TWN Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues
21 April 2020
Third World Network
www.twn.my

Attempts for “virtual” talks, decisions amid COVID-19 rejected
Published in SUNS #9104 dated 21 April 2020

Geneva, 20 Apr (D. Ravi Kanth) – Many developing and least-developed countries have sharply rejected attempts at the World Trade Organization to take decisions through virtual negotiations or written-answer procedures in the face of the worsening COVID-19 global pandemic, trade envoys told the SUNS.

At a virtual informal heads of delegations (HoD) meeting on 17 April, around 30 developing countries, including India, Barbados, South Africa, Jamaica on behalf of the ACP (Africa, Caribbean, and Pacific) group, Ecuador, Venezuela, and the African Group, shot down WTO director-general Roberto Azevedo’s proposal for taking decisions by using “virtual platforms” or written response procedures.

The above-mentioned developing countries, individually or in groups, said they are not prepared to use the virtual platforms for taking decisions at this juncture.

Azevedo’s proposal had been mooted in the second question he had posed to members seeking their views on the use of virtual platforms or written procedures to take decisions.

The developing countries and LDCs said they are comfortable with the conduct of informal meetings and exchange of views that would not involve taking any formal decisions, said several trade envoys, who asked not to be quoted.

In contrast, the so-called “friends of the system” such as Canada, Australia, Singapore and Switzerland among others, and the European Union said they are open to work for exchanging information through virtual platforms and also for taking decisions, including negotiating outcomes for finalizing the disciplines in fisheries subsidies negotiations.

The United States said it would prefer an “incremental approach” for exchanging information while ruling out horizontal decision-making through virtual platforms and “remote engagement”, said trade envoys, who asked not to be quoted.

China, which appeared to be subdued in its intervention, said any process to be adopted must take on board the core concerns of the developing countries. China acknowledged that developing countries need to be supported during the COVID-19 crisis.

In an email sent to members on 9 April, Azevedo had sought responses from members to two questions:

A. Is your “delegation comfortable with the conduct of informal meetings and exchange of views (i.e. without formal decision-making) through virtual meetings?”;

B. What are your views on where decisions are required and whether we are open to the use of virtual platforms to take decisions, or alternatively to written procedures for the adoption of decisions? (The precise modalities for such procedures would need to be agreed through further discussion with Members)”.

In their introductory remarks, the DG and the General Council chair said while they remain concerned about the escalating COVID-19 pandemic, it is important to start work at the WTO.

The DG said the virtual informal HoD meeting is not going to take any decisions. The GC chair, Ambassador David Walker from New Zealand, underscored the need for convening a special General Council meeting as and when conditions permit after the COVID-19.

INTERVENTIONS OF MEMBERS

During their interventions at the HoD meeting, trade envoys of Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and the European Union – the first four to take the floor – lent support to the DG, saying that they are comfortable with both information-sharing and taking decisions through the virtual platforms.

Canada even suggested that the virtual platform route can be adopted for pursuing work on the plurilateral Joint Statement Initiative groups on electronic commerce, investment facilitation, disciplines for micro, small- and medium enterprises, and trade and gender.

The four countries also emphasized the need for continuing with the fisheries subsidies negotiations for finalizing a decision by the end of the year at a special General Council meeting to discuss about the time and venue for the WTO’s 12th ministerial conference next year.

The US, which spoke after these four countries, delivered a nuanced statement saying that the US is comfortable with the convening of informal meetings and virtual meetings which are feasible and appropriate, said trade envoys, non-attributively.

US Ambassador Dennis Shea said it “would be premature to look for horizontal process at this point of time (as) that can create unnecessary problems at this juncture,” said several trade envoys.

As for taking decisions, Ambassador Shea said the US doesn’t have a clear view on how to conduct work by remote engagement, including the decision-making process, said trade envoys, who asked not to be quoted.

Singapore supported commencing work right away, saying that the WTO has a major role to play in fighting COVID-19.

Singapore said it has joined with New Zealand to pursue an initiative to address trade restrictions on food and other items.

