General Council Meeting
December 16-18, 2020
***
Statement by India – Delivered by Ambassador & PR to the WTO
Agenda Item 11: ‘Procedures to strengthen the negotiating function of the WTO - Statement by the US’ – (WT/GC/W/757/REV.1 and WT/GC/W/764/REV.1)
We thank the United States for their statement under this agenda item.
- At the outset, we would like to refer to the submission WT/GC/W/765 by India and other Members, where we have dealt with most of the issues raised by the U.S. in their paper, also underlining that Special & Differential Treatment (S&DT) is a treaty-embedded right at the WTO, an entitlement which developing countries have paid for, and that it cannot be taken away from us, based on certain arbitrary assumptions. Certainly not through creative interpretations of the basis of G20 membership. Continuing with such narrative on differentiation would only widen the trust deficit amongst Members.
- The basis of S&D is to give Members flexibility to integrate into the rules-based system. Chair, Members with huge differences in economic and social development cannot be put in the same category. For instance, to put a country in the same development category with another country with about 25 times higher per capita GDP, would be blatantly unfair. Moreover, recent studies highlight that the gap that existed between developed and developing countries in 1990s, has actually widened, and new gaps in the form of digital divide have emerged.
- Chair, ongoing Covid19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted developing countries and LDCs with large populations. Many of them are experiencing their worst economic setback since the 1930s. In view of the uneven impact of the ongoing pandemic, Special & Differential Treatment becomes all the more relevant today than ever before.
- We are therefore firm in our conviction that S&DT needs to be part of any current and future negotiations in WTO. We also cannot agree to a case-by-case approach for the same. We believe that it is high time for the developed country Members to consider foregoing flexibilities available to them under various existing WTO Agreements and Decisions, including AMS and green-box subsidies, Special Safeguard Mechanism and flexibilities under the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition, providing them with substantial reverse S&D treatment. Chair, these reversed subsidies are generally not available to developing countries, and in fact badly hurt developing country exports. WTO Membership can consider case by case approach for review of such reverse S&DT, unjustifiably enjoyed by developed countries en masse for so long.
- In conclusion, Chair, India believes that the only mandate that exists on S&DT is to review S&D provisions in the existing WTO disciplines, with a view to make them more precise, effective and operational, as entailed in paragraph 44 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration. In this context, India strongly supports the G90’s Agreement Specific Proposals as contained in Document JOB/TNC/79- JOB/DEV/60. We sincerely hope that Members will constructively engage in discussions on this G90 Proposal, so as to work towards a meaningful outcome on the same by MC12.
I thank you Chair.
***
