The ‘Doha’ season of the multilateral trade negotiations saga, launched in the capital of Qatar in 2001, was supposed to close at the end of 2006. The initial excitement about this new season gave way to a lot of pessimism as the first episode, the Cancun opus, was a huge flop (see our review entitled ‘Cancun revisited: the ‘Soap Box’ opera’ in ‘l’express économie’ of 15 October 2003). Haunted by the fear of another debacle at the box office the new Director of the serial, the former lead-actor turned Director, Mr. Pascal Lamy, and the whole crew did just what was needed to keep the serial going: some minimal improvements in the scenario and acting to retain the interest of viewers. ‘Sleepless in Hong Kong’ was not a box office hit as ‘Sleepless in Seattle’ (sic) but the Hong Kong episode (the Fifth WTO Ministerial Meeting in Hong Kong) grossed sufficient revenue (the concessions obtained from all the major players) to finance the next episode (refer to our review entitled ‘The World Trade Organization Saga: The Hong Kong Episode’ in ‘l’express économie’ of 11 January 2006).

However, as the crew embarked on the making of Episode III, the fundamental flaws in the serial, which caused the Cancun episode to flop resurfaced rapidly. The Director was unable to get a consensus on the scenario as the main actors and extras continued to interfere with the storyline, making it impossible to make significant progress, let alone move towards a happy ending scheduled for December 2006. Production deadlines (30 April 2006 and 30 June 2006) were missed. In spite of two postponements for the release of Episode III, 31 July 2006 and then 15 August 2006, the main plot in the serial has become so entangled that Director Pascal Lamy decided on 24 July 2006 to recommend that the serial be temporarily stopped. In order to mitigate the shock that such a decision could cause to the millions of viewers around the world, Mr. Lamy came with a formula, which only the WTO showbusiness has the secret: Time out! To keep viewers guessing when the next episode will be released.

Two outright flops and one poor performer at the box office represent a serious setback not only to the Doha season of the serial but to the whole saga itself. From the reactions of the main players we can get a glimpse of the seriousness of the situation. Director Lamy, in spite of all his diplomatic skills, conceded the following on 24 July 2006: “I cannot hide the sad truth: we are in dire straits.” (maybe he is thinking of starting a new career in rock music!)

Mr. Peter Mandelson (EU Commissioner for Trade), one of the leading cast of the serial and possibly still under the spell of the world première of ‘Tokyo Drift’ declared the following: “we have missed yesterday the last exit on the motorway of negotiations this summer and it would be unwise to conceal this from ourselves”. Mr. Kamal Nath, Trade Minister of India, added a more dramatic twist to the situation. He said “the WTO is between the death bed and incineration”. It is true that new American lead actress, Ambassador Susan Schwab, although starting by saying that “it is with a profound sense of disappointment that I take the floor”, has, nonetheless, tried to minimize the consequences on the serial of the new flop. But her attitude was perfectly understandable as the lead actor, Mr. Mandelson, has not hesitated to put the blame for the flop on her poor acting. In his press conference, after release of Episode III, Mr. Mandelson said that “in deciding to withhold any indication of future flexibility, the US has judged that it would be better for the process of negotiations to be discontinued at this stage”.

Beyond the over-dramatization, which is proper to all serials, there is no doubt that the WTO Saga is in trouble. And there are deep roots to the current complicated situation.

<B>The triangle of issues</B>

The WTO Saga being a global serial, it has to continuously incorporate novel features which translate the latest fashion and developments to keep the attention of viewers. One of these features is the reference to numbers and mathematical concepts. The ‘Da Vinci Code’ of Dan Brown might have inspired the latest references. But this feature has developed earlier with the Doha season. Thus the appellation of the main actors as QUAD, G-20, G-33, C4 or MF6 was reminiscent of the ‘James Bond’ tradition (you certainly remember at least 007, M and No.2). But lately the references have become more widespread. In addition to the ‘Swiss formula’, which has been part of the script for quite some time, the new side plots have been dubbed as ‘bilaterals’, ‘trilaterals’ and ‘quadrilaterals’, from which one moves to FIPS (Five Interested Parties’), G6 and G8.

As if all this mathematical denotations were not enough, the scriptwriters have decided to give a mathematical connotation to the main plot itself. And this plot is referred to as the ‘Triangle of Issues’. This is certainly a more catching appellation than the erstwhile ‘Triangle of Love’, the central theme of so many movies.

