TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Discourse: RI voices development concerns in Doha talks
Iman Pambagyo - courtesy of Iman PambagyoThe historic trade reform deal of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Bali in December 2013 restored confidence on multilateral trade systems and acted as a stepping stone to continue talks on the Doha Development Agenda, which had stalled for more than a decade
Change Size
Iman Pambagyo - courtesy of Iman Pambagyo
The historic trade reform deal of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Bali in December 2013 restored confidence on multilateral trade systems and acted as a stepping stone to continue talks on the Doha Development Agenda, which had stalled for more than a decade.
The Jakarta Post's Linda Yulisman discussed the progress of the implementation of the Bali Package, which covers trade facilitation, agricultural issues and provisions for least developed countries (LDCs), as well as ongoing developments in the world trade governing body, to prepare for the next ministerial meeting scheduled for later this year in Nairobi, Kenya, with Indonesian Ambassador to the WTO Iman Pambagyo. Here are excerpts of the interview.
Question: How is the progress of implementation of the trade facilitation deal and where does Indonesia stand now?
Answer: WTO members agreed in November last year on a protocol to implement the Trade Facilitation Agreement and now most of them are preparing their domestic rules for its adoption. A few countries like the US, Hong Kong and Singapore have already ratified and put it into effect. Indonesia still has to ratify it in a government regulation as stipulated in our new Trade Law [passed in 2014].
On agricultural issues, how far have the talks gone to formulate a permanent solution for domestic support as agreed in Bali?
We're still working on it in parallel with discussing the post-Bali work programs.
Our target is to make a permanent solution for the domestic support issue one of the deliverables at the Nairobi conference. We don't want the current measure ' the so-called 'peace clause' [the exemption for any developing economy that breaks the WTO's 10 percent subsidy limit from being challenged by other members] ' to apply forever because we want the public food stock provision by governments to benefit other developing countries outside those that had already launched subsidy programs for their farmers before the Bali meeting.
We have met for dedicated sessions to discuss the permanent solution and we heard some more specific objections from developed nations, and Indonesia as the leader of the G33 Group [an alliance of developing countries with large populations of smallholder farmers] will further bring those issues to the members and think of what we must do next: revise or add parameters to address their concerns, etc.
What will be on the table for post-Bali work programs?
There are quite a lot of issues, such as agriculture, non-agriculture market access and services. But, it is important to note that these issues are part of the Doha Development Agenda and contain interests of developing countries that we aim to defend.
Talks about developing countries and development agendas can't be separated from agriculture. That's why the level of ambition in post-Bali work programs is determined by the level of ambition in agricultural issues ' domestic support, export competition and market access.
The G33 Group's interests are concerned with market access which, apart from tariff reductions, also affects special products to be excluded from tariff reduction or elimination and a special safeguard mechanism that allows us to quickly and easily impose additional duties to offset an influx of imports.
What message has Indonesia been trying to voice and how does it play a role to help move all these negotiations?
What we have been trying to voice is that development interests must be accommodated in whole issues, including non-agricultural market access, services and agriculture because once again, this is a development agenda.
For developed nations, the level of ambition is measured by the achievement of commercially meaningful outcomes. But, for developing countries like Indonesia, the credibility of these entire discussions [on post-Bali programs] is determined by how much the development issues can be accommodated.
We don't want to rush for a conclusion of the Doha Development Agenda in Nairobi as some countries have expected. It's because we always only want to complete the agenda when it's credible. It's the sole chance for developing countries to have their development needs accommodated.
The agenda also addresses difficulties faced by developing nations in their specific situations and, at the same time, fixes imbalances in existing agreements that, for instance, have allowed developed countries to provide continuous agriculture subsidies for their farmers and adjust them to a level that reflects the current situation.
Once the Doha Development Agenda is finished, or otherwise remains stagnant, members will move forward with other issues, such as environment, the extension of information technology agreements and e-commerce, in the multilateral discussions, and these are not specific issues for developing countries.
So that's why we really have a strong interest in finishing the Doha round in a credible way.
We're trying to voice the interests of our [country] and other developing countries in various formats, including informal breakfast meetings of 15 developing and developed countries such as China, India, Brazil, the US, European Union and Japan and informal consultations with the Committee on Agriculture.
As we chair the G33 Group, we certainly focus on endorsing proposals on public food holding, special products and special safeguard mechanisms.
On the domestic subsidy issue, we've always maintained our position that we are not a strong demander, but we have a great interest in seeing that trade-distorting support is reduced and disciplined both for developing and developed nations, which will also apply for us.
