised the issue arguing for an agreement on export competition at the plenary session of the conference running simultaneously.
“We are disappointed at the cavalier manner in which these issues are being pushed into the future,” Indian Commerce and Industry Minister Nirmala Sitharaman told the session.
She said the reform process of the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) appeared to be in jeopardy.
“There is a sudden inexplicable zeal to harvest export competition,” she said. “On this, we are told that there is convergence when in fact there appears to be little.”
EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom said the deal would be meaningful and a breakthrough for the talks while Brazil’s representative insisted that an agreement on export subsidies would make way for a successful ministerial conference.
“There is a developing and developed world split” over many issues, WTO Spokesman Keith Rockwell said, replying to a question at a press conference at the conference venue. “There are considerable differences among the members.”
He said the groups are also split over new issues brought forward like food security, currency, investment, government procurement, e-commerce, and micro, cottage, small and medium enterprises.
Listing the disputed issues of agriculture, market access, non-agriculture market access and preferential and differential treatment, Rockwell said: “There is huge array of negotiations.”
The LDCs earlier called for substantial reduction of all forms of market distorting domestic support, moving towards their eventual elimination. They also favour the consideration of innovative and practical approaches to avoid box-shifting practices that impact trade distorting domestic support reduction commitments.
In their ministerial declaration made the day before the start of the conference, LDCs urged members to agree to the elimination of all forms of export subsidies and discipline on all export measures with equivalent effect, in accordance with the Hong Ministerial Declaration, the Bali Ministerial Declaration on Export Competition, while also maintaining flexibility for the LDCs contained in the two declarations.
They urged developed country members and developing countries in a position to do so, to provide duty-free quota-free market access on a lasting basis, for all agricultural products originating from all LDCs.
At the same time, LDCs called upon members that maintain Tariff-Rate Quotas (TRQs) for agricultural products to accord LDC members’ priority in filling under-utilised quotas, when implementing the Bali decision on TRQ administration.
“If the WTO no longer provided a forum where all nations have a say in setting global trade deals, developing countries would be put at a serious disadvantage as talks would shift to regional and bilateral agreements where rich countries would have even more sway,” ActionAid said in a statement yesterday, expressed concern over the division.
“Developing country governments should take this prospect as a call to action,” said ActionAid International USA Executive Director Marie Clarke. “They must not assert their sovereignty and not be intimidated into agreeing to things that will deny their countries the benefits of world trade.”