Turkey-Türkiye – Trade β Blog

WTO farm talks seek fresh thinking without losing everything

After the disaster at the Abu Dhabi Ministerial Conference, members’ views differ on how to restart, negotiate and agree by 2026

PREVIOUS STORIES
Seven talking points after the WTO’s 2024 Ministerial Conference
Chair’s draft pushes WTO farm talks deadlines back to next conference
‘Mission impossible’ and ‘mission essential’ collide in WTO farm talks
See also all stories on this topic (tagged “agriculture negotiations”)

Posted by Peter Ungphakorn
APRIL 21, 2024 | UPDATED APRIL 21, 2024

Negotiators in the World Trade Organization’s farm talks broadly agree that a new approach is needed to revive the talks after they failed completely at the Abu Dhabi Ministerial Conference, but they differ on whether to tackle the entire subject or focus on priority areas.

On the table in the April 16, 2024 meeting was a proposal from Brazil for a decision by the General Council in July. This would effectively turn the scrapped draft from Abu Dhabi into a postponed decision, while removing the no longer available option of agreeing on over-the-limit subsidies in food stockpiling (“PSH”) at the Ministerial Conference.

The WTO’s General Council has the power to take decisions on behalf of its Ministerial Conferences.

In a separate process, WTO members also agreed on a non-binding document on food security, including export restrictions, also a binned agricultural text in Abu Dhabi.

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.

Chair’s draft pushes WTO farm talks deadlines back to next conference

Negotiators are meeting almost daily as they work through the Türkiye ambassador’s draft for this month’s Ministerial Conference

PREVIOUS STORY
‘Mission impossible’ and ‘mission essential’ collide in WTO farm talks

SEE ALSO
WTO ministers’ meeting — no interaction, no movement, just speeches
Texts: state of play in WTO farm talks and the crisis-meeting invitation
and all stories on this topic (tagged “food stockholding”)

UPDATE: The draft prepared for the February 26–29, 2024 Ministerial Conference was circulated on February 16. It still pushed the deadlines back to the next conference, but with options throughout: members “shall” agree by then or they “agree to work towards” the target.

The deadlock remained over whether price support in food security stockpiling (PSH) should be a stand-alone decision at this conference or resolved with all the other topics by the next one.

See the full update below

Posted by Peter Ungphakorn
FEBRUARY 5, 2024 | UPDATED FEBRUARY 18, 2024

World Trade Organization agriculture negotiators are spending the first two weeks of February scrutinising a draft text for the WTO’s upcoming Ministerial Conference.

In a meeting on January 30, 2024 they accepted the draft as the document to work on for the February 26–29 conference in Abu Dhabi — the WTO’s 13th Ministerial Conference, called “MC13” by insiders.

It was prepared by the talks’ chair, Ambassador Alparslan Acarsoy of Türkiye.

The 5-page draft is detailed, but for most issues it postpones any resolution until the Ministerial Conference after Abu Dhabi — “MC14” — normally within two years.

However, one issue still threatens to sink the whole effort. This is about finding a long-term solution for the present short term fix for over-the-limit subsidies used to buy into food security stocks (explained here).

Members disagree on whether this should be a single-issue decision or part of a package covering the whole of domestic support. (More below.)

A WTO website news story summarises its content in detail.

‘Mission impossible’ and ‘mission essential’ collide in WTO farm talks

India insists on a stand-alone decision on food security stocks procured with large subsidies. The US says consensus by next month is impossible

Posted by Peter Ungphakorn
JANUARY 17, 2024 | UPDATED JANUARY 18, 2024

The US, EU and the majority of the Cairns Group told fellow agriculture negotiators at the World Trade Organization yesterday (January 16) that a stand-alone decision on relaxing rules on food security stocks procured with higher than permitted subsidies will not be possible at next month’s WTO Ministerial Conference.

The writing had been on the wall for some time. In this meeting, according to sources, the US seems to have taken the lead, in declaring that deep divisions among members cannot be resolved and therefore a consensus decision at the Abu Dhabi conference will be impossible.

The US reaction is said to have come after India sought to “refresh members’ memory” by recalling mandates from previous years.

The purpose for India and its allies would be to find a permanent solution to replace the present temporary fix for when developing countries exceed their domestic support entitlements through purchases into food security stocks at subsidised prices.

What’s left to resolve in WTO fisheries subsidies talks after deadline missed

The fate of the talks now rests on intensive negotiations in four weeks from mid-January with some consultations before then. Are the differences still too numerous to settle in that time?

