Burying Doha Development Agenda

I must admit that for a long time, I have wondered whether the World Trade Organization's Doha Development Agenda wold yield its expected fruit. Reading a number of articles by those in the know, it appears that the Doha Round was all along set for massive disappointment and failure. Jean-Pierre Lehmann writes in the FT (gated) and openly calls for an end to the pretense to end and for Doha to be buried because its long been dead.

I have closely examined and participated in a couple of mMinisterial conferences but I was not always sure that the outcome would be such a mess. With the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that this Trade rRound was bound to be long and difficult on account of the different expectations between member states. I am sometimes left aghast when I hear that there is a developing country and developed country divide with China, iIndia and Brazil being the torch bearers for the developing nations. The poor definition of sides is part of the problem because it encourages the argument of victimhood into debates with expectations of market opening by the "northern" countries.

Jean-Pierre Lehmann's assessment is plausible but I disagree with the claim that fact that Pascal Lamy's exit would in itself render the WTO's future as safe. As a custodian of the affairs of the WTO round on behalf of the member states, Lamy's demeanour has been exemplary and the problem here is with the intransigence of the members as opposed to the secretariat of the WTO. I am not sure that the WTO can be saved if the Doha Round fails completely especially since the piecemeal approach to trade reforms is the "modus operandi" for many of its members. As a system of exchanging concessions, the WTO seems to be reaching its limits and there's nobody to blame but is members.