Tag: WTO

Rio 2025 BRICS Paves Way for Global South Leadership

Posted on By Musanjufu Benjamin Kavubu

Dear Editor, in July, Brazil hosted the 17th BRICS summit on the theme “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance”, and if by any chance you followed main stream media especially from Western outlets the emphasis was put on the absence of the Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russia’s Vladimir Putin. The West pushed this narrative to water down the 17 years of this summit. The BRICS is a group formed by eleven countries: Brasil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and Iran. It serves as a political and diplomatic coordination forum for countries from the Global South and for coordination in the most diverse areas.

After the summit ended the former President of Russia Dmitry Medvedev said “BRICS is gaining authority. Trump announced that an additional 10% tariff would be imposed on any country that supports BRICS policy. So, we’re doing everything right!”. There was a myriad of development in Rio de Janeiro that are very important to the development of the global South and many based on the South-South framework. For starters on top of the already 11 member states at the moment going by the Kazan declaration  the Republic of Belarus, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic of Cuba, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Malaysia, the Kingdom of Thailand, the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, the Republic of Uganda, and the Republic of Uzbekistan attended as BRICS partner countries. Which is a stage to attaining membership status.

Uganda’s delegation was led by the Vice President H.E Maj. (Rtd) Jessica Rose Epel Alupo. The only lady to lead a delegation to the summit from a sovereign country in attendance.

Since BRICS prides itself in political and diplomatic coordination, western media didn’t report about the strongest of emphasis put on multilateral reforms especially with actions that amplify the theme of the summit, for example when it comes to making sure Africa, the Caribbean and South America take a more central role in organizations like the World Bank, the World Trade organization (WTO) and the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The BRICS recognize the legitimate aspirations of African countries, as reflected in the Ezulwini Consensus and Sirte Declaration that advocate for Africa to have two Permanent seats and 3 non permanent seats at the UNSC, they also stressed that the UNSC reforms are to lead to the amplified voice of the Global South. Recalling the 2022 Beijing and 2023 Johannesburg-II Leaders’ Declarations, China and Russia, as permanent members of the UNSC, reiterated their support to the aspirations of Brazil and India to play a greater role in the UN, including its Security Council.

On the issue of poverty and inequality the BRICS put forward the reform of the world Bank and the IMF so that the Bretton Woods system can address the most critical issues of the global South in a just and with more meaningful representation. The BRICS expressed support for the 2025 World Bank shareholding review that is co-chaired by Brazil that is aimed at enhancing legitimacy of the world bank group so that it’s in a better place to really take on modern challenges like creating jobs for a youthful population and dealing with the climate crisis.

Reforming the WTO was very central to the proceeding especially at a time when commercial diplomacy through Tarrif hikes and other trade restrictions is taking place. BRICS is also advocating for the admission of Iran and Ethiopian into WTO. BRICS are also not going to support sanctions that violate international law, a huge push back to the West’s misuse of the concept.

The BRICS forum reappointed Dilma Rousseff to the presidency of New Development Bank (NDB) an institution that is continuing to grow especially with the capacity to raise money that is used to facilitate projects in the global South. To ensure financial independence and resilience a number of measures amongst BRICS members and partners were put in place for example the BRICS New Investment Platform, the BRICS Interbank Cooperation Mechanism, the Rapid Information Security Channel, and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement that is specifically for use of local currencies while sidelining the US dollar. The measures also facilitate Cross border payments, encourage funding of projects through fast and cheap payments.

Later this year Brazil will host COP30, and climate was very key to issues discussed at the 17th BRICS summit, the forum agreed to approach the climate change issue through multilateralism for example by upholding the Paris agreement and putting in place a BRICS climate leadership agenda dedicated to the climate crisis the world faces. It was agreed that each country should play it’s part and honor it’s commitment to climate financing and that there should be local solutions that don’t encourage protectionism in the pretext to combating climate change.

Peace and security was also top of the agenda, for starters there was concern for ongoing conflict around the world, and discouragement for increased military spending that is becoming the trend world over.  The BRICS jointly condemned the USA’s military actions on Iran that were against the UN Charter. On the Ukraine situation there was acknowledgement of the different national positions and a peaceful way forward was advocated for, and appreciation of mediation efforts like the Africa initiative.

On the Israel-Palestine question the BRICS strongly condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza for example the blocking of entry of humanitarian aid and called for an unconditional Ceasefire and the release of hostage on both sides and expressed support for a two state solution.

BRICS was very conscious on human rights, women’s empowerment, the summit committed to advanced collaborative endeavors like the BRICS Network of Universities. Encouraged celebration of cultural heritage and the return of cultural items taken from the global South. There was a very intentional pronouncement on the question of AI and technological advancements.

BRICS is growing, evolving and expanding as it proves its ready to take part in shaping a multipolar world that is inclusive and beneficial for especially the global South.

The writer is a research fellow at the Development Watch Centre.

US Tariffs Contradicts WTO Rules on Fair Trade and Non Discrimination

Posted on By Ernest Talwana

The current US administration has continued the rhetoric of the previous Trump administration (2016-2020) which includes placing trade barriers against China amongst a litany of actions including barriers on Chinese EVs entering the US market (carefully avoiding placing tariffs on Chinese rare earth metals critical to US defense and aviation industries). This time round, the current administration has opted to place tariffs on all nations and territories  across the planet (with the exception of Russia).

