The WTO talks in Cancun ended in failure on Sept. 14 due to the enormous divide between participants.
This outcome implies a setback in WTO's ongoing effort to push for global trade liberalization. Some Taiwanese pundits, however, are of the opinion that the failure to reach a consensus on agricultural issues is advantageous for the nation's agricultural sector as it goes through a transitional period.
The main tasks of this conference were to review the progress made since the Doha talks, provide necessary political guidance and make policies as necessary.
The conference is a failure in that the members failed to find common ground on agricultural negotiations, and whether the four issues -- trade and investment, trade and competition policy, transparency in government procurement and trade facilitation -- mapped out in the 1996 ministerial meeting in Singapore should be included in the Doha Round Negotiations.
In the closing ceremony, WTO members issued a joint ministerial statement saying that more work needs to be done in some key areas and that, "We ask the chairman of the General Council, working in close cooperation with the director-general, to coordinate this work and to convene a meeting of the General Council at senior officials level no later than Dec. 15, 2003, to take the action necessary at that stage to enable us to move toward a successful and timely conclusion of the negotiations."
This, however, indicates that WTO members have not abandoned the Doha round. It is possible that the WTO may not be able to conclude negotiations on various issues by the deadline at the end of next year. Rather, it will become a marathon negotiation like its predecessors, the Tokyo- and Uruguay-round negotiations. The deadline for the Doha round might be postponed under a consensus reached among WTO members.
Even so, with all members prioritizing their domestic political and economic interests, it will be difficult for the trade body to break through the deadlock in agricultural negotiations and carry through all the negotiation plans in the Doha round.
For example, the draft Cancun ministerial declaration, proposed by General Council Chairman Carlos Perez del Castillo, accepted the joint proposal presented by the EU and the US to cut tariffs on their agricultural imports, but it did not set up a deadline for revoking subsidies for all agricultural exports.
In response, developing countries, led by Brazil, India and China, demanded that export subsidies for all agricultural produce be canceled and domestic agricultural support be slashed on a large scale. The EU was of the opinion that this would put too great a burden on industrial countries. The US strongly opposed the proposal that industrial countries cut tariffs on agricultural produce by a larger margin than developing countries do.
This dispute underlines the big challenge in negotiating the two widely different stands between industrial and developing countries.
An important feature of this conference is that developing countries formed three big blocs in opposition to industrial countries. Brazil, India, China and others formed a 21-country group. Africa, Caribbean and Pacific nations became a 52-member coalition. Thirty least-developed countries, led by Bangladesh, also formed an alliance.
In addition to advocating special and differential treatment, they also urged that no negotiations be kicked off before a clear and unanimous consensus is reached on the "Singapore" issues. This has put pressure on industrial countries.
It indicates not only the active participation by developing countries in the Doha round, but also the trend whereby forming alliances will be the major mode of interaction in the next round of trade negotiations.
The failed Cancun ministerial conference does not mean that Taiwan is immune from agricultural negotiation pressure, because pressure on developing countries to open up agricultural markets will continue.
Moreover, as countries voice doubts on global trade liberalization under the WTO umbrella, promoting bilateral or regional free-trade agreements (FTAs) will become the main strategy. If Taiwan intends to sign bilateral FTAs with trading partners such as the US, New Zealand and Japan, opening up the agricultural market is unavoidable. Therefore, the government should be prepared for further opening up of agricultural and service sectors.
As for possible developments in the Doha round, Taiwan should focus on important negotiation issues, analyze the positions of major members and study the potential impact of the various proposals on Taiwan. Moreover, it is necessary to actively forge alliances with other members.
Tsai Horng-ming is deputy secretary-general of the Chinese National Federation of Industries.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
Every day since Oct. 7 last year, the world has watched an unprecedented wave of violence rain down on Israel and the occupied Palestinian Territories — more than 200 days of constant suffering and death in Gaza with just a seven-day pause. Many of us in the American expatriate community in Taiwan have been watching this tragedy unfold in horror. We know we are implicated with every US-made “dumb” bomb dropped on a civilian target and by the diplomatic cover our government gives to the Israeli government, which has only gotten more extreme with such impunity. Meantime, multicultural coalitions of US