Read the other Global Envision blogs from Hong Kong:
December 12, 2005 – Why Free Trade?
December 13, 2005 – Opening Session
December 13, 2005 – Aid For Trade
December 13, 2005 – Food Fight
December 14, 2005 – Results of Day One of WTO Negotiations in Hong Kong
December 15, 2005 – The Joy of the Press Conference
December 16, 2005 – The Word of the Day is Deadlock

Our week in Hong Kong is coming to a close. We're in the final hours of this WTO conference, and prospects of a boost to international free trade are slim. The EU has gone as so far as to say that the talks are actually going backwards. This ministerial has clearly demonstrated the need for all sides to participate in a rules based multilateral trading system in a reciprocal manner for trade to benefit all.

Reciprocity

Let me be clear about what I mean by reciprocity, because it is a fighting word here in Hong Kong.

In the general sense, reciprocity a is considered a basic concept of equity and equilibrium. In the context of international trade, reciprocity has the potential to institutionalize inequality. The WTO's 149 member countries are profoundly different in their economic, political and social institutions. If the playing field is totally leveled, and the same rules applied to each and every player without the help of “Aid for Trade” (see the December 13, 2005 Aid For Trade blog for more background on this topic), then true reciprocity could wreak havoc on the economies of the least developed countries.

The poorest countries should participate in the multilateral trading system, because they have a lot to gain by doing so. But they deserve a lot of help along the way. It's also worth remembering that developing countries often impose harmful trade rules on one another. A full 70% of all tariffs paid by developing countries are levied by other developing countries. These countries need to take a hard look at their trade balance – the balance between exports and imports of total goods and services – and recognize the wins and losses that accompany tariffs. The more they trade, the more the losses outpace the gains.

The richest countries are enormous traders and easily grasp the consequences of trade barriers in a very clear way. Yet they continue to hold on to their own trade barriers. The U.S., EU and other large economies need to give the world more than lip service on their promises to lower their own trade barriers and subsidies if they want the small economies to do the same.

In Seattle in 1999 and again in Cancun in 2003, very little was accomplished because poor countries decided not to participate in a game where so few win and so many lose. I refer to the WTO specifically, not free trade in general. Everyone at these meetings seems to recognize (or concede) that the WTO had not been a valuable, equitable organization for developing countries. Hence the Doha Round, with a promised emphasis on development. Trade is now recognized by a growing number of stakeholders – including civil society organizations worldwide – as an important part of global poverty alleviation. As Oxfam's website puts it, “World trade has the potential to act as a powerful motor to reduce poverty and enhance economic growth. However, global trade rules, which are rigged in favor of powerful commercial interests in rich countries, have contributed to the marginalization of many least-developed countries (LDCs) from global markets.” One positive coming out of Hong Kong is that more people are saying that they will play, but that it is necessary to change the rules of the game.

The positions staked out by various interests here are not all that far apart. Developed countries keep repeating “free trade is the best way,” and developing countries keep repeating “we need time, protection, and monetary support to move forward.” The haggling over the details will not be easy, but people are beginning to speak the same language.

In the corridors of the Convention Center, the talk is that developing countries need to decide what it is that will truly benefit them the most, and work together to achieve that. There's been progress made here on this front. One twenty one countries — over 80 percent of the entire WTO — have decided to work together to push for a trade agenda that benefits them. Worldwide development benefits when all WTO members cut tariffs and subsidies. But, although it is not always acknowledged by rich countries, it is imperative that poor countries do this on their own terms. Otherwise, the entire global multilateral trading system on which the World Trade Organization is based may fail.

Highlights

For me, the highlights of the week have come in the form of small vignettes.

The most information here, as everywhere, emerges around the water cooler. People are very courteous and willing to chat about the heart of the issues and acknowledge the divergent viewpoints. These issues really need to be solved at a personal level if developing countries are to truly be included in the world economic framework, because it is people who are hurt and helped by the policies forged here.

On our first day in Hong Kong, before the meetings got underway, we walked into the U.S. Agricultural Trade Coalition Conference just ahead of U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns. He was discussing with his staff what he could and could not say to the press on the topics of the U.S. negotiating position on peanuts and cotton. Yesterday, Assistant U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Susan Schwab prefaced nearly all of her remarks at a press briefing with comments about how cranky everyone was. Time for a nap? Some people were doing just that in the audience!

I did a little shopping one afternoon and came back to the conference with bags in tow. I felt like the belle of the ball – everyone from Ministers on down asked me where I had gone shopping and if it was close by. Some even asked for a show-and-tell. Apparently Americans aren't the only ones who feel they can't return home empty-handed. What’s more, people at the conference yearned for a non-climate-controlled world after long hours in meetings.

And then there are the cows. Two Dutch citizens have been dressed as cows – more specifically, cows subsidized by the European Union – this week in Hong Kong. They arrive by limousine, shop at Prada, and make a show of snubbing their noses at the protesters who represent the poor countries. After all, they make significantly more per day than most of the people participating in these protests.

The Hong Kong delegation have been nothing but gracious hosts. I have been very impressed by the way the non-governmental organization (NGO) participants have been treated. This is my first time at a WTO conference, but veteran NGO delegates report that things have come a long way since both the 1999 Seattle and 2003 Cancun meetings, where they were kept out of the process as much as possible. And some of the best food I have had all week was at an NGO party hosted by the Hong Kong Government.

I didn't have much time to sightsee, but I did learn an invaluable amount about Hong Kong from its citizens. The economy is booming in Hong Kong. The government plays a role in almost everything, from assuring that there is no homelessness to making sure the Hong Kong Convention Center is booked a solid 18 months in advance. Every person I met here in Hong Kong asked me what I thought about China. It is a question all citizens should ask themselves and others about their own country more often.

Heading Home

As the meeting wind down, protesters have ratcheted their demonstrations up a notch. The street violence and vandalism that has been feared is beginning to show itself, primarily from the Korean protesters. This afternoon the Convention Center was surrounded by the throng of protesters. Accredited participants in the conference who found themselves outside the building at that time were barred from entry by police announcements of “Leave for your own safety”. Two subway stops in Central Hong Kong were closed down, and people seemed genuinely fearful. However, aside from the 50 or so protesters at the front of the rally who were combating police with bamboo sticks and the riot gear of the police when they could snatch it away, the rest of the 2000 plus marchers remained peaceful. A group of about 500 protesters has settled in within view of the Convention Center and plans to stay there until the meeting ends. Their hope is that no agreements or deals will be made at all because continued inaction could possibly shut the organization down over time.

Most people in and outside the Convention Center hope that there is no more street fighting and failure to report from this week’s meetings. What is hoped for by the majority is a simple agreement between all that the development agenda is not dead. Non-governmental organizations that have delegations in the conference are holding their own press conferences to announce that they want the process to move forward as long as developing countries have a say it its results. There may be incremental progress for the WTO in Hong Kong, such as the acceptance of the compromise text on eliminating agricultural export subsidies (submitted by WTO Director General Pascal Lamy as a last-minute bid to break the stalemate). Or there may not be. But it seems like the important thing now is to leave Hong Kong with a consensus that future agreement is possible.




Blog and photos by Erin Thomas, Managing Editor Global Envision. Erin is in Hong Kong with other global NGOs advocating for free trade policies that are fair. Please send them any comments or questions and stay tuned for the inside scoop on negotiations.

Read the other Global Envision blogs from Hong Kong:
December 12, 2005 – Why Free Trade?
December 13, 2005 – Opening Session
December 13, 2005 – Aid For Trade
December 13, 2005 – Food Fight
December 14, 2005 – Results of Day One of WTO Negotiations in Hong Kong
December 15, 2005 – The Joy of the Press Conference
December 16, 2005 – The Word of the Day is Deadlock

Return to top