● <B>What is exactly the ‘Triangle of Issues’?</B>

On the first corner of the triangle is the issue of subsidies to domestic farmers. The second corner is represented by market access for agricultural products. And the third corner of the triangle is market access for non-agricultural products, or NAMA in the WTO jargon. In this three-cornered fight sequence (a remake of the final sequence of ‘For a Few Dollars More’?) There were two well-established stars of the WTO serial, the USA defending its farm subsidies and the EU access to its market for agricultural products, and an upcoming new actor, the G-20, represented mainly by Brazil/ India, to defend NAMA. You have certainly understand the name of the game: shoot the other two before you are shot. Mr. Lamy has had enormous difficulty to direct this sequence. Although the three main actors have been making movements towards the centre of the triangle (by putting some revised offers on the table) and made some attempts to pull their guns, no one actually did so. The fear of losing in the shoot-out has kept the guns in their hostlers (no one was prepared to show its final fallback position). At some stage Mr. Lamy even invited them to have a go ‘off-camera’, just to build the required confidence (the various meetings around the main WTO negotiations). But to no avail. Each time there was some reluctance from one player or the other. That is why an exasperated Peter Mandelson mentioned the following in his press statement after ‘time-out’: “this was meant to be a consensus building meeting, a ‘what if’ meeting, one in which we could indicate movement without tabling formal new offers so that, in the end, we could bring the ingredients together and finally act in concert. Nobody was being asked to act prematurely or unilaterally”.

No wonder that Director Lamy after months of wrangling to get this sequence over decided that he had had enough and stopped this episode on this last shot of the three parties facing each other ready to draw their guns. Not such a bad ending for the longest-running serial on planet Earth.

Some might ask whether this account of things is not a simplistic view of the WTO Saga. This serial is supposed to have a cast of 149 (member countries of the WTO). What is the role of the other actors?

The making of this Episode III has shed some light on a major misconception on the WTO set-up, the democratic nature of the organization and the law of numbers.

Given that every actor has in principle a say in the scenario (the famous ‘one country one vote’), if actors having secondary roles or mere extras were to act together, they could influence the course of things. That is how the developing countries organized as G-90 were supposed to have successfully opposed the developed countries in Cancun in 2003 and caused the failure of that meeting. In fact the G-90 was even blamed for the Cancun flop. After Cancun we wrote (article mentioned earlier) that the ‘Singapore Issues’, which supposedly were the cause of the failure, were in fact a smokescreen and that it was in the interest of the major players to stop the negotiations as they had no additional cards to play. And on the agricultural issue, which is at the core of the failure of Episode III, we argued as follows: ‘Is the fate of 25,000 American cotton farmers so important in the outcome of the Doha Round? Then, and that is the real question, what is the margin of maneuver of the US Trade Negotiator on the rest of the American agriculture? Probably very little and certainly well below the expectations of the G-21 (now the G-20)’.

Already in the ‘31 July Framework’, a mini episode shot with a restricted cast in Geneva in July 2005 after the Cancun flop, many elements of the scenario which had contributed to the failure were scrapped and several secondary roles eliminated or watered down (Singapore Issues, Implementation Issues, Geographical Indications, Environment , …) making the storyline more fluid and centered on the main actors.

The Hong Kong episode was to confirm the polarization of the serial on the main players as a new element in the scenario (paragraph 24 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration entitled ‘Balanced between agriculture and NAMA’) explicitly put their parts as the central element in the serial. Farewell the law of numbers. The stage was set for the ‘Triangle of Issues’. And in Episode III, most of the secondary actors of the 149 cast have been reduced to mere extras.

● <B>What is the future of the WTO serial?</B>

In an article in the ‘Financial Times’ of July 2006, lead actor Peter Mandelson started as follows: “Now the smoke and fire have cleared from the suspension of the Doha talks, we should ask what phoenix can be summoned from the ashes”. The ‘Rise of the Phoenix’, which has inspired many movies does offer some interesting elements for the next episode of the serial. It contains all the drama to attract the attention of viewers anew. Mr. Mandelson and other actors are all calling for a new twist in the scenario (‘the negotiations have to be resuscitated’). More importantly, one of the producers of the serial, Mr. George Bush, which ensures its distribution in the lucrative US market, has promised to do everything “to get Doha back on track”. It is important to note that the last episode of the Doha season has to be released in the USA by July 2007 as the distribution rights of Mr. Bush (the trade promotion authority, which gives the administration the mandate to negotiate trade agreements and submit them to Congress for a take-it-or-leave-it vote, more commonly known as the ‘Fast Track Authority’) would expire by then. Negotiations to extend these rights might be problematic.

Taking these elements into account the more optimistic commentators think that the next and last episode of the Doha season can be shot in the next five to nine months. However, the more pessimistic ones, basing themselves on other elements, specially some changes in the main producers of the serial (looming presidential elections in Brazil, France and the US) believe that progress is unlikely before 2009 or 2010.

Most probably the time-frame for producing the final episode will be somewhere between these two extreme scenarios. The main actors cannot afford to remain on the flop of Episode III for too long as their reputation is at stake, given that they bear the responsibility for this latest failure.

Many of the other actors and extras are also keen to complete the Doha season as they have been promised increased ‘fees’ and bonuses. Among these are the C4 (the Cotton Initiative Group to which elimination of subsidies on cotton has been promised), the LDCs (duty-free and quota free access to markets of developed countries) and other DCs, (‘Aid for Trade’ initiative). So we can expect some consensus to get back on the setting for the last episode.

Do we need to be excited in Mauritius on these prospects? Not really. We have not been promised any special deal for the next episode. On the contrary we would most probably be subjected to some significant reductions of our fees (reduction of our preferential market access).

So ‘Time-out’. Let us get some popcorn and sodas for the next episode.

<B>By Mahmood Cheeroo</B>