Mission impossible, almost

The Indian answer to this basic change in the world’s stage has been predictably pathetic. Every Indian finance, commerce and prime minister has been saying for the past five years that aggressive trade and economic diplomacy are key to the country’s overall development. Every Indian leader coming to Geneva — and there are plenty of them — says India’s mission to the WTO should be strengthened. During one of his many trips to Davos, Switzerland, India’s famous finance minister Palaniappan Chidambaram said his fight to place trade on the Indian agenda included asking for at least two more posts for the Indian mission to the WTO. And so goes the theory.

In reality, India continues to treat its WTO mission as a backwater for intra-ministry feuds even as the rest of the world increases and consolidates its WTO presence complete with lawyers and negotiators in preparation for the struggle ahead. India’s WTO mission comes under the Commerce Ministry, which barring notable exceptions, treats the job as a foreign posting to be doled out. “This is not a district in UP where an Ambassador car and a red flashing light does the job WTO is about negotiating India’s future with sharks. Where are we going”, one Indian diplomat said.

Nowhere, at least for now. Consider this. Under GATT, there were 10 legal instruments. Under WTO, that replaced GATT as a single-undertaking (meaning if you sign on to one text you sign on to all), there are 27 legal texts covering everything from agriculture to textiles and having an influence on the price of your medicines to that of your local telephone call. The number of standing bodies has increased from 14 to 33. On an average, there are 10 meetings at the WTO every day, each equally important as part of the larger international trade liberalisation process. Munir Zahran, Egypt’s ambassador to WTO even told the General Council that the burgeoning of meetings was taking a toll on delegations with limited human resources. The various trade disciplines are inter-linked if not in subject then in resolution of disputes because the WTO treaty, which is a single undertaking, allows cross-retaliation. Translated, this means if a country is unhappy with India in telecommunications, it can retaliate in textiles. This means all the meetings are equally important. This means two Indians India’s real resource in Geneva that includes the ambassador and one diplomat have to run around between meetings in addition to briefing Delhi and working the Geneva trade circuit. Sometimes New Delhi sends extra hands, but that is meagre compensation. Visiting experts do not have the contacts or the networks to make their point several important WTO processes are non-transparent and need non-transparent networks that evolve over time. In addition, India’s non-existent trade policy changes with each political ripple placing even the most committed Indian negotiator in a tricky situation. In contrast, other developing countries have clear direction and a back-up position. Key European and American negotiators have been in Geneva for 10 years and they have the institutional and negotiating memory to defend their interests.

India’s position compares poorly not just with the developed countries but also in its own league. Brazil (10 trade diplomats), Chile (7), South Korea (16), Egypt (10), Malaysia (5), Indonesia (7), Mexico (8) and Thailand (19) have all increased their trade presence in the city. Japan has 20 people, European Union has 11 plus four from each of the 15 member states and the US has 10. Most of these countries are backed by entire ministries in their capitals and all of them have set up legal departments to dissect WTO’s legally binding trade texts. “In our part of the world, every WTO position is evolved after consultations between our foreign, finance, trade, commerce and environment ministries,” one Latin American diplomat told The Indian Express. In India, these ministries are often not on talking terms as far as the WTO is concerned and there is no sign of any legal body being set up to deal with WTO issues that will have far-reaching effects on the way we live.

Earlier this year US Trade Representative Charlene Barshefsky said the WTO would be an important part of how Washington looks at the world. She drew attention to the fact that the new, rules-based organisation would introduce the much-needed discipline into the international trading system. The WTO’s agreements on Safeguards, Subsidies, Countervailing Duties and Anti-Dumping Measures and its famous Dispute Settlement Mechanism have brought greater certainty and predictability to the system giving it teeth.

For the moment, apart from help from heaven, there is no other indication of how New Delhi proposes to rise to that challenge.