*{A New WTO for a New Century: The Role of Emerging Countries [http://www.weforum.org/site/knowledgenavigator.nsf/Content/A%20New%20WTO%20for%20a%20New%20Century%3A%20The%20Role%20of%20Emerging%20Countries?open&topic_id=300250000&theme_id=300]

            27.11.2000

            India Economic Summit 2000}

            "The multilateral trading system is in crisis" declared Claude Smadja, Managing Director of the World Economic Forum, to initiate the discussion. In referring to the difficulties in Seattle, he noted that the trade round was like a bicycle: once the wheels stop turning, the bike stops running. The challenges to a new trade round being initiated are many, and include the fact that many countries are staunchly opposed to linking trade and labour, social conditions and the environment, while NGOs and the protesters insist on this. In addition, numerous bilateral agreements threaten to make the multilateral framework increasingly difficult. 

            The discussion included very divergent views on the lessons of Seattle and the prospects of a new trade round. Supachai Panitchpakdi, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Commerce of Thailand, said that that instead of a debacle, that Seattle's lessons were clear, and that it signified several watershed issues for developing countries. Among these:
            Seattle was an opportunity for developing countries to initiate joint planning for the 10th UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) subsequently held. For the first time developing countries were very vocal in voicing their dissatisfaction with the progress of trade rounds thus far.
            Developing countries "put their foot down" in favour of enacting special provisos to enable least developed countries to be integrated in the global trading system more easily.
            For the first time developing countries insisted on being an integral part of a new trade round, and full players from the first to the last day.

            He further emphasized the importance of including developing countries in discussions on a new trade round and specified the following conditions on which it could be based:
            The benefits of global trade should be shared more equitably, and specifically, the 80/20 split of benefits between developed and developing countries needs to be reversed.
            Developed countries should collectively announce their concessions to developing countries, especially in important sectors such as agriculture and textiles; Developing countries should be able to access increased funds, not only from governments but also from international institutions such as the World Bank and the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development), especially for capacity building.

            Supachai Panitchpakdi concluded by stating that developing countries should not insist on setting a date for a new trade round, but instead aim to establish the right conditions for such a round taking place. 

            George Yong-Boon Yeo, Minister of Trade and Industry of Singapore, gave a remarkably different picture of Seattle. He said the discussions there failed to result in a new trade round because it was an election year in the US, not because of the protestors or the lack of consultation, or disputes about linking trade and labour, or other such issues. The US elections were clearly "in my mind the core problem", he said. In looking towards the future, he said that the "big boys" agreed on many things, and as such, all parties should push together for a new round. India and China, as the two largest developing countries, could work together on this. Once "global consensus" is established, countries can more easily sort out the domestic issues. Resistance to globalization does exist, he noted, but society, especially in the new economy, must adapt to changing conditions. 

            Omar Abdullah, the Minister of State for Commerce and Industry of India, offered his own analysis of Seattle, agreeing with Smadja that there is a widespread feeling of failure. Despite the scepticism about the WTO and its benefits, countries should continue to push for a new trade round. The WTO, he said, if anything, needs to be expanded as a dispute and discussion mechanism between countries. However, expansion should take place only within a suitable framework. First, countries should be able to liberalize "at their own pace," using many of the development tools used by developed countries during their own industrialization processes. Second, countries should work towards "meaningful liberalization," - disassembling trade barriers, anti-dumping practices and tariffs.

            Paul-Henri Ravier, Deputy Director-General of the World Trade Organization, presented the WTO's answer to the pressing questions at hand. Why do we need a new trade round? First, he declared, "globalization is a fact, neither good nor bad." While countries need to work to maximize its benefits and minimize its negative side effects, all must recognize that "globalization remains one of the strongest engines of development." He cited that the developing countries that had joined the global trading system had benefited from access to the markets of the developed countries, and that the WTO is becoming more and more inclusive all the time. 

            Where do we go from here? Ravier answered that despite widespread resistance to a new trade round, there needs to be more support for progress. He agreed that there would be no new trade round without a good number of emerging countries involved. The major players plus 15 to 20 developing countries is the target.

            Rahul Bajaj, Chairman and Managing Director of Bajaj Auto and Summit Co-Chairman, briefly outlined the view of the Indian business community, which he described as simple and straightforward. Above all richer countries need to work alongside developing countries to implement results from the previous rounds, especially dismantling tariffs and market access barriers. Free trade would be meaningful, he insisted, only when it takes place. He also reported that he and his fellow Indian business leaders are adamant that labour standards not be linked to trade.                  

                  *{Contributors:       Abdullah Omar
                  Bajaj Rahul
                  Panitchpakdi Supachai
                  Ravier Paul-Henri
                  Smadja Claude
                  Yeo George Yong-Boon}