Singapore said it is comfortable with both the options – exchanging information through virtual platforms and taking decisions where they are needed – mentioning in this respect the UN General Assembly practice of the 72-hour silence rule, adopted last month during the COVID-19 pandemic.

(The 72-hour rule authorizes “the President of the General Assembly, where, in his view, a plenary meeting of the General Assembly is not practicable due to the coronavirus pandemic, to circulate, after consultation with the General Committee, draft decisions of the General Assembly to all Member States under a silence procedure of at least 72 hours. Subsequently, if the silence is not broken, the decision shall be considered adopted, and the General Assembly shall take note of the decision at its first plenary meeting held after the cessation of the precautionary measures as soon as the circumstances allow, and that this decision on the procedure for taking of decisions of the General Assembly shall be in effect until the end of May unless extended through this procedure.”)

During its intervention after Singapore, India issued the sharpest statement on both the questions, ruling out completely taking decisions through the virtual platforms.

India’s trade envoy Ambassador J S Deepak said that “India can agree to the conduct of informal meetings and exchange of views without formal decision-making, through virtual means, so that we remain engaged on important issues,” said trade envoys, who asked not to be quoted.

“However,” said Ambassador Deepak emphatically, “let us be very clear that informal virtual meetings cannot translate into discussions on substantive negotiating issues that have implications on Members’ policy (space).”

The Indian envoy said, “We are also open to considering regular Committees seeking online written submissions, but only on non-negotiating agenda items,” provided the “time-lines for submitting written responses need to be pragmatic and flexible.”

In a categorical rejection of the proposal in the second question, Ambassador Deepak told the DG that “we do not think that it is feasible to conduct negotiations or adopt decisions on substantive negotiating issues through virtual meetings or written procedures.”

He cited four reasons as to why conducting negotiations or adopting decisions on substantive negotiating issues through virtual meetings or written procedures are not feasible at this juncture.

The four reasons are:

First, the lockdowns and social distancing norms imposed across most capitals, make it very challenging to coordinate with and receive substantive inputs from all relevant stakeholders.

Second, our capitals are preoccupied with battling the current crisis and WTO negotiations are low on their priority, further constraining our ability to negotiate.

Third, the economic hardship, threat to food and livelihood security and other negative repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic, may lead several WTO Members to re-assess their negotiating positions across different areas of the WTO’s work. Therefore, to carry on with negotiations in a business as usual format does not make sense.

Fourth, in a consensus-based organization such as the WTO, it is of fundamental importance that negotiations are transparent and inclusive. Not all Members are equally equipped for this because of the digital divide and resource constraints.

For these reasons, said India, it would strongly “recommend that negotiations are postponed till the situation improves. The time-lines for all negotiations, including for disciplines on fisheries subsidies, must also be re-adjusted in tandem with the revised time-lines for MC12.”

Speaking after India, Ecuador, which is severely affected by COVID-19 pandemic, said that it is important to ensure security, privacy, and recognize the difficulties in their capital where extreme lockdown conditions are being pursued.

China said the developing and least-developed countries must be assisted with technical assistance to address their core problems.

The Chinese trade envoy Ambassador Zhang Xiangchen said decision-making at this stage is more sensitive and complex, stressing that it should be dealt with more cautiously.

China said that the two questions raised by the DG have their pros and cons, pointing out that there should be consensus on both the options.

China said members must not allow the pandemic to override their work at the WTO, said trade envoys, who asked not to be quoted.

Barbados said that countries are in uncharted waters following the COVID-19 pandemic, calling for creative solutions based on transparent, inclusive, and non-discriminatory framework. Barbados would support virtual meeting for information sharing where formal decisions are not needed.

Barbados said it is hesitant to support processes for taking formal decisions that would change our national policies or regulatory framework.

South Africa, which spoke after Barbados, said the immediate priority for its government “is to contain the spread of virus and save lives and livelihood and thereby, enable economic recovery.”

Ambassador Xolelwa Mlumbi-Peter said that as regards WTO work, different countries and regions are still experiencing varying problems and grim difficulties in the face of COVID-19.

