Significance of IFD Agreement at MC13
- Non-adoption of IFD Agreement: The 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in Abu Dhabi saw the non-adoption of the agreement on investment facilitation for development (IFD).
- Plurilateral Basis: Negotiations for the IFD agreement were launched in 2017 on a plurilateral basis by 70 countries through the Joint Statement Initiative.
- Support for IFD Agreement: Currently, around 120 of 166 WTO member countries, more than 70% of the membership, back the IFD agreement.
India's Concerns
- Content of IFD Agreement: India's concerns regarding the IFD Agreement lie not in its text but rather in its integration into the WTO rulebook.
- Investment Distinction: India argues that investment is not inherently trade, citing the lack of a direct link between investment and cross-border trade.
- Process Concerns: India questions the process followed in negotiating the IFD Agreement, citing the absence of a mandate for investment negotiations within the WTO framework.
Debate Over Mandates and Plurilateral Negotiations
- Negative Mandate: India contends that there's a negative mandate against launching negotiations on trade and investment relationships within the WTO framework.
- Scope of Negative Mandate: There's debate over whether this negative mandate encompasses all aspects of investment, including facilitation, and whether it applies to plurilateral negotiations.
- Importance of Plurilateral Agreements: PAs like the IFD agreement are viewed as crucial for revitalizing the WTO's legislative function amid difficulties in achieving consensus.
India's Defensive Approach
- Reconsideration Needed: India, as a major economy, is urged to reconsider its defensive stance towards PAs like the proposed IFD Agreement within the WTO.
Conclusion
- WTO's Legislative Stalemate: PAs such as the IFD agreement are seen as essential for overcoming the stalemate in the WTO's decision-making process and adapting to the complexities of international trade.