The latest phase of trade talks show the wealthy countries still trying to extract the maximum concessions from the poorest, writes Colin Roche
2005 has been a major year for the fight against global poverty. Promises have been made (and remade) by rich countries to provide more aid to poor countries. Rich countries have promised to cancel the debts of poor countries, even if only for some of the poorest countries and for some of the debt.
But for many in poor countries, the benefits may be undermined by another continuing injustice - unfair trade. For farmers around the developing world, who struggle to grow and sell crops to provide a living for themselves and pay for education and healthcare for their families, unfair trade threatens to keep them in poverty.
For rice farmers in Ghana, cotton farmers in west Africa, dairy farmers in the Caribbean and many others around the world, unfair competition with highly-subsidised producers in the richest nations has driven them even further into poverty. Set alongside other unfair trade practices and rules - such as those which have threatened access to cheap medicines in the developing world - action is clearly needed to reform world trade.
This week in Hong Kong trade negotiators representing 148 countries will come together to try to make progress on the current round of trade talks.
Following the anger expressed by developing countries during the previous round that their concerns were not been taken into consideration, these talks were billed as a "development round" in Doha four years ago. Rich countries promised this round would genuinely benefit developing countries.
But since that hopeful start four years ago, these talks have been characterised by failure - a failure to meet the timetables for decisions agreed at Doha, but also, more fundamentally, a failure to put the interests of developing countries at the heart of the talks as promised. Instead, what we have seen is a continuation of the same old tactics of wealthy countries seeking to extract the maximum possible concessions from the countries least able to defend themselves. So much for the rhetoric of encouraging poor countries to use trade to work themselves out of poverty.
As the EU, for example, makes much of its current offer on agriculture, it is also rigorously seeking market access from poor countries in other areas - demanding that concessions by rich countries are matched by concessions from poor countries. They and the US want to see "blood on the floor" even from developing countries in return for addressing development concerns in other areas.
In agriculture, the offers on the table from rich countries still fail to deal with the dumping of subsidised produce overseas, which undermines livelihoods in poor countries. An analysis of the current EU offer shows that it leaves enough leeway for the EU to actually raise the level of subsidies by $13 billion. The US is also massively culpable when it comes to dumping: it subsidises many agri-business corporations to the tune of millions of dollars to sell commodities like rice and cotton overseas.
Rich countries don't pay subsidies simply to keep small struggling family farms in business. Instead, payments are skewed to the largest farmers. In the EU the largest 25 per cent of farms receive 70 per cent of all support, while the two million smallest farmers share 10 per cent. Even with decoupling of subsidies from production, a welcome step, many
European farmers will be receiving hundreds of thousands of euro per annum, allowing them to compete unfairly against producers in poor countries.
In trade in industrial goods, the richest nations are demanding extensive concessions from poor countries, making a mockery of promises that poor countries would be asked to do less. If the EU and the US get their way, poor countries will be prevented from pursuing the very polices that industrialised countries used in the past to grow their economies and develop competitive industries.
For trade in services, rich countries are seeking greater commitments from members than was envisaged at the launch of the negotiations in Doha, effectively changing the rules of the game halfway through.
The development dimension seems to be disappearing from the talks. While there may be an advance on a development package including aid, parallel to the main negotiations, any such sidelining of developing country concerns will ultimately be harmful to them. Their opportunity to utilise international trade to grow their economies and rise out of poverty will have been dealt a severe blow. A mere 1 per cent increase in the share of world trade for the poorest parts of the world could potentially raise 128 million people out of poverty. It is a chance that should not be missed.
Oxfam Ireland is a member of Oxfam International, a confederation of 12 Oxfams worldwide www.oxfamireland.org
Colin Roche is Oxfam Ireland's campaigns and advocacy executive