The WTO on one side with the developed countries.
Developing countries want the right to vote.
In the 21st century, trade is the most important element of economic growth and prosperity of each country. Historically established global trade began to develop at the end of World War II with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT, 1947) and contributed to the creation of sustainable economic and market relations between countries such as America, Australia, Europe, Japan and China over the next 60 years. After a while, well established as a union of 155 countries, the World Trade Organization aimed to create the favorable equal conditions for all members of the organization, began to put into doubt their intentions towards the less developing countries. (Ansong, 2013). During the last decade, the value of world exports and imports began to exceed $ 13 trillion. However, according to leading experts in 2002 to rich countries accounted for 63 percent of world exports, while developing countries implemented only 32 percent (Buckman, 2005). Despite the fact that the main purpose of the WTO is to disseminate the ideas and principles of free trade and the stimulation of economic growth of all members of this organization, many believe that the WTO does not help the majority of countries to be more prosperous, but only contributes to further enrich already rich and developed countries. Some experts also suggest that developing countries have very little impact on the WTO, and, despite the stated purpose of assisting such economically weaker countries, developed countries are focusing only on their own commercial interests.
In order to improve opportunity in trade abroad, developing countries need to get their voice and opportunity to influence the World Trade Organization by having equal rights to developed countries. It has been ubiquitously discussed in recent years that developed countries get more benefits and support from WTO that contributes stability to their economic growth. In terms of the trade relations between countries, it can be clearly seen that there is inequality of roles of participants (Community Health, 2001). As a confirmation, it may be proposed fact about WTO “Green room” meeting, which usually consists of Ministers from some 30 countries what seems contrary to the accepted rules and principals of the trading system (Kent, 2009). The concept "Green Room" has become called an informal meeting of 20-40 countries, usually attended by the heads of delegations. This meeting also occurs, for example, at the Ministerial Conference (WTO, 2011). Such meetings, according to an opinion of several experts and majority of WTO members, are "opaque", i.e. decision-making in a small groups are often are not announced to other members, not all WTO members are informed about what is happening in the "Green Room". Decisions should be made by all members of the WTO on the basis of total vote, also Braham (2002) stressed in his work that the coalition-developed countries are constantly trying to "impose" their views.
On the other hand, according to the statute, adopted in 1947 (World Trade Organization, 1999), the WTO does not dictate the policies of governments of its Member States. On the contrary, decisions are formed through the general solutions of all members. The confirming fact can be the records of all Nine WTO Ministerial Conferences from the official website of the WTO, where for example it is shown that all members were invited to “Geneva, 15-17 December 2011” Conference (WTO, 2011). Nevertheless, although the WTO includes most of the world (all major importing and exporting countries), according to the organizational structure of the WTO of the World Trade Organization, apart from the general Conference time, all members of the WTO have the right to meet in special interest groups, which include only some countries with common trade interests. So in that case the...
References: 2. Ansong A. (2012). The WTO Decision-Making Process: Problems and Possible Solutions. U.K.; Unpublished Papers. Retrieved December 30, 2013, from http://works.bepress.com/alex_ansong/4
4. Scott J. (2001). The EU and the WTO: Legal and Constitutional Issues. Oxford; Hard Publishing. Retrieved January 2, 2014.
5. Jones K. (2009). Green rom politics and the WTO’s crisis of representation. Babson; SAGE Publications. Retrieved January 2, 2014
7. Stiglitz J. and Charlton A. (2005). Fair Trade for All: How Trade Can Promote Development. Oxford; Oxford University Press. Retrieved January 2, 2014.
8. Schott J. and Watal J. (2000). Decision-Making in the WTO. Peterson Institute for International Economics. Retrieved January 3, 2014.
9. Steger D. (2010). Redesigning the World Trade Organization for the Twenty-first Century. Canada; The Centre for International Governance Innovation and Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Retrieved January 3, 2014, from http://books.google.com.au.
10. Baldwin R., Winters L. (2004). Challenges to Globalization: Analyzing the Economics. Chicago; University of Chicago Press. Retrieved January 3, 2014, from http://books.google.com.au/books.
11. Michalopoulos C. (1999). The Developing coutries in the WTO. Oxford; Blackwell Publishers. Retrieved January 3, 2014.
12. Jawara F., Kwa A. (2004). Behind the Scenes at the WTO: The Real World of International Trade negotiations the lessons of Cancun. New York. Retrieved January 3, 2014, from http://zedbooks.co.uk
14. Zeng D. (2005). China’s Employment Challenges and Strategies after the WTO Accession. World Bank reports – China & Knowledge Economy: Seizing the 21st Century. Retrieved January 3, 2014.
15. Baum F. (2001). Health, equity, justice and globalization : some lessons from the People’s Health Assembly. J. Epidemiol Community Health. Retrieved January 2, 2014.
16. Moore J. (2012). Humanitarian Law in Action Within Africa. Oxford; Oxford University Press. Retrieved January 1, 2014, from http://books.google.ca/books/about/Humanitarian_Law_in_Action_within_Africa.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document