The Chairman of the Arab Knowledge and Management Society (AKMS), Mr. Talal Abu-Ghazaleh, considers the control of advanced nations over the World Trade Organization (WTO) to be much more significant than their control over the UN.
He pointed out that the WTO is a necessary evil so to speak, and that “I do not advise Arab countries to remain outside the framework of this organization. Rather it is better to see injustice than to have this injustice exercised upon us.”
He stated that since the Doha Round, there was no achievement that the WTO could claim. He further added that the pharmaceuticals declaration announced at the time could not be implemented due to the objection of the USA, and that he doesn’t expect it to be executed or even raised at the Cancun conference.
Abu-Ghazaleh stressed that the idea of creating a free global market is for deceptive purposes only in order to prevent the creation of a common Arab market.
Alhawadith met with Abu-Ghazaleh during the coordinative meeting held for Arab ministers convened at the ESCWA headquarters in Beirut in preparation for the Cancun conference, and discussed various WTO issues with him. Here is the interview.
A meeting was convened in Beirut for Arab ministers, in preparation for the Cancun conference relating to WTO negotiations. Why is this conference being held, especially since there are numerous topics that were raised previously that Arab states couldn’t fulfill or prepare for?
Abu-Ghazaleh: Since the Doha Round –which was considered an accomplishment for the WTO- what achievements can the organization claim? At the time, the pharmaceuticals statement was announced which the WTO considered a victory in light of the concessions obtained by the developing countries, and this was declared at the Doha conference.
What were the specifics of the pharmaceuticals declaration which the WTO considered a victory?
Abu-Ghazaleh: It stated that in the case of environmental health crises countries can –on an exceptional basis- ignore the law of intellectual property (IP) protection. This means that if any country faced a health disaster, we cannot allow this country to die to preserve IP rights; rather, this nation can manufacture the necessary medication or buy it, as long as it abides by the protective requirements. When the negotiations occurred for the implementation of this declaration however, it was rejected.
During the negotiating meeting convened for the organization in Geneva, the USA alone voted against this decision. Since the WTO system states that decisions can only be taken unanimously (and this is one of its shortcomings), then this means that the decision remains suspended until everyone approves it. In the WTO law, this means “protecting the significant minority from the tyranny of the majority”.
So this decision hasn’t been executed till now, and I don’t expect it to be executed or brought up at the Cancun conference.
This topic may be discussed again if it is raised in a new formula such that the American pharmaceutical industry isn’t damaged, with the confirmation that nobody wants to see harm come to the American pharmaceutical industry because it is useful to us. This is because if it wasn’t for this industry and what it invests in R&D, we would have been prevented from many medications.
Talk now however is about finding a balance between investment, R&D and innovation, in order to find medications useful for mankind and solutions for the humanitarian crises in countries that suffer from them. So we are effectively waiting for a new declaration that is a concession from the old one that was considered a victory.
The Doha Round was called a “development round”. What was achieved there in terms of development?
Abu-Ghazaleh: All indicators relating to developing countries were negative in the aspect of global trade. So the supposedly shining round that was called the development round really didn’t have the desired result. This is also a situation that needs to be confronted –albeit with difficulty- in Cancun.
What about the services round?
Abu-Ghazaleh: the focus at the Doha Round was also on services. Timetables were put in place to achieve this, and the services negotiations were supposed to be complete by June 2003.
Services are the most important sector in the global economy. In the USA, approximately 80% of the GNP is from services. In developing countries it can reach half this figure, and in Lebanon it is over 60%.
We entered into the round of negotiations in relation to commodities. The negotiations round called on countries to submit their schedules and present their suggested commitments. I’d like to point out that the commodities negotiations are over, with the exception of those related to oil, which wasn’t discussed and isn’t scheduled to be for the future. When the current schedules and timetables were presented, they were shown to really be just a repetition of what was submitted in the past.