The WTO mini-ministerial has failed in Geneva on the issue of safeguards for farmers of developing countries. America wanted that agricultural commodities should be fully opened up for global trade. Upper limits of import duties imposable by all countries should be drastically reduced so that trade would get a chance to develop. This policy impacts countries differently. Exporters of agricultural commodities like America, Australia, Brazil and Panama stand to gain from such free trade. They will get easy access to world markets. This policy is also beneficial for countries that are deeply dependent on food imports such as Egypt and Zimbabwe, at least in the short run. Free trade will make it easier for them to buy goods from the world markets. This may turn into a loss in the long run, however.

An increase in world prices of food products can jeopardize their very existence as is happening lately. Also, their ability to increase domestic production and secure their food security will be hit due to availability of cheap imported food. Increased trade in food products, as demanded by America, was, therefore, beneficial, in part at least, for the food exporting- and food importing developing countries. This was not suited to countries like India and China which were largely self-sufficient in meeting their food requirements. Free trade would jeopardize their present food security.

The combination in favor of opening of free trade is formidable. It includes
1. Food-export in developed countries like America;
2. Food-importing developed countries like those of the European Union;
3. Food-exporting developing countries like Brazil, Thailand and Panama; and
4. Food-importing developing countries like Egypt and Zimbabwe.

The last group of may be benefited only in the short run but nevertheless does stand to gain. On the other side stand India, China and a handful of other countries that are presently self-sufficient and want to protect their food security from being threatened. There is truth, therefore, to the American allegation that India and China have hit at the interests of other developing countries by causing failure of the WTO negotiations.

We are soon likely to face demand from other developing countries to soften our stance. We need to present before them an alternate agenda that keeps them all together. First point should be that of free movement of labor. The present model of globalization allows free movement of goods and capital but restricts free movement of labor. Interestingly, free movement of the former is justified for reaching benefits to the labor of developing countries. It is said that expansion of world trade will allow the poor people to purchase cheap goods produced in other countries.

The benefits of expansion of global trade after formation of the WTO have largely been captured by the developed countries. The share of developed countries in world income has declined marginally from 25.9 to 22.4 percent but the overwhelming feature of lopsided global distribution of wealth continues unabated. The main reason is the TRIPS agreement that was included in the world trade mechanism at the behest of America. This agreement has made it possible for the developed countries to sell their new inventions at exorbitant price to the developing countries. India should raise the demand of removing the TRIPS agreement from the WTO so that all developing countries can freely copy and use the global technologies.