A (3:10)

When you were working inside the WTO what are you most proud of?

B (3:15)

Amendment to the TRIPS agreement. That was a very, I think, humbling experience for me because it was a time when Africa was going through an HIV AIDS pandemic and obviously everything else that is, you know, that goes with that.

A (3:34)

TRIPS, for those who don't know, being the regulations covering intellectual property rights.

B (3:37)

Absolutely.

A (3:39)

It's a very complex issue.

B (3:41)

Yes, it is, it is. But then for the amendment, we are actually focusing on issues that relate to the compulsory licensing and importation of generic drugs and specifically for hivaids, malaria and tuberculosis. And these were issues that were of great concern to the African continent.

A (4:03)

So that was a bit of a breakthrough in that it was permitted the compulsory licensing that then in turn led to the increase in the manufacture of generics, especially by India, thereby bringing down prices for Africa. Is that right?

B (4:15)

India and others as well. Brazil was another one. But also some of the developed countries, you know, that decided that they should also be part of this, do this and contribute basically to what was looked at as a global humanitarian good.

A (4:34)

And so did the United States then eventually concede to this amendment? Because I think no, they were part of the.

B (4:39)

They were part of the solution. They were part of the solution. You know, we negotiated the first, we agreed on a waiver in 2001 in Doha and then we consequently then started negotiating the amendment, the real amendment to the treaty. It's never happened before, but that a WTO or a trade related treaty is amended. And I don't see it happening ever again. So in a way, it was historic in all sense. First that we were able to amend the treaty, but also because of the contribution that amendment actually made to saving lives in Africa. Millions of lives were saved just because the drugs were not just accessible, they're also affordable.

A (5:27)

We're going to take our first quick break. When we come back, I want to ask you if there are any lessons from your experience in participating in the negotiations for amending the TRIP agreement for the way forward on Doha. This is the Global Prosperity Wonkcast from the center for Global development. I'm Lawrence MacDonald and I'm very pleased that my guest today is Amina Mohamed, Assistant Secretary General in the United Nations Environment Program and one of several candidates to become the next Director General of the wto. We'll be back in just a moment. Welcome back to the Global Prosperity wonkcast. I'm Lawrence McDonald. My guest today, Amina Muhammad. We're talking about what she would do if she became the leader of the World Trade Organization. Ms. Mohammed, before the break you were telling me about your participation in the negotiations to amend the TRIPS agreement, that. Which governs trade and intellectual property rights. You said it was the first time and perhaps the last time that a trade treaty would get amended. Do you see any lessons from that process for the major challenge facing the WTO today, which is to break the deadlock around the Doha Development Round?

B (6:55)

Yeah, many lessons. You know, the first one being that I think for me it was the time that I realized that the WTO was not about dogma, it wasn't about rigidity, that it was flexible, that it could adapt, it could improve things, it could, you know, be. Make the, you know, that we could make the compromises that we needed to make to make sure that we made progress, that we made movement, that we addressed concerns and addressed them effectively and that we were able to actually rise to the occasion when faced with such a tragedy. Right. Of actually incredible, you know, of an incredible magnitude of people dying because the medicine that was available and that could have helped them probably extend their lives a little bit to allow them see their children through nursery school, maybe primary school, maybe even secondary school to see their children married. Those drugs were so expensive that they couldn't afford it. So in fact, people were dying knowing that there was treatment out there, but that because they couldn't afford it, they had no access to.

A (8:16)

Do you think the stakes are as high in the case of the Doha Round? It seems to me they might be higher, but they're less acute, they're less obvious.

B (8:24)

Absolutely. And I don't know how many.

A (8:26)

So can we motivate a sense of emergency in order to get benefits for developing countries from the round?

B (8:32)

No, we don't need to do that, actually. What we need to do is make sure that we conduct negotiations that are inclusive, that are transparent, that, that bring everybody around the table where people actually feel that their contributions matter. We need to make sure that these negotiations take place mainly in Geneva, where governments have invested heavily to place missions to ensure that they have their trade experts there that can do the negotiations on a day to day, hour to hour basis and, you know, try and, you know, just refrain from that temptation to always take these discussions elsewhere.

A (9:13)

I'm interested that you say that because a number of the other candidates have pointed to the trade ministerial meeting in Bali in December and said that an agreement on trade facilitation there could be the way forward. Is there tension between that idea and the idea of keeping the work in Geneva?