“So our work must take cognizance of this reality,” Ambassador Xolelwa emphasized.

More importantly, “decisions [at the WTO] must be held in abeyance until all members are able to participate,” she argued.

Negotiating mandates are based on consultations, political, and policy guidance with capitals that are nearly impossible during the period of COVID-19, Ambassador Xolelwa suggested.

As regards the DG’s first question of information-sharing through virtual platforms, Ambassador Xolelwa said that South Africa would be flexible, aimed at conducting virtual meetings for exchange of views (information- gathering) without taking formal decisions.

She called for infrastructural support to developing countries who are currently grappling with COVID-19.

Ambassador Xolelwa said decision-making through virtual means and written exchange of views on substantive issues involve policy making and aspects of legal commitments.

Therefore, South Africa would not support decision-making that would require political and policy guidance, which are not possible at this juncture.

She said information-sharing for regular meetings through virtual or exchange of written answers is fraught with difficulties and full of constraints.

South Africa, she said, is committed to a rules-based multilateral trading system, and will work, with all members to find innovative methods to continue work at the WTO.

Sri Lanka, speaking after Saudi Arabia, said that it can agree with information sharing through virtual process provided they do not involve any decisions, or lead to negotiations, or decision-making on substantive issues.

Given the huge effort to combat the COVID-19 pandemic in her capital Colombo, Sri Lanka said it cannot agree to the second question for taking decisions through virtual or written-answers procedures. The Sri Lankan envoy said WTO-related issues are not the priority now. Sri Lanka wants restrictions on medical supplies to be lifted.

Venezuela called for worldwide effort of solidarity to combat the COVID-19, mocking at restrictions placed by some countries on medical supplies.

It called for cooperation and international support for the initiative taken by the World Health Organization at this juncture, suggesting there is no room for conducting negotiations at this juncture at the WTO.

On behalf of the ACP (Africa, Caribbean, and Pacific) group, Jamaica delivered a strong statement, saying the ACP group acknowledges that these circumstances require creativity to sustain the operations at the WTO.

However, it must be done on the basis of carefully balanced framework by preserving the principles of transparency and inclusivity, Jamaica’s trade envoy Ambassador Cheryl K. Spencer said.

The ACP group, she said, is flexible on using virtual platforms or written procedures in a controlled way on substantially routine outcomes.

She urged caution in using these processes for negotiation meetings, or meetings to adopt decisions that involve policy space.

The ACP group expressed several concerns, saying there is a need for clarity on the status of written comments during the informal process.

Jamaica said the ACP group members get guidance from their capitals in the face of COVID-19 pandemic. The ACP group reaffirmed its commitment to the MTS (multilateral trading system), emphasizing for strict adherence to inclusiveness, transparency and non-discrimination.

The African Group said that its members are facing grave difficulties, adding that “lockdowns and states of emergency across the continent have adversely affected effective communication with our Capitals.”

The African Group said its members are concerned about COVID-19 trade-restrictive measures and their impact on Africa, particularly the affordable access to food stuffs, medicines and equipment critical to addressing COVID-19.

The African Group said it is flexible regarding the holding of informal meetings and exchange of views without formal decision-making through virtual meetings. However, the African Group does not support negotiations through virtual meetings, as this method of communication has proven not to be the most practicable even within its own regional consultations.

On the DG’s second question, the African Group reiterated the importance of consultations with Capitals and the limitations currently posed by the COVID-19 situation.

While written procedures may be practical, from experience they have proved to be very time consuming and do not allow fluid exchanges among delegations, the African Group said.

Therefore, as regards the DG’s second question on taking decisions, the African Group said that it is “unable to support the use of virtual platforms or written procedures to reach any substantive decisions during this extraordinary time.”

“Any such decisions should be deferred to a period when sufficient normalcy has returned and our Capitals are able to provide the necessary technical and political oversight,” the African Group said.

In his concluding remarks, the DG admitted that there is no consensus among members on taking decisions through the virtual platforms.

He said members seem flexible with the first option of information-sharing without taking decisions through the virtual platforms.