nyhetsbrev17u36
Printed: tisdag 23 juli 2002 20.58.30
toppmötet/utspelet i "Bridges" den mycket initierade
löpande
uppdatering som ICTSD i Geneve sänder ut: "However,
while Swedish
Prime Minister and Summit (ref. alltså till EU-USA
summit) Chair Göran
Persson said the Conclusions sent "a clear signal" that a
round was
necessary to revive global economic growth, officials said
the summit
achieved no substantive breakthroughs on the issue of a new
round."
handelsrelaterade frågor så kan det samtidigt
vara viktigt att komma
ihåg att
ett
pågående propagandakampanjen - det handlar om
att på alla olika sätt
framställa rundan som självklar och
oundviklig.
inklusive nya områden såsom ett MAI-liknande
investeringsavtal. Vi har
under de senaste månaderna sett exempel efter exempel
på hur EU
utnyttjar varje tillfälle för att driva denna
propaganda. Ett exempel
var FN-konferensen om de minst utvecklade länderna i
maj där både Leif
Pagrotsky och kommissionen i
uttalanden
ny runda" trots att denna inte fanns med i någon
handlingsplan för
MUL-länderna. En del u-länder stödjer EU
medan andra (framför allt den
s k "like-minded gruppen" i WTO med bla Indien, Pakistan
m.fl)
fortfarande uttrycker tveksamhet t ex till investeringsavtal
i WTO.
Olika arbetsgrupper sitter just nu inom WTO och diskuterar
olika
delfrågor. Investeringar var uppe på ett
möte den 31/5. Jag bifogar
nedan en kort rapport från "Bridges" från just
denna diskussion:
Members met to discuss how investment should be treated in
the Doha
Ministerial process. According to trade sources, the
discussion was
extremely animated, given the sensitivity surrounding the
topic, as
countries brought forward their perspectives on the role of
investment
in the WTO.
sizeable number of countries, including the EC, Chile, Costa
Rica,
Korea, Japan, Morocco and the Czech Republic. Setting out
the
rationale for such an agreement, proponents argued that a
multilateral
investment agreement would increase transparency in the
multilateral
system; confer the benefits of increased FDI flows to
developing
countries; minimise investment risk for investors; and
create better
entry opportunities for small and medium sized enterprises.
In
addition, it was said that since service-related investments
already
exist under the purview of the General Agreement on Trade in
Services
(GATS), extending WTO rules to include all forms of FDI
would be
feasible. GATS Article 1.2(c), dealing with the "commercial
presence"
of foreign service providers, includes foreign service
providers
within the purview of the GATS' obligations and
rights.
including India, Malaysia and Egypt -- remained opposed to
the idea of
a multilateral investment agreement, arguing that binding
rules on
investment might diminish the options developing countries
have when
establishing the conditions of entry for foreign direct
investors. A
multilateral investment regime, they said, could prove to be
a limit
on national sovereignty. This group was additionally
concerned that
developing countries were not ready to take on new
multilateral trade
commitments as they were still in the process of
implementing the
Uruguay Round agreements.
completely polarised. Representing something of a middle
ground,
Australia, Argentina and Brazil stated their willingness to
consider a
multilateral investment regime at the WTO in exchange for
concessions
granted in the area of agriculture, such as reduced export
subsidies