In everyone's interest. Pressure in favour of a positive outcome at the WTO's Doha Round is understandable but not at any price. The conditions and modalities are, in my opinion, more important than the success itself. In world trade, the volume of trade is far from being in the negative and its rate of growth is generally higher than economic growth. The real priorities are better participation of poor countries in world trade, protection of natural balances, respect for existing rules and the introduction of new rules if necessary. I am only going to go back to what I wrote the day before yesterday on deviations from the rule and the abuses and dangers resulting from counterfeiting and piracy to highlight the conclusions of recent investigations: “the trade in counterfeit medicines is greater than drug trafficking trade but involves fewer risks”. The consequences of the current situation can be summed up as: “sabotaged economies, lost jobs and lives in danger”. Outlining corrections is in everyone's interest and not just in Europe's. The investigations have proved that the first victim of counterfeit medicines is Africa, where controls are rare or non-existent and the effects, frightening: “At best the patient doesn't get better, at worst, he dies”. The list of disasters is a long one: 2500 deaths in Niger due to false vaccines against meningitis, is just one example. According to Christophe Zimmermann, who was already quoted the day before yesterday, “50% of medicines on sale on the internet are counterfeit”. The overall conclusion of Michel Dantet, Secretary General of the World Customs Organisation is, “counterfeiting is the second most serious scourge of the 21st century, after terrorism”.
A strange priority. I sometimes ask myself why too great a priority is too often given to (even by some illustrious and powerful NGOs) big international trade interests, when there are plenty of others which call for hunger in the world to be fought and nature and biodiversity to be safeguarded. The primary demand of poor countries is to reconstitute subsistence farming by firstly feeding their people, whereas monoculture for exports to rich countries only benefits large trade interests and a few multinationals (sometime some of the corrupt local authorities). Exports from poor countries to rich countries, including Europe, should certainly be facilitated and encouraged but they depend on the maintenance of trade preferences in their favour, whereas opening up the international markets erga omnes barely helps them at all, as proved by the examples of bananas and sugar (made to compete with the most efficient producers, African countries will soon cease exporting even a single kilo of bananas or sugar).
Other categories of countries have crucial demands to be made known. If emerging countries can still not open up to free international competition in certain services sectors, we have to try and understand why and take this into account. Europe, as we are aware, cannot give up farming for a whole range of vital reasons which readers of this column know only too well and which are now acknowledged at the highest political level. It should therefore not give in to pressure. Valid exchange could allow (and in part, it has to) for an end to export subsidies that deregulate markets to the detriment of poor countries but on access to the European market, it has already reached and perhaps gone beyond the limit of possible concessions. Fewer goals in the Doha Round would be in Europe's interest rather than seeing its traditions collapse, as well as its nature and territorial balance.
Three documents for next half of the year. The correct assessment of the negotiations in the Doha Round is therefore not to be found in the cold calculation of additional trade which can result from it but rather in the respect for the essential demands of humanity and fair trade. The good news is that Peter Mandelson has announced (see our bulletin 9185) that in the second half of this year the Commission will be presenting three “communications” on: a) a “tough approach” for defining a global and hard-headed strategy guaranteeing markets are effectively open and that the rules of free trade are respected in a transparent way; b) a reflection on an anti-dumping system adapted to globalisation, that takes into account changes in production and trade; c) a European strategy specific to China, that focuses on key areas such as intellectual property, market access issues and investment opportunities. A balanced but successful result in the Doha Round is still Mr Mandelson's immediate aim. He will then turn his attention towards the future.
(F.R.)