These actions contradict World Trade Organisation agreements on Trade Without Discrimination which asserts equal treatment for all parties under said rules that the US is party to.

Freer Trade through negotiation is equally envisaged by said rules. These rules equally desire gradual and progressive liberation. Something the current US administration is rallying against by putting America First.

Predictability through transparency is equally significant amongst trade partners. Uneven tariffs can be viewed as acting against stated principles and creates strain on well established trade relations.

The Uruguay round of talks therefore placed a ceiling on custom tariffs which would avoid any form of unpredictability that causes strain on global supply chains and unnecessarily raises the coat of doing business.

The current American administration thus disregards the rules based order and seeks to act in her own interests while affecting global trade as a whole, subsequently causing price hikes for American citizens as well as creating shocks on global stock markets.

It should be noted that global supply chains are dependent on free trade. Not the restriction of it with tariffs. Tariffs only act to protect one party while causing economic slowdown.

In an economic war, there are no clear winners. Any form of concession another party seeks to achieve will be offset by losses incurred through higher production costs and strains on the end consumer who foots a higher bill to buy the same commodity.

China’s complaints at the World Trade Organisation are done in an effort to promote fair trade amongst a comity of nations. China doesn’t actively seek to antagonise other nations. Rather, to promote her own interests while building her trade and industrial capacity in a dynamic world.

China equally has bilateral trade agreements with a variety of nations across the globe. This means that countries are aware of China’s competence and willingness to trade. These include Austria, the Belgium-Luxembourg Economic Union, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Thailand, and the United Kingdom.

China has built these relationships through her culture of mutuality and trust. A culture deeply embedded in China’s millennia old cultural fabric and permeates throughout her society and international relations.  It is no surprise that many nations are seeking trade relationships with her. China is equally the leading trade partner with the MERCOSUR regional bloc with the Uruguayan President seeking to fast-track negotiations on a free trade area with China.  This includes 30 free trade agreements with a variety of nations across the planet. Aside from the more dominant states, China is equally a dominant Economic and regional player in the Pacific region.

American tariffs underestimate China’s resilience, adaptability and the versatility of Chinese supply chains and her global trade apparatus. Any pain the US hopes to inflict on China is grossly overestimated as China has shown throughout her history a capacity to withstand greater pains.

US Tariff hikes can also be seen as a deprivation of the Global South’s right to development as asserted by the Chinese MFA Spokesperson. Developing states utilise WTO Rules to negotiate global trade through negotiation and deliberation. The actions by the United States signal eonomic coercion and exceptionalism which contradict the desire for a fair system that promotes growth and development of all nations in line with the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Furthermore, it should be stated that WTO Rules promote fair competition which protectionism stands antithetical to. Protectionism limits innovation and dulls an economy’s ability to challenge itself in the face of competition from other global players.

Protectionism isolates a nation from the rest of the world and causes possible stagnation in the face of changing trends in consumer preferences.

A nation only thrives when it acknowledges competition in all its forms. Not close itself to it.

The writer is a research fellow at Sino-Uganda Research Centre.

U.S. Violated Trade Rules With Tariffs on China, World Trade Organization Says.

Posted on By Admin

By Bryce Baschuk, Bloomberg.

The World Trade Organization undercut the main justification for President Donald Trump’s trade war against China, saying that American tariffs on Chinese goods violate international rules.

A panel of three WTO trade experts on Tuesday said the U.S. broke international rules when it imposed tariffs on Chinese goods in 2018. Washington has imposed levies on more than $550 billion in Chinese exports.

The panel said in its report “that the United States had not met its burden of demonstrating that the measures are provisionally justified.”

While the ruling bolsters Beijing’s claims, Washington can effectively veto the decision by lodging an appeal at any point in the next 60 days. That’s because the Trump administration has already paralyzed the WTO’s appellate body, a tactic that has rendered toothless the world’s foremost arbiter of trade.

Section 301

The dispute centers on the Trump administration’s use of a 1970s-era U.S. trade law to unilaterally launch its commercial conflict against China in 2018.

China claimed the tariffs violated the WTO’s most-favored treatment provision because the measures failed to provide the same treatment to all WTO members. China also alleged the duties broke a key dispute-settlement rule that requires countries to first seek recourse from the WTO before imposing retaliatory measures against another country.

The U.S. tariffs against China were authorized under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which empowers the president to levy tariffs and other import restrictions whenever a foreign country imposes unfair trade practices that affect U.S. commerce. The Trump administration has claimed the tariffs were necessary to confront China’s widespread violations of intellectual property rights and forced technology transfer policies.

Though the use of Section 301 isn’t unprecedented, the provision largely fell out of favor in the 1990s after the U.S. agreed to first follow the WTO’s dispute settlement process before it triggered any retaliatory trade actions.

While the European Union has so far been spared U.S. levies based on the controversial Section 301, the 27-nation bloc may breathe a sigh of relief over Tuesday’s WTO verdict. That’s because the Trump administration has threatened to use Section 301 to hit European goods with levies in retaliation over the taxation of digital companies in the EU.