WTO AT A CROSSROADS: MORE DEVELOPMENT, OR MORE OF THE SAME?

By Hazel Henderson and - - Reprint | | Print |

This column is available for visitors to the IPS website only for reading. Reproduction in print or electronic media is prohibited. Media interested in republishing may contact romacol@ips.org.

GENEVA, May 1 2005 (IPS) - The selection of a new Director-General of the World Trade Organisation presents a fundamental choice between a vision of a WTO that is genuinely oriented towards development and one that would keep the organisation more or less aligned with the interests of the major players in the international arena, writes Carlos Perez del Castillo, Uruguayan Ambassador to the WTO, president of the WTO General Committee in 2003, and ex-secretary of the Latin American Economic System (SELA). Many now believe that the time has come to end the developed countries\’ historic control over the position of Director-General of the WTO and the GATT process before that, the author writes in this article. It is time to introduce greater balance into the multilateral system and it is imperative that this process begin with the WTO. There are three reasons for this: the first is that it is politically beneficial that the demanded greater integration of developing countries into the multilateral trade process also implies sharing responsibility for its direction. The second is that it is necessary to conclude the present negotiations with a result that does honour to their name: the Development Round. The third is that to make this happen, nothing could be better than choosing a WTO Director-General who comes from a developing country and has dedicated his or her professional life to working directly and continually in this area.

The multilateral trade system is in a crucial phase of its history. The selection of a new Director-General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), which should be made before May 31, is not simply the replacement of a functionary to head this body for the next four years. It presents a fundamental choice between a vision of a WTO that is genuinely oriented towards development and one that would keep the organisation more or less aligned with the interests of the major players in the international arena.

Of all the multilateral organisations, the WTO, World Bank, and International Monetary Fund (IMF) have the greatest influence over international trade and finance. The rules and practices that they elaborate determine the scope of action for states concerning international trade and economics. Since its creation, however, this system which emerged from the 1947 Bretton Woods conference and the desire to reorganise the post-war international economy, ignored the needs of the majority of the world’s population, which lives in the developing world.

It is thus to be expected that throughout their history all of these institutions have been headed by representatives from the developed countries, who, whatever their particular professional or personal capabilities, were the pilots of a system oriented towards protecting the major equilibria of North-North trade and finance and addressing its tensions and conflicts. Today, at the beginning of new century, the situation remains exactly the same: the IMF is headed by a European, Rodrigo Rato of Spain, while the President of the World Bank is James Wolfensohn of the US, soon to be replaced by fellow-American Paul Wolfowitz at the end of this month.

In the WTO, the tendency is the same. With the exception of the abbreviated tenure of the current Director-General, Supachai Panitchpakdi of Thailand, we have seen a perpetuation of the developed countries’ monopoly over leadership of this body. Nonetheless, the marginalisation of developing countries has lessened in recent decades: first, through greater participation in trade talks, as occurred during the Uruguay Round of GATT (1986- 94), which not for nothing bore for the first time the name of a developing country; and second, with the launching of the Doha Round in November 2001, where development took centre stage in the mandate for negotiations adopted by the ministers.

However, this major step forward in incorporating the interests of developing countries into the system remains unconcluded, and has thus far failed to produce any results. Negotiations are ongoing and the themes tied to development have yet to be approached with sufficient commitment, which has generated uncertainty regarding the final outcome. The selection of the new Director-General, meanwhile, will be between two candidates: one from the developed countries, one from the developing countries. Both matters are intertwined.

Many now believe that the time has come to end the developed countries’ historic control over the position of Director-General of the WTO and the GATT process before that. It is time to introduce greater balance into the multilateral system and it is imperative that this process begin with the WTO. I think there are three reasons for this: the first is that it is politically beneficial that the demanded greater integration of developing countries into the multilateral trade process also implies sharing responsibility for its direction. The second is that it is necessary to conclude the present negotiations with a result that does honour to their name: the Development Round. The third is that to make this happen, nothing could be better than choosing a WTO Director-General who comes from a developing country and has dedicated his or her professional life to working directly and continually in this area.

I believe that I have the credentials necessary to fill this post with professionalism, independence of judgement, and responsibility. I have always been a firm believer in multilateralism as the principal pillar of international relations, and I am convinced that strengthening it will first benefit the weakest countries which face the grim consequences of unilateralism and discrimination. I also believe that trade is not a panacea for all the problems that weigh on developing countries, particularly poverty and marginalisation, but that it is a powerful tool to address them through setting fair and just rules and practices and assuring that development needs are fully integrated into the WTO agreements.

The numerous positions I have held at the national, regional, and international level, and the fact that I have visited the majority of developing countries not as a simple tourist, has enriched me as a person and established in me a clear, strong perception of what their needs and challenges are and what possible solutions might be. I have and will always been committed to this cause.

I sincerely believe that developing countries have sufficient maturity to take responsibility for leading the WTO. (END/COPYRIGHT IPS)