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED DECEMBER 12, 2023 | UPDATED DECEMBER 13, 2023

The chair of the World Trade Organization’s fisheries subsidies negotiations and Iceland’s ambassador, Einar Gunnarsson, admitted on on December 8, 2023, that there would not be an agreed text by the end of the year, despite a commitment from senior officials six weeks earlier that there would.

He and WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala told ambassadors at the end of the final “fish week” of the year that they still hoped that the differences could be settled by the Ministerial Conference in February next year — although the next talks are now not scheduled until mid-January.

They noted that delegates showed they were determined to reach agreement, and were encouraged by various proposed amendments to the chair’s September 4 draft designed to bridge the differences.

Texts on the table (details below) show that members diverge on a wide range of topics, particularly whether the biggest players should face extra scrutiny and if so how they would be identified, and the details of exemptions for developing countries.

WTO ministers’ meeting — no interaction, no movement, just speeches

They met. They spoke. They showed no sign of listening. They made no attempt to find consensus to break the deadlock on agriculture

Posted by Peter Ungphakorn
DECEMBER 1, 2023 | UPDATED DECEMBER 5, 2023

The supposed “crisis” meeting of about 25 World Trade Organization ministers on November 28, 2023 showed no sign of breaking the deadlock in the WTO agriculture negotiations.

With barely two working months to go members now face the real risk of no outcome at all on agriculture at the February 2024 Ministerial Conference.

According to sources, the three-hour online meeting consisted only of a series of prepared statements echoing what delegations have been saying in the negotiations. No minister made any attempt even to edge towards compromise, even though they had been urged to do so before the meeting.

Nor did the chair attempt to encourage a dialogue, or to explore possible compromises. The presiding minister was UAE Foreign Trade Minister Thani bin Ahmed Al Zeyoudi, who will chair the Abu Dhabi Ministerial Conference.

Türkiye and EU: appeal-by-arbitration cases leave questions about WTO law

Similar to the 50-member ‘Multi-party Interim Appeal Arrangement (MPIA)’, one ruling has been formally adopted, the other not

Originally published as
“Alternative to the alternative: Turkey and EU use arbitration for WTO appeals”
and previously as one section in
“Arbitration — the stop-gap when WTO appeals are unavailable”

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED AUGUST 30, 2022 | UPDATED SEPTEMBER 26, 2022

Türkiye told World Trade Organization members on August 29, 2022 that it would comply with dispute rulings that said it was violating WTO agreements by giving preferences to locally-produced pharmaceutical products, even though the rulings have not been formally adopted.

So far, the case is unique among WTO legal disputes. It is the first use of appeal-by-arbitration as a route to a second legal opinion on a ruling, while the WTO Appellate Body cannot function.

And because at the time arbitration was the only route open to Türkiye to appeal the case, neither the first-stage “panel” ruling, nor the findings in the appeal, have been formally adopted by the WTO’s membership.

This raises questions about the status of the rulings in WTO law. When a ruling has been formally adopted, governments (and others involved in trade) can assess with a degree of confidence whether similar policies or measures comply with WTO agreements.

When the membership has not adopted a ruling, that confidence is weakened, although some legal experts suggest the difference is small. The US treats non-adoption as significant without explaining why.

Explainer: The 18 WTO plurilaterals and ‘joint-statement initiatives’

Brand new, decades old, or in between? Exclusive or applying to all members? Proper negotiations or just talk? Which is which, and what are the subjects?

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED JANUARY 3, 2022 | UPDATED APRIL 13, 2024

As World Trade Organization (WTO) members struggle to reach consensus on numerous issues, many see talks among “the willing” as the way to modernise the organisation and in many cases to update its trade rules. But the approach is controversial.

These talks and resulting decisions among only some WTO members are called “plurilateral” to distinguish them from “multilateral” activities and agreements among the WTO’s whole membership.

Questions on Brexit, agriculture, WTO schedules, standards, free trade agreements

Written replies to questions for the inquiry of the UK House of Lords EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee’s inquiry on ‘Brexit: agriculture’, February 8, 2017

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED FEBRUARY 9, 2017 | UPDATED FEBRUARY 9, 2017

On February 8, 2017 the UK House of Lords EU Energy and Environment Sub-Committee’s inquiry on Brexit: agriculture published two sets written replies to questions.

In a nutshell: Brexit and the UK’s trading relations with the EU

The four options are well-known but their implications are not always understood. Some summary graphics

By Peter Ungphakorn
POSTED SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 | UPDATED SEPTEMBER 30, 2016

This is a summary of the four main options facing the UK for its trade relationship with the EU after Brexit. The four options are well-known but their implications are not always understood. These are the options: