Betrayed! Yet another defeat for least developed countries at WTO ministerial.(Inter-Movements)

Not only was the recent World Trade Organisation ministerial conference in Hong Kong a failure, it was also a form of betrayal to developing countries worldwide. While some governments praised the latest Ministerial Declaration for protective commitments in agriculture, trade activists perceive the text as promoting the interests of developed nations.

Reactions ranged from disappointment and expressions of outrage over the betrayal to outright condemnation, seeing the outcome as an "affront to the poor." Majority agreed that the conference was a failure in terms of the development goals promised by the WTO, and only served to support the status quo, in which developed countries benefited at the expense of the economies of least developed countries (LDCs).

The bad end of the deal

The deal arrived at in HK involved getting LDCs to agree to a development package which the Africa Trade Network (ATN) called "empty," and led Oxfam International to condemn it as "unacceptable and reflecting rich countries' interests." It includes a provision for the "duty-free and quota-free" entry of LDC products into developed countries, but at the same time, provides rich countries with an escape clause to exempt key products which are of export advantage to LDCs, such as textiles, clothing, rice, and fishery products. In other words, "the LDCs can have market access for products they don't produce at all or don't market competitively, but access can be blocked for products in which they are competitive" (Khor, 2005).

Included in the package as well is an aid-for-trade deal in the form of loans which would increase the foreign debts of LDCs. Jubilee South, an international network of social movements and NGOs, called this a "bribe," and "evidence of the extent to which rich countries can maneuver to perpetuate a World Order based on Debt (in the form of aid) and unfair and enslaving trade."

In exchange for the "development package," LDCs received the worst deal in services and non-agricultural market access (NAMA). Developing countries would be pressured to liberalise in 19 broad-ranging service sectors, undermining their right to choose which service sector to open and to what extent. This would open up more of their service sectors to foreign ownership and investments.

According to Jubilee South, the liberalisation of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) would "grant (global corporations) greater rights than citizens to exploit access (to markets and human services)." It would make such services "less accessible and affordable" and citizens would "bear the cost of adjustments required in privatisation and trade liberalisation." The International Gender and Trade Network (IGTN) added that with the increased liberalisation of services, "access to. (these) ... cannot be guaranteed when profit maximisation is the bottom line."