THE KOREA HERALD
On a terrestrial globe, Uruguay is almost exactly at the opposite point of Korea. Between 1987 and 1994, however, it seemed closer than ever, albeit in not-so-favorable terms. Many Koreans then associated the South American country's name with an economic catastrophe. In fact, however, Montevideo only hosted the inaugural meeting of new multilateral trade liberalization talks, dubbed the "Uruguay Round." Soon, global attention will focus on Doha, Qatar, in which trade ministers from roughly 140 countries will meet Nov. 9-13 to discuss launching yet another round of free trade negotiations under the auspices of the World Trade Organization. The WTO's similar attempts in Seattle two years ago broke up in failure in the face of differences among major countries over setting up an agenda and "street fighting" between the police and anti-globalization demonstrators.
Now, major trading powers appear more willing to compromise and civic activists less virulent than in 1999. The changes, while somewhat belated, are desirable, at a time when America's war against terrorism is adding uncertainty to the already slump-stricken world economy, causing concerns about a looming depression. The global trade body and the host country deserve compliments for pushing ahead with the ministerial meeting not far from the scenes of military conflicts. The launch of the WTO's "new round" talks is not completely assured, as a matter of course. There still are wide gulfs over the scope of the agenda between those sticking to a "narrow" agenda of expanding market access and those preferring a "broad" agenda by revising the existing rules and introducing new ones. Some of the world's poorest countries even find it difficult to catch up with the free trade tempo of the Uruguay Round. Agricultural exporters also call for freeing up farm trade to that of manufactured goods, while importers, including Korea, prefer a gradual approach, citing the "non-trade concerns" of the farm industry. The industrial nations are demanding to reflect environmental and labor standards regarding trade issues but developing countries oppose it as premature. Seoul wants strong rules against the abuse of antidumping import restraints, facing strong opposition from Washington.
Despite the widely shared need for further liberalizing trade and investment as a means of reversing global recession, most developing countries also have some distrust of the intentions of developed ones, and with sufficient reasons. Should the upcoming meeting bear fruit by successfully launching a new round, the industrialized nations must dissolve the less affluent group's suspicions by lowering tariff and non-tariff barriers first as they promised seven years ago.
All these potential stumbling blocks notwithstanding, the ministers should be able to start a new round for no other purpose than proving the world's business is as usual in spite of the obstructionists' sabotage. Otherwise, the situations are feared to replicate the late 1930s and early 40s when an economic slump resulted in competitive import regulations, which in turn sparked trade disputes among bigger countries and contributing to the Second World War.
We know - and hope the lesson has been learned - that these worst-case scenarios would not occur, but even a trade war would prove to be fatal for a country like Korea, which depends on foreign trade for more than 70 percent of its gross domestic product. So it is vital for Seoul not to repeat the mistakes it made in the Uruguay Round, when the government negotiators failed to make proper preparations and deceived themselves and the nation by pretending there would be few problems.
Our biggest concern will still be the opening of the domestic farming market, particularly that of rice. The time is long overdue for the nation to reach a consensus on this staple grain. It should decide whether to keep protecting the domestic market at heavy costs or leave it to international market and promote other industries with comparative competitive edges, while compensating farmers or finding them alternative sources of income under a long-term program.
It is important to set up a unified negotiating strategy by coordinating differences and preventing administrative overlaps among competing government agencies. No less significant are proper relations with the public. The government should make transparent key proceedings of the talks - if not the details and major negotiating tactics. Intentional or not, any misleading of the public and damages from the consequent public distrust would be worse than industrial injuries.:
