Thus, in the 2021 edition of our flagship report Foresight Africa, the Brookings Africa Growth Initiative has chosen to highlight the transformative leadership of women—in management roles, on the front lines of the pandemic, and in everyday life—by opening each chapter with a salient quote from an eminent woman.

Now, to celebrate International Women’s Day this year, the Brookings Africa Growth Initiative asked leading women to reflect on the challenges facing young women and to share their thoughts on how we can more effectively encourage and empower young women and girls to become leaders themselves. Each woman was approached for this purpose because they took action against all odds, rising to great heights in their communities, on the continent, and on the global stage. Below are the responses from these inspiring women.

bodog online casino Former Leader of Opposition, Parliament of Uganda

Even though women are vaulting to leadership spaces, our communities remain obstinately resistant to women in leadership roles. They (the patriarchy) too often perceive women as too delicate to lead. This trend, among many other deeply-seated and unconscious gender biases, force potential women leaders to withdraw into their shells. Yet, women possess inherently strong attributes that can help lead more effectively.

As women leaders, we should and can operate under the existing patriarchal system by sharing our accomplishments and ambitions, so as to change and shape our communities’ perceptions about women’s ability to lead, and create a source of inspiration for women to rise above the gender bias and fear.

Hafsat Abiola
President, Women in Africa Initiative

Africa’s girls and women stand to gain most from shaping their continent into a place that releases its enormous potential. It is to them that I look for leadership. So many are living on the margins of society, in the black and gray economies, in community associations, in peer lending groups. They are not integrated into the economy or the institutions of governance. It is high time they were. Indeed, we will go on talking about Africa’s potential until this army-in-waiting of changemakers take charge. They can and must connect their businesses to the economy and anchor the state to their vibrant communities. They can give birth to an Africa that becomes the finest expression of how to develop a continent. Africa was the cradle of civilization. Tomorrow, it can be a leader in a globalized world.

Dr. Frannie Léautier
Senior Partner and CEO, SouthBridge Investments

This year, more than any other year, we should celebrate women in leadership. The COVID-19 pandemic has fallen heavily on the shoulders of women. Many have lost sources of livelihood. Most have triple duty, caring for families, managing households, and holding down economic activities. And some have faced the brunt of the pandemic as caregivers and essential service providers. Yet others have stepped up to also solve challenges in their communities. We should engage our young women to realize that they already have superpowers they can invoke to solve problems and lead—locally, nationally, and internationally. They should trust in these superpowers, ones of observing, listening and learning; empathizing with others; experimenting and persevering when doing what’s hard; and crystallizing lessons into actions that bring systemic change. But most importantly, we should encourage them to not be afraid to dream big or to start small, as seeking solutions to the day-to-day problems facing us and our communities can lead to broader change in the world.

Arunma Oteh, OON
Former Treasurer, World Bank

Harnessing Africa’s phenomenal female leadership is critical to “building forward better” post COVID-19. Indeed, when given the opportunity, African women bring to bear important leadership qualities such as courage, compassion, character, and empathy. They are also able to succeed with managing complex situations because they are authentic, collaborative, rigorous, results-oriented, and sacrificial. These are all attributes that society needs today to rebuild after the greatest crisis of our lifetime and to end the twin challenges of poverty and inequality. I am optimistic that, if we equally leverage men and women, young and old, we can transform what has been a multi-faceted crisis into possibilities that will unleash Africa’s enormous potential.

For more on women in leadership and the unique obstacles they face, see the recent Brookings event, “Women and Leadership” with new World Trade Organization Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and former Prime Minister of Australia Julia Gillard.

See the blog, “5 ways women are driving Africa’s transformation and contributing to a global reset” by Winnie Byanyima and Caroline Kende-Robb for more on the remarkable role of women in Africa’s long-term recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic.

For strategies on how women and girls can be put at the center of the COVID-19 response, see the blog by the World Bank’s Mamta Murthi, “Putting girls at the center of the COVID-19 pandemic response in Africa.”

Furthermore, you can learn more about the pressing challenges facing women and girls under COVID-19, in Damaris Parsitau’s Foresight Africa 2021 viewpoint, “Invisible lives, missing voices: Putting women and girls at the center of post-COVID-19 recovery and reconstruction.”

Finally, each chapter of this year’s Foresight Africa report begins with a salient quote from an eminent woman, emphasizing the transformative leadership of women—in management roles, on the front lines of the pandemic, and in everyday life. You can find all of those reflections here.

To read the original report from Brookings, please click here

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_More and more appeared first on bodog.

“the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level”, and as

“Sustainable development” – “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

Sustainability of the WTO

Applying the first of these two definitions of sustainability: the WTO must not continue as it is.  It must succeed as a forum for negotiations, where agreements evolve and be relevant; it must be a place where disputes are settled; and it must be a fount of information on every subject that a national trade policy maker requires to make informed decisions.  Continued underinvestment in the institution is not acceptable.  Maintaining the status quo can only lead to further disaffection. 

The economic history of the last seven decades has validated the wisdom of the founders in their decision to create the multilateral trading system. There is only one sensible world order and it includes a global framework for rules-based trade.  However, stasis will not suffice.  It is necessary to respond now to the challenges before us – dealing with the pandemic, supporting the needed economic recovery, taking responsibility for stewardship of the planet and its peoples, and WTO institutional reform. 

Recognizing that their relations in the field of trade and economic endeavour should be conducted with a view to raising standards of living, ensuring full employment and a large and steadily growing volume of real income and effective demand, and expanding the production of and trade in goods and services, while allowing for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, seeking both to protect and preserve the environment and to enhance the means for doing so in a manner consistent with their respective needs and concerns at different levels of economic development, … .

There is no better place to start a conversation on this subject than to examine the activities of the WTO in relation to the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) which aim to transform our world by the year 2030:

• GOAL 1: No Poverty
• GOAL 2: Zero Hunger
• GOAL 3: Good Health and Well-being
• GOAL 4: Quality Education
• GOAL 5: Gender Equality
• GOAL 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
• GOAL 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
• GOAL 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
• GOAL 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
• GOAL 10: Reduced Inequalities
• GOAL 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
• GOAL 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
• GOAL 13: Climate Action
• GOAL 14: Life Below Water
• GOAL 15: Life on Land
• GOAL 16: Peace, Justice and  Strong Institutions
• GOAL 17: Partnerships for the Goals

The SDGs explicitly identify trade, alongside finance, technology and capacity building, as a means of implementation, that is, as a tool to achieve the SDGs. This perspective closely mirrors the WTO’s founding charter, where global co-operation in trade is a means to unleash growth, alleviate poverty, raise living standards and ensure full employment, while also protecting the environment.

In a 2018 publication, Mainstreaming trade to achieve the sustainable development goals, the WTO looked at how its work could support efforts to fulfill the SDGs. That report emphasized nine of the seventeen SDGs, in the sections which are summarized here:

How trade contributes to delivering key Sustainable Development Goals

SDG 1: No Poverty

WTO 2018: There is increasing evidence that well planned and strategically executed trade policy initiatives can impact positively on sustainable poverty reduction. Trade opening has also generated higher living standards through greater productivity, increased competition and more choice for consumers and better prices in the marketplace.

The UN cites two specific goals:

• By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere, currently measured as people living on less than $1.25 a day.
• By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitions.

It should be beyond doubt that by these two agreed measures, the trading system has contributed toward this goal.  Progress has been made toward lifting hundreds of millions of people out of poverty.  Trade contributes to higher living standards through productivity increases, made it possible by access to global markets and sources of supply.  Decades of empirical evidence indicate that the countries that have sustained high per capita growth rates long enough to transform people’s living standards and life prospects used the global economy to drive growth.

Broadly open global markets provided demand far larger than the home market, to be sure, but also served as a source of ideas, technology, and knowhow. While the years before the pandemic saw substantial progress on reducing poverty, the countries that lagged behind were generally those that had been unable to break into world markets for goods and services, or only managed to export unprocessed minerals.

Today, trade plays an important role in the economy of developing countries. To have an idea, trade now represents 34% of developing countries’ GDP on average – compared to 20% for advanced countries. Fueled by trade, real GDP per person in emerging economies more than doubled from 1995 to 2019 and facilitated rapid, broad-based economic expansion that has narrowed the income gap between countries and within them.

And, in addition to accelerating economic growth, trade also makes available the necessary resources to implement other development targets in the social and environmental spheres.

There are two groups of challenges to this claim.  There are growing voices against globalization as a creator of income inequality within and perhaps among countries.  There is also criticism that economic growth is potentially incompatible with environmental goals.

Neither set of criticisms is borne out by the facts.  Widely differing levels of income inequality in countries similarly exposed to globalization suggest trade is not the determining factor.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

WTO 2018: Eliminating subsidies that cause distortions in agriculture markets will lead to fairer more competitive markets helping both farmers and consumers while contributing to food security. The WTO’s 2015 decision on export competition eliminated export subsidies in agriculture, thereby delivering on Target 2.B of this goal.

A well-functioning multilateral trading system is imperative for the realization of SDG 2. In remarks at the FAO in 2017, I made the following points

It is widely acknowledged that trade openness can make a positive contribution to each of the four dimensions of food security as espoused by the FAO, namely availability, access, utilization and stability. Trade openness increases the availability of food by enabling products to flow from surplus to deficit areas, connecting the “land of the plenty to the land of the few”. It enhances access as it contributes to faster economic growth, higher incomes and higher purchasing power. Indeed, in response to the transmission of unbiased price signals, it encourages an effective allocation of resources based on comparative advantages, thus limiting inefficiencies.

Trade openness also facilitates utilisation and improved nutrition by increasing the diversity of national diets and accelerating the diffusion of sound SPS regulations around the world. Lastly, it enhances food availability and reduces price volatility, as risks associated with domestic food production are greater than pooled production of countries worldwide.

In addition, the elimination of export subsidies has levelled the playing field and provided opportunities for farmers in developing countries to compete. This has increased their incomes and enhanced their living standards.  

