|
THE
Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) has aired concern
over the collapse of the G4 meeting in Potsdam, saying
the attempts to revive negotiations on the Doha
Development Agenda (DDA) will be “difficult and
prolonged” as it now involves 150 member countries of
the World Trade Organization (WTO).
DFA
undersecretary for international economic affairs Edsel
Custodio said the reason for the collapse of the G4
meeting composed of the US, the European Union, India
and Brazil was negligible.
“With
the impasse in the
Doha negotiations, debates will return to
Geneva
where WTO director Pascal Lamy has asked the chair of
the agricultural and nonagricultural market access (Nama)
negotiations to release the chair’s draft,” said
Custodio in an interview over the weekend. He said the
proposal contained in the chair’s draft will be debated
for adoption by the 150 member countries.”
But
Custodio emphasized that “the process for the debates
will be prolonged” because it would now involve 150
member countries with different levels of interests. He
said another concern is the end-July deadline to come up
with an agreement in principle because US President
Bush’s trade promotion authority will lapse by that
time.
He
emphasized that the collapse has affected most the
developing countries like the Philippines and other
members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean)
that rely on the WTO to push for fair trade facilitation
and market access through lower tariffs.
A
contrary view was advanced by the Stop the New Round
Coalition, a private advocacy group. The collapse, in
effect, favors “poor countries like the Philippines,” it
said, as the G4 meeting did not, anyway, live up to
expectations it would trigger a consensus among the rest
of the 150 members of the WTO, as the major players (US,
EU, Brazil, India) were intransigent in their positions.
Over the
past few years, noted the coalition, the Doha Round
negotiations had deteriorated into nothing but a “battle
between developed and developing countries over such
issues as farm subsidies, greater market access for
industrial goods and easing of restrictions on
services.” In the end, it added, the main concern had
been simply to meet schedules, not attain the substance
of fair trade that is so vital to poor countries. “The
poor countries have already sacrificed so much for the
Doha Round and yet more is being demanded of them. The
continued intransigence of the rich and powerful
countries in
Potsdam
should prompt our leaders to finally say enough with
Doha.” |
