Investment facilitation – Trade β Blog

Scoring the Ministerial Conference results in the WTO director-general’s ‘half-full’ glass

Is it right to judge the Abu Dhabi Ministerial Conference by counting the decisions as if they each had equal significance? This is how we’d score the 10 that were agreed and some others that weren’t

By Peter Ungphakorn and Robert Wolfe
POSTED APRIL 5, 2024 | UPDATED APRIL 23, 2024

Judging by the WTO website’s coverage, the World Trade Organization’s Abu Dhabi Ministerial Conference was a success, albeit a qualified one, at least in WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s assessments. Is this credible?

“Despite the more than challenging context, we concluded [the Ministerial Conference] with 10 consensus multilateral ministerial decisions and declarations,” she told ambassadors to the WTO on March 21. “That’s why I personally see the glass as half full.”

We, however, conclude that the glass is quite a lot less than half full.

Despite the more than challenging context, we concluded … with 10 consensus multilateral ministerial decisions and declarations. That’s why I personally see the glass as half full
— Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala

We looked closely at what was agreed in Abu Dhabi and what wasn’t, and we scored each issue. The results are below, a bit like the scorecards we produced after the last Ministerial Conference in Geneva in 2022, but slightly different.

And we believe over-selling the result may be unhelpful because it may encourage complacency. Members can and should do better. And they should start working on that now.

Setback for plurilateral approach as investment deal blocked again

The 128 participants will continue efforts to persuade India, South Africa and Türkiye that their deal can become an official WTO plurilateral agreement

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED MARCH 22, 2024 | UPDATED MARCH 23, 2024

India and South Africa, now joined by Türkiye, continued to block consensus on adding the 128-participant Investment Facilitation Agreement to the World Trade Organization’s rulebook when WTO members met as the General Council today (March 22, 2024).

The on-going resistance is a setback for the large number of countries that had hoped deals among only some of the WTO’s 164 members — known as “plurilateral” — could be a way to allow rule-making to develop among the willing without affecting others who are not ready.

Lack of consensus prevents “plurilateral” agreements from being part of the organisation’s official package of rules. That means WTO committees cannot be set up to oversee implementation and the agreements are not subject to legal proceedings under WTO dispute settlement.

Only three of the 36 non-participants have opposed adding this plurilateral agreement to the WTO’s rules. The US is a non-participant that has previously argued in favour.

What next? Seven talking points after the WTO’s 2024 Ministerial Conference

Lots to think about as WTO delegations pick up the pieces from Abu Dhabi and look ahead to the next conference in two years’ time and beyond

By Peter Ungphakorn and Robert Wolfe
POSTED MARCH 13, 2024 | UPDATED MARCH 20, 2024

We’ve deliberately taken our time. The World Trade Organization’s 2024 Ministerial Conference in Abu Dhabi ended almost two weeks ago, after deadlock forced it to be extended by over a day, into the early hours of March 2.

Before the conference we had warned against expecting too much. We had argued that what was going to be essential was to preserve the system. Most issues were not ripe, and the geopolitical situation meant political energy was elsewhere.

Not to cause any harm seemed to be enough to say “job done”.

Some have criticised us for being too complacent, for being satisfied with the status quo. Far from it. We were simply recognising reality.

Quite a lot has been written and said about the conference, its minor successes and the major failures to meet expectations. Here are some talking points that stand out for us. It’s time to look ahead.

Definitely. Maybe. Unlikely. Who knows? Issues on the WTO conference agenda

We’d better be prepared for little or nothing substantial when ministers meet in Abu Dhabi at the end of the month

By Peter Ungphakorn and Robert Wolfe
POSTED FEBRUARY 21, 2024 | UPDATED FEBRUARY 27, 2024

Two large but stubborn members may prevent ministers from agreeing on anything important at the World Trade Organization’s upcoming Ministerial Conference, and so the cynics are circling with doom-laden prophecies that “the WTO” is likely to fail again.

One is India, which is demanding the impossible in agriculture and threatening to block several other issues supported by a majority of WTO members. The other is the US, which is also — but more quietly — defying a majority of members on appeals in WTO dispute settlement.

Between them, they could ensure that the February 26–29 meeting in Abu Dhabi becomes yet another where WTO trade ministers kick dozens of cans down the road.

Cynics circle as another WTO Ministerial Conference heads for small pickings

Given the challenging circumstances, system preservation may be the most important outcome

By Peter Ungphakorn and Robert Wolfe
POSTED FEBRUARY 21, 2024 | UPDATED FEBRUARY 27, 2024

The cynics are circling the World Trade Organization’s upcoming Ministerial Conference with doom-laden prophecies that the “WTO” is likely to fail, again.

The cans that were kicked down the road in Geneva in 2022 are now supposed to produce content in Abu Dhabi in 2024. The prospects of that are sobering.

But the WTO is not just its Ministerial Conferences, and the purpose of these conferences is not merely concluding new agreements. Given the challenging circumstances, system preservation may be the most important outcome.

Comment: on India’s claim that a plurilateral WTO deal is ‘illegal’

Participants want to add their investment facilitation agreement to WTO rules, but India objects, calling it ‘illegal’, ‘non-mandated’, ‘non-multilateral’ and a ‘violation of the WTO framework’

SEE ALSO
In General Council India alone opposes investment deal as a WTO agreement
Technical note: types of plurilateral deals and adding them to WTO rules
What the agreement includes
●
General Council minutes from this meeting and in general (published a few months after the meeting)
All articles tagged “investment facilitation”
All articles tagged “Plurilaterals”

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED JANUARY 12, 2024 | UPDATED MAY 10, 2024

India has circulated a strongly-worded statement prepared for the World Trade Organization’s General Council on December 15, 2023 on why it opposes bringing the new plurilateral agreement on Investment Facilitation for Development (IFD) into the package of WTO rules.