By making more affordable goods available at home, trade enables poor households to purchase more with their income, particularly essential foodstuffs. Better and less distorted access to foreign markets for agricultural goods that the rural poor farmers produce also opens new employment opportunities for them.

One lesson from COVID-19 is that stockpiling and on-shoring with added domestic investment are not a sufficient substitute for trade flows. 

As my colleague, DDG Xiaozhun Yi recently noted, 

The trade coverage of the regular import-facilitating measures stood at USD 731.3 billion (up from USD 544.7 billion in the previous period) while that of import restrictions came in at USD 440.9 billion (down from USD 746.9 billion). This is a positive development. This drop was likely a result of the sharp decline in overall global trade flows, the diversion of governments’ attention towards fighting the pandemic – through trade policy as well as other areas, and a general commitment to keep trade flowing.

The export restrictions on food seen in the Spring have been substantially rolled back.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

WTO 2018: One of the main objectives under SDG 3 is to ensure access to affordable medicines for all. An important amendment to the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement recently entered into force. This measure will make it easier for developing countries to have a secure legal pathway to access affordable medicines in line with Target 3.B of this goal.

The COVID-19 pandemic taught us that trade can be responsive to human health and well-being.  There was more than a doubling of trade in goods relevant to fighting the disease from 2Q 2019 to 2Q 2020. 

The next challenge will be the distribution of the vaccines. Trade is playing – and will continue to play – a key role in the manufacturing and distribution of vaccines around the world.  Leveraging supply chains for everything from pharmaceutical glass, syringes and refrigeration equipment to the vaccines themselves, where possible, would help scale up production more efficiently than trying to do everything domestically.  The trading system must help deal with any cross-border logistics challenges that exist.

WTO Agreements give Members ample space to pursue health protection objectives and promotes cooperation in the pursuit of health. In the area of food safety and animal and plant health, the SPS Agreement requires Bodog Poker that measures be based on science and Members are strongly encouraged to follow international standards. The TBT Agreement also strongly encourages that health protection regulations for drugs, PPE or medical devices be based on relevant international standards. The TBT and SPS Agreements also promote regulatory cooperation among trade partners – such as mutual recognition of certification – which can help increase global access to essential health products.

To this should be added an immediate update of the Pharmaceutical and Information Technology Agreements to cover, among other goods, all those which will facilitate the international movement of vaccines, medicines, equipment (including production equipment), PPE, and IT equipment relevant to fighting COVID-19.  Not only should duty-free treatment be provided but also trade facilitation measures to lower the costs of trade and speed delivery of essential goods.  Medical services should be covered in a companion agreement with the same objective.

SDG 5: Gender Equality

WTO 2018: Trade can create opportunities for women’s employment and economic development. Through trade, job opportunities for women have increased significantly. Jobs in export sectors also tend to have better pay and conditions. Export sectors are an important job provider for women in developing countries.

A group of WTO Members agreed to establish an Informal Working Group on Trade and Gender on 23 September 2020, marking the next phase of an initiative started in 2017 to increase the participation of women in trade. The online meeting to launch the new WTO working group was held at the invitation of Iceland and Botswana.

Women’s empowerment through trade is an important part of the WTO’s current narrative.  There will undoubtedly be a further effort to make this more concrete for MC12, the 2021 WTO Ministerial Conference.  Given that internet access is a boon for micro, small and medium enterprises, in which tend to be disproportionately represented as workers and entrepreneurs, the flexibilities offered by e-commerce should continue to be a great equalizer in these areas, where individual initiative and ingenuity is the first key to market entry.  The e-commerce talks as well as those aimed at making the trading system more responsive to the needs of micro, small and medium enterprises should prove beneficial to the empowerment of women through trade. 

Moreover, the choice of the first woman Director- General of the WTO provides a role model for women advancing in the field of trade policy. 

SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

WTO 2018: Trade-led inclusive economic growth enhances a country’s income-generating capacity, which is one of the essential prerequisites for achieving sustainable development. The WTO’s Aid for Trade initiative can make a big difference in supplementing domestic efforts in building trade capacity, and SDG 8 contains a specific target for countries to increase support under this initiative.

Trade is very important in the attainment of SDG 8 as it is generally described in the Agenda 2030 as an engine for inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction.

Opening up to trade affects growth positively through a number of channels. Trade improves resource allocation. It allows each country to specialize in the production of the good or service it can produce relatively cheaper and import the other goods and services, thus exploiting comparative advantages. By extending the size of the market in which the firm operates beyond national border, trade allows firms to exploit economies of scale and become more productive.  Trade also affects long-term growth since it gives access to more advanced technological inputs available in the global market and because it enhances the incentives to innovate.

The rise of populism in the industrialized countries indicates that providing opportunities for decent work and experiencing the fruits of economic growth are not solely a concern for developing countries.   David Riccardo’s voice now has increasing competition among economists who focus on a rising tide not necessarily lifting all boats.  

Technological progress and trade have been key engines of global prosperity. Resistance to innovation and retreat from global integration are not options that will help eliminate extreme poverty. At the same time, policymakers need to ensure that benefits are spread more widely. A reallocation of resources is often necessary to reap the substantial benefits from trade.  Governments need to be better prepared for disruptions, including those caused by the pandemic, and enable their peoples to take advantage of new opportunities.

Like other structural change – notably change triggered by technological progress – trade can create adjustment pressures for certain segments in society, both in developing and developed countries. It is therefore important to have in place appropriate complementary domestic policies to ensure that the gains from trade are more evenly shared and the trade-related adjustment costs affecting certain regions and individuals are mitigated. This can contribute to make the gains from trade truly inclusive and sustainable.  

The global rules for trade must be seen to deliver fairness.  The WTO needs to be widely known for providing a level playing field for trade.  Factory workers, farmers, designers of apps, must all feel that they can rely on the rules of the trading system to provide opportunities to serve markets abroad as well as being able to source what they need from suppliers whether at home or abroad.  Trade must be able to flow on the basis of competitive merit.  The core underlying principle of the WTO, although unstated, is that market forces are to determine competitive outcomes. 

In sports, another area of international competition with roots in antiquity, the Olympics have long strived to provide equality of opportunity to the extent possible.  To counter crimped nationalistic views but allow scope for pride and dignity that comes from excelling on a world platform, the trading rules have to be improved.  The system needs to be widely seen as rewarding those who excel in the marketplace on equal terms to the extent that this can be achieved.  The WTO must combine the heritage from Ancient Greece of the agora, the marketplace, with that of the Olympic stadium. 

SDG 8 contains a lot more to unpack. For example, it includes as a target “endeavour to decouple economic growth from environmental degradation”, as well as youth unemployment.  WTO Members are addressing the former (see environmental sections of these remarks) but not directly as far as I know, the latter.  

One of the targets of SDG 8 is to “encourage the formalization and growth of micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to financial services”.  There is a current WTO Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) launched at 11th Ministerial Conference at Buenos Aires in December 2017 aimed at assuring improved participation of MSMEs in the multilateral trading system.  Work has progressed very substantially over the last three years and is seen as particularly relevant to the contribution that the WTO can make to economic recovery from the current pandemic.

Trade finance is also a focus of the WTO, particularly for Micro, Small and Medium Sized Enterprises.  The WTO, the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and B20 Saudi Arabia issued a joint statement on 9 July pointing to the diminishing availability of trade finance. Warning that gaps between trade finance supply and demand could seriously impede the ability of trade to support post COVID-19 economic recovery, they are urging private and public-sector actors to work together to address shortages.

Another of the targets of SDG 8 reads:

• take immediate and effective measures to eradicate forced labour, end modern slavery and human trafficking and secure the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labour, including recruitment and use of child soldiers, and by 2025 end child labour in all its forms

Forced labor is not a topic on the current WTO agenda, but it has been discussed.  Although the  WTO has not taken a multilateral decision to address this issue, this does not prevent individual governments from adopting and taking measures that they deem necessary. GATT Article XX General Exceptions permits measures dealing with products relating to prison labour and measures necessary to protect human life. On core labor standards, WTO Members have sought coherence and recognized the role of the ILO in its Singapore Ministerial Declaration.  The WTO General Council in 2003 agreed on a waiver that gives legal certainty to domestic measures taken under the Kimberley Process aimed at curbing trade in conflict diamonds, the mining of which often involves forced labor.

SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

WTO 2018: Trade produces dynamic gains in the economy by increasing competition and the transfer of technology, knowledge and innovation. Open markets have been identified as a key determinant of trade and investment between developing and developed countries allowing for the transfer of technologies which result in industrialization and development, helping to achieve SDG 9.

The WTO deserves good grades on fulfilling this SDG even were the benefits of the system were limited to the movement of goods across borders.  The products covered by the information technology agreement foster the global availability the tools that connect budding inventors, innovative individuals, making possible the world wide web.  The WTO provides more than that, however, as noted in the WTO’s “World Trade Report 2020 government policies to promote innovation in the digital age”

Open and transparent trade policies contribute to innovation through improved access to foreign markets and increased competition, which provide firms with incentives to invest more in R&D. This is true for both developed and developing economies: a study of 27 emerging economies shows that both competition from foreign firms and linkages with foreign firms, through importing, exporting or supplying multinationals, increase product innovation, the adoption of new technologies and quality upgrading….

The basic set of GATT and WTO agreements provide a framework that foster “the development of an ICT-enabled economy in countries across all levels of development”.  The framework provides for non-discrimination, transparency, reciprocity and the prohibition of unnecessarily trade restrictive measures.  This framework includes the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Agreement, the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA), the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

Innovation will be key to advancing sustainability.  Just as we needed to innovate our way out of the COVID-19 crisis – with adaptable supply chains, digitalized economies, and turbocharged vaccine development – we will also need to innovate our way out of the current environmental crisis.  A striking example of this –is the way renewable energy, especially solar power, is fast becoming cheaper and more cost effective than fossil fuels. This could be the gamechanger in climate battle. And it is at least partly thanks to trade/globalization’s role in spreading renewable technologies, fuelling innovation and driving down production costs. It turns out that the very things many people thought needed ‘fixing’ or ‘resetting’ at the beginning of the pandemic – globalization, free markets, supply chains, corporate innovation – are actually what got us through the crisis, delivered a vaccine, and could provide us with the tools to fight climate change or plastics pollution.

The links between development, technology and trade have been widely recognized. For most developing economies, accessing and deploying new technologies is the primary source of economic growth. Imported capital goods and technical intermediate inputs can directly improve productivity by being placed into production processes. There is significant evidence that global value chains are a powerful channel of technology dissemination. 

Supply chain linkages intensify contacts between foreign firms and domestic suppliers and therefore open up channels for flows of knowledge and know-how. When a foreign firm and a local supplier are part of the same production chain, they need to interact and coordinate to guarantee a smooth functioning of the chain. Face-to-face communication with key foreign personnel will facilitate the transfer of non-codified knowledge and increase domestic innovative capacity. Also, foreign outsourcing firms are more willing to transfer the know-how and technology required for an efficient production of the outsourced input, because they will eventually be the consumer of that input. Offshoring of tradable services has also been key in the development of these industries in the developing world. 

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

WTO 2018: At the global level, changes in development patterns have been transforming prospects of the world’s poorest people, decreasing inequality between countries. WTO rules try to reduce the impact of existing inequalities through the principle of Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries. This allows the use of flexibilities by developing and least-developed countries to take into account their capacity constraints.

A rising tide lifts most if not all boats, but some boats ride higher in the water than others.  Within industrialized countries, there are wide variations of participation in income and sharing of the benefits of trade.  This is mainly due to domestic policies, not international trade agreements.  But trade agreements can be made more responsive to this set of problems.   Political support for open international trade depends substantially on finding answers to questions of income inequality.  One obvious area of response is the availability of trade remedies under the WTO agreements.  These were conceptually important to the structure of the GATT and the WTO.  Trade remedies were designed to offset unfair and injurious practices and to smooth adjustment to international competition.  That basic concept was lost sight of during the last several decades, and costs are now being incurred.  When trade remedies become unavailable and job losses occur, domestic support for the “rules-based” trading system is undermined. (See also the discussion of level playing field issues under SDG 8). 

Productivity gains from new technologies are reducing the demand for labor in more traditional sectors, such as agriculture or manufacturing. This so-called “fourth industrial revolution” is not going to make all jobs disappear, but it is bringing about enormous changes. While these processes have brought progress overall, it is important to recognize that not everybody has been able to benefit and participate.

This is a challenge facing governments and societies everywhere – in both developed and developing economies. Sustainable and balanced economic progress will hinge on the ability of economies to adjust to changes and promote greater inclusiveness. There is not a ‘one size fits all’ recipe, approaches need to be tailored to a country’s specific situation and mainstreamed into development policy objectives to ensure that trade is inclusive, that it benefits the largest possible sections of the population and that those who may be losing out are provided assistance to adjust.

A challenge that the WTO faces is how to balance the rights and obligations across its diverse membership. In the past this has mostly been done by the adoption of special and differential treatment provisions in the WTO Agreements that in many cases give developing countries flexibilities in undertaking commitments. Views have varied among Members over the potential benefits of these provisions.  Many believe that special and differential treatment, particularly for the least developed, needs additional elements to be effective.  Being freer of obligations for those with limited capacity to participate beneficially in world trade does not convey an advantage.  Moreover, if there are no new agreements, there is only a stock of S&DT that may not deliver much more that is of use.  The entire approach to development needs fresh thinking. 

SDG 14: Life Below Water

WTO 2018: The WTO plays an important role in supporting global, regional and local efforts to tackle environmental degradation of our oceans under SDG 14. The Decision on Fisheries Subsidies taken by WTO members in December 2017 is a step forward in multilateral efforts to comply with SDG Target 14.6, committing members to prohibit subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, with special and differential treatment for developing and least-developed countries. Members committed to fulfilling this commitment by the 12th Ministerial Conference.

There is currently active engagement of WTO Members bodog sportsbook review in negotiations to reach this goal.  While the trade aspect of the negotiations is certainly an important element, it is worth highlighting that the principal objective in the negotiating mandate is an environmental one. This is a first for the WTO.  A successful conclusion of these negotiations will demonstrate the importance and flexibility of the multilateral trading system in pursuing global aims that go beyond the purely economic.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

WTO 2018: SDG 17 recognizes trade as a means of implementation for the 2030 Agenda. The targets under this goal call for: countries to promote a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system; the increase of developing countries’ exports and doubling the share of exports of least-developed countries (LDCs); and the implementation of duty-free and quota-free market access for LDCs with transparent and simple rules of origin for exported goods. The WTO is the key channel for delivering these goals.

The UN states the following with respect to trade and SDG 17:

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development defines international trade as “an engine for inclusive economic growth and poverty reduction, [that] contributes to the promotion of sustainable development”. The adoption of Agenda 2030 commits UN member states to continue to promote “meaningful” trade liberalization over the next 15 years to help maximize the contribution of trade to the success of the sustainable development agenda. In this context, international trade is expected to play its role as a means of implementation for the achievement of the SDGs.

As major institutional stakeholders on trade and the SDGs issues, UNCTAD, WTO, and International Trade Center monitor trends, analyze policy and build analytical capacity for making international trade an engine for sustainable development.

The WTO works closely with FAO with respect to achieving SDG 2.  With respect to accessions, the WTO works closely with the World Bank, the IMF and regional development banks and UN agencies.  With respect to the environment, the WTO works with UNEP.  These are a small fraction of the collaborative efforts that support the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals. 

In order to further support efforts at the national level to achieve the SDGs and to ensure that the benefits of trade are spread more widely, the WTO together with our partners in the Geneva Trade hub, UNCTAD and ITC, also recently launched the SDG Trade Monitor, at SDGTRADE.ORG. This website is an online repository of trade-specific development indicators including MFN and preferential tariff rates, amongst others. This database will allow policymakers, trade professionals and researchers to explore the relationship between trade and sustainable development, and to support data driven trade policies.

By implementing responsive, data-driven polices trade can serve as a driver of development, there are impressive figures to confirm that this is the case. For instance, developing countries’ share of global trade has jumped from 25% in 1995 to 43% in 2017. This has happened not just because of growth in the large emerging markets of China, India and Brazil but also because of increased participation by small, former LDCs such as Samoa, Cabo Verde and the Maldives. All of these countries have graduated from LDC to developing country status and Vanuatu is expected to do so very soon. These countries mainstreamed their trade policies to tackle capacity constraints, using trade and attracting FDI, to advance their economic growth and development which, in turn, helped them to achieve the required social benchmarks they needed to graduate from the ranks of the world’s “least developed countries”.

Recent WTO negotiating outcomes also prove that the system does deliver for development. Successes include the Trade Facilitation Agreement, the expansion of the Information Technology Agreement, the amendment of the TRIPS Agreement easing access to medicines and the agreement to abolish agricultural export subsidies.

The different approaches represented in each of these agreements show that the system can rise to the level of being adaptable and dynamic in its response to emerging challenges. Members must now show sufficient flexibility in their negotiations on fisheries subsidies, WTO reform, and e-commerce, if these subjects with important implications for SDG attainment are to move to a successful conclusion.

This adaptability will also be crucial to an effective response to COVID-19, which is likely to have a severe negative impact on the achievement of the 2030 SDG Agenda.

The Environmental Dimension

The WTO is at the dawn of a new era of addressing deepened and broadened environmental concerns of its Members.  The remaining 8 SDGs, those not highlighted in the 2018 WTO publication cited throughout the preceding sections of this narrative are front and center in the emerging WTO focus.  

Trade policies, pursued through WTO agreements, have a huge potential to support environmental sustainability. For example, reviving and quickly concluding an Environmental Goods and Services Agreement (EGSA) would serve SDG goals 6 and 7, Clean Water and Sanitation, and Affordable and Clean Energy; SDG Goal 11 Sustainable Cities and Communities; Goal 12 Responsible Consumption and Production and Goal 13 Climate Action.

A study by the World Bank found that eliminating import barriers in the top 18 developing countries ranked by emissions of greenhouse gases would increase imports by 63% for energy-efficient lighting, 23% for wind power generation, 14% for solar power generation and close to 5% for clean coal technology. At the same time, more open trade in environmental goods and services can help domestic companies to tap into a rapidly growing global market estimated at US$ 2 trillion per year by 2020.

An EGSA and expansion of the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), together with an increase in the coverage of GATS, would address  in several respects these goals, making more available the goods, for example, to enable cleaner transportation and cleaner air and water, and better handling of waste.  Using trade to assist in creating the circular economy; dealing with plastic waste, all would make cities more livable.  Climate would be addressed directly as Members consider initiatives for curb fossil fuel subsidies. 

Just last month, during WTO Trade and Environment Week, several Members took an important step forward for expanding the contribution of trade to the SDGs by launching two initiatives. The first consists of “structured discussions” on trade and environmental sustainability launched by 50 WTO Members.  The second is the informal dialogue on plastic pollution and sustainable plastics trade launched by 8 WTO Members.  

The structured discussions seek to identify areas of common interest and work towards concrete deliverables on trade and sustainability. The group plans to have its first meeting in early 2021. The initiative seeks to build on past efforts by WTO Members to address issues such as circular economy, natural disasters, climate change, fossil fuel subsidies reform, the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity and the Blue economy, among other issues that are at the core of the SDGs 7 on clean energy, 12 on sustainable production and consumption, 13 on climate change and 15 on life on land.

Trade and Environment Week also saw the inaugural meeting of the WTO informal dialogue on plastics pollution and sustainable plastics trade. The dialogue seeks to identify areas where the WTO can complement global efforts to fight plastic pollution, for example by improving transparency and coherence of plastic-related trade measures, promoting best practices and tracking trade in plastics, exploring areas for collective action and cooperating with other international processes. These efforts could make a tangible contribution to achieve not only SDG12 on sustainable production and consumption, but also SDG 14 on ocean health, SDG 15 on life on land, SDG 11 on sustainable cities and SDG 8 on decent work, among other SDGs.

One area of great potential for constructive bilateral and multilateral discussions is trade and climate change. The WTO, and in particular its Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) has a standing mandate to discuss trade and environmental measures with potential significant trade effects and to arrive at coherent, most fit-for-purpose solutions.  Several countries have recently started to look at the adoption of border carbon adjustment measures (BCAs) to support their ambitious climate mitigation plans.  The European Union expects to have a concrete proposal by next June and a measure in place by January 2023, at the latest, Canada, in its recently announced 2020 Fall Economic Statement, and Mexico, in its nationally determined contribution, has also shown interest in such measures. It is my understanding that the next Administration in the United States also envisages a BCA as part of its climate ambition.

It would be an understatement to say that these discussions will not be easy and the potential for trade conflict and retaliation is ever present. To avoid a counterproductive clash over climate-related trade measures, we need to have serious and constructive discussions at the WTO on how to ensure that trade-related measures adopted – and trade more broadly – contribute effectively to transatlantic ambitions on climate change but are also fair and well calibrated in terms of their trade impact. It is worth noting that discussions on the EU plan to adopt a BCA have already started at the WTO, including inquiries in the form of specific trade concerns in three different Committees.  The new US Administration could ensure that discussions move forward in a proactive and constructive way, adding the US unique perspective and expertise to the table.

In the same vein, other trade and climate topics, such as fossil fuel subsidy reform or facilitating trade in low carbon technologies also seem to offer constructive avenues for transatlantic cooperation. If the recent trend of ambitious carbon neutrality pledges continues, the multilateral trading system will certainly have to play its role in addressing the intersection between climate action and the cross-border flow of goods and services. Transatlantic co-operation on these topics could become an important driver of concrete action on these important issues, all of which have big implications for achieving SDG 13

Goal 4 Quality Education

This goal is addressed in a myriad of ways by the WTO.  ITA makes more available computers, smart phones and tablets.  E-commerce talks and the moratorium on imposing customs duties on electronic transmission facilitate international transfer of the tools to educate.  The Enhanced Integrated Framework (EIF) helps to increase capacity of the least developed through the spread of technology and information.  The Cotton Consultative Forum for Development is currently working on identifying projects to assist cotton farmers in least developed countries to gain the knowledge as well as the means necessary to increase the value that they can get from cotton by-products.  The WTO is active in providing technical assistance to acceding countries, and more generally to developing and least-developed countries with respect to the full range of WTO agreements. 

Trade in education services can help to increase the supply of education and investment in the sector, particularly in higher education, thereby, contributing to enhancing access and quality in education. In this context, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), which aims at progressively liberalizing trade in services, including trade in education services, is a means of promoting economic growth and development. Leading universities can more easily establish campuses in countries making commitments to openness in this sector.   The GATS provides enough flexibility to craft commitments reflecting countries’ needs and priorities in a way that allows them to reap the benefits of opening trade in education with the aim of achieving the SDGs.

Goal 15, Life on Land

Promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems.  Being able to have efficient use of land depends very much on trade.  Standards must be known, transparency is needed, they must not be protectionist, developing countries must be helped to meet international standards.  The WTO and other partner international organizations have set up the Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF).  The STDF promotes improved food safety and animal and plant health capacity in developing countries by convening and connecting diverse stakeholders from across its projects, and by piloting and learning from innovative, collaborative and cross-cutting approaches.  Technical assistance can help lessen the use of pesticides and herbicides, including through the fund-raising efforts of the Director-General’s Consultative Framework for Cotton Development Assistance.  Curbing subsidies yields more environmentally friendly use of land for crops.

Goal 16, Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

It should not be surprising that the multilateral trading system, conceived during a 30-year war that took place in two great catastrophic phases separately mainly by a deep economic depression, was intended to be an antidote to conflict.  It was designed to maintain peace.

These roots were over time forgotten – something that historians might come across –  until these last few years, when conflict-affected countries, Afghanistan, Liberia, countries of the Middle East and of the Horn of Africa sought entry into the WTO.  For them, the contribution of integration into the global economy, of thereby increasing the likelihood of stability, the precondition for economic development, the link of trade to peace, the cause of trade for peace, is real, immediate and profound.  These fragile countries appreciate the relevance of the multilateral rules-based trading system as a mechanism for peacebuilding through promoting good governance and the rule of law, reducing poverty and achieving economic growth.

Conclusion

The bottom line:  A new edition of a book on the WTO and the SDGs should spell out how all 17 goals either are or can be served by the WTO and its agreements. But more than a book, we need WTO Members to engage and conclude negotiations that have a direct impact on achieving the SDGs.  I have already spoken about the negotiations to discipline fisheries subsidies, the specific goal of SDG 14.6 on a result on that subject would speak volumes, and you can all push for its successful conclusion.

Trade is one of the best anti-poverty tools in history. By boosting economic growth, trade was a catalyst for reaching the Millennium Development Goal of cutting extreme poverty in half – well ahead of the 2015 deadline.

Trade must play its full part in achieving the 2030 sustainable development goals.  To help deliver on these goals and maximize the power of trade in tackling poverty and hunger, making our economies more sustainable and inclusive, WTO Members must put sustainable development at the core of WTO reform efforts. A reform process that results in tangible progress in fully aligning trade and sustainability would be a major contribution the WTO could make to advancing the issues we are discussing here today.

To read the original blog post, please click here.

Ambassador Alan Wm. Wolff is Deputy Director-General of the World Trade Organization.

The post bodog sportsbook review|Most Popular_address  appeared first on bodog.

But the WTO’s decline accelerated dramatically over the past four years, with the United States retreating from leadership, the US–China trade war spilling over to Geneva, and the many excessive trade restrictions imposed worldwide through the COVID-19 crisis. With Director-General Roberto Azevedo’s early departure, the WTO leadership transition has since been less than smooth, with no one serving in an acting capacity and the United States blocking consensus on a new director-general.

There are still glimmers of hope. Middle powers have undertaken important work, such as the recent statement on trade and health issued by Canada, the European Union, Japan, Australia and others. President-elect Biden has also emphasised the importance of working with allies and partners and through international organisations to achieve US foreign and economic policy objectives. And it is hoped that a new director-general will be selected soon to advance the organisation’s important work.

With a long list of issues requiring attention, the Biden team needs to sort out its priorities and separate what can be accomplished and how soon. When the new administration considers near-term objectives, it should be mindful of Bodog Poker the upcoming 2021 WTO Ministerial Conference. To demonstrate commitment to repairing and revitalising global rules-based trade, there are a series of immediate actions that could be taken early in the new administration’s tenure.

First, by lifting the US reservation on Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala for director-general, the Biden administration stands to gain immediate international goodwill. The move would allow Geneva to shift its focus towards substance in the lead up to the Ministerial Conference. Dr. Okonjo-Iweala is highly qualified, having risen to the top of contention, and the sooner the United States joins in the consensus to select the Nigerian candidate, the sooner attention can be redirected towards the substantive agenda.

An early visit to Geneva by the new US Trade Representative (USTR) would help set the tone for US engagement in revitalising the WTO. Sessions could be held with the newly-appointed director-general, as well as Geneva ambassadors, to survey first-hand the situation and formulate initial thoughts  on priority reform efforts. A visit would be in striking contrast to Trump administration USTR Robert Lighthizer’s WTO engagement. He never once visited Geneva as USTR and frequently skipped mini-ministerial meetings in third countries.

A critical step in fixing the broken dispute settlement mechanism would be for the new administration to table proposals for Appellate Body reform, recognising that success would need to be accompanied by negotiation of new rules in other areas. Since blocking the appointment of new Appellate Body members, the United States has not shared its views on the approach to a concrete reform agenda, instead pressing discussions around the underlying divergent views among delegations.

Meanwhile, other member countries, as well as the former chairman of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, have put forward ideas aiming to address US concerns. The Biden team should draw from this rich input and the detailed suggestions of other trade experts that have also been floated. Negotiation will be difficult but the paralysis needs to end if a functioning WTO has any chance of surviving.

While the Trump administration identified challenges to the current WTO system posed by non-market economies, particularly China, it fell far short of delivering meaningful results. The Biden team has underscored the importance of working with partners and within international institutions to address these problems. As a first step, the incoming administration should finalise the trilateral work with the European Union and Japan on industrial subsidies, recruit wider international support, and submit a proposal to the WTO for negotiation.

While progress is being made in plurilateral negotiations on e-commerce, a wider agreement is still far from reach. The lack of multilateral rules in this critical sector reinforces the narrative that the WTO is falling into irrelevance. The incoming administration has the opportunity to light a fire under negotiations. It can work with others to step up high-level engagement from capitals. More importantly, it can spur momentum by launching digital trade negotiations among like-minded countries in the Asia Pacific region.

Many in the region have already concluded or are in the process of negotiating digital trade agreements among themselves, building on the Trans-Pacific Partnership platform. If robust regional progress is made, others are likely to become more serious about the WTO talks, not wanting to be left behind.

These suggested actions would help pave the way for the Biden administration to make an early and constructive impact on WTO reform and contribute to the success of the 2021 WTO Ministerial Conference. But this list is not exhaustive; reform to developing country status and trade aspects of other global issues, including in climate change and health, are also overdue.

The United States should not be relied on to pick up the mantle alone. For the WTO reform agenda to succeed, others will also need to step up to the plate and move out of their comfort zones.

To read the original blog post, please click here.

Wendy Cutler is Vice President and Managing Director of the Asia Society Policy Institute Washington DC Office.

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_this rich input and the appeared first on bodog.

In prior posts, I have reported on the developments in the third and final round of consultations that the troika (Chairs of the General Council, Dispute Settlement Body and Trade Policy Review Body) had with Members between October 19-27 and the informal meetings with Heads of Delegation on October 28. See October 29, 2020, WTO press release from informal Heads of Delegation meeting on October 28 and Amb. Walker’s statement to the WTO membership on the outcome of the third round of consultations in the Director-General selection process, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/10/29/wto-press-release-from-informal-heads-of-delegation-meeting-on-october-28-and-amb-walkers-statement-to-the-wto-membership-on-the-outcome-of-the-third-round-of-consultations-in-the-director-general/; October 29, 2020, October 29^th video discussion on WTO Director-General selection process following the announcement of results of third round of consultations and U.S. announcement of not backing the candidate with the greatest support, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/10/29/october-29th-video-discussion-on-wto-director-general-selection-process-following-the-announcement-of-third-round-of-consultations-and-u-s-aanouncement-of-not-backing-the-candidate-with-the-greatest/; October 29, 2020, U.S. support for Minister Yoo for WTO Director-General premised on need for person with trade expertise, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/10/29/u-s-support-for-minister-yoo-for-wto-director-general-premised-on-need-for-person-with-trade-expertise/; October 28, 2020, WTO Director-General selection process doesn’t generate immediate consensus, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/10/28/wto-director-general-selection-process-doesnt-generate-immediate-consensus/.

There were two strong candidates being considered by Members in the third round of consultations — H.E. Yoo Myung-hee of Korea (Trade Minister) and Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala of Nigeria (Chair of GAVI, former Finance Minister of Nigeria, and senior official at the World Bank). As reported by the Chairman of the General Council, Amb. David Walker of New Zealand, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala was the candidate found based on the preferences of Members to be most likely to attract consensus of the Members and whose name would be put forward to the General Council in a special meeting as recommended by the troika consistent with the procedures (para. 19).

Because the Republic of Korea did not withdraw the Korean candidate and because the U.S. indicated it could not support a consensus for Dr. Okonjo-Iweala, the Chair of the General Council was faced with additional consultations ahead of the planned special General Council meeting that was scheduled for November 9. On November 6, the meeting was postponed for an indefinite period reflecting reimposed restrictions by the Swiss government in light of a second wave of COVID-19 cases in Switzerland, thus permitting the Chair more time to consult and seek a resolution.

We are now 13 days after the postponement was announced. Absent a resolution through consultations, the option exists to move to a vote on who should be the next Director-General. WT/L/509, para. 20. While a possibility, to date at least, there has been no move to shift from a consensus approach to a vote, although that may happen in the coming weeks or months.

Steps that could be taken to help resolve the current situation

1. Withdrawal of H.E. Yoo Myung-hee as a candidate

Since the procedures were adopted at the end of 2002, all candidates who have been put forward have done so understanding that the procedures envision any candidate who is not moved to the next round or who is not found to be the candidate most likely to attract consensus in the final round will withdraw. WT/L/509, para 18 (“It is understood that the candidate or candidates least likely to attract consensus shall withdraw.”). The withdrawal of candidates not receiving the requisite support was followed by all candidates who didn’t advance in 2005 and in 2013 and in the first two rounds of the 2020 consultation process. So the failure of Korea to withdraw its candidate was surprising and inconsistent with the agreed procedures.

Korea is a strong supporter of the WTO as was recognized by Amb. Walker is his prepared comments at the meeting on October 28 (JOB/GC/247).

” 4 TRIBUTE TO CANDIDATES AND TO MEMBERS

“4.1. Before I conclude, I would like to acknowledge H.E. Yoo Myung-hee for her participation in this selection process.

“4.2. As I said at the start, Members consider her a highly qualified individual. H.E. Yoo Myung-hee has vast experience, which she has acquired in a number of leading positions, and her outstanding
qualifications are highly valued and respected by all Members. In her distinguished career, H.E. Yoo Myung-hee has always been a tireless promoter of the multilateral trading system, and I am certain that the WTO can continue to count on that commitment.

“4.3. We would also like to acknowledge the Government of the Republic of Korea and its Geneva Representative Ambassador PAIK Ji-ah for their commitment to this institution and to the multilateral trading system.”

The government of Korea has indicated that it has not decided a course of action and press accounts suggest that Minister Yoo is still in the fight for the Director-General position. Hopefully, Korea will take the correct action even if belatedly and withdraw its candidate. There is no doubt that Minister Yoo is a qualified individual. But that has been true of many candidates who did not ultimately succeed. The procedures adopted by the General Council obviously don’t work if candidates who do not receive the broadest and largest support don’t withdraw. Korea’s and Minister Yoo’s actions in having Minister Yoo stay in the competition are hurting the organization that both have actively supported. In an organization where Members already have a low level of trust, having important Members disregard procedures all have agreed to simply compounds the challenge of restoring trust and permitting the WTO to get on with the critical work before it.

2. Carry on in the existing configuration until the Biden Administration is in place in late January

While it is unlikely that the incoming Biden Administration will have its full team in place for a number of months after President-elect Biden is sworn in on January 20, my belief is that there will be a reasonably strong likelihood that the new Administration will not prevent a consensus for Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala to be appointed the next Director-General of the WTO. Thus, holding the special General Council meeting sometime in February would likely permit the recommendation identified by Amb. Walker and his two facilitators at the October 28 informal meeting of Heads of Delegation to proceed unopposed. While a February date drastically reduces the time for an incoming Director-General to help Members prepare for the Ministerial to be held in Kazakhstan midyear 2021, many of the priority short term objectives identified by Dr. Okonjo-Iweala (such as completing the fisheries subsidies negotiations and getting the plurilateral on e-commerce to an advanced state) are being worked by existing groups within the WTO and so hopefully will be positioned for early harvest.

Conclusion

The WTO has many needs for reform going forward. There are issues where drawing a line in the sand may be warranted by Members. I believe that the U.S. has correctly drawn a line in the sand on dispute settlement, an issue of concern to Administrations and Congress for more than 20 years. Hopefully reform of the dispute settlement system can happen in 2021 to restore the balance of rights and obligations that sovereign states negotiated during the Uruguay Round and that will limit the role of panels and the Appellate Body to that which was originally envisioned.

While all decisions by Members are obviously for them to make regardless of outside views, as an outside observer I don’t see the justification for drawing a line in the sand in the selection process for a new Director-General. Both candidates in the final round of consultations were highly qualified and respected. The organization needs a new Director-General. The organization will be well served by either candidate. But only one was found through the 2002 procedures to be the candidate most likely to attract a consensus. With a change in U.S. Administrations a few months away, hopefully the 2002 procedures can be respected again without the need to resort to voting and with Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala becoming the next Director-General of the WTO.

Terence Stewart, former Managing Partner, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, and author of the blog, bodog poker review|Most Popular_Congressional

To read the original blog post, please click here. 

The post bodog poker review|Most Popular_To read the original appeared first on bodog.

“Annex I

“The Values of the World Trade Organization

“In the current upsurge in criticism of the inadequacies of the collective responses to the pandemic, the WTO is receiving heightened scrutiny, and more urgent calls for WTO reform. It is necessary to understand the values that the multilateral trading system is designed to promote before it can be reformed.

“A serious inquiry into this subject would serve three purposes:

“to know the value of what we have in the current system,

“to determine if the values of the current system enjoy the support of all WTO members, and

“to address the degree to which the WTO is of sufficient continuing relevance as it is at present or whether it needs fundamental change.

“WTO members can make progress toward improving the organization to help it to create a better world through building on the values that are inherent in the system. These include –

“Stability and peace — The original mission of the multilateral trading system was to enhance economic growth to achieve stability and support peace; today the WTO fosters integration of conflicted countries into the world economy.

“Well-being — At its core, the organization is about the economic advancement of the people whom its members represent. Well-being is defined to include creating jobs and, as we are finding out, it also includes health;

“Rule of law — The enforceability of obligations is a key distinguishing feature of the WTO as compared with most other international endeavours;

“Openness – The multilateral trading system rests upon the principle that to the extent provided within the bounds of the WTO agreements, markets will be open to international trade and trade is to be as free from distortions as possible;

“Equality — Equality among members provides the opportunity for each member to participate in the organization, and its rights and obligations, to the extent of its capabilities;

“Sovereignty — Sovereignty is preserved — no decision taken within the WTO is to have an automatic effect on the laws or actions of any member;

“Development — Fostering development to allow all members to benefit equally from the rights and undertake equally the obligations of the WTO.

“International cooperation — Cooperation is a shared responsibility of membership to enable the organization to function.

“Sustainability — There is increasingly an attitude of care among members for stewardship of the planet and its inhabitants.

“The primacy of market forces — Commercial considerations are to determine competitive outcomes.

“Convergence —The WTO is not simply about coexistence; differences among members affecting trade which deviate from the principles governing the WTO, its core values, are to be progressively overcome.

“Reciprocity — Broadly defined reciprocity is required for negotiations to succeed.

“Balance — is provided:

“Through each member’s judgment of the costs and benefits of the rights it enjoys and the obligations it has undertaken;

“Through its view of how its costs and benefits compare with those of other members;

“Through a member’s view of its freedom of action in relation to the freedom of action for others, and

“Specifically, through its judgment of whether it has sufficient freedom to act to temper its commitments for trade liberalization (openness) with measures designed to deal with any harms thereby caused.

“Trust — International trade would largely cease if trade-restrictive measures that were inconsistent with the rules were as a regular matter put into place and only removed prospectively through lengthy litigation.

“Morality — in its absence, it would be hard to fully explain the provision addressing pharmaceutical availability in health emergencies. The 1994 Marrakech Declaration states that the WTO was being created to reflect the widespread desire to operate in a fairer and more open multilateral trading system.

“Universality — Membership is open to all who are willing to negotiate entry.”

Many of these “values of the WTO” are not controversial. Two are critical to the direction of the WTO moving forward — the primacy of market forces and convergence. These values are viewed as critical by the United States and as central by the EU, Japan, Brazil and others. China’s economic system is viewed as inconsistent with these values. See, e.g., February 22, 2020, WTO Reform – Addressing The Disconnect Between Market and Non-Market Economies, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/02/22/wto-reform-addressing-the-disconnect-between-market-and-non-market-economies/; Statement from Brazil, Japan and the United States, Importance of Market-Oriented Conditions to the World Trading System, WT/GC/W/803/Rev. 1 (2 October 2020); CHINA’S TRADE-DISRUPTIVE ECONOMIC MODEL, COMMUNICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES, 16 July 2018, WT/GC/W/745.

China rejects the claim that its economic system is properly the subject of WTO scrutiny or that it hasn’t engaged in “reform”. Coexistence, not convergence is China’s view of the appropriate value within the WTO. See, e.g., Statement of H.E. Ambassador Zhang Xiangchen of China at the General Council Meeting (Item 7), October 13, 2020, http://wto2.mofcom.gov.cn/article/chinaviewpoins/202010/20201003007644.shtml; CHINA AND THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION, COMMUNICATION FROM CHINA, 19 July 2018, WT/GC/749; General Council, MINUTES OF THE MEETING, 26 July 2018, WT/GC/M/173 (5 October 2018)(pages 29-41). And, of course, while China is the largest economy with an economic system at odds with market-economy conditions, it is not the only one.

Importantly, the candidate found through consultations with the WTO membership to be most likely to attract consensus and hence be recommended by the Chair of the General Council and his facilitators to become the next Director-General of the WTO, Dr. Ngozi Oknojo-Iweala of Nigeria, has taken the view that the WTO’s role is not to exclude any economic system but is rather to determine if different economic systems create distortions in trade that need to be addressed through modifications to the rules. See, e.g., August 19, 2020 [updated August 27], The race to become the next WTO Director-General – where the candidates stand on important issues:  convergence vs. coexistence of different economic systems; possible reform of rules to address distortions from such economic systems – Part 2, comments by the candidates, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/08/19/the-race-to-become-the-next-wto-director-general-where-the-candidates-stand-on-important-issues-convergence-vs-coexistence-of-different-economic-systems-possible-reform-of-rules-to-addre/; August 17, 2020, The race to become the next WTO Director-General – where the candidates stand on important issues:  convergence vs. coexistence of different economic systems; possible reform of rules to address distortions from such economic systems – Part 1, background on issues, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/08/17/the-race-to-become-the-next-wto-director-general-where-the-candidates-stand-on-important-issues-convergence-vs-coexistence-of-different-economic-systems-possible-reform-of-rules-to-address-dist/.

Here is what I had written up based on Dr. Okonjo-Iweala’s participation in a WITA webinar on July 21 and her answer to specific questions. The webinar can be found at /event-videos/conversation-with-wto-dg-candidate-dr-ngozi-okonjo-iweala/.

Q: On resetting of tariff commitments (comment from USTR Lighthizer as a problem within the WTO based on changing economic development of many countries), would this be in the best interest of the system? 

A:  This is a critical question and issue.  Renegotiating any agreement would require consensus building that would be very difficult to achieve.  That would certainly be true on bound tariffs. The balance of rights and obligations raised by the United States flows from the concerns about state-led economies and state-owned enterprises and whether such economies belong in the system.  Dr. Okonjo-Iweala stated that the WTO is not there to comment on the economy of any Member.  In her view, the key question is what disciplines does the WTO have around any issue that arises.  Are the disciplines sufficient to address the imbalances in rights and obligations that may arise?  We need to start there.  What are the fundamental issues —  state-owned enterprises (SOEs), public body.  Can we come to agreement on the meaning of the term public body?  Can we tighten subsidy disciplines that already exist or can we negotiate new subsidy or other disciplines to address the concerns that arise from these types of economies? That is the approach all Members should be pursuing. 

Q: On industrial subsidies, China has signaled that they will oppose tightening disciplines.  The U.S., EU and Japan have been working on a proposal and discussing with some Members.  How can the Director-General help the membership navigate these issues? 

A:  If Dr. Okonjo-Iweala becomes the next Director-General, she would encourage that proposals from the U.S., EU and Japan be tabled so all Members can see what they are and how acceptable they are to other Members (including China).  Let’s start to work with an actual proposal.  Sometimes countries are not as far away as one might think.  Members need to work on a specific proposal and see what happens.”

Conclusion

The WTO is a different organization in 2020 than it was when it started in 1995 or when its basic structure and agreements were being negotiated during 1986-1994. Major economies have joined and some have economic systems that are significantly different than the traditional economies who led the GATT. The question of how to deal with different economic systems within the global trading system has not been addressed directly although some would argue that the U.S., EU and others have worked hard during accession negotiations to get commitments from acceding countries to engage in reform if the economy is based on state-control or other deviations from a market economy. For an economy like China’s, there were early reforms, some of which have been reversed over time and others which were never in fact implemented.

While evaluation of distortions caused by different economic systems is certainly an approach that can be pursued, it starts from a premise of coexistence of economic systems within the WTO and assumes rules can be formed that will adequately address all distortions created by non-market factors in a given economy. But the “convergence” value and the “primacy of market forces” value are fundametal to a system where the results of competition will be viewed as acceptable by all Members. In a consensus system, the refusal of a major player like China to agree to these values limits the likely options to other Members but clearly endangers the ability of the WTO to fulfil its core functions in ways that are acceptable to all.

That the likely next Director-General has taken a position that is at odds with the two WTO values identified in Annex 1 of DDG Wolff’s presentation from November 6 is understandable in a consensus system where there is obvious disagreement among WTO Members on the particular values. However, if moving forward with reform, the WTO membership and its Director-General fail to get Members to agree on the core values, such failure will ensure the WTO will not be the sole arbitrator of trade matters going forward.

Terence Stewart, former Managing Partner, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, and author of the blog, bodog poker review|Most Popular_Congressional

To read the original blog post, please click here.

The post Bodog Poker|Welcome Bonus_early reforms, some of appeared first on bodog.

On day one, President Biden and the Congress will confront a range of difficult transnational challenges. A few, like ongoing wars in Syria, Yemen, Libya, are security issues that must first be addressed by the Department of Defense. But the wider range of issues—COVID-19, global economic contraction, climate change, retrenchment in democracy, historic levels of refugees and migration, humanitarian crises, social and economic inequities, terrorism—can be addressed only by the two D’s of diplomacy and development—with a heavy responsibility on the latter. I presented many of these ideas in a recent paper.

‘Givens’

The question is what should the American people expect from the new president on development in addressing these challenges—and opportunities? We can be fairly certain from his track record and stated commitments that President Biden will seek to renew trust in American international engagement and leadership through a series of initial actions. They include:

• Support for robust funding for the International Affairs Budget.
• A commitment to working as a collaborative partner and supporter of international organizations and alliances such as rejoining the Paris Climate Accord and the World Health Organization (WHO), supporting the consensus candidate for Secretary-General and appointment of judges to the dispute panel of the World Trade Organization (WTO), engaging in multilateral/multiparty efforts to address regional and global problems, and seeking consensus with our allies.
• Nominate a Secretary of State and leaders for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), U.S. Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) who bring relevant experience, expertise, and commitment to the strategic and effective use of U.S. development, cooperation, and respect for the dedicated and talented career staff responsible for advancing U.S. development and diplomatic interests in the world.
• A concern for social and economic equity, with an immediate reversal of the Mexico City policy, the recent suspension of trainings on equity and diversity, and the regressive draft USAID policy on gender.
• Design and implementation of strategic initiatives, including:
  • An interagency plan led by USAID for addressing the global health pandemic that encompasses U.S. and multilateral approaches to stemming the tide of COVID-19, including through participation in the ACT-Accelerator to accelerated development and delivery of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics, and prepares developing countries to contain the next pandemic.
  • Incorporation of climate change actions into U.S. development cooperation policies and programs.
  • Alignment of U.S. development policy objectives and assessment of impact with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
  • A multinational/multiparty digital initiative (akin to Power Africa)—made even more urgent by COVID-19 demonstrating the centrality of digital technology to health, education, and employment—that leapfrogs the benefits of the digital world to developing countries, including digital literacy and efficient/cost-effective infrastructure and 5G, while providing protection against nefarious use of information technology.
• Listen to the views and recommendations of senior political and career appointments, and other stakeholders and allies, treating them with respect and providing clear, consistent policies; and replacing at international/multilateral organizations U.S. appointees who are not reflective of the values of international partnering and equity.
• Establish a collaborative, locally-driven approach to dealing with fragility and building resilience through effective implementation of the Global Development Act.
• Fully staff USAID to its funded level.

’Incremental’

So, if these are some of the starting points that are “givens,” what are “incremental” steps the Biden presidency could take quickly to elevate development with the stature and authority needed to fully address global development issues? They are:

• Assign the Administrator of USAID cabinet rank (as some presidents have done for the U.N. Ambassador and the trade representative).
• Make USAID a permanent member of the National Security Council (NSC) so the development perspective has a voice in the range of issues that touch on development—for example, development isn’t usually a prime consideration when authorizing military action, but it should be as it is development practitioners and diplomats who bear responsibility for the aftermath.
• Assign USAID full authority for the budgets it manages—made real by gaining congressional consent for the merger of policy and budget into the proposed new Bureau of Policy, Resources and Performance with a Senate-confirmed leader—and reign in the mission creep of F (the State Department Office of Foreign Assistance) for its unproductive interference in USAID program implementation.
• Direct an assessment of the level of staffing that USAID should reach to be able to appropriately manage its budgets and policy responsibilities (including in interagency councils) and (like the military) maintain a 10 percent float for professional career development.
• Issue a global development policy to bring coherence across the interagency to policies and programs of development cooperation, foreign assistance, and international economic policy, constructed through interagency deliberations led by USAID and the NSC in consultation with the Congress and the broader development and foreign policy communities.
• Engage with international initiatives to address the burgeoning debt crisis of developing countries, including through providing greater liquidity through emergency issuance of SDRs.
• Empower the leadership of the DFC to fully implement the development mandate of the BUILD Act, including: placing priority on supporting investments in low-income and fragile environments and on assessing and reporting on the development impact of projects; reducing the budget impact of equity finance by bringing it under the purview of credit reform; and, catalyzing collaboration among the DFC, USAID, and other agencies.

‘Visionary’

Beyond the “given” and the “incremental,” what about the “visionary and ambitious”? What if averting future pandemics, the existential threat of climate change, the growing social and economic equities within and between countries, rising authoritarianism, the destabilizing effect of Chinese challenge to U.S. global leadership and established international norms are understood by the new President, his key advisers, and congressional leaders as creating a moment in time that demands more than just incremental improvement? What if this is viewed as another 9/11 moment, or a post-World War II opportunity, and development is acknowledged as central to re-envisioning U.S. global engagement?

The first step would be to bring together the key actors—the President’s national security team with leaders from the two foreign affairs authorizing and appropriations committees—to determine if there is sufficient consensus that the urgency of global challenges to U.S. interests demands more than business as usual, that elevating development is central to answering the challenges, and that they are prepared to collaborate on redesigning and upgrading U.S. tools of development. Among the options that should be on the table are:

• Strategy. Modeled on the Defense Department quadrennial security strategy, undertake separate diplomacy and development strategic reviews that, along with the defense review, would roll up into a U.S. Global Strategy, which Congress should mandate be undertaken every four years.
• Department of Global Development. As President Kennedy did with the creation of USAID in 1961, bring coherence to U.S. development cooperation policies and programs through consolidation of development activities (bilateral and multilateral) in a cabinet-level department, in a manner that (1) incorporates into our development endeavors the diplomatic and regional knowledge of the Department of State, the technical expertise of domestic agencies, and the broad community of private stakeholders and (2) maintains the brands and principal operating modalities of certain agencies and programs, such as the MCC and DFC.
• Global Development Act. Replace the 60-year-old Foreign Assistance Act of 1961—with its hundreds of pages of amendments and overlapping/ inconsistent/constraining barnacles—with a less cumbersome, updated statute that provides strategic coherence, nimbleness of action, and clear accountability.
• Personnel. Design a personnel system for development that fits agency needs and the personnel dynamics of the 21st century.
• Multilateralism fit for the 21st century. Use the U.S. position in multilateral/regional development institutions and vertical funds to address 21st century challenges—climate change, health and education, mass migration, growing debt problem, and state and community fragility and resilience.
• Marshall Plan on Sustainable Development. Initiate an international Marshall Plan that joins American domestic and international efforts in a multiparty global endeavor to advance sustainable development that ramps up investment along its interconnected elements—green infrastructure, health, education, conservation of land and water, and justice and equity.

President Biden and his team face the options of incremental improvement or ambitious innovation—each approach has its own benefits and deficiencies—but, the more ambitious better fits with U.S. history of responding to moments of international crisis and will better  serve U.S. global leadership for decades rather than several years.

To read the original blog post, please click here.

George Ingram is a senior fellow in the Center for Sustainable Development, housed in the Global Economy and Development program at Brookings.

The post bodog sportsbook review|Most Popular_levels of refugees and appeared first on bodog.

Switzerland has reimposed various restrictions in an effort to deal with a second wave of new cases which topped 10,000 in a single day in early November. See CoVID-19 – the situation in Switzerland, https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/covid-19_coronavirus–the-situation-in-switzerland/45592192. Such restrictions can affect the ability to have in person meetings at the WTO and the willingness of Members to make formal decisions absent in person meetings.

It is also the case that there are external events which are not resolved which could be relevant to the selection process of the next Director-General. One such event is the Presidential election in the United States, where a final resolution is not likely for some time (and certainly not before next Monday).

Similarly, press articles indicate that the Republic of Korea has not resolved internally where it will be on Minister Yoo’s candidacy (withdraw or not withdraw) by the time of the special General Council meeting. See Yonhap News Agency, November 5, 2020, No decision made on S. Korean minister’s WTO chief bid: foreign ministry, https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20201105010900325.

Thus, a postponement provides Amb. Walker and his two facilitators more time to see whether a consensus can be reached on the candidate who received the largest number of preferences in the third round of consultations (Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala) and who was identified by the troika as the candidate most likely to attract consensus.

No specific date has been selected for when the postponed special General Council meeting will occur. It is possible that there will be slippage until 2021.

Terence Stewart, former Managing Partner, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, and author of the blog, bodog poker review|Most Popular_Congressional

To read the original blog post, please click here. 

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_World Trade Organization appeared first on bodog.

Dr. Okonjo-Iweala has received the backing of the WTO Members of the African Union and reportedly several dozen other Members from the Americas and Asia. See, e.g., RTL Today, October 19, 2020, ‘I feel the wind behind my back’: Nigerian WTO candidate, https://today.rtl.lu/news/business-and-tech/a/1596831.html.

Some press article have suggested that China is also likely to support the Nigerian candidate, although there has not been formal confirmation to date and some articles have suggested China may have problems with each of the two remaining candidates. See, e.g., South China Morning Post, October 8, 2020, China faces ‘difficult trade-off’ as WTO leadership race heads into final round, https://www.scmp.com/economy/china-economy/article/3104712/china-faces-difficult-trade-wto-leadership-race-heads-final.

The United States has been reported in the press as supporting Minister Yoo Myung-hee from the Republic of Korea. Bloomberg (article in Swissinfo.com), October 21, 2020, Global Trade-Chief Race Slows as U.S., EU Split on Finalists, https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/bloomberg/global-trade-chief-race-slows-as-u-s—eu-split-on-finalists/46110158.

It is also known that the President of Korea and other senior officials within the Korean government have been actively reaching out to WTO Members to encourage support of Minister Yoo in the third round. See, e.g., Yonhap News Agency, October 20, 2020, Moon requests support from 2 nations for S. Korean candidate’s WTO chief bid, https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20201020009151320; The Korea Times, October 20, 2020, Government goes all out for Yoo’s WTO election, https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20201020009151320.

What do the news articles portend?

Assuming the support for Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is as broad and deep as is being reported, the Nigerian should be the candidate who is announced by the troika in the WTO (Chairs of the General Council, Dispute Settlement Body and Trade Policy Review Body) as the candidate most likely to achieve consensus from the membership at an informal heads of delegation. If there is no opposition from a Member or Members suggesting blockage of consensus, the informal heads of delegation meeting could be set for as early as Thursday, October 29, with a General Council meeting to confirm the selection held that afternoon or on the 30th of October. If one or more Members indicates a likelihood of blockage of consensus, it is likely that the informal heads of delegation meeting would not occur on the 29th to give the troika the opportunity to work with those threatening blockage to attempt to achieve consensus. See October 9, 2020:  October 8^th video discussion on WTO Director-General selection process following the announcement of two finalists, https://currentthoughtsontrade.com/2020/10/09/october-8th-video-discussion-on-wto-director-general-selection-process-following-the-announcement-of-two-finalists/ (video from WITA; see comments of Amb. Rufus Yerxa, President of the National Foreign Trade Council).

Under the procedures adopted in late 2002 for the selection of a Director-General if there is a failure to achieve consensus, Members could select the Director-General based on a vote. To date, voting has not been required. Hopefully, the same will be true in this selection as well. If so, it appears that Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala will be the next Director-General of the WTO.

Terence Stewart, former Managing Partner, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, and author of the blog, bodog poker review|Most Popular_Congressional

To read the original blog post, please click here.

The post bodog online casino|Welcome Bonus_and the EU, after extended appeared first on bodog.

The third round started on October 19 and will continue through October 27. While the process is confidential, with each Member meeting individually with the troika and providing the Member’s preference, Members can, of course, release information on the candidate of their preference if they so choose.

The two candidates who remain in contention are Minister Yoo Myung-hee of the Republic of Korea and Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala of Nigeria. While all eight of the candidates who were put forward in June and July were well qualified, Minister Yoo and Dr. Okonjo-Iweala have received high marks from WTO Members from the very beginning. While Minister Yoo has the advantage in terms of trade background, Dr. Okonjo-Iweala has an impressive background as a former finance minister, 25 years at the World Bank and her current role as Chair of GAVI.

The procedures for selecting a new Director-General which were agreed to in late 2002 by the General Council put a primary focus on qualifications as one would assume. However, where there are equally well qualified candidates then geographical diversity is specifically identified as a a relevant criteria. There has never been a Director-General from Africa and there has only been one Director-General from Asia (although there was also a Director-General from the Pacific area outside of Asia). With the UN Sustainable Development Goals including one on gender equality (SDG #5), many Members have also been interesting in seeing a Director-General picked from the women candidates. Since both of the two remaining candidates are women, geographical diversity will likely have an outsized role in the third round .

Both remaining candidates are receiving strong support from their home governments in terms of outreach to foreign leaders seeking support for their candidate. The candidates, of course, are also extremely busy with ongoing outreach.

Thus, Minister Yoo traveled back to Europe last week and had a meeting with the EC Trade Commissioner Dombrovskis on October 13, among other meetings. See https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/cldr_20_1935; Yonhap News Agency, Seoul’s top trade official to visit Europe to drum up support her WTO chief race, October 12, 2020, https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20201012003300320?section=business/industry;

Similarly, the Korean President Moon Jae-in, Prime Minister Chung Sye-kyun and the ruling Democratic Party (DP) Chairman Lee Nak-yon are engaged in outreach for Minister Yoo’s candidacy. Korea JoongAng Daily, October 12, 2020, Moon, allies intensify campaign for Yoo Myung-hee to head WTO, https://koreajoongangdaily.joins.com/2020/10/12/national/politics/Yoo-Myunghee-WTO-Moon-Jaein/20201012172600409.html. Contacts have been made with heads of state or senior officials in Malaysia, Germany, Brazil, Colombia, Sri Lanka, Guatemala, Japan and the U.S. among others. See The Korea Times, October 20, 2020, Government goes all out for Yoo’s WTO election Government goes all out for Yoo’s WTO election, https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2020/10/120_297887.html. President Moon has also raised the issue of support with new ambassadors to Korea — including the German, Vietnamese, Austrian, Chilean, Pakistani and Omani ambassadors. Yonhap News Agency, October 16, 2020, Moon requests support for S. Korea’s WTO chief bid in meeting with foreign envoys, https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20201016008600315.

Minister Yoo is reported to be having problems in solidifying support from some major Asian Members — including China and Japan — for reasons at least partially separate from her qualifications and is facing what appears to be block support by African WTO Members for Dr. Okonjo-Iweala. Thus, broad outreach in Asia, the Americas and in Europe will be important for Minister Yoo if she is to be the last candidate standing on October 28-29.

Dr. Okonjo-Iweala is similarly receiving strong support from her government where President Muhammadu Buhari indicated full support by the Nigerian government. See The Tide News Online, Ocotber 14, 2020, Buhari Backs Okonjo-Iweala For WTO Job, http://www.thetidenewsonline.com/2020/10/14/buhari-backs-okonjo-iweala-for-wto-job/. Press accounts report that Dr. Okonjo-Iweala has the full backing of the African Union as well as support in both the Americas and Asia. See RTL Today, October 19, 2020, ‘I feel the wind behind my back’: Nigerian WTO candidate, https://today.rtl.lu/news/business-and-tech/a/1596831.html. Many have felt that Dr. Okonjo-Iweala is the candidate to beat, and she is certainly helped by the support of the African Union WTO Members but will also need broad support in the other regions of the world to be the one remaining candidate.

With just eight days to go to the conclusion of the third round of consultations, the remaining two candidates and their governments are turning over every stone in their effort to generate the support needed to come out of the third round as the sole candidate left.

While the candidate announced on October 29 as the remaining candidate still has to be put forward to the General Council for consensus adoption as the new Director-General, it seems unlikely at the moment that either candidate, should she emerge as the preference of the WTO membership, would be blocked by a Member from becoming the next Director-General. While such blockage is always a possibility, the 2002 agreed procedures have prevented such blockage and hopefully will result in a clean conclusion this year as well.

It is certain to be an interesting end of October.

Terence Stewart, former Managing Partner, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, and author of the blog, bodog poker review|Most Popular_Congressional

To read the original blog post, please click here.

The post bodog sportsbook review|Most Popular_Members, the process of appeared first on bodog.

Both Minister Yoo of Korea and Dr. Okonjo-Iweala of Nigeria are in the process of seeking support from WTO Members and have the full support of their governments which are making calls and sending letters to government officials in many of the WTO Members.

Minister Yoo is back in Europe seeking support in this third round (she and Dr. Okonjo-Iweala both received preferences from the EU in the second round). Press reports indicate that China is believed to be supporting Dr. Okonjo-Iweala, and Japan is understood to have concerns with both candidates. Thus, Minister Yoo is working to bolster support in other regions of the world to supplement what is assumed to be only partial support within Asia.

Dr. Okonjo-Iweala has received the support from Kenya after Kenya’s candidate did not advance to the third round. It is not clear whether she will receive support from all African Members of the WTO, although Kenya’s action is obviously an imortant positive for her.

So the next eleven days will be an active time as each of the remaining candidates seeks support in the final round of consultations from Members in different geographical areas as well as in different categories (developed, developing and least developed countries).

One source of information about the candidates that hasn’t been available to the public but is now available is the questions and answers provided to the General Council meetings with each candidate on July 15 (Dr. Okonjo-Iweala) and July16 (Minister Yoo). While there were three days of meetings with the General Council to accommodate the eight candidates, the two remaining candidates appeared during the first two days. The Minutes of the Meeting of the General Council, 15-17 July 2020 are contained in WT/GC/M/185 (31 August 2020). The procedures for each candidate were reviewed by the General Council Chairman David Walker (New Zealand).

“Each candidate would be invited to make a brief presentation lasting no more than fifteen minutes. That would be followed by a question-and-answer bodog sportsbook review period of no more than one hour and fifteen minutes. During the last five minutes of the question-and-answer period, each candidate would have the opportunity to make a concluding statement if she or he so wished.” (page 1, para. 1.5).

Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s statement, questions asked, answers given and closing statement are in Annex 2 on pages 16-26. Minister Yoo Myung-hee’s statement, questions asked, answers given and closing statement are in Annex 5 on pages 51-60. The statements have previously been reviewed in my posts and are available on the WTO webpage.

Questions are picked randomly from Members who indicated an interest in asking questions. Dr. Okonjo-Iweala received questions during the meeting from nineteen Members with another thirty-nine Members having submitted their names to ask questions of her. Minister Yoo received questions during her meeting from seventeen Members with another forty-four Members having submitted their names to ask questions of her.

Dr. Okonjo-Iweala’s questions came from Afghanistan, Ireland, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Norway, New Zealand, South Africa, European Union, Paraguay, Estonia, Australia, Latvia, Guatemala, Japan, Mongolia, Brazil, and Malaysia. The questions dealt with a range of issues including the following sample:

• The negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on developing countries, LDCs and small vulnerable economies (SVEs).
• How to ensure the benefits of open trade are distributed equitably?
• What steps will you undertake to ensure a multilateral outcome at the next Ministerial?
• Role of the Director-General (DG) in addressing lack of trust among Members.
• Role of the DG in facilitating economic recovery and resilience.
• What is necessary to restore functioning of a binding, two-step dispute settlement system in the WTO?
• Do transparency and notification obligations need to be strengthened?
• Focus in the first 100 days.
• Your initial approach to the reform of the WTO.
• What kind of approach and efforts would you like to make to advance the subject of e-commerce?
• Role of plurilaterals in the WTO.
• How to deal with the different views on special and differential treatment?
• What are your plans relating to empowering women in the future WTO agenda?

Minister Yoo’s questions came from Guatemala, Belgium, United States, India, Germany, El Salvador, Chinese Taipei, Sri Lanka, Spain, Qatar, Lithuania, Gabon, Botswana, China, Barbados, Malaysia, and Zimbabwe. The questions dealt with a range of issues including the following sample:

• Do you have any proposal on how to overcome the current crisis?
• How do you plan to include measures to respect sustainable trade in an agenda focused on free trade and trade liberalization?
• In looking at interim arbitration agreement of EU and other countries, is it appropriate for WTO resources to be used for activities that go beyond what is contemplated by the DSU?
• How to convince Members that the multilateral trading system is still best way forward over bilateral and plurilateral trading arrangements?
• Is there a gap in the WTO rulebook with regard to level playing field issues such as subsidies, economic action by the State and competition?
• Do you have a multilateral solution to issues like e-commerce which are being tackled in the Joint Statement Initiatives that would be of interest to a large number of Members?
• WTO is lagging behind in pursuing the development dimension; what is the path forward?
• Role of DG re fighting protectionism and unilateral measures.
• How to strike a balance between public stockholding and food security and the avoidance of unnecessary trade restrictions?
• What is your view on the Doha Development Agenda?
• What role the WTO can play to help drive Africa’s integration agenda?
• What is the most important issue to achieve results?

Both candidates gave extensive answers to the questions posed while avoiding staking out a position on any issue that is highly controversial within the WTO. The answers are worth reading in their entirety. As a result the minutes of the meeting are embedded below.

Each candidate in their summing up at the end of her meeting with the General Council circled back to their prepared statement. Their short summing up statements are copied below.

Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (page 26):

“The nature of the questions that I have heard and the nature of the discussions give me hope. Members are clearly interested in a WTO that works, in a WTO that is different from what we have now, in a WTO that shows a different face to the world. I can see it and I can feel it. And if ever I am selected as Director-General, that gives me hope that there is a foundation to work on. Before coming in here, I have spoken to several Members, but I did not really know that. From listening to all of you and fielding your questions, I now know that there is a basis to work on. And I want to thank you for it.

“And I really want to end where I began. Trade is very important for a prosperous and a recovered world in the 21st century. The WTO is at the centre of this. A renewed WTO is a mission that we must all undertake, and we need every Member, regardless of economic size, to participate in this. If we want the world to know who we are as the WTO, we have to commit. Having listened to you, I hear the commitment and I want to thank you sincerely for that.”

Minister Yoo Myung-hee (page 60):

“I spent the past few days meeting with Ambassadors and delegates in Geneva. When I listen to your views, together with the questions today, it seems that there are diverse views and priorities of Members – whether it concerns the negotiations, how to pursue development objectives and special and differential treatment, the plurilaterals or restoring the Appellate Body function. So, how can we, a dynamic group of 164 Members with different social and economic environments, come to an agreement? This brings me back to my original message. We need to rebuild trust in the WTO. How? Amid these divergent and different views of Members, I would share the commitment and hope to restoring and revitalizing the WTO.

“This pandemic has forced us to reflect upon what is needed from the multilateral trading system. Despite the current challenges, I have a firm belief in the multilateral trading system and what we can actually achieve in the future if we put our heads together and also our hearts into it. We are embarking on a new journey towards a new chapter for the WTO. Building on the past twenty-five years, when we embark on the new journey for the next twenty-five years, I am ready to provide a new leadership that will harness all the frustrations but most importantly all the hopes from Members to make the WTO more relevant, resilient and responsive for the next twenty-five years and beyond.”

Conclusion

The process that WTO Members agreed on in 2002 to promote a process for finding a candidate for a new Director-General is cumbersome, time consuming and burdensome for candidates brave enough to put their hat in the ring. To date, the 2002 process has resulted in Members agreeing by consensus on a new Director-General (2005 and 2013). The process in 2020 has worked remarkably smoothly as well despite the deep divisions in the membership and the multiple-pronged crisis facing the organization.

The two finalists bring different backgrounds and skill sets to be considered by Members. Each started strong in the General Council meetings in mid-July as can be seen from their answers to questions posed, and each has continued to impress many Members in the subsequent months. There are political considerations in the selection process of the Director-General (just as in any major leadership position of an international organization). Both candidates are getting active support of their home governments. Fortunately, the membership has two qualified and very interesting candidates to consider. Whoever emerges as the candidate most likely to achieve consensus among the Members will still face the hurdle of whether any Member (or group of Members) will block the consensus. While that seems unlikely at the present time, one never knows.

Whoever becomes the next Director-General will face the daunting challenges of an organization with all three major functions not operating as needed, deep divisions among major players and among major groups. The lack of forward movement and the lack of trust among Members will weigh heavily on the new Director-General with a narrow window before the next Ministerial Conference likely to take place next June. It is remarkable that talented individuals with long histories of accomplishments would be willing to take on the problems the WTO is weighed down with at the present time. Hopefully, the next Director-General will be known in the next three weeks.

Terence Stewart, former Managing Partner, Law Offices of Stewart and Stewart, and author of the blog, bodog poker review|Most Popular_Congressional

To read the original blog post, click here.

The post bodog poker review|Most Popular_the next twenty-five years, appeared first on bodog.