About AEI My AEI Support AEI Contact AEI
Home Events Books Short Publications Research Areas Scholars & Fellows


Search


FindAdvanced Search

Browse all short publications by:
- Date
- Subject
- Author
- Type
- Title

SHORT PUBLICATIONS
AEI Newsletter
AEI.org Exclusives
The American
Press Releases
Outlook Series
On the Issues
Papers and Studies
AEI Working Paper Series
Government Testimony
Speeches
Book Reviews
AEI Policy Series
The War on Terror

E-NEWSLETTERS
Enter e-mail:
 

Home >  Short Publications >  Will the Economic Downturn Jumpstart WTO Trade Talks?
Will the Economic Downturn Jumpstart WTO Trade Talks?
Print Mail
By Claude Barfield
Posted: Wednesday, December 3, 2008
INTERVIEWS
Latin America Advisor  
Publication Date: December 3, 2008

The impasses that have stalled the Doha Round talks show no signs of being resolved; barring a miraculous breakthrough in the next few days, negotiations should be suspended for at least a year. By that time, the economic crisis will have hopefully diminished, and fresh perspectives from the new administrations in India and the European Commission may help to find a bridge over the yawning negotiating gaps that defeat compromise today.

Q: At the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit last month, leaders publicly proclaimed their goal of restarting stalled WTO trade talks, but bilateral trade deals, such as those between China and Colombia as well as Peru and Japan, stole the spotlight. Will countries be more willing to move ahead with multilateral talks in the midst of the current economic situation? What compromises are most likely to occur if WTO members reconvene in Geneva this month?

 
Resident Scholar
 Claude Barfield
 
A: Reports last week from Geneva described the mood regarding a proposed mini-ministerial to achieve a breakthrough in the Doha Round of trade talks as swinging between "cautious optimism" and "gloom." While not gloomy, I am decidedly pessimistic. There is a sense of deja vu about yet another attempt to salvage the talks in the near term. Over the past few weeks, high-level political meetings involving numerous heads-of-state (G-20 Summit, APEC Leaders Meeting in Lima) have issued ringing declarations calling for trade ministers to make the necessary compromises in order to reach a framework for pushing to a successful conclusion in the coming year. But just as in the past (six or seven similar calls since Cancun in 2003), reports on the ground in Geneva find little or no movement in the crucial agricultural and nonagricultural market access (NAMA) areas. Barring a miraculous breakthrough in the next several days, Director General Pascal Lamy--who has worked tirelessly to accommodate all interests--should move to suspend the Doha Round for at least a year, while obtaining a promise from the full WTO membership not to institute additional protection in the interim. By that time, the Obama Administration (hopefully) will have moved toward stemming the US economic panic and recession, India will have gone through national elections and there will be a new European Commission. There is no guarantee that the atmosphere will be better in early 2010, but at least fresh leaders may then find a bridge over the yawning negotiating gaps that defeat compromise today.

Claude Barfield is a resident scholar at AEI.

Related Links
Related event on the WTO Doha Round
Related International Economic Outlook on trade policy by Philip I. Levy
AEI Print Index No. 23729


Also by Claude Barfield
Recent Articles
Suspend Negotiations at Doha
Suspend Doha Talks for a Year
Beware of Investment Protectionism
Latest Book
Biotechnology and the Patent System
Balancing Innovation and Property Rights
AEI Newsletter

The January 2009 issue of AEI's newsletter covers President Bush's visit to AEI, the Mumbai terrorist attacks, pharmaceutical price regulation, and more.

  • January 2009 Newsletter
  • Past Issues

  • Innovation and Technology Adoption in Health Care Markets
    Innovation and Technology Adoption in Health Care Markets

    Anupam B. Jena and Tomas J. Philipson argue that the use of cost-effectiveness analysis to curb health care spending may do more harm than good.