A Deal Doomed From the Beginning

While some anti-globalization activists and NGOs breathe a sigh of relief with the collapse of the Doha round talks, others frantically question how the talks could have gone awry. So ambitious, the Doha Round was destined for failure, suggests Alan Beattie, world trade editor with “The Financial Times.” Priorities of large agricultural exporters like the US, Australia and initially Brazil conflicted with those of developing nations such as India and more protectionist nations like France. In 2004, the US offered to cut farming subsidies in exchange for lowering tariffs. However, a group of developing nations known as the G-20 and the EU had another agenda, expecting the US to make greater promises to reduce subsidies and ensure access to global markets for farmers from developing nations. In the end, a lack of interest among exporters could not overcome protectionist sentiments, and the talks collapsed. For the world to strike a trade deal that is fair and opportune for all nations, the World Trade Organization needs to reevaluate its collective priorities and establish common goals among nations. – YaleGlobal