Chairs of the negotiating groups on Agriculture and NAMA would draw up issue-based work plans in consultations with member countries chief negotiators and senior officials for intensifying engagement to complete negotiations and would form the agenda for discussion when the WTO's official Ministerial Meeting takes place in Geneva in December, this year.

The trade ministers unanimously affirmed on the need to conclude the Doha Round within 2010. Ministers also agreed for engagements in bilateral and plurilateral negotiations, which can work as an adjunct for developing a better understanding among member countries.

Briefing mediapersons at the conclusion of the Delhi Ministerial, the Chair and the Indian commerce and industry minister, Anand Sharma claimed that “breakthrough” in multilateral trade negotiations was achieved by the “rainbow coalition” of trade ministers from 36 countries representing the “microcosom” of the WTO membership.

The Delhi Ministerial felt that there was a clear recognition that differences subsists on issues and intensifying negotiations was the first step towards bridging these gaps. There was a strong reaffirmation that development remains at the heart of the Doha Round. Ministers agreed that in consultation with chief negotiators and senior officials, the chairs of other negotiating groups would also draw up work plans, including, where applicable, tabling, discussion and finalization of texts where required and the timelines for submission of revised offers in Services in line with the overall agenda of action.

While Sharma said that the intention of convening the Delhi Ministerial was to re-energise the Doha Round negotiations, the WTO Director General, Pascal Lamy said : “Delhi Ministerial which was an initiative by India was never intended to crack substantial nuts. Geopolitical intention is to complete the Round. The purpose of the meeting was whether we can built necessary momentum in Geneva. I cannot say it can be done, but it is doable. Future negotiations are going to be tougher than what we did for the Uruguay Round. I may not expect immediate market openings, but it may result in stronger disciplines.”

The US Trade Representative, Ron Kirk said that his country was ready to work collaboratively for the successful completion of the Doha Round. “The December 2008 texts have a number of gaps which need to be negotiated. There is a need for negotiation on more market access. US will embrace agreements that give meaningful market access that would result improvement in our economy and result in job expansion,” he said

Kirk said that sustained engagements in bilateral negotiations was necessary which would be in consistent with multilateral trade negotiations. “Many things can be resolved through bilateral negotiations he said.

When asked if he saw the end-game dawning in Doha Round negotiations, Kirk said “substance will drive the process, not deadlines or timelines'. He said that the issue of climate change should not figure in multilateral trade talks. There were other for a where it can be discussed.

Kirk said that he also wanted a bilateral negotiation with India within the US trade policy, but he fell short of terming it on the lines of a free trade agreement (FTA). Indian commerce minister, Anand Sharma when asked to clarify said : “We had discussions on bilateral agreements with over two dozen countries, including China, Brazil, South Africa, African Group, CARICOM, ACP countries and US.”

The success of the Delhi Ministerial was primarily due to the leaders from least developed countries (LDCs), small and vulnerable economies (SVEs), African Group, and ACP countries. They have been adversely affected by the global financial crisis and the accompanying recession with loss of job and decline in exports and want a revival of their economy through a fair and equitable multilateral trade system which can also protect their interests

The Delhi Ministerial agreed that the work agenda for LDCs covering all specific issues across the entire spectrum should be put on a faster track for negotiating convergance with the WTO DG, Pascal Lamy and chairs of the negotiating groups taking the lead in the process. The ministers agreed to review progress and provide further guidance on how to complete negotiations. All opportunities for political guidance, including at the level of leaders to be used between now and the end of November 2009 as also to iteratively track progress.

The G-20 and the G-33 emphasised the need to respect the multilateral mandate as reflected in the work done on the Agriculture and NAMA modalities over the last seven years; both Groups were of the view that the texts of December 2008 must form the basis of future work. Regarding the negotiating process, they reiterated that bilateral and plurilateral meetings could only be used to supplement the multilateral process and not to substitute it. The G-20 called for the expeditious completion of the Round with contributions from all Members.

The Cotton-4 recalled the mandate of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration according to which the cotton issue must be addressed ambitiously, expeditiously and specifically. They expressed the hope that this issue would be taken up on priority when talks resumed. They were supported in this by all other Groups, particularly, the G-33, the G-20, the African Group and the ACP Group.

The African Group re-emphasized the importance of keeping development concerns as the main focus of negotiations. ACP Group reaffirmed the need for the banana issue to be specifically addressed outside of the modalities on agriculture, in order to reach a just and balanced outcome.

The two groups, supported by CARICOM, also drew the attention of participants to the progress made in July 2008 on preference erosion modalities. They expressed disappointment that the specific understandings developed then had not reached fruition on account of the delay in resumption; they emphasised the importance of this issue for their economies.

The G-10 group expressed its commitment to a successful and expeditious conclusion of the Doha Round to face the economic downturn and to fight the spread of protectionism. Citing the contributions being made by developed countries, the Group stressed the need for a balanced result in the single undertaking.

The LDC Group expressed concern that delay in concluding the Doha Round was costing them dearly. They called for an expeditious conclusion of the Round and progress on issues that were critical to them including DFQF.#