It describes the whole process as “illegal”, without any mandate and against the multilateral WTO framework. Worse, India says, the investment facilitation talks defy a “negative mandate” because of previous consensus decisions against the move.

Why is this important? Two words: WTO reform.

But is that legalistic rejection valid? Some lawyers suggest the argument is political even though it is dressed up as legal.

And “BS” is how one described the claim that negotiations can only be launched in the WTO by a consensus mandate.

Six talking points from the year’s final General Council meeting

From negotiations to WTO reform, the Ministerial Conference is unlikely to deliver much. Time to hand out some Mario Balotelli shirts?

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED DECEMBER 21, 2023 | UPDATED JANUARY 24, 2024

The World Trade Organization’s General Council had 25 items on the agenda for its last meeting of 2023, several of them with multiple sub-items. Most are — frankly — boring although essential for the record of WTO operations.

But some points were worth discussing from the meeting, which we can extend to include year-end sessions of the Trade Negotiations Committee and Dispute Settlement Body.

Here are six. They won’t hit the headlines, except perhaps one, but they do tell us something about the state of play on bigger issues, and where the WTO might be heading, particularly with the February 26–29 Abu Dhabi Ministerial Conference now only two months away.

In General Council India alone opposes investment deal as a WTO agreement

Overwhelming support for 117-member deal to be a formal WTO agreement, even among non-participants

THIS UPDATES AND REPLACES
“118 members want investment facilitation deal to be formal WTO agreement”
(from December 13, 2023)

SEE ALSO
Comment: on India’s claim that a plurilateral WTO deal is ‘illegal’
WTO investment facilitation text completed but still faces uphill battle
Technical note: types of plurilateral deals and adding them to WTO rules
Explainer: The 18 WTO plurilaterals and ‘joint-statement initiatives’
Technical note: Participation in WTO plurilateral talks
●
General Council minutes from this meeting and in general (published a few months after the meeting)
All articles tagged “investment facilitation”

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED DECEMBER 18, 2023 | UPDATED MAY 10, 2024

India says it will block adding to the official WTO rule-book a new investment facilitation agreement among over 70% of the World Trade Organization members, even though it was the only country to speak against the request in the organisation’s General Council on December 15, 2023.

India’s opposition has implications beyond this particular deal, which is backed by 117 developed and developing countries such as China, the EU, Bolivia, Chad and Laos.

It makes investment facilitation a test case for all rule-making negotiations among subsets of the membership.

The other subjects that could potentially line up to follow investment facilitation into the WTO rule-book include e-commerce and digital trade, plastics pollution, and fossil fuel subsidies, all involving only part of the membership.

WTO members are struggling to conclude several negotiations because of insoluble differences preventing them from reaching consensus agreement.

This means existing agreements are lagging behind the latest developments in global trade — for example in digital trade or sustainability.

Many governments now consider the best way to modernise WTO rules is to try to reach agreement among “the willing” first. The rest of the membership can join later when they are ready.

But to insert an agreement among only the willing into the rule-book still needs consensus support from the whole membership, including non-participants.

If India (previously also supported by South Africa and Namibia) continues to oppose anything short of a fully multilateral agreement, this would prevent the deal from becoming a proper WTO agreement.

Now replaced: 118 members want investment facilitation deal to be formal WTO agreement

One way or another it needs a consensus decision by WTO members, in the face of some strong opposition

This article has been updated and replaced by
In General Council India alone opposes investment deal as a WTO agreement
(December 18, 2023)

Image credits:
Main image | Michelle Henderson, Unspalsh licence

WTO senior officials face struggle to avoid distractions ‘elsewhere’

The challenge for officials from capitals is to keep the multilateral trading system up-to-date. How next week’s meeting is organised might help

UPDATE October 30, 2023—The G7 trade ministers’ statement issued in Japan on October 2023 covers a lot of these issues.

UPDATE October 25, 2023—As we thought, little has emerged on the substance, particularly whether the officials narrowed any gaps on substance, or showed they were receptive to others’ concerns and therefore prepared to move from existing positions.

The chairs’ summary (with oral reports from break-out sessions) and the WTO website news story are optimistic — more than some might be — but mainly based on the process and the tone, at least as far as we can tell from their descriptions.

For example, they were encouraged by the agreement to bring forward the target for concluding a fisheries subsidies text to the end of this year. But what does it really signify? Does it show the chances of a deal have improved? Or is it simply practical — that a text is needed by about that time if a deal is to be concluded by the February Ministerial Conference. There was no report of any movement in the widely differing positions on the text.

The rest of their summary seems similar, and includes some floated views that will not work.

Whether that translates into genuine progress in the final months of the year remains to be seen. Which is more-or-less what we suggested.

By Peter Ungphakorn and Robert Wolfe
POSTED OCTOBER 19, 2023 | UPDATED NOVEMBER 1, 2023

In the middle of last month, a well-known journalist specialising in trade made “one of my infrequent trips” to the World Trade Organization in Geneva. He found that “the big trade news” during the WTO’s high profile annual public forum was “unilateral action that took place elsewhere”.

That just about sums up the situation facing senior officials of WTO member governments as they head for one of their own infrequent trips to the WTO’s Geneva offices.

On Monday and Tuesday (October 23–24, 2023), officials from capitals have been summoned to Geneva to try to drag themselves, their counterparts and their Geneva delegations further along the road towards meaningful results when their ministers gather in Abu Dhabi early next year (February 26–29, 2024).