O Director do CENTRO DE ESTUDOS EUROPEUS DO INSTITUTO DE ESTUDOS POLÍTICOS,

JOSÉ MANUEL DURÃO BARROSOconvida V. Exa. para

INSCRIÇÕES LIMITADAS

ATÉ 10 DE MARÇO europe.iep@ucp.pt / Tel: 21 721 41 29

Preço: 25 Euros / Alunos UCP: 12 Euros

COM O APOIO DE:

European Commissioner for Trade (second Barroso Commission) and Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response (first

Barroso Commission). Former Minister of Foreign Affairs and Vice Prime Minister of Belgium

Karel de Gucht

15 DE MARÇO 2016DAS 13H ÀS 15H

Hotel Marriott · Sala Mediterrâneo

ALMOÇO PALESTRA

The Geopolitics of Trade

Trade is the continuation of politics by other means

KDG Speech - Catolica Instituto Des Estudos Politicos, Lisbon, dd.15.3.2016.

The Geopolitics of Trade Trade is the continuation of politics by other means

Ladies and gentlemen….., (Students, Experts and Colleagues...), I am delighted to be here to share some thoughts with you on a topic, just as colourful as this beautiful city of Lisbon; ‘The Geopolitics of Trade.’ Thank you again Mr. Barosso and your team for organising this event (lunch lecture).

*** ! “A day will come when there will be no battlefields, but markets opening to

commerce and minds opening to ideas.” Wise words by Victor Hugo, and hopefully one day attainable for all.

! World Trade was at 16% of the world GDP in 1914, after the first wave of globalization. Today, goods and services exports amount to more than double that percentage – to say nothing of the vast cross-border stocks and flows of investment.

! What is more, about a hundred years ago, most consumer goods were

produced in one country. Today, the vast majority of the products you use every day are a mix of components, logistics and services delivered by workers all over the world. World Wide Supply Chains.

! For each country it now depends on finding a place in regional and global value chains. Trade is no longer a means of exchange for finished products; it lies in the production process itself.

! What is more interesting in Trade’s evolution is its geostrategic relevance. Trade has always been more than its economic and

2

commercial components. It’s become politically influenced. And thanks to globalisation this is only becoming more set in stone.

! I actually see Trade being used more and more like a tool to create and maintain ‘spheres of influence.’

! “Trade is the continuation of politics by other means.” As the subtitle of

my speech reads, thereby paraphrasing Carl von Clausewitz.

! Also, despite political promises to work together to find openings for Trade at the multilateral level, in practice it rather looks like a rush among players to collect or attract as many ‘friends’ as possible to join their club. Sometimes even excluding other Trade partners.

! The following examples that I am going to present to you can help explain this line of thought.

Ukraine and Russia

! When thinking about the geostrategics of Trade, one automatically turns

to the 2014 events in Ukraine and today’s ping-pong game played between the EU and Russia with Trade sanctions.

! The historical connections and emotional relationships between all the parties concerned run deep and undoubtedly played a role in what had transpired.

3

! Over several years, the EU negotiated Association Agreements (AA) and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreements (DCFTA) with the governments of Armenia (now abandoned), Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. The shared vision of a mutual Trade policy, with unhindered access to each other’s markets, would bring prosperity and stability to all those involved. Benefits were clear.

! However, these partnerships were construed as being ‘hostile’ by a dominant neighbour. Russia. Who feared they would impact and down-size Russia’s own influence in these countries and region. Strangely, Russia only objected to these agreements at a very late stage in the negotiation rounds, and particularly with regards to Ukraine.

! What should have been a strictly ‘bilateral’ agreement between two like-minded partners was being hijacked into a ‘Tri-partie’ debate. Rude, but strategic.

! As the European Commissioner for Trade during that period, I still remember clearly the commotion surrounding the Vilnius Signing Summit (2013). Both parties, the EU and Ukraine, had been working hard to get the AA and DCFTA ready for signature.

! We had been negotiating these agreements since 1999! (formally

launched in 2008).

! Unfortunately, just a few days before its signing, