The "Bali package" approved by the WTO on 7 December:
More profits for big corporations and powerful countries.
GUE/NGL was active during the whole week of the 9th WTO Ministerial meeting in Bali with
one MEP (Helmut Scholz) as member of the official delegation of the European Parliament, and 2
MEPs (Søren Bo Søndergaard and Alda Sousa) taking part in the alternative program #End WTO
organized by social movements (Social Movements for an alternative Asia, Gerak Lawan, Via
Campesina, SPI, etc...), and networks (Focus on the Global South, Attac...)
WTO Bali Package : More of the same.
What the Ministerial of Bali has shown once again, is how WTO with its principles (national
treatment, nondiscrimination between strong and weak, most favored nation) and with its existing
agreements, is tailored for the interests of corporate and foreign investors, and how damaging it is
for poor, for job creation, and for the environment.
Instead of rebalancing the multilateral trade system, the approved Bali constitutes more or less
10% of the total of the DDA (so called Doha Development Agenda). The Bali package contains a
chapter on trade facilitation, interesting mainly corporations and developed countries, and two
other items, mostly empty boxes, with items interesting mainly developing countries, among
them LDCs.
The conference did not address at all questions such as the responsibility of the international trade
system in the problem of climate change.
The 3 parts of the Bali deal
The first agreement, on Trade facilitation presented as the low hanging fruit" is a binding
instrument that corporations and developed countries are pushing for from 1997 because it is
easing and speeding the transit of goods through borders. As developing countries have mainly
complied with those norms, this instrument will mainly increase the exportation of goods to
developing countries. The agreements contents 3 categories. Category A contains provisions and
measures that members are already implementing and therefore should be implemented upon
entry into force of the agreement. Category B contains commitments for provisions to be
obligatorily implemented after a transitional period; and category C mostly for LDCs, contains
provisions to be implemented after a transitional period and upon the acquisition of
implementation capacity, with the support and assistance of developed countries.
The second agreement approved regards Agriculture, with some concessions on food security,
especially for India that will be authorized to continue with it food security program without a
limit of time. But the right question is whether such programs on food security should be an issue
of trade negotiation, considering that food security is a fundamental right, and an obligation for
all Governments. Another aspect of the Agriculture package is chapter is the so call export
competition, in reality it is related to the same long standing commitment of developed countries
to eliminate export subsidies, but once again there is no binding agreement on this issue. The
Agriculture chapter contains also a deal on tariff rate quota administration, or how imports within
quotas for importation in developed countries -generally not fully used-, will be shared among
exporters.
The third agreement is related to LDCs and development. It contains a non-binding
commitment of developed countries to grant duty-free quotas to all LDC's countries, -a decision
already taken in Hong-Kong (2005) and that the EU is applying independently of the WTO
negotiations; It contains a deal on the simplification of the rules of origin that remains in empty
declarations; a chapter on cotton, that only contains the obligation to meet twice a year to analyze
the situation; and the operationalization of the LDCs service waiver that has also been approved
in the development agenda ahead of the conclusion of the Doha package, but has never been
applied by developed countries so far.
Development of the negotiations:
Most of those points were agreed in advance in Geneva. But during the last week preceding the
ministerial conference, India declared that in the chapter on agriculture, it was requesting to
review the minimum subsidy limit of 10% of the total value f food production as per the external
reference price (ERP) prevailing during 1986-88. With this request, India was asking for a
permanent authorization for its national program aiming to sustain the price of agricultural
products, (stockholding and reselling at low price to people needing food). Even if those
countries are subsidizing their agriculture at much higher level, the US and Canada declared that
they were opposing this request of India.
During the week a maximum pressure was exerted on India to abandon this request but the
authorities under pressure of the peasant grass root organization maintained this request. But at
the same time, it was clear that the request of India was legitimate considering on one hand the
number of the small peasants requesting support and stabilization of the prices, and the number of
people suffering hunger. And on the other hand the Indian program is valued in 20 billions of
USD/year, while the developed countries are subsidizing their agriculture to an extent of more
than 300 billion of USD/year.
The very last day an agreement was found basically ensuring India to continue with its program,
but impeding other developing or emerging countries to do the same. This concession to India is
surely a consequence of the raising role of emerging economies in the multilateral trade system.
In the night of the last day, Cuba asked the floor to insist on the inclusion in the text of the trade
facilitation, of a sentence related to the embargo that the US are applying on this country for 6
decades. The Indonesian Minister chairing the conference refused to give the floor to the
representative of Cuba. As a consequence, Cuba supported by the ALBA countries blocked the
final agreement on the final text. It is only one day after, on Saturday 7 December, that the whole
package was finally approved, including a sentence related to the embargo against Cuba in the
agreement on trade facilitation.
The threats and blackmail of plurilateral and bilateral agreements
The Bali package was settled , after 18 years of intents and failure (in Seattle (1999), Cancun
(2003), Hong Kong (2005), Geneva (2009, 2011),...) The conference took place under the threats
and on a certain extent the blackmail of the plurilateral agreements and the bilateral agreements.
US and EU are repeating constantly that if the WTO is not delivering they would continue to
regulate international trade through plurilateral agreements, such as ACTA (on counterfeiting) or
TISA (on the liberalization of services) or through bilateral agreement, such as the TTIP
(Transatlantic Market place) and the TPP (Transpacific Market place). The reality is that they are
doing both pushing for agreements under the WTO rules and principle, that are favoring very
much the multinational corporation, and though plurilateral and bilateral agreements that are
extensions of the WTO principles and already agreed deals.
The new deal settled in Bali, after 18 years will certainly give new forces to the WTO that many
were considering condemned to dead, but it will not refrain the wave of plurilateral and bilateral
free trade agreements that are simply the extension of its principles and accumulation of deals.
GUE/NGL took part in the Alternative activities
Even despite the difficulties, (distance, costs, ...) an Action Week #EndWTO was organized by a
number of organization, mainly Via Campesina, the Global TNC campaign, Social movement for
an Alternative Asia, the Indonesian peasant's organization SPI, trade unionists and political
representatives of several countries of the region, and important networks focusing on fair trade,
public services, food security, and the impunity of transnationals.
The GUE/NGL delegation took part in those alternative activities and organized a workshop on
the impunity of TNC's and the proposal of a new UN Treaty to tackle it, with invitees from
Brazil, Canada, South Africa, The Philippines, Colombia and Indonesia. More people from other
countries such as Malaysia, Thailand, India, intervened in the debate.
The GUE/NGL delegation also was present at the arrival of the caravan #EndWTO, took part in
the March against WTO in the city of Denpasar on 3 December, and organized several important
bilateral meetings with social movements and MP's of the Asian region.
This positioning of GUE/NGL with the social movements, left political forces, NGOs and
networks is in line with the position assumed in the European Parliament in November, when
GUE/NGL did not take part in the resolution of the neoliberal majority of the European
Parliament but instead presented its own resolution. The presence in Bali is allowing GUE/NGL,
-unique European political force taking part in the alternative agenda-, to strengthen its ties and
cooperation with the alternative forces in Bali, and to better focus its future work on international
trade issues.