Two years ago there was talk of the “Miracle of Geneva” because, despite international tensions, the WTO launched an agreement that all countries agreed to. It doesn’t look like that this time.
There is little hope for breakthroughs at the World Trade Organization (WTO) ministerial meeting on the last day of the conference. Unanswered questions include whether WTO ministers will approve a new agreement against fishing subsidies and whether an agreement against imposing tariffs on electronic commerce will be extended. Participants today expected that the conference in Abu Dhabi would be extended – as is usual with such meetings. At the last ministerial meeting in Geneva two years ago, an agreement between the member states, who always made decisions by consensus, took until the early hours of the next morning.
At that time, the first agreement against the most harmful subsidies in fishing was passed. It was not clear before the last day of the conference whether a planned further fisheries agreement would be reached. It would restrict all forms of subsidies that contribute to overcapacity or overfishing. However, ministers are still struggling with exception rules and transition periods.
It was also recently unclear whether an agreement that no tariffs would be levied on “electronic transmissions” such as video games or emails would be extended. Western countries are promoting it, but countries like India and South Africa have concerns. They fear less customs revenue if, for example, books that are subject to customs duties are replaced by duty-free electronic download versions. “The German economy hopes that the ministerial conference will maintain the ban on tariffs on data transfers,” said the German Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
With their resistance, India and South Africa have so far prevented an agreement on measures to facilitate investments, agreed by 123 countries shortly before the conference, from coming under the umbrella of the WTO. Then, among other things, the WTO dispute settlement mechanism could be used. Opponents argue that such agreements among some members undermine the principle of consensus in the WTO. Critics also doubt whether poorer countries actually benefit.
Source: Stern
