• Latest
Analyzing the Relevance of WTO

Analyzing the Relevance of WTO

December 27, 2013
Women In The Red-Green War

Women In The Red-Green War

February 27, 2018
Behind the Indigenous People’s Free, Prior and (Un)-Informed Coercion

Behind the Indigenous People’s Free, Prior and (Un)-Informed Coercion

February 28, 2018
FPP and Its Advice on Secret Fund

FPP and Its Advice on Secret Fund

March 2, 2014
Welcome FLEGT-VPA, Goodbye FSC

Welcome FLEGT-VPA, Goodbye FSC

March 2, 2014
When the Suspect Yells as the Victim

When the Suspect Yells as the Victim

March 2, 2014
Why Is Central Kalimantan So Interesting To The FPI?

Why Is Central Kalimantan So Interesting To The FPI?

January 17, 2014
Who will be the Next President?

Who will be the Next President?

January 10, 2014
Partnering with ENGOs for Opinion Building

Partnering with ENGOs for Opinion Building

January 10, 2014
Ambiguous Political Support for Greenpeace in Indonesia

Ambiguous Political Support for Greenpeace in Indonesia

January 10, 2014
The Fate of Indonesian Crude Palm Oil in the Global Market

The Fate of Indonesian Crude Palm Oil in the Global Market

January 7, 2014
NGO Transparency

NGO Transparency

January 7, 2014
Indonesian Middle Class: Trap or Rescue?

Indonesian Middle Class: Trap or Rescue?

January 3, 2014
Friday, February 22, 2019
Dekker Center
  • About
  • Creative Commons
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
  • About
  • Creative Commons
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact Us
No Result
View All Result
Dekker Center
No Result
View All Result
Home Policy

Analyzing the Relevance of WTO

by Ika
December 27, 2013
in Policy
0
Analyzing the Relevance of WTO
0
SHARES
7
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Post Views: 859

Finally, the 9th Ministerial Conference (MC), held by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Nusa Dua, Bali, sealed the Bali Package deal. Although the passage took tough negotiations over many hours (which resulted in the delay of the closing ceremony), the success of the Bali Package made Roberto Azevedo as Director General of the WTO and Gita Wirjawan as the Chair of the MC dare to claim that they’ve recorded new history for the WTO. The Bali Package contents focus on the agricultural sector, trade facilitation, and the capacity of building for the least developed countries. It is believed it will restore public trust in the WTO, which has been besieged by constant failures to protect the global economy.

At the opening ceremony of 9th MC, the delegates also believed the Bali Package would increase the relevance of the WTO to global trade. But does it really? One of the WTO members, India, does not think so. India took a tough stance against the food subsidy points of the Bali Package materials, which were based on WTO rules that require the members to provide subsidized food based on prices from 1986-1988. Anand Sharma, Minister of Commerce and Industry of India, admitted that he had pleaded with the WTO to review the rules and raise the food prices to 2013. Questions about the relevance of the WTO began when its role in global trade was reduced little by little as time went by. The fading relevance began prior to the failure of the Doha Round in 2001 and was followed by the failure of the Ministerial Conference in Mexico in 2003, Hong Kong in 2005, and Geneva in 2009 and 2011. This series of failures made many countries prefer bilateral/regional agreements in trade transaction such as the Trans-Atlantic Partnership, the Trans Pacific Partnership, and the ASEAN Free Trade Area (AFTA). In the end, these pacts unwittingly divided the WTO into two, the South bloc, which comprises the least developed countries, and the North bloc, which comprises the most developed countries.

The split was exacerbated by the failure of the WTO to accommodate the interests of the least developed countries. The original mission of the WTO was to develop a free trade system, which was often considered more favorable for the economies of developed countries. This system included the removal of trade tariffs and import taxes, reduction of subsidies, and product standardization requirements. Looking at how strong and efficient their industries are, these rules are certainly not a big problem for developed countries. But for the least developed countries, where the quality of products is not as high as that produced by developed countries due to limited technology, this rule is very detrimental. So it is not surprising many parties accused the WTO, like other international economic regimes such as the World Bank and the IMF, of applying the practices of colonialism. Among other accusations, critics accused the WTO of extending control over weak governments and giving rise to global economic inequality, as well as widening the gap between the North and the South. For these reasons, many people were pessimistic about the Bali Package. Jean Pierre Lehmann, a professor at a business school in Switzerland, even stated that the Bali Package is like giving candy to a crying baby. If it succeeds, it will be an extremely small victory. But if it fails, it will be a rather big failure for all.

As can be seen from the examples above, it is very clear that the colonialism of the WTO has threatened the sovereignty of its members. A government’s obligation to protect the welfare of its people and its economy has been replaced with WTO policies that follow the trends of the world market. The result is unfair competition, decreasing welfare of farmers, fishermen, and small entrepreneurs, as well as raising the risk of unemployment. WTO Director General Roberto Azevedo, know this very well. Despite the rising voices of protest against the WTO’s unfair policies, why does Azevedo seem like he doesn’t care and keep pushing the Bali Package? Is it because he wants to “redeem” the series of previous WTO’s failures? Or is it because of the lure of USD $1 trillion that will rotate in the world due to the increasing of global trade transactions with the success of the Bali Package? If so, then who will benefit from that U.S. $1 trillion?

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Google+ (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Ika

Ika

Ika Virginaputri is an independent writer and current-affairs observer for the Dekker Center. She lives in Jakarta and writing for the Dekker Center and national and international media.

Next Post
How Will Bali Package Benefit Indonesia?

How Will Bali Package Benefit Indonesia?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

twenty + thirteen =

Recommended

Why Is Central Kalimantan So Interesting To The FPI?

Why Is Central Kalimantan So Interesting To The FPI?

5 years ago
Women In The Red-Green War

Women In The Red-Green War

5 years ago
Analyzing the Relevance of WTO

Analyzing the Relevance of WTO

5 years ago
Frankincense: The Politicization of a Dying Trade

Frankincense: The Politicization of a Dying Trade

5 years ago
Law Enforcement, The Mediator in Democracy

Law Enforcement, The Mediator in Democracy

5 years ago

Popular News

  • pernikahan bawah umur

    Breaking the Child Marriage Tradition in Indonesia

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • Who should Pay for Tesso Nilo?

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0

Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter.
SUBSCRIBE

Category

  • Featured (9)
  • Policy (14)
  • Politics (18)
  • Society (7)
  • Stories (10)
  • Top News (8)

Follow Us

About Us

The Dekker Center is based on a long standing tradition of hard-nosed investigative journalism.
Read More

  • About
  • Creative Commons
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact Us

© 2011 Dekker Center

No Result
View All Result
  • About
  • Creative Commons
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Contact Us

© 2011 Dekker Center

%d bloggers like this: