Sustainable Development Policy Institute

Over to the Next Meeting
The News on Sunday, Political Economy
December 25, 2005
by Abid Qaiyum Suleri

One of the signs for perfect negotiations is that none of the negotiating parties feels satisfied. Going by this definition, the recent ministerial meeting of World Trade Organization (WTO) may be termed quite successful. None of the major stakeholders, ranging from big trading nations to the civil society representatives, were 'completely' satisfied with the deal that was reached by 149 member governments of WTO on December 18, 2005.

Though the expectations from the Hong Kong ministerial meeting were strategically toned down, the success in avoiding a repeat of what happened at Cancun or Seattle can be called another victory. The Hong Kong meeting has put the sluggish Doha Round of trade talks "back on track," in the words of WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy.

The Hong Kong conference was never meant to propose any modalities (specific numbers and formula structures) for reduction in subsidies and tariffs as a means to liberalise international trade. In fact, before the meeting the whole process that was originally designed to discuss the modalities was renamed as 'recalibration' phase in which ministers had to re-assess their positions on agricultural as well as non-agricultural market access to determine how far they would like to go to materialize the Doha Development Agenda. Thus the ministers' agreement to disagree and their decision to resolve their differences on agriculture, industrial goods and services (probably in Geneva) allows them to fill in the considerable blanks still left from the Hong Kong. After successfully avoiding failure now, they can still hope to conclude the Doha round by the end of next year.

That the level of success depends on the level of expectations is only stating the obvious. This time our expectations were very low. So it came as no surprise when John Tsang (Hong Kong's secretary for commerce, industries and technology), who was chairing the meeting in his capacity as the host minister, said that the outcome of Hong Kong meeting exceeded his expectations.

But the question remains: Whose victory was it? And in Pakistan's domestic context, what does it entail for our country? These questions, though, seem very simple and direct but their answers are extremely complicated.

A close analysis of the ministerial declaration issued at the end of the six-day Hong Kong meeting reveals that the gathering's most talked about achievement is the putting down of 2013 as the end date for elimination agricultural export subsidies, contingent "upon the completion of modalities". The US has also agreed to eliminate its export subsidies on cotton next year. Progress is also visible on the Least Developed Countries (LDCs) long standing request for duty free quota free market access. The developing countries' reservations about the treatment of services were also addressed to some extent by weakening the mandatory and prescriptive nature of certain provisions relating to the future course of negotiations.

The critics of the declaration question the rationale for allowing subsidy-providing nations to have eight more years to keep supporting their agriculture exports on the expense of poor farmers from the developing nations. They also question the untamed domestic support on cotton provided by the US, the elimination date of which is not indicated in the final declaration.

The final draft declaration contains 59 paragraphs on key areas of agriculture, Non-Agriculture Market Access (NAMA), services, cotton, Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs), WTO rules, environment, Least Developed Countries (LDCs), aid for trade, integrated framework, and accession.

On agriculture, there are minor improvements on what was written in the pre-Hong Kong December 7 draft text of the declaration. For instance, the "working hypothesis" on three bands for classifying trade-distorting domestic subsidies for the purposes of reduction has been replaced by text specifying that "there will be three bands," with similar language for structuring tariffs into four bands for making tariff cuts. The EU will face the highest reduction on both counts and will be placed in the first band, the US and Japan would be placed in the second band, while all the other members will be in the lowest bands of tariff and domestic subsidy reduction. Countries such as Switzerland, which have high relative amounts of trade-distorting subsidies even though they fall into the lowest band, are enjoined to make an additional reduction.

On export subsidies, the members have agreed to develop detailed modalities on parallel elimination of all export subsidies and discipline all export measures. The text commits members "to ensure the parallel elimination of all forms of export subsidies and disciplines on all export measures with equivalent effect to be completed by 2013." This date has is more acceptable to the EU than a widely-supported 2010 deadline which European negotiators resisted in the exclusive 'Green Room' meetings all week. This is because the 2003 reform of Europe's Common Agricultural Program (CAP) will eliminate most export subsidies by 2013 anyway. However, in order to placate the advocates of earlier date, the declaration says "a substantial part" of the reductions is to be "realized by the end of the first half of the implementation period." For the purposes of comparison, the implementation period for the Uruguay Round commitments was five years for the developed countries.

The declaration also requires WTO members to develop disciplines on food aid, export credit programs and the reform of state trading enterprises by "30 April 2006 as part of the modalities." On food aid, in particular, the EU has argued that a great deal of US in-kind food aid is tantamount to an export subsidy to its farmers. The declaration, therefore, provides for an "effective discipline on in-kind food aid, monetisation and re-exports so that there can be no loop-hole for continuing export subsidisation." It also calls for the creation of a 'safe box' for bona fide food aid to ensure that new rules do not serve to impede it in emergencies.

An important movement in the declaration is the recognition of the fact that Special Products (SP) and Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) will be an integral part of the modalities and the outcome of negotiations in agriculture. This is a huge victory for G-33, which achieved it by making an alliance with G-20 nations. The developing countries have been given the flexibility to self-designate an appropriate number of goods as Special Products guided by the indicators on the criteria of food security, livelihood security and rural development. Similarly, their right to a recourse to SSM -- based on import quantity and price triggers -- have also been recognised. Recognition on the basis of price triggers is particularly significant because many developing countries cannot effectively monitor import quantities; prices are far simpler to follow.

On the cotton issue, it is agreed that "all" export subsidies for cotton would be eliminated by the developed countries in 2006, a major achievement for the four African LDCs -- Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad and Mali -- who are dependant on cotton exports. This means not only the elimination of the US Step 2 export subsidy program but also the 'subsidy element' of the export credit guarantees the US extends to cotton traders -- both ruled inconsistent with WTO rules by a WTO tribunal in April 2005.

There is, however, no mention of a binding commitment on the reduction of domestic subsidies for cotton production. African cotton-producing countries were intensely disappointed at this outcome, as the high level of producer and marketing support allows US producers to sell cotton in international markets at prices below the real cost of production. Domestic subsidies make up 80-90 per cent of total US support for cotton (estimated around 3.8 billion dollars in 2004).

It is also agreed that some time in future (from the commencement of the implementation of the deal that comes about at the successful conclusion of the Doha round of global trade talks), the developed countries will provide duty and quota free access to their markets for cotton exports from the LDCs. African countries are, however, unlikely to benefit from this provision because they do not export cotton to the developed countries markets in general and the US market in particular. They sell their cotton in other markets, particularly in Asia, where they have to compete with subsidized US exports.

A small development on NAMA negotiations is the inclusion of a paragraph on the need for a balance between agriculture and NAMA ambitions in a proportionate manner, consistent with the principle of special and differential treatment. Similarly, the earlier "working hypothesis to use a Swiss Formula" has been replaced in the revised text with "We adopt a Swiss formula".

Though the structure and details of the formula are yet not finalized, the declaration sets the direction that the co-efficient levels in the Swiss Formula will take. According to the declaration, the formula will be used, among other things, to "reduce or as appropriate eliminate tariffs, including the reduction or elimination of tariff peaks, high tariffs and tariff escalation, in particular on products of export interests to developing countries and... take fully into account the special needs and interest of developing countries, including through less than full reciprocity in reduction commitments". This leaves the door open to both Pakistan sponsored two-co-efficient 'simple Swiss formula' and the multiple-co-efficient-based approach linked to each country's average tariff favored by Argentina, Brazil, and India.

The declaration notes the concerns raised by small, vulnerable economies, on how to handle the issue of preference erosion and instructs the Negotiating Group to establish ways to provide flexibilities for these members without creating a sub-category of WTO members.

On services, the developing countries (barring Cuba and Venezuela, who raised objection and showed concerns in final plenary) can take a breath of relief as the final ministerial declaration weakens the mandatory and prescriptive language in the original version of Annex C of the declaration. The annex's much-contested paragraph on the plurilateral request-offer process was revised to explicitly specify that the members' obligatory consideration of collective requests will take place in the context of an article on General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) which stipulates that liberalisation in services trade should pay respect to the countries' developmental levels. This change was thought to be necessary to address the concerns of G-90 and some members of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

The annex to the paragraph of the declaration that deals with LDCs provides details on the brand-new developed country obligation to provide duty free and quota free access for LDC exports as of 2008. While it is later than LDCs would have hoped, a precise date is important because it guarantees an application of the benefits even if the Doha round stretches beyond 2008. There is, however, an important caveat on product coverage: developed countries that face difficulties in providing full unrestricted access in 2008 will only be required to do so for 97 percent of tariff lines. This three per cent reservation will account for some 330 tariff lines. The undiversified export basket of the LDCs may deprive them of getting any real benefit through this clause.

According to the declaration, the ministers have come up with a self-imposed challenging deadline of April 30, 2006 for finalising the full modalities and have agreed on a second milestone of July 31, 2006, by which date they will have to submit the detailed draft of their commitments based on the final modalities. But, as they say in WTO negotiations, deadlines are meant to be missed. Both the above mentioned deadlines do not seem to be very practicable, though it is expected that attempts to meet them will keep the ball rolling for the global trade talks.

Also, all the above mentioned developments appear to be far away from even starting to benefit the global trade share of the developing and least development countries because of the impracticability of the new deadlines.

The Globe and the Other Globe
The News on Sunday, Rawalpindi/Islamabad
December 18, 2005
by Abid Qaiyum Suleri and Muhammad Badar Alam in Hong Kong

The setting sets the tone: A grand steel and glass structure barricaded by security personnel and emblazoned with corporate sponsorship banners is where the world is meeting to discuss international trade. If the barricades are meant to keep the protesting farmers away from the Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre (HKCEC), the venue of the World Trade Organization's sixth ministerial conference, the corporate insignias at the building's exits and entrances may indicate who is it that really counts in global trade.

Korean farmers, who have still not forgotten the suicide of their colleague at the last ministerial meeting Cancun in 2003, tried to bridge the apparently impassable gulf between the official and the popular by taking a dip in the cold waters of Victoria Bay around the conference venue on the opening day. But their bravado as well as the 2003 suicide of their comrade have been unable to change anything in the global trade situation. Thousands of them -- they could have been much more if the Hong Kong authorities had not embarked on an aggressive detention and deportation policy for would be antiglobalisation trouble-makers -- are camped in Victoria Park, some five kilometres away from the HKCEC. While drumming and dancing their way from their camp to the conference venue, they are playing hide and seek with local security forces, creating poignant photo shoots and screeching headlines across the globe.

But they are only a part of a large contingent of civil society action groups all bent upon making their rejection of WTO heard and seen. People from places as varied as Bangladesh and Kenya and groups as different from each other as sex workers and indigenous tribes have set up colourful camps plastered with red-hot slogans and covered with anti-imeprialist banners. Daily they get together in their respective places to speak up, to march and to raise the pitch of the protests further through music and even visual arts.

Closer to the convention centre, another group of civil society representatives, dressed like business executives, deem it beneath their dignity to show up on the streets while mulling over 'alternate' texts and proposals. They believe what goes inside the official talks would have been alright only if it had followed their policy recommendations.

Inside the venue, official delegates rush to meet their counterparts as if every meeting that they fail to attend will turn out to be an opportunity missed in realising the benefits, perceived or real if any, of the opening of global trade. The nervous energy of the delegates from the developing countries is all the more visible in their desperate efforts to seek succour from the media, ensconced like a watchdog on the entrance to main meeting rooms, or even the NGOs stationed in another exhibition centre just round the corner. When they are not rushing to secure support from the outside, they are trying to curry favour with the high and the mighty inside. In their hot pursuit for tips to take into the next meeting, they always try to remain at a close 'listening' distance from their chief delegate in order to get hold of every single word he or she speaks.

Those who matter can be told from those who don't from the number of briefings a national or multilateral delegation gives in a day. While the United States (US), European Union (EU), Japan, the WTO secretariat and the host government can be seen daily on the briefing roster, Burkina Faso and Samoa either have hardly anything to say or like most developing countries they are scared to annoy those whose words count.

Most of these briefings are very well attended and very carefully listened to, though the questions asked do not all the time relate properly to the subject. Sometimes they are couched in some incomprehensible variety of English, the language of the globalised world, that those giving the briefings and those at the receiving end are both at a loss to pick up the thread of the conversation. This may be mainly because the journalists are being treated as a noisy lot, better left as far away as possible from the 'real' talks. Beyond the press centre, the farthest end of their domain reaches the NGO centre. The official worthies, protected by the seclusion afforded by the architecture of the venue, hardly bother to give the press a complete picture. Hence, the gaps in the journalist's queries.

Owing to various statements by a number of important players that Hong Kong ministerial meeting would not produce any meaningful output, the enthusiasm and dynamism among all the above mentioned stakeholders is markedly low than what they showed in Cancun. In the absence of a clear direction, the negotiations have turned into kids' quarrel where everyone is blaming everyone else for not doing enough to save the multilateral trading system. While in the global political arena there are only two blocs -- that is, US and others -- in WTO there are many more. The EU, the US, various groups of developing countries (G-20, G-33, ACP (African Caribbean & Pacific Group)) and on top of all that the least developed countries (LCDs).

This multiplicity of actors is making consensus difficult to arrive at, if not altogether impossible and negotiations on agriculture like always are proving the most contentious ones. Both the EU and US are claiming that they have done their best through their proposals on the agreement on agriculture. Now they want the developing countries to reciprocate.

Members are intensely divided on how deeply to cut farm tariffs, how many products to exempt (partially or entirely) from tariff reductions, and whether and how to set tariff ceilings on agricultural products. Proposals for reductions by developed countries range from 45 per cent maximum cut with no fixed tariff ceiling being offered by G-10 to a 90 per cent maximum cut with up to 75 per cent tariff ceiling for some specific products proposed by the US. The EU's offer of an average farm tariff cut of 46 per cent for all the countries has been criticised as too low by the US, the Cairns Group of agricultural exporters and the G-20. The latter wants developed countries to cut tariff by 45 per cent and developing countries to cut it by 36 per cent. Some EU member states, most vocally France, have slammed the G-20 offer for being too high.

The EU in fact is sticking to its Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform and its Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has made very clear that the EU would not go above and beyond its existing CAP commitments. The Europeans link their flexibility on agriculture to the concessions that they want the developing countries to make in NAMA (non agricultural marketing access) and services.

The US government is similarly obliged to accommodate its cotton growers because they have a major role in determining who reaches the White House next. This is one of the reasons that cotton subsidies in the US will not be phased out as a stand alone case and it will be part of a larger deal (which does not seem to be feasible in the near future). It is against this backdrop that the African cotton-producing countries have warned that they will not sign any declaration in Hong Kong that does not offer concrete results.

The agreement on agriculture remains a sticking point for another reason. During the Doha Ministerial Conference (2001), the members had agreed to "phase out export subsidies with a view to eliminate them entirely". But nothing substantial has happened on this front so far. The EU is not specific on the date, whereas the US and G-20 have suggested 2010 for the elimination. This turns out to be another worry for the small economies who want to protect their subsistence farm growers from the subsidised agricultural imports. The developed countries have not given adequate attention to the G-33 proposal for special products and for special safeguard mechanism (SSM) for the developing countries to protect their agriculture from imports.

India, however, has shown some willingness to go ahead nevertheless. Commerce Minister Kamal Nath has given signals that New Delhi may make some concessions on services and NAMA because for him agriculture is not the only issue in WTO and there is a need to move forward in other areas, if that can happen without compromising the food security concerns of 650 million poor Indian farmers.

For Pakistan, food security does not seem to be so much an important issue as the joining of the Cairns Group which is being believed as a magic formula to enhance exports. Islamabad's formal entry into the club of agriculture exporters on the opening day of the conference seems to precede all other concern that Pakistan otherwise has on the formula for a breakthrough in the agriculture negotiations. Though it is still not clear what Pakistan aims to export or achieve through this move, Commerce Minister Humayun Akhtar Khan has categorically rejected any possibility of getting a bilateral favour from Australia as a reciprocal measure for joining the Canberra-led group. The jury is still out on the real motives behind the move.

Another factor that has made Pakistan a visible player is the appointment of Humayun Akhtar as the facilitator for NAMA negotiations. These talks are aimed at discussing a working formula to reduce tariffs on industrial goods. The basic bones of contention in this area is whether or not to provide flexibility to the developing countries in tariff cuts and whether or not the same coefficient for reduction should be applied across the board for all countries.

Pakistan, being the friend of the chair (facilitator), is trying to remain impartial and attempting to build consensus among the WTO members on NAMA formula. Unluckily for Humayun Akhtar his efforts do not seem to be bearing fruit. Midway through the conference, he declared that the chances of arriving at a consensus on NAMA were very bleak.

Because the commerce minister is also the head of the Pakistani delegation, his pre-occupation with NAMA negotiation is preventing him from taking part in important meetings on issues other than the industrial market access. Even the G-20 meetings are being attended by the bureaucrats despite the fact that Pakistan has an opportunity to play a leading role in this group. This window of opportunity was opened in a meeting of the group in Bhurban three months but the minister's engagements elsewhere are likely to close it. All the limelight that G-20 is enjoying in the conference is falling on the already shiny shoulders of India and Brazil.

Hong Kong colonial legacy offers a perfect backdrop for an offer that the developed countries have made to the least developed once for duty free, quota free exports. The details are not out yet but the fine print says that the offer will only be realised if the LDCs reciprocate with the same generosity on trade as well as non trade issues like democracy, human rights, environment and social standards. That the crucial manufacturing sectors like textiles will remain off limits for the LDCs, even under this offer, does not prove a hindrance in the way of the global West to control the rest of the world through divide and rule. Despite all the strings attached, many LDCs appear too willing to avoid the bait that will set a clear cleavage between them and the relatively 'advanced' developing countries. So much for the free and fair global system.

Aid for Trade- "Mixing Lime juice with Milk"
The News on Sunday, Rawalpindi/Islamabad
December 18, 2005
by Shafqat Munir

With no breakthrough in the multilateral trade talks held during the 6th WTO Ministerial Meeting (13-18 December 2005) in Hong Kong, delegates were busy in a face-saving exercise that revolved around 'improvements in the WTO agreements on services, non-agriculture market access and agriculture' instead of 'negotiations on modalities'; and 'aid for trade' instead of 'fair trade'.

Old tactics of 'divide and rule' seemed to be working as negotiators from the United States, the European Union and Japan offered to double their technical assistance to the developing and the least developed countries (LDCs). But no concrete commitment had been made by Friday, December 16.

Following the announcement of the Aid for Trade package by the developed nations, negotiators from some of the developing and the least developed countries were reluctant to enter into what they called 'monkey business'. Others were aiming at the jackpot.

World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), in a joint report, said that the Aid for Trade had grown to some 4.4 per cent of the total aid commitments of the world's major contributors.

There are three categories of technical assitance under Aid for Trade. Technical assistance for trade policy and regulation will help countries reform and prepare for closer integration with the multilateral trading system. It will also be available to help enterprises to trade and create a favourable business climate, and to help countries build the physical infrastructure for producing and moving goods and for exporting them.

The Deputy Director General of the WTO, Valentine Rugwabiza, spoke at a panel organised by IMF and the World Bank in Hong Kong, saying that Aid for Trade must be a complement to, not a substitute of, ambitious results from the Doha Development Agenda, and that Aid for Trade "must not have to compete for existing official development assistance flows with other development and poverty reduction priorities."

Pakistan's Commerce Minister, Humayun Akhtar, who supported the Aid for Trade initiative at the IMF and the World Bank panel, later said that Islamabad supports channeling Aid for Trade assistance packages through the UNDP. He described the International Finance Institution (IFI), the existing channel for such assistance, as too restrictive. "Considering the conditionalities attached to IMF/World Bank programmes, most countries are either reluctant to accept such assistance or for some political reasons they do not qualify. These organisations may not be ideal to do the Aid for Trade job," Akhtar told this correspondent.

Terming Aid for Trade a farce, John Samual, regional director Actionaid International (Asia Region) said this was neither aid nor support to trade. "Aid for Trade is like mixing lime juice with milk," said John, adding that such offers were made to divert the attention of the world from unfair trade at the cost of the poor of the world. "This aid is not worth ten days of agricultural subsidies the big countries are giving to their farmers. Imperialistic free trade agenda is creating economic inequalities."

Some civil society groups viewed the initiative as a way of attracting more partners from the developing and the developed countries. Mr Naveen Dhal, the Executive Director of Kathmandu-based South Asia Watch on Trade, Economic and Environment (SAWTEE), said Aid for Trade could only work if the receiving countries were installed in the driving seat. The assistance must include hardware, software and infrastructure development. He said: "The recipient countries must be asked for their priorities instead of imposing donors' solutions on them. They should be given a leadership role. Foreign experts from the donors must not consume the bulk of aid under this package."

The developing and the least developed countries can hardly expect any benefit from Aid for Trade, as much of the aid will be consumed by foreign experts and by their capacity-building efforts. It is time for the developing and the least developed countries in the WTO to try and force big players to opt for a just and fair trade instead of a farce like Aid for Trade. Aid for Trade is nothing but another club of a few at the expense of the unity of the developing and the least developed nations of the world. Divide and rule as usual.

Global Kongregation
The News on Sunday, Rawalpindi/Islamabad
December 11, 2005
by Abid Qaiyum Suleri

"We should tone lower our expectations from the Hong Kong Ministerial (Conference), as the divergence in positions among major trading blocs on various issues will not let any meaningful conclusion of the Doha (Development) Agenda to happen". These were the comments of Pascal Lamy, Director General of World Trade Organization (WTO) who had termed the international trade body a medieval organisation, only two years ago when the Cancun Ministerial Conference finished inconclusively. In Cancun, Lamy was the protector of European Union's trade interests and he had vowed to opt for bilateral and pluri-lateral approaches, replacing WTO's multilateral trading system (MTS), because the latter did not seem to work for him.

Two years down the road, Lamy has been elected as the head of a body where each member country has one vote and whose 75 per cent membership comprises of developing countries. Since Cancun, WTO members have missed all the deadlines for taking the Doha round of international trade negotiations forward. The only concrete step that has been taken is a 'controversial' July Package arrived at in 2004. But at the same time, even this package could not be implemented and now everyone is fearing that the ministers will not be in a position in Hong Kong to agree on the 'full modalities' for the international trade in order to conclude negotiations in the agriculture and non-agriculture market access. Instead, they are expected to set new deadlines for reaching a mutually acceptable agreement on the framework for subsidy and tariff cuts, possibly in another ministerial meeting in the first half of 2006.

When the member countries could not agree on a draft text for the Hong Kong ministerial meeting, the chairman of organisation's General Council and the Director General put forward a draft on November 26. But due to heavy criticism from the members, a revised draft was circulated on December 1. The new draft contains some additions in the main text (particularly new language on agriculture and non-agricultural market access) and a few revisions in various areas. The major change incorporated in the revised draft after a lengthy discussion in General Council is a reflection of the fact that no consensus could be reached on how to treat 'services'.

What does all this entail for Pakistan? The country has gained considerable importance in WTO's politics. The decision to hold a G-20 (A combination of 20 developing nations) meeting in Pakistan in September 2005 was an indication that Pakistan is willing to take a leadership role in the WTO negotiation process. Commerce Minister Humayun Akhtar Khan had also been selected as 'friend of chair' or facilitator on the Non-Agriculture Market Access (NAMA) issues. Though a non-transparent and undemocratic practice, yet in the context of WTO political economy where 'might is always right', gaining of some leadership position may mean that Pakistani government should not return home with empty pockets.

While, multilateral trading system is not expected to get any breakthrough in Hong Kong, our eyes should be focused on bilateral and pluri-lateral achievements. If there is no progress on the agricultural and non-agricultural market access issues, then we should focus on the less contentious issues. Services can be one such sector. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh was successful in gaining 100,000 plus GATS (General Agreement on Trade of Service) visas for skilled information technology specialists of Indian origin during his last visit to Washington. For all that our government has done for the United States, I would expect that Pakistan should also bargain for GATS visas so that we can try to balance the deficit in service sector exports.

On NAMA, Pakistani formula of two co-efficient tariff cuts (one for developed and the other for developing countries) has gained popularity among the major players and is considered to be a moderate approach. Perhaps that is why our commerce minister was awarded the role of facilitator to conduct the negotiations on NAMA. However, it is expected that nothing will come out from NAMA negotiations in Hong Kong. We, therefore, should try to get a preferential access to major northern markets, especially for our textile sector. We should also try to bargain on the removal of anti-dumping duty, a sword that keeps on hanging on our bed linen sector.

On agriculture, let us bargain for the generalised system of preference. During the donors' (read lenders') conference in Islamabad last month, many countries have promised preferential market access for our major agricultural products. Let us keep reminding them so that their pledges don't end up into false promises.

On intellectual property rights, Least Developing Countries (LDCs) have been given an extension to maintain a status-quo on patent implementation till 2013. This means that Trade-Related aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) review process would come to a halt. Perhaps we should focus on building our capacities of pharmaceutical production in this period.

Another major 'achievement' from the government's point of view is that Pakistan has decided to join Cairns group (a gathering of agricultural goods exporting countries). Our membership will be formalised on December 13 in Hong Kong during a Cairns group meeting. As usual in the WTO proceedings, it is a 'one man' decision. Apparently, Australia's Prime Minister John Howard during his recent visit to Pakistan invited President Pervez Musharraf to join the grouping. As a good will gesture, his invitation was accepted. As a result now we will officially declare ourselves as an agricultural exporting country, though we are not sure whether we have any agricultural surplus to sell, except in rice. Every second year we buy wheat from the international market to meet the domestic demand and only this year we have imported sugar in large quantities to keep local prices stable.

Even for surplus crops, we are not in a position to meet non-tariff trade barriers and standards followed by our likely importers. Packaging, storage and preservation are some of the areas where we need to improve ourselves and this should be followed up with a proper marketing strategy. We need to do our homework properly before taking the decision to join an exclusive club of agricultural exporting countries. It would have been much better to do all this through a consultative process. The issue of joining the Cairns group should have been discussed not only with domestic stakeholders but also with our G-20 allies.

One way to turn the membership of Cairns group into a window of opportunity may lie in asking Australia to provide Pakistan bilateral trade concessions as a quid pro quo of our entry in the group.

We should demand for more open access for our agricultural commodities from rest of the world and should also work against the subsidies that the northern developed countries are providing to their farming sector.

On a positive note, it is heartening to know that for the first time the government of Pakistan has decided to include the representatives of civil society in its official delegation for Hong Kong, though these representatives will bear their expenses themselves (flights, accommodation etc). Though a bit expensive, still it is a major achievement for the Pakistani civil society which has been working hard to offer its services to bridge the government-layperson gap on WTO-related development and issues.

To end, let me share a news item that was released by the Reuters news agency on December 5, 2005. Apparently, Hong Kong government has blacklisted 300 anti-globalisation activists (especially those who were the trouble-makers in Cancun and Doha). According to the news agency these people will be deported from Hong Kong whose government has also declared Victoria jail a possible destination for those who try to disrupt the ministerial proceedings. I am not sure how true this news item is. If it's true, I cannot say if I will be sharing my experiences next with the readers from my hotel room or from the Victoria jail.

Due to Donors
The News on Sunday Political Economy
Nov 7, 2005
by Abid Qaiyum Suleri

International donors have pledged some $ 5.4 billion (£ 3.14 billion) in a donors' conference last week to help Pakistan recover from October's devastating earthquake. The figure exceeds $ 5.2 billion Pakistan had been asking for. The Pakistani demand was based on a Preliminary Damage and Needs Assessment released by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and World Bank.

More than 70 donor countries, financial institutions, and aid organizations attended the conference. The single biggest donor country was Saudi Arabia, which pledged a total of 573 million dollars in grants and soft loans. The United States pledged 510 million dollars, including 156 million dollars already given. Among other top contributing countries were Britain, other European Union nations, Japan, Kuwait, Iran and Turkey. The World Bank and the Asian Development Bank pledged one billion dollars each, mostly in the form of loans. The Islamic Development Bank said it would increase its assistance from more than 250 million dollars to more than 501 million dollars. Nearly 30 countries extended offers of help, with China pledging $ 316 million and Iran $ 200 million.

While one is heartened by these pledges for the quake survivors, it should also be kept in mind that historically, following major disasters only about half of the pledges made by donors have ever materialized. Another disturbing fact is that approximately 68 per cent of the pledges are loans -- although donors are calling them soft loans. However, the hard reality is that Pakistan already has $ 32 billion in debt and is paying billions as interest on these loans. The deepened burden of debt may turn the future a bit darker for our coming generations.

One would have even agreed to swallow the bitter pill of debts in the name of rehabilitation and reconstruction, provided it had come timely. Problem with the international pledges is that most of them are long-term commitments.

Another significant aspect of the donors conference was its failure to involve society in large. This is because like many other developing countries, there is no culture of national consultation, building consensus or taking parliament into confidence before taking decisions of national importance such as agreeing to borrow from lending agencies. However, even more amazing was the working of donors. It seems they were so eager to lend that they totally ignored the need for consulting stakeholder.

This makes it all the more necessary to analyze all the pledges even if they have already been made. Let us examine the World Bank's commitment first. The Bank announced $ 470 million on October 25, 2005 and raised it to one billion dollars during the donors' conference. Of the money that the Bank has pledged only $ 200 million have been transferred to Pakistan so far.

The break-up of the World Bank pledge is as follows:

(i) Supplemental financing of $ 150 million for the Poverty Reduction Support Credit (PRSC): The supplemental credit will support the sustained implementation of the PRSC reform program and help finance part of the gap in resources incurred as a result of the earthquake.

(ii) Supplemental financing of $ 50 million for the North West Frontier Province Structural Adjustment Credit II (SAC2): The NWFP SAC2 was the second in a series of three operations to support the implementation of NWFP government's Provincial Reform Program. The proposed supplemental financing will support the sustained implementation of the SAC reform program, and help finance part of the gap in resources incurred.

(iii) Additional financing in an amount of $ 100 million for 'Highways Rehabilitation Project': The new activities include civil works for reconstruction and rehabilitation of earthquake damaged roads, which, based on an initial needs assessment, may include some sections of main national highways connecting Muzaffarabad, Kagan Valley and Northern Areas with the rest of the country.

(iv) Additional financing in an amount of $100 million for second Pakistan Poverty Alleviation Fund Project: The partner organizations and PPAF will use these additional funds to rebuild communities through intensive social mobilization (approx 1 million individuals); low-cost seismologically appropriate housing (approximately 25,000 units); rehabilitation of 1500 community infrastructure schemes; community buildings; coordination, monitoring and supervision; and technical assistance for earthquake resistant structures.

(v) Re-allocation of part of the proceeds of the NWFP CIP II credit in an amount of $ 22.5 million: The project will comprise three components: (a) restoration of economic and social infrastructure destroyed and damaged by floods and earthquake including restoration of roads; repair and/or reconstruction of buildings; repair of water supply schemes and restoration of irrigation canals; (b) strengthening of the safety net and disaster preparedness programs; and (c) project management and implementations support.

(vi) Re-allocation of part of the proceeds of the credit in an amount of $ 7.5 million for North West Frontier Province On-Farm Water Management Project: This project will also comprise the above mentioned three components.

(vii) Re-allocation of part of the proceeds of the credit in an amount of $10 million and additional financing in an amount of $ 30 million for AJK CISP: The proposed project will cover three districts of AJK that have been affected by the earthquake (Muzaffarabad, Rawalakot and Bagh). The project will again comprise the three components, i.e, restoration of economic and social infrastructure, strengthening of the safety net and disaster preparedness programs; and project management and implementations support.

Even one is mindful that there can never be perfect answers, it does not answer the question whether survivors of the October 8 tragedy have any say in prioritizing what is required for their rehabilitation. Of course, none at all. It, therefore comes as no surprise that the donors and the government are deciding on their own what is beneficial for the quake-hit areas and what is not.

The above mentioned allocations are based on a quick assessment carried out by ADB and the World Bank mission. Many officials who have visited the disaster areas have commented that they've never seen the destruction and the access complexities of this magnitude. We are talking of helping save almost one million people who are still homeless or un-served, who are now facing the spread of disease and further illness, even death as the Himalayan winter descends. In return we get the loan enhancement for NWFP government reforms and on-farm water management as if these reforms will solve the chronic problem of governance.

There is no denying the fact that the NWFP government reforms, or on-farm water management are important in themselves. But revising allocation of loans for them in the guise of helping the quake victims is mere eyewash.

Story of the ADB's one billion dollars support is no different. According to ADB's official version, this support will be provided in a number of stages. About $ 100 million of savings from concessional loans from eight ongoing projects in Pakistan has been re-allocated to the ongoing ADB-backed Decentralization Support Program. These funds will provide budgetary support for earthquake-related rehabilitation and reconstruction activities.

ADB's Resident Mission in Pakistan is also reviewing seven ongoing loans in the earthquake-affected areas to see whether these can be redesigned to address earthquake damage more effectively. The Multi-sector Rehabilitation and Improvement Project for Azad Jammu and Kashmir is one such project.

ADB has set up a special Pakistan Earthquake Fund with an initial contribution of $ 80 million. In early December, a $ 300 million Earthquake Emergency Assistance project, inclusive of the $ 80 million from the Pakistan Earthquake Fund, will be considered by ADB's Board of Directors. The project will focus on transport, power, health, education, governance and institution building.

The remained of ADB's support is expected to be provided in 2006 in the form of a credit line facility to ensure that it can be flexibly used to address the remaining high priority needs of rehabilitation and reconstruction.

The absence of stakeholders' participation and lack of national consultation on rehabilitation may turn the process into commercial development in the name of the marginalised and the poor as was the case during post-tsunami reconstruction process. The tsunami experience also proves that coordination, aid utilisation, and accountability need to be put on top of the priority list in the reconstruction process -- something that seems lacking in our context.

It is also appropriate to review the donors' commitments, especially the loan component to determine its usefulness for quake survivors. There must be transparency and accountability not only at the level of the recipients end but also at the donors' end. It is important that the terms and conditions for grant contracts and loans are people-friendly, not simply donor-friendly. This makes the fine prints of grant contracts very crucial, including how much will go back to the donor country in money for providing 'technical expertise' and equipment, and how much actually goes to the people in distress.

This brings into focus who does what when the money finally arrives and is distributed. This means we need to ensure the crucial task of aid utilisation in a transparent and unbiased manner. The major challenge is of course how the impact of the aid and loans will be realized by the millions of survivors, living either in tent villages and/or still in the open.

Also, over-dependence on the external donors will further undermine our national sovereignty. It is ironical that the government has not shown any sacrifice from its part of the pie. No cuts have been made in lavish 'entertainment' and protocol budgets, no reduction have been done in overseas trips and no downsizing has taken place in the flock of advisors and consultants. The mega plans like shifting of army headquarter from Rawalpindi to Islamabad and the controversial New Murree Development Project are also still on. Let us realise our collective responsibilities and enter in a meaningful rehabilitation which should also include rehabilitation of our attitudes and paradigm of thinking that revolves around dependency on external sources of money.

Women Sufis of the Bhakti Movement
Business Recorder, Islamabad
Weekend Magazine
November 04, 2005
Ahmed Salim

If the hatred between India and Pakistan is viewed in gender perspective, then all the conflicts, including Kashmir, seem to be overshadowed by attempts to dominate each other, which stem from the concept of "mardangi".

This is evident in anthems, especially those connected with wars. For example, the war anthem composed by Dr Rashid Anwar during 1965 war runs:

Maharaj eh khed talwar di Ae

Jang khed nahin hondi zananian di

However, women reformers, especially those connected with Bhakti movement, deeply affected the social patterns, widening the mental horizon of people and establishing greater tolerance and inter-communal harmony.

Indian society being largely patriarchal, the position of women has for long been regarded as inferior. Significantly, the Bhakti movement saw the emergence of women saints on an unprecedented scale. The spiritual path helped a woman to break out of stereotypes; the chains of tradition, orthodoxy and convention which sought to control her sexuality.

As a saint, she could transcend the normally accepted limits and seek God even as a naked saint - Lalla and Akka Mahadevi - or skeletal being - Karaikkal Ammaiyar. The women saints in medieval Indian society emerged in an atmosphere of discrimination and suppression, but blossomed into thinkers, scholars and spiritually advanced and emancipated beings. Their lives and works constitute the supreme forms of self-expression.

Sharply breaking away from the traditional role assigned to a woman as wife, daughter or mother, the women saints consciously or unconsciously departed from the established norms of social behaviour and spurned the limitations imposed on them by their families and society. Not only did their compositions carry the overtones of protest; their emergence was in itself a social revolt.

Women saints can be classified into a few broad categories on the basis of their choice of spiritual path and interaction with the traditional society. If at one end of the spectrum were rebels like Meera and Akka Mahadevi, at the other end were pious and chaste housewives, the ideals of womanhood like Vasukiyar, the wife of Tiruvalluvar, Gangambika and Nagalochane, Basava's wives, Vishnupriya, wife of Chaitanya, and Bahinabai.

To the latter category belonged Tilakavatiyar who elevated karpu or chastity to such a height that she began to live as a widow when Kalaippagaiyar, to whom she had been betrothed, died in battle. In between these two ends of the spectrum are those women saints who gave up their home and conventional life only when they were driven to it and were left with no other option. The best examples are Karaikkal Ammaiyar, Lalla Arfa and Rupa Bhavani.

Lalla Arfa and Meera were both reluctant brides. Lalla was married to a Brahman at the age of 12, and Meera married Prince Bhoj Raj of Mewar. Both walked out of their homes mainly because of domestic ill treatment, which was occasionally combined with unnatural husband-wife relationship and the fear engendered in the husband by the wife's unconsciously manifested supernatural powers. Lalla believed that her husband was actually her son in a previous birth.

Several women saints looked upon the omnipotent as their husband. To this category belong Meera, Akka Mahadevi, Andal and NangaPeennu apart from Muktabai, Janabai and Goggave.

Significantly, while the "bride of the Lord concept" came naturally to women saints, it was not uncommon among the male saints of the Bhakti movement to see the jivatman (individual soul) and paamatman (supreme soul) relationship as that of a husband and wife. Tirumangai Alvar, a male saint, preferred to assume femininity and looked upon Krishna as his bridegroom.

Total transcendence of normally regarded feminine virtues of beauty, modesty and gentleness is another feature of the Bhakti movement. Several women saints showed complete freedom from inhibitions and flagrantly defied all notions of women's sexuality. With no consciousness even of body, Akka Mahadevi went naked with her body covered only by her long hair.

Meera flouted social conventions in her own way. Though a Rajput queen who should have strictly observed purdah, she publicly danced with anklets on her feet in the motley company of devotees and sang in abandon:

pad ghunghroo bandh meera nachi re

(Meera dances with anklets on the feet).

Despite limitations and constraints of the social milieu, most women saints contributed significantly to the religious and social development of the period.

Rigors of caste did not weigh heavily on most women saints. Even Bahinabai, a Brahman and scrupulous observer of social norms, accepted low caste Tukaram as her guru. Meera, belonging to a princely Rajput family, found in untouchable Raidas her ideal guru. Neither of them, however, made any conscious effort to critically examine or overturn the existing social order. In many cases the overtones of protest are to be found not so much in the role perceptions of women saints as in the very fact of their emergence.

Several women saints, however, provide more concrete examples of the rejection of existing social structure and behavioural modes. Akka Mahadevi, for example, asserted:

O brothers, why do you talk to me

Who has given up her caste and sex

Having united with Chenna Mallikarjuna.

Lalla, a disciple of priest Srikanta and the companion of such Muslim dervishes as Sayyid Ali Hamadani and Sayyid Husain Samnani, boldly declared in her vak:

"The idol is but stone, the temple is but stone."

It is interesting that like Kabir, Hindus and Muslims now revere Lalla equally. In fact, Muslim chroniclers like Pir Ghulam Hasan call her Lalla Arifa and a rabia (saint).

A Link of Unity

One of the most powerful characteristics of the medieval age in India was the Bhakti movement, which started in the sixth and seventh centuries in the South and gradually spread throughout the country.

The word Bhakti means to serve, honor, revere, love and adore. In the religious idiom, it is attachment or fervent devotion to God. The fundamental premise of the Bhakti movement is that all are equal before God, and the merits of religious devotion are measured by the degree of bhakti - personal devotion of God.

The movement deeply affected the social patterns, widening mental horizon of people and establishing greater tolerance and inter-communal harmony. Bhaktas (devotees) adopted gurus of spiritual directors, many from the lower castes, as their supreme authority.

From the 14th century onwards, the Bhakti movement became a dynamic force in the North India and, up to a point, filled the vacuum created by the retreating Buddhists, since it attracted the professional castes.

The movement had a deep effect on Indian life, culture and history. The Muslim Sufis attracted attention and people flocked to hear them. People's saints rose everywhere: in the Punjab, Guru Nank (1469-1539); in Utter Pradesh, Ramanand (1400-1477) and Kabir (1440-1518); in Bengal, Chaitanya (1485-1533); in Rajputana, Dadu (1544-1603); in Maharashtra, Nama Deva (1400-1450), and others later.

Kabir and Dadu preached a personal God, His kindness and mercy, condemned idol worship, and were against caste restrictions and other social prejudices. The result was that the regional culture was given new life and a religious revival took place.

The followers of these reformers organized themselves into brotherhoods (panths). The movement attained more attention in Northern India initially because of greater Hindu-Muslim interaction as Muslim merchants and Sufis had settled in these areas.-AS.

How Beggars can be Choosers
The News, Political Economy
Nov.13, 2005
Abid Qaiyum Suleri

Despite the fact that October 8 earthquake is a national tragedy, it is well neigh impossible to imagine the grief of those who lost their beloved relations, properties, and/or places to which their memories belonged. Unfortunately, those who are most affected from this tragedy have least or negligible say in planning and implementation of remedial measures. After losing their major assets, now they are being deprived of freedom of choice as well. Their miseries would have lessened to a certain extent, had there been a system of effective governance in place.

While the earthquake jolted structures even with strong foundations throughout the affected areas, it adversely affected something that neither has been on a strong footing, nor has a strong foundation. I am referring to the 'state of governance in Pakistan'. Shaky foundations of governance are evident from the lack of preparedness, slow mobilisation of rescue operations and poor coordination among different relief agencies, price gouging and lack of transparency.

Under these circumstances, it was fortunate that the international community immediately came to our rescue, trying to fill in the vacuum created by the lack of preparedness in Pakistan. However, the magnitude of response of the international community is generally inadequate. In many cases the verbal commitments have not materialised whereas in other cases the loans are being extended by international financial institutions (IFIs) in the guise of disaster assistance. The government authorities as well as the United Nations bigwigs are pleading for more and more funds from donor community and are convening a high profile donors forum in Islamabad which would be attended by Kofi Anan among other international leaders. A similar effort (without much output) was carried out in Geneva last month. But one should learn from the partial success of the Geneva conference and ponder on the reasons for donors' cold response.

As an individual, would you be willing to extend any charity to someone who is a known 'professional beggar'? And I am not talking of street beggars only. I am applying the literal meaning of a beggar -- someone who lives by asking people for money or food. I have tried to figure out the possible reasons why professional beggars did not deserve my charity. Here are the few reasons I could think of. Perhaps a feeling that professional beggars are forced to beg by some one who would take away their alms; or a feeling that they would misuse my money (for drugs, arms etc); or a feeling that they already have enough resources but they just like to ask for more and more; or a feeling that if they don't curtail their unnecessary spending and a lavish life style then why should I give them my hard earned money.

Now just think if I am a conscious representative of a donor, also answerable to my tax payers, would I be willing to throw unlimited money in response to the appeal made by a government whose human development as well as transparency records are one of the worst on table of nations? Would as a donor I be impressed with the centralised nature of the response which does not allow the national airline to carry my donation free of cost unless it is addressed to 'President's Relief Fund'? Would as a donor I get impressed with the fact that relevant stakeholders and representatives are excluded from planning and materialising the remedial measures? Finally what would be my response to the government's unwillingness to re-orient its priorities, such as deal for military aircraft SAAB, shifting of the military's General Headquarter, and the lavish style of working? I am not sure if the presidential eleven is ready to answer some of these questions in the forthcoming donor's forum.

Some people may say that it is not the right time to talk of these things and we should not raise fundamental questions such as the role of the army and the 'banned' religious outfits in relief activities. I was even told that lack of transparency in remedial efforts should not be questioned as it may affect the donors' commitment. "Even if 50 per cent funds are misused, we should still be optimistic that at least half of them are being used to help out the people who are in real need," said a speaker at a seminar the other day. You may or may not agree with these arguments. I certainly do not buy this point of view.

While I don't want to undermine the urgency of relief measures, I still believe that ends cannot justify the means. Unfortunately one cannot convince our policymakers on this point as they have witnessed and are bound to follow the US policy of justifying the means by ends in the 'war on terrorism'.

International community had to accept the otherwise banned religious organisation as well as Pakistani Army in a leading role during the relief phase. However, most of them have directly or indirectly showed their concern on an 'extended' role for Pakistan Army and its exclusive involvement in the reconstruction operations. According to reliable sources, the rescue team of the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) moved into quake affected areas after negotiating that the army authorities will give reconstruction activities a civilian face.

As for as banned religious groups are concerned, they have regained credibility among people through this disaster, a fact that has disturbed progressive Pakistanis as well as the United States and its allies in war on terrorism. No wonder, it is commonly perceived in Pakistan that the main purpose of a NATO contingent's presence here is to keep an eye on the activities of Al-Rasheed Trust as well as Jamaatud Dawa. "If NATO forces did not come for rescue during tsunami and the US forces were not spared to provide immediate relief to Katrina victims, then what is special with Pakistan earthquake that led NATO to move into Pakistan?" This question may have nothing to do with the reality but it is the word of mouth everywhere.

The army and the jihadis are not the only concern for the major donors, who are also concerned about the governance issues at large. When the representatives of major donors had a meeting with the government officials at the Economic Affairs Division last week, one of the issues raised by them was 'The New Murree' project and its related expenses. The donors questioned whether it was wise to carry on with the spending of Rs 60 billion on the project in the wake of the earthquake. They also asked why these funds could not get transferred towards the reconstruction activities.

Lack of public trust in the transparency of the spending on relief and the lack of attention to the grinding poverty in the affected areas is another major concern. For instance, there is a strong concern on the non-transparent modality of making compensatory payments to the affectees.

The World Bank (WB) as well as the government of Pakistan are separately assessing the cost of reconstruction in quake affected areas. The World Bank has estimated that 2.651 billion dollars would be required for reconstruction and rehabilitation, whereas the government is putting forward a figure of 5.6 billion dollars for the same purpose. I do not want to imply that the government is exaggerating the cost by three billion dollars, however, I would like to caution that in the absence of any transparent mechanism for spending, this is what a laypeople is bound to perceive. This may be another factor which will adversely affect the donors' commitment.

The international community has already witnessed reconstruction after tsunami. So far, the post-tsunami reconstruction has turned into the development of commercial sites in the name of the poor. What is the guarantee that we would not follow the same approach? My worry is that our focus will also be on developing hi-fi shopping malls and business areas in major cities whereas the rural areas will remain neglected.

Disparities have also been witnessed in tsunami relief efforts. Many areas were bypassed to provide relief to major cities. Our government, therefore, needs to show a strong political will so that reconstruction is unbiased and non-discriminatory.

Still another concern is the danger of reconstruction on seismically inappropriate sites, using inadequately revised building codes without proper oversight. By doing so the authorities will create a false sense of security among the relief victims. But it will be a criminal negligence that may lead to another tragedy in future.

Finally, the lack of involvement of representatives of all stakeholders in relief and reconstruction agencies is a major factor affecting the credibility of all efforts at the government level.

One way to overcome all these apprehension may lie in planning fool proof reconstruction and rehabilitation. A comprehensive reconstruction strategy covering seismic, livelihood, environmental, cultural, psychological and social aspects should be presented in the forthcoming donors' forum so that the donors are able to find answers to all their questions in it. They help in eliciting more meaningful commitments from them.

Non-government organisations (NGOs) and civil society outfits have already proved their worth in relief activities. They should be formally invited to give their input in planning for reconstruction and rehabilitation. Last week an Islamabad-based organisation convened a meeting of the like-minded individuals to devise a strategy about the reconstruction. It was during this meeting that a Citizens' Commission was formed to facilitate independent monitoring and evaluation of the relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction activities.

The primary objectives of the commission were identified as follows:

1. To ensure a much higher level of preparedness for future emergencies including much faster and better coordinated relief measures and the clear delegation of responsibilities.

2. To ensure the delivery of fair compensation to all eligible affectees, especially women and children, and to help file claims on behalf of those losing lives and assets due to legally culpable violation of due regulatory procedures.

3. To ensure transparency in the relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction efforts including public disclosure of all plans, receipts and expenditures.

4. To ensure that the reconstruction is just, sustainable, participatory and supportive of the dignified restoration of livelihoods.

5. To ensure that the reconstruction conforms to the best practices relevant for construction in the ecology of the disaster affected areas.

6. To hold all organisations and agencies involved in the recovery process accountable on behalf of citizens.

7. To foster a better understanding of the systemic socio-economic and political reasons for the unduly excessive loss of lives and property compared to the comparative shocks elsewhere.

As the primary vehicle for monitoring the rehabilitation and recovery process, the commission has agreed to issue, in collaboration with the NGOs active in the earthquake affected areas, regular fact sheets and consolidated three-monthly reports on the state of the earthquake affected Areas detailing stated targets and actual achievements with identification of major gaps and recommendations for remedial actions.

It is hoped that the government appreciates the positive intentions of civil society groups in forming the commission. A constructive partnership between the government and the civil society will indicate that as a nation we are not professional baggers and do have a mechanism of working for sustainable disaster mitigation measures. It will not only enhance the government's credibility at the domestic level but also help to elevate its image among the donors who may as a result provide a meaningful assistance towards rehabilitation.

As They do it in Our Part of the Globe
The News, Rawalpindi/Islamabad
November 04, 2005
Abid Qaiyum Suleri

We are living in a globalized world. Globalization is not only affecting our day-to-day life but our families are also becoming more and more global in nature. A typical characteristic of globalized families is that their members are spread all over the world; grandparents in one continent, maternal grandparents in another continent, some of the uncles and aunts in a third one and the rest of them in still other continents. This phenomenon is replacing the traditional concepts of nationalism with new values that are above any geographical ties. These new values are somehow based on principles of human dimensions of globalization -- globalization increasing the freedom of choices for human beings. With increasing choices to settle down in more than one country, the decision to settle down somewhere for globalized families is a matter of setting priorities or an issue of political choice.

By my definition, mine is also a globalized family. I am a Pakistani born Canadian, whereas my wife and kids are British born Pakistanis and we have settled down in Pakistan. 'Why Pakistan when so many people are trying their best to leave this place?' This is a question that I have to respond to again and again. While I am a strong critic of various odds happening in Pakistan, I also considered some positive aspects of living in Pakistan. As I am going to share some of the positive aspects about Pakistan, let me remind you that my opinion on this particular subject is biased and is valid for my personal circumstances. Readers have every right to agree or disagree with it.

My prime objective of settling down in Pakistan was to look after my ailing mother. On top of it there were some other pull factors for Pakistan. What would determine the identity of our kids was one of the major issues for us. We have seen many expatriate Pakistani families who suddenly decide to return to Pakistan as they want their kids to learn better Urdu, some basic knowhow of religion and to get familiar with their relatives. This was the main pull factor for us as well.

It is not that we lack opportunities of learning any language or religion abroad. Of course a majority of the families of Pakistani origin settled abroad speak their mother tongue as fluently and are as religious as someone living in Pakistan. However, it is the sense of inclusion that matters.

If I have to talk of ten positive things about Pakistan, my first take would be the sense of inclusion that people of Pakistani origin (or at least I) feel here. I am a strong advocate of intercultural integration and intercultural harmony. However, I do feel that my kids need to experience the sense of inclusion in order to enjoy the cultural diversity abroad. They need to know what it is being South Asian to take pride (and not to get defensive) when they would be labelled as 'South Asians' by western media.

The second positive thing about Pakistan for me is its strong social fabric. Although joint family system is getting diluted mainly because of economic or/and spatial constraints, the way our friends and family members are always there in the time of need is a refreshing experience. Having said this, it does not imply that in other parts of the world social fabric is not strong. Of course it is strong but in the case of Pakistan it compensates for lack of strong social safety nets in public sector. Pakistan is not a public welfare state and the responsibility to take care of each other is mostly fulfilled through our social relations. For us these relations, our friends, relatives and well wishers mean a lot and we feel protected under the umbrella of social relations.

The third positive thing about Pakistan is philanthropic zeal prevailing among general masses. Although un-organised and maybe insufficient, the support being provided by individual philanthropists is extremely valuable in a country that neither has any disaster management policy nor disaster management capacity at public level (Earthquake relief activities are one example). Hence during any mishap, individual efforts and acts of philanthropists contribute a lot towards mitigation measures.

The fourth positive thing about Pakistan is its youth. I am very impressed with Pakistani youngsters. Our elders lived under colonial rule and we spent some our time under colonel rule, however, the generations of the 1980s onwards are living in era of information. Exceptions are there, but these youngsters are generally hardworking, enthusiastic, enlightened, well aware and eager to bring change in the system by challenging many of the unwanted taboos and accepted social evils (such as honour killing or dowry).

The fifth positive thing about Pakistan is that Pakistanis are jack of all trades. They know, tend to know, or pretend to know a little bit of everything. The people in Europe and Americas are 'subject specialists' and may know very little outside their subjects. People in Pakistan are quite well informed almost about everything, be it the role of America in the Iraq civil war or unrest in any African state.

This takes me to the sixth positive thing about Pakistan. The role Pakistani media is playing in information dissemination (particularly) for the last one decade is admirable. Pakistan has witnessed the era of ignorance when recording of recitation from the Holy Quran, recorded in Islamabad studio, was edited and mixed with the then President's address in UN General Assembly -- followed by tons of praises from government circles that the President used his influence to get the General Assembly proceedings inaugurated by Quranic recitation. The situation has dramatically improved now. Private TV and radio channels and internet has improved general public's access to information. Pakistani media is not only devoted to local and national issues, but also covers regional, international, macro and mega issues.

The seventh positive thing about Pakistan is the sense of recognition for the professionals who are sincere and devoted to their professions. This is particularly true for private and non governmental sector. I can provide a whole list of successful professionals who got themselves established and recognised in a very short span of time because of their hard work. I would rephrase my point that to me the social reward of hard work for skilled professionals is quite high in Pakistan.

From my perspective, the eighth positive thing about Pakistan is that its people do not live a 'nine to five' life. Pakistanis are not pre-programmed robots. Many would say it is one of the reasons for Pakistan's inefficiency. While partially agreeing with them, I would say it is the beauty of Pakistan that here people can take care of their social obligations while delivering on their professional commitments and can take care of work while socialising.

The ninth positive thing about Pakistan is its food. Although not a heavy eater, I am always impressed with the great variety and quality of food that one can have in Pakistan; fried, baked, dry, curry, barbecue, boiled and what not. The choice of food is simply unlimited. It caters to all tastes and means and delicious food does not have to be expensive here.

Having talked of nine positive things about Pakistan, we should not ignore hundreds of negative things happening in Pakistan too. But as I mentioned earlier, it is our duty to take care of those negatives and try to turn them into positives. Actually this aspect takes me to the tenth positive thing about Pakistan. I feel Pakistan presents opportunities so that one may contribute for its sustainable development.

While Pakistan is faced with various challenges; evident from lack of crisis management in the recent earthquakes to low ranking in the human development as well as transparency index, it also offers opportunities to work and reform the situation. It provides a conducive environment for organisations such as SDPI and many others to flourish. The professional satisfaction and the sense of contribution towards sustainable development that I feel in Pakistan is one of the major attractions for me to settle here.

"What was the worst form of poverty that you ever experienced?" About 20 of us belonging to various walks of life had to answer this question in a meeting on 'community of practice for poverty reduction' organised by Swiss Development Corporation couple of months ago. Everyone was reluctant to share their experiences in public. To break the silence, the moderator started by narrating his personal experience and then everyone was narrating his/her experience. The crux of the matter was that poverty was a state of helplessness, hopelessness, humiliation, lack of choices, lack of freedom (all sort of human freedoms), marginalisation and isolation.

I personally felt extremely poor, when last year my mother was in coma due to multiple organ failure before she passed away. She was in one of the best medical institutions, under the treatment of best physicians. I could feel her breath, but doctors were telling me that she had undergone an acute septicaemic shock and it was useless to put her on ventilator. It was the worst form of helplessness for me.

Today I am trying to imagine the helplessness and poverty of those who could see their dear ones, buried alive in rubble and debris of collapsed buildings. Pity, they could hear the screams and cries for help but could not do much to provide rescue. Rescue requires preparedness, and we were never prepared for any disaster. We have witnessed Tsunami, Katrina, and Rita in recent past, thinking that nothing like them can ever occur to us.

To me, the difference between 'natural calamity' and 'disaster' is that of planning, preparedness, and having 'shock absorbers' intact. It is true there is a limit to which one can avoid a natural calamity. However, with right prioritisation, anticipatory planning and political will to act, one can stop a natural calamity turning into major human disaster.

Our lack of planning proved how important it is to build safe hospitals and schools in disaster-prone areas. Many schools were damaged during the earthquake with the result that children were buried alive under the rubble. It is true that the earthquake was of an exceptional magnitude and the strongest in living memory in Pakistan, but the Himalayas, where the epicentre of the quake was, are located on a tectonic plate and have long been identified as a region at risk by earthquake experts. Our policy makers and planners should have kept this warning in mind. Reinforcing buildings in disaster prone areas is essential.

Loosing hospitals (because they were not built to withstand earthquakes) has become a 'double disaster', a disaster in that they are destroyed, but also in that their equipment and their staff are no longer available to rescue other victims. The destruction of schools means the loss of a whole generation. New structures, therefore, need to be built safe and old ones need to be systematically reinforced or retrofitted to avoid future disasters.

We (South Asians in general and Pakistanis in particular) as a society believe in reactive planning. We like to wait for the crisis to happen and only afterwards try to do post-crisis management. Our ruling class has its own style of post-crisis management. It has put a price tag for every mishap. Instead of investing money in remove the likely cause of an accident, our rulers announce monetary compensation (it is extremely cumbersome process to receive that compensation and sometimes these are just the political announcements that never get materialised) for the victims/survivors after an accident has taken place.

This monetary compensation cannot be a substitute for rescue operation. A rescue operation in mature societies consists of more than just pulling out the dead bodies and picking up the debris. Unfortunately despite attaining the age of 58 years as a country, we are still not mature enough to think beyond pulling out the dead bodies. We never give attention to preparedness and like to keep the people dependent on external help.

One can learn from one's neighbours. In India 'Disaster Risk Management Programme' is set up with the main goal to build capacity of the local communities to respond to a natural calamity, since local communities are invariably the first ones to respond to a calamity. Had we concentrated on building the shock absorbing capacity of local communities, people waiting in far flung areas for rescue might have been more prepared to help themselves.

In Pakistan, too, the UNDP has proposed a five year programme to the federal government to be executed by the National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA) within the structure of the Emergency Relief Cell. It was in this connection that UNDP commissioned an independent review of disaster management policies and systems in Pakistan. The report of the review, launched in January 2005, describes Pakistan's disaster management approach in these words: "There are no long-term, inclusive and coherent institutional arrangements to address disaster issues with a long-term vision. For instance, the Emergency Relief Cell is mandated to deal only with post-disaster scenarios. Disasters are viewed in isolation from the processes of mainstream development and poverty alleviation planning. Some of the large-scale development projects are bringing new forms of disaster and adding to the vulnerability of at-risk communities. The Left Bank Outfall Drainage (LBOD) project and link canals are significant examples in Pakistan".

Some of the disaster management agencies in Pakistan include Emergency Relief Cell (ERC), Pakistan Meteorological Department, Federal Flood Commission (FFC), National Crisis Management Cell, Civil Defence, provincial relief departments, provincial irrigation departments, provincial health departments, provincial agriculture and livestock departments, provincial food departments, Communication & Works, Planning & Development, armed forces, Police, Dams Safety Council and SUPARCO.

According to the review report, disaster management bodies in Pakistan lack knowledge about hazard identification, risk assessment and management. The officials of the two important organisations for disaster management -- ERC, headed by cabinet secretary and FFC -- are not given adequate training. Disaster and relief departments remain under-sourced, untrained and are not given required importance. There is no linkage between disaster management, development planning, and environmental management. It is perceived that absence of a central authority for integrated disaster management and lack of coordination within and between disaster related organisations is responsible for ineffective and inefficient disaster management in the country.

The review report further adds that applied disaster management policy sometimes carries strategic biases that are aimed at protecting locations and infrastructure of greater economic, political and strategic significance at the cost of areas and communities with lesser influence and importance. This has proved true in the current relief efforts. The grief and sorrow for the losses due to recent earthquake in Pakistan was felt equally for all affected sites, be it in Margalla Towers Islamabad or in Balakot. However, the relief response by the government was not the same for both sites. In some areas there were no signs of any relief/rescue operation even after five days of the tragic earthquake.

Same holds for relief provided by non-governmental actors. Though highly appreciable, in general it has lacked coordination and integration and seems to be supply driven rather than demand driven.

Reconstruction and rehabilitation take me to the issue of survivors of this tragedy. Most of them have lost their loved ones. They are emotionally shattered, physically injured, and economically helpless. Once they start rebuilding their lives, we will be witnessing a massive displacement, accompanied by all sorts of social and economic side affects that particularly target women and children. How prepared are we for this massive displacement? What are our plans for the survivors' rehabilitation? As international aid is pouring in, how are we planning to undertake the reconstruction and finally what are the alternative livelihood options in the urban areas that we can offer to the displaced population? To answer these questions, one needs to take an anticipatory planning approach. UNDP's review report has already warned that state-level disaster preparedness and mitigation measures are heavily tilted towards structural aspects and undermine non-structural elements such as knowledge and capacities of local people, and the related livelihood protection issues.

Disaster management and rehabilitation has never been a priority in our national policies. The five year plans, in place since 1957, remain silent on preparedness for and management of natural calamities. Some of these plans, though, have identified mismanagement and scarcity of water resources, poor health infrastructure and flood threats at few stages of planning and implementation during the last three decades. But the strategies and solutions they have proposed are either relief-driven or event-based without having an integrated disaster management plan.

It is a coincidence that today (October 16) is the World Food Day, a day when international community reaffirms its commitment to reduce the world's hunger to half by 2015. Owing to lack of disaster mitigation and preparedness policies, the number of the hungry in Pakistan is bound to increase with many from 5-7 million earthquake affected people joining in.

Also while relief operation in Pakistan is going on, international community observed International Day for Disaster Reduction on October 12. The lesson our policy makers must draw from October 8 earthquake was encapsulated in this year's theme for the day: "Invest to prevent disaster." We cannot stop natural calamities, but we can and must equip individuals and communities better to withstand them. Those most vulnerable to nature's wrath are usually the poorest, which means when we reduce poverty, we also reduce vulnerability.

But do government policies address the issue of poverty as it should be? Sadly, no. In an attempt to reduce poverty and hunger, the government has come up with a World Bank funded poverty reduction strategy paper in December 2003. In the paper, the government has recognised that poverty is a complex and multidimensional phenomenon that extends beyond the notion of income and encompasses social, economic and political exclusion.

So far so good. The problem arises when the paper suggests ways and means to address these problems. The official vision of poverty reduction strategy is based on four pillars. It says the poverty will be reduced through accelerated and broad-based economic growth while (i) maintaining macroeconomic stability, (ii) improving governance and consolidating devolution, (iii) investing in human capital and (iv) targeting the poor and the vulnerable.

Under the strategy, the whole focus seems to be on 'accelerating' economic growth at any cost. But though we are achieving impressive growth rates (more than 8 per cent for the current fiscal year), we will soon be unable to maintain macroeconomic stability. Increasingly fuel prices, inflation, and the aftermath of the earthquake will go a long way in destabilising Pakistan's macroeconomic environment. The second pillar -- that is, governance -- is deteriorating fast. Had there been good governance, faulty buildings such as Margalla Towers and poorly constructed school buildings could never have been there in the first place. Likewise devolution has been very cleverly used to turn non-party elections into PML-Q supported elections. The third pillar of the strategy -- investment in human capital -- is being completely ignored. Of course, the above mentioned factors have turned the fourth pillar upside down, resulting in the poor and the vulnerable getting targeted by natural calamities (turned disasters).

It is about time that we learn our lessons. Poverty in all its forms reduces people's resilience and threatens their livelihood making them more vulnerable to external shocks. Let us not only invest but invest in 'human beings' to prevent disasters. Human dimension of development is a must but it should not be restricted to the development of few selected human beings alone.

One of the major objectives of World Trade Organization (WTO) is to create and promote a rule-based, liberal and 'transparent' multilateral trading regime. It was already perceived that multilateralism would not take off overnight, hence from the very beginning there was a room for regional trade agreements (RTAs) in the WTO. When a WTO member enters into a regional integration arrangement, it grants more favorable conditions for its trade with other parties to that arrangement than it allows for trade with other WTO members. This a departure from the guiding principle of non-discrimination defined in Article I of General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs, Article II of General Agreement on Trade in Services, and other provisions of various WTO agreements. WTO Members are, however, permitted to enter into regional trade arrangements under specific conditions, which are spelled out in three sets of rules (Paragraph 4-10 of Article XXIV of GATT, Enabling Clause, and Article V of GATS).

The vast majority of WTO members are party to one or more regional trade agreements. The surge in RTAs has continued unabated since the early 1990s. Interestingly there is an increase in the number of RTAs after the establishment of WTO in 1995. Before January 1995, 120 RTAs were notified to GATT whereas 130 were notified to WTO from 1995-2002. Failed Seattle and inconclusive Cancun talks on WTO led to an increased trend to sign RTAs and bilateral trade agreements (BTAs). If RTAs reportedly planned or already under negotiation are concluded, the total number of such agreements in force may well approach 300 by the end of 2005. Compared to other regions, South Asia as a region is lagging behind in catching up with the trend.

It is in the above mentioned context that we need to see the work being done to promote regional economic integration in South Asia. In this regard, it is rightly perceived that South Asia needs to increase intra-regional trade, especially the trade between Pakistan and India. To me, the volatile relations between Pakistan and India are one of the major factors hampering the operationalisation of any meaningful economic cooperation arrangement in the region. However, it is also an established fact that trade precedes politics and trading activities are taking place within South Asia (including between India and Pakistan) through informal channels if not through formal channels. A recent research carried out by Sustainable Development Policy Institute suggests that annual trade between India and Pakistan over the past seven years has never exceeded $ 250 million. On the other hand, informal trade between these neighbors is estimated to be in the range of 0.5 to 1.0 billion dollars.

India has granted the status of Most Favored Nation (MFN) to Pakistan, which Pakistan has not reciprocated. We still maintain a positive list of over 800 importable items from India. Thanks to non-tariff trade barriers on both sides, India does not take us to dispute settlement court of WTO for not granting her the MFN status. There is another piece to the jigsaw puzzle of regional trade: Pakistan and India in particular and South Asian countries in general have recently undertaken initiative to liberalise their trade relations with their neighbours through bilateral and multilateral arrangements. The South Asian Preferential Trade Agreement (Sapta), signed in April 1993, paved the way for South Asian Free Trade Agreement (Safta), which is supposed to become operational from January 1, 2006. But as the implementation date approaches, the agreement is facing teething problems even in its preparatory negotiations.

While, Safta provides for free trade in goods and services among the member countries of South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc), officials have to wrestle with various contentious issues -- such as preparing the sensitive or negative list on which exchange of tariff concessions is forbidden, evolving rules of origin to ensure value addition and prevention of third party from piggybacking on the preferential route, resolving revenue loss compensation mechanism for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and technical assistance for LDCs etc. If things remain as they are, Safta will soon be out of the political priority list for the member governments because separately all of them are pursuing bilateral free trade agreements with each other.

But Safta is more than a regional free trade agreement. Some commentators feel that if implemented in true spirit, it can prove a key for a South Asian Economic Union, with the region having a common currency, zero tariffs for internal trade and open borders for intra-regional travel.

We can debate how optimistic one can be as for as Safta is concerned.

Currently the tendency towards a peaceful coexistence between India and Pakistan -- a prerequisite for flourishing trade and economies -- is quite obvious. In fact, we are already witnessing some of the peace dividends as a result. The players in this arena, therefore, need to be more sensitive to this reality.

But can we leave regional economic cooperation for only governments to take care of? We are talking of an economic cooperation based on peaceful coexistence and mutual respect that in turn may lead to peace and prosperity in the region. It will be materialised when government-to-government initiatives are backed by people-to-people contacts and broader societal interaction.

Already in our neighbourhood we are witnessing the coming to fruition of various regional trading agreements, starting from Bimstec (that includes Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal, and Bhutan), to Asean, to Indian Ocean Rim.
It is in the interest of Pakistan to be an active player of regional cooperation so that we can have our due share in the South Asian consumer market, which is one of the largest in the world. This will also help our consumers at home to enjoy the best quality goods at reasonable prices with a diversity of choice.

But if the regional cooperation in South Asia does not get sufficient momentum, we may just miss the bus for good. Therefore, the government apart, civil society, intelligentsia, business community, the NGOs -- all who have interests and are interested -- must emphatically promote awareness about the need and advantages of regional cooperation.

There were considerations which culminated in the convening of a national consultation workshop, jointly organised by Sustainable Development Policy Institute, Consumer Unity and Trust India, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, and Pathfinder Group, in Karachi last week. The event was designed to involve business representatives, government officials, civil society representatives and academics to create awareness on regional economic cooperation and to discuss various challenges and opportunities that this cooperation may bring along. Apart from a large number of Pakistani participants in the workshop, there was representation from from India and Bangladesh as well.

Federal Commerce Minister Humayun Akhtar Khan made the inaugural address at the workshop and called upon the business community, media and civil society to influence and pressurise politicians to take bold steps for achieving greater regional economic cooperation in South Asia. He lauded the consultation process, saying it would help engage stakeholders in regional trade initiatives and provide inputs to the regional governments for moving forward to have more regional trade arrangements in place. He also emphasised that the visa regimes within the region, particularly between India and Pakistan, should be flexible so that they could facilitate movement of people. He called for tapping the great trade potential that exists between Pakistan and India. The minister specifically called upon media in South Asia to encourage their respective governments and businessmen to take the initiatives that could expand the regional trade volume.

Diversified views were expressed during the consultation about Safta, its possible mandate, and its pros and cons. Some participants were of the opinion that Safta does not address India-Pakistan trade in real sense. The participants were of the view that until the visa regime between India and Pakistan remains tough and the immigration process humiliating, no real growth in trade would be possible. "We need to address this problem first before we can open up trade," one of them stressed.

Speakers addressing the session on Investment and Finance claimed there was an enabling environment in Pakistan for investment and the economy was moving in the right direction. In the ensuing discussion, some participants highlighted the need for allowing investment and money to flow across the region. This, they viewed, will not only facilitate regional trade but will also decrease dependence on foreign investment from outside of the region.

In another session, speakers discussed regional economic cooperation as a tool to attain Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). They were of the view that trade alone could not be considered as a panacea to reduce poverty and to achieve MDGs. They stressed the need for setting long term objectives with a human development focus and suggested that trade should be one of the means to attain human development and not an end in itself. Talking of regional economic cooperation, they were optimistic that it could bring sustainable peace in the region.

There was a session on trade facilitating measures where speakers emphasised the importance of harmonised trade facilitation measures for promoting regional trade. Session on business to business engagement concluded that one should not be over optimistic and should not consider regional trade as solution of every problem. Speakers in this session warned that regional economic activities might lead to creating their own problems as one can observe from what is happening in the European Union. However, they were of the view that economic cooperation would create trust, and promote healthy competition for providing quality goods at cheaper prices.

One of the most important sessions was on the 'Role of Media in Promoting Regional Economic Cooperation'. The speakers, while acknowledging the positive role of media in overcoming the taboos for regional cooperation, stressed the need for strengthening the 'freedom to information' culture. They were of the view that the freedom of media should not only be confined to promoting cultural and entertainment programmes. They rather suggested that informative programmes, business news, and current affairs channels should allowed to be relayed across Saarc countries. They also suggested that restrictions on regional trade and movement of printed literature and newspapers, particularly between India and Pakistan, should be removed.

The workshop concluded with a commitment from participants to work towards a change in paradigm, which makes people believe that others' gain is not their loss and which lets people live to create a win-win situation for everyone.

Developed countries were asked by G-20 countries to show flexibility in their stance on agriculture issues, which was central to the Doha Development Agenda (DDA). This may be a political demand only and one has to see the reaction of the developed world on G-20's Bhurban declaration issued last weekend.

It is predicted that the European Union and the United States would remain stubborn and Hong Kong -- where the next ministerial meeting is scheduled to take up international trade -- may prove another Seattle or Cancun. In this scenario, Bhurban declaration may not play a vital role in the run up to the Hong Kong meeting.

As far as the meeting of G-20's member countries in Bhurban is concerned, it was a great success, at least from a Pakistani perspective. Pakistan managed to share the leadership of G-20 with India and Brazil. Indian, Brazilian and Pakistani ministers assured the meeting that G-20 stands united. They were also determined that any draft declaration imposed by the chairperson of the World Trade Organization's General Council, bypassing the negotiation route would be unacceptable for G-20 members. The credit goes to Pakistani minister of commerce, officials of WTO Cell of Ministry of Commerce and members of Pakistani negotiation team in WTO Geneva. They had done their homework right for this big event. It was also due to their lobbying that civil society representatives were invited by visiting ministers for a presentation.

The Bhurban declaration issued by ministers and representatives of 21 countries -- Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, China, Cuba, Egypt, Guatemala, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, South Africa, Thailand, Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela and Zimbabwe reiterated the commitment to conclude the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) negotiations in 2006 to eliminate trade-distorting policies in agriculture maintained by developed countries, and provide for substantial improvement in market access for all products from developing countries.

The declaration reaffirmed G-20's position on the three pillars of the agriculture negotiations as contained in the New Delhi declaration, issued by the group in March 2005. This position was subsequently elaborated in the proposals submitted by G-20 to the WTO. Its central elements are domestic support, export competition, market access, besides tariff capping and special and differential treatment f