B (9:29)

No, no, no, absolutely not. No, I think that we should have the Ministerials, every two years, we should do as much work as possible. In fact, we should do most of the work in Geneva so that when we go to the ministerials, right, which are only four days, how often are they held now?

A (9:45)

It's not every year, I guess every two years. Every two years. So we should continue every two years.

B (9:48)

We should continue every two years. But we should actually refrain from having the mini ministerials and the other small meetings that are held every so often in different capitals in the world where with the expectations that in fact, that would break the deadlock.

A (10:05)

So leave it more up to the professional negotiators.

B (10:07)

Leave it there because these professional negotiators and I had a discussion on this this morning actually with some of the negotiators in this country, have direct access to their governments. They talk every day, many times a day, they get their instructions direct from government. So there is an open, if you like, an open mic between governments and the negotiators in Geneva. It's not as if the negotiators are totally delinked from their governments so that, you know, you get this necessity of having these mini ministerials where you bring in ministers.

A (10:39)

Some people would say the mini ministerials create some pressure for action. It's three weeks away. We need to have something for the ministers to announce. Maybe we should really buckle down.

B (10:47)

Well, if that was true, we wouldn't have a deadlock for 11 years. We've had so many other meetings. Right. We just had Davos in January. Right. For half a day. But for me it doesn't make sense. I don't know whether it makes sense to you that in half a day, ministers, 15, 10 ministers. We have 159 countries, member states of the WTO. The 10 ministers meeting for half a day in Davos would break the deadlock.

A (11:19)

Well, that sounds persuasive to me. We're going to take our second break. We'll be back in just a minute. I'm Lawrence MacDonald, Global Prosperity Wonka speaking today with Amina Mohammed, who is campaigning to be the next Director General of the World Trade Organization. Welcome back to the Global Prosperity Wonk cast. Amina Mohamed, the Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations Environment Program and one of several candidates to be the Director General of the WTO. Ms. Mohammed, I've read now eight or nine of the statements presented to the General Counsel. And if I remember correctly, you're the only one who actually had an item in there where you addressed the WTO role in climate change. That interests me a lot. Why did you decide to include that in your statement?

B (12:23)

Well, the WTO has to be part of global problem solving. It cannot be outside that framework. Climate change is an issue of global concern, Right. Everybody is talking about it. It affects, whether you like it or not, the flow of goods and services. Look at a country like Maldives, not even any other country for that matter, that is so dramatically affected by climate change, and tell me that floods, famine, drought does not affect the production of goods, their flow. Right. And basically the volume of trade, the.

A (13:20)

Specific thing that you mentioned was liberalization of trade in environmental goods and services.

B (13:26)

Absolutely.

A (13:26)

Talk to me about that. Why does that matter?

B (13:29)

Well, it matters because, again, I mean, it's an issue that everybody's paying attention to. Right. And WTO negotiates rules, and these rules are rules that impact and affect the movement, the production of goods and services.

A (13:49)

Now, this would be a special liberalization for environmental goods, above and beyond that for other goods. Do you see that as being part of the solution?

B (13:56)

It would be part of the solution, yeah. It would be part of the solution. For instance, I mean, and I talked about this, too, the issue of subsidies, right. And the fact that there may be some very harmful subsidies that are given to, you know, by government.

A (14:13)

We're paying a lot of attention recently to the collapse of the Chinese solar panel producer and whether or not that was linked to the crackdown on subsidies. A lot of people here say that's ridiculous. If the Chinese want to subsidize the solar panel makers, let them do it. It's good for the world. Would that be your view?

B (14:31)

If it affects competition, if it gives them an edge over other producers, then there's a problem. If it doesn't. Yes, you know, of course it would.

A (14:41)

Give them an edge. That's why somebody provides subsidies.

B (14:44)

If they're violating any of the WTO agreements. Right. Then there's an issue. Then there's an issue. But there's a meeting, a wonderful meeting that took place on environmental. On liberalization of environmental goods and services in Russia. And many of the major players were there, and they agreed actually on a list of products that they could probably convince members of WTO in Geneva to move forward on. That's one way to go.

A (15:12)

And would that be an amendment to the existing fisheries? You know, please talk about fisheries. I'm interested in that, too.

B (15:19)

Yeah. And the subsidies. Right. If the subsidies would actually increase the volume of fish.

A (15:28)

They have the opposite effect, by the way. Right.

B (15:30)

That's why they're harmful.

A (15:31)

The subsidies accelerate the depletion of the stocks and the destruction of the fisheries.

B (15:34)

Absolutely. That's why they're harmful. So we need to look at them and see ways in which maybe we can suspend them for a while to just make sure that the stocks are replenished and that they recover and then see what needs to be done.

A (15:49)

So are there cases now concerning fishing subsidies at the wto?

B (15:52)

Not that I know of. Not that I know of.

A (15:54)

I've been interested in fishing subsidies, but I've never heard the WTO mentioned in that context.

B (15:57)

Yeah, but it's an issue that, you know, we have mentioned in at unep.

A (16:01)

Well, and especially I think some of the coastal African nations suffer from this because the coastal fleets are hurt by the bigger fleets from the industrial countries that come and grab their fish and the island states.

B (16:12)

And it's not even just about grabbing of fish. I think that this affects even, you know, those developed countries. Right. That fish around there. You know, I mean, there's scarcity now. Right. And some of the species are actually drying out. Yeah. And so we need to do something to be able to recover. Give it the time and the space that it needs to do that. Right. You know, but it's an issue again, you know, WTO is member driven. It's a member driven organization. And therefore any issues that arise have to be put on the table so that the members can sit around the table and discuss which is the best way to move this forward. Right. Like the subsidies and fisheries, what do we do about them? Right. When should we do anything about them? Unless there's a general agreement that this should happen, it won't happen.

A (17:04)

And if you become Director General, you put some very interesting things on the table that I haven't heard from the other candidates. The liberalization of trade, environmental goods and services, fishing subsidies. Your idea about pushing forward on Doha by focusing more on the role of the professional negotiators, among those things and other things. What would be your top priority if you become dg?

B (17:27)

Negotiations? Definitely. The WTO was established in order to set rules and open markets. That was the diamond standard that the WTO set for itself. And we should not move away from that. So that has to be, for me, the top priority. The other one is ensuring that you have the stakeholders. Right. Other than governments participating in the work of the organization, I think that you should get business on board. And I have proposed to the establishment together with the members of WTO Business Advisory Council. I think we can go beyond that and invite others as well. Right. Whether it is, you know, the fourth estate or civil Society organizations who have a contribution to make. I think that the other thing that we should do is basically update the agenda, the negotiating agenda. Look for innovative ways of moving this process forward so that we don't get stuck for the period that we've been stuck and get on board countries that have joined recently and establishment a solid implementation. Right. And market opening coalition because some of these countries actually big markets.

A (18:57)

One final question which I should have done before giving you your last question, but we didn't touch on the free trade agreements, the bilateral and multiple free trade agreements. And this is an issue, I think of increasing concern for those who believe in a WTO rule backed system. How would you reconcile this rush to towards FTAs and the tension with the role of WTO?

B (19:18)

Well, there's an adverse relationship and I also said that when I launched my campaign between stalled negotiations and mushrooming of FTAs. Now 90% of the membership of the WTO are involved in one FTA or another. So it's not new. The FTA and the WTO have co existed and the MTs have coexisted for a very long time. What we need to just ensure is that in fact the primacy of the multilateral trading system is not questioned. It's not in doubt. The other one is to make sure that in fact any trade agreement of any category has as a basis the principle of non discrimination and that it's for economic welfare. If you can actually put those three as the platform on which you construct trade agreements of any category, then you are safe. I have also said that if you are negotiating an fta, one way of ensuring that the link is not broken between the FTAs and the MTs is to ensure that you don't create new dispute settlement mechanisms, that you actually tie the fts to the, you know, any new fts, I mean to the dsu. Right. So that the link is there, but also so that the standard that has been set by the dispute settlement understanding is actually maintained and the legitimacy that has. And the credibility that it has. Right. You know, is maintained. It's not questioned, it's not doubted. Because as soon as you start creating others, it just means that you're uncomfortable with the dsu. And the DSU is one of the strongest pillars of the world trade the dispute settlement mechanism. Yes, the dispute settlement understanding is the strongest pillar of the multilateral trading system. So we should not lose it.

A (21:16)

Well, thank you so much. It's a real pleasure to speak with you today and I know you have a very busy schedule, so I appreciate you taking the time to come and see us here at the center for Global Development. This has been the Global Prosperity Wonk cast from the center for Global Development. My guest today, Amina Mohammed. She's the Assistant Secretary General of UNEP and one of several candidates to be the next DG of the wto. You can find the Wonkast online on itunes and on Stitcher. Just search for wonkcast or CGD and subscribe to hear a new interview every week. Until next time, I'm Lawrence McDonald. Thanks for listening.

B (23:38)

SA Sam.