It is a happy sign that the rich developed countries, which constitute only one-fourth of the total WTO membership of 147, had at last realised that everything has its limit, and that their one-way wrong policy, followed during the last several decades, has done more harm than good to vitiate the trade and economics relations between the rich and the poor nations. Although the developed nations had reaped the maximum of harvests, at the cost of the poor nations because of their 'imperial' type policy of 'head I win, tail you lose,' they have now learnt to call a spade a spade, to share their proverbial 'summer ice' with the poor nations.

The main reason that led to the shocking collapse of the WTO talks on Doha Round launched in Qatar's capital Doha in 2001, was the arrogance and obstinacy shown by the developed nations to agree to the basic demands put forward by the developing countries, perhaps in apprehension of losing their vested 'economic empire'. The main bone of contention centered round the most vital issue of the demand made by the developing countries that rich nations drastically slash their billions of dollars farm subsidies for their exportable agro-products and the lowering down of the high tariff wall raised by them against entry of products from the developing countries as both the policies had a direct adverse impact on the growth of the economy of the poor countries.

New hope for developing nations

Thus the agreement reached at the recent Geneva talks, however small a step may be considered by many, had opened the closed door to the hitherto 'forbidden' area, a new vista for the exploited poor nations. That deserves a welcome. After about a week's wrangling, the developing countries, which constitute some three-fourths of the total WTO membership, representing some 85 pc of world population, had at last seen for the first time, since they began their struggle several decades ago, some light at the end of the tunnel, some ray of hope, some silver-lining on the horizon. It is for the first time, since the establishment of the first UN-related world trade body, GATT (General Agreement on Tariff and Trade) which came into existence in 1948, the monopoly of a ruling 'minority group' exploiting the poor nations worldwide, had been broken. GATT, later replaced by WTO in 1995, had opened a new chapter in global trade after a hard and strenuous journey.

Rich richer made
The GATT, later WTO, was literally entangled for the last five decades, particularly for the last 30 years, with the question of reducing barriers between the rich and the poor nations, but as the last say remained with the powerful minority group of the rich, the mill was always grinding in favour of them at the cost of the poor. Hence whatever was achieved by the GATT and WTO, as the only international trade body for regulating global trade, by holding different 'rounds' of talks, it made the rich richer and the poor poorer. Such 'Rounds' of trade talks included the 'Kennedy Round' (1964-67), the 'Tokyo Round' (1973-74), the 'Uruguay Round' (1986-93) and the last one 'Doha Round'. It may be mentioned here that the 'Uruguay Round' took more than seven years to complete its mission from its launch in 1986. So it is difficult to say how far the 'Doha Round' would be able to reach its target scheduled to be reached by the end of 2004, or at best by the end of 2005, when WTO meets in Hong Kong.

Supachai's plea for poor nations
Such doubts are there and will be there until the take-off is made. Undoubtedly, the Geneva talks had been successful in bringing together the "wolves and the lambs" to drink from the same bucket but there is still a long way to go to actually make them drink from the same pot. As they say, yon can bring the horse to the pond but yon can't make him drink unless it drinks itself. Only time will show how the rich countries behave in the changed circumstances. It all depends how much the rich nations agree to share with the pour countries, which are now more organised and united than before to face the music. In fact, they are now ready to make the rich nations to face the music. The developed countries, led by USA, had already heard metal music at Seattle (USA) when the WTO talks ended in a fiasco in 1999 because the developing countries threatened not to sign any trade deals unless they were involved in the decision making process. This very question was raised by the WTO Chief Supachai himself prior to his assuming office as DG from his power sharing predecessor Mike Moor, former PM of New Zealand, on the eve of the 'Doha Round' in 2001. Mr Supachai had then strongly pleaded for giving the poor developing countries, what he called, "a longed-for voice" at the top table of the global commerce to ensure them a commanding role along side the west and Japan. It has taken just three years to change the scenario for the developing countries to make their strong presence felt at the top table because of the strong and united stand taken by the 'G-20' (Group of 20) representing the developing countries, led by Brazil, China, India and South Africa.

'Road map' for global trade
Thus a clear cut 'road map' for the rest of the journey together by the rich and poor nations as equal partners has been drawn at the Geneva moot. It is a big leap forward for the poor nations to force the rich nations to commit to honour two basic demands which had been made by the poor nations and consistently squeezed out of the agenda during last several decades by the developed countries. Under the historic Geneva accord the developed nations had at last agreed to slash the huge farm subsidies which they had hitherto provided to their farmers and give the developing countries better access to their farms markets by substantially lowering their tariff wall. Had the developed nations not agreed to these two basic demands of the developing nations, the WTO Geneva talks would have also gone down the drain, following the Cancun way. The world trade body would have lost all credibility.

NGOs take a different view
Although whatever had been achieved at the Geneva talks has been welcomed by the rich and the poor nations as a new milestone and landmark for a fresh and renewed journey to achieve their goal of common good, sweeping the past mistakes, deliberate or otherwise, and frustrations under the carpet, it has come under heavy criticism by some influential NGO activists and groups, such as, the British based Focus on the Global South and the Oxfam, both of which have been fighting on the side of the developing countries to win their due share in global trade. Some even had accused the developed countries of "bullying and arm twisting of the poor nations to accept the offer made by them, which was considered by such aid agencies as "against their (or poor nations) interest." The Oxfam had opined that the Geneva pact "fall far short of what is needed to reform world trade rules so that they work for the poor." The focus on Global South went a step further to dub the Geneva pact as "a catastrophe for the poor." Anyway, these warnings will serve as red signals for the developing nations.

Thus the developing countries, instead of being carried away by the complacency of what had been achieved, should move more cautiously, keeping in view the danger signals raised by their well-wishers, to avoid the still-hidden 'land-mines' that could sabotage their road map. But to achieve this the developing nations need their unity to consolidate their position at the 'top table' when they meet their powerful counterparts. They will have to keep up their "fight for fairer global trade," as advised by former PM of Malaysia, Mahathir Mohammad. There cannot be a fair competition between two unequal partners. That would be farcical. To quote Mahathir, "cities don't compete with villages, nor adult athletes with children." However, the Geneva gains undoubtedly had given the poor nations a new ray of hope to establish their united strength at the next WTO conference to be held in Hong Kong by the end of next year.

AMM Shahabuddin is a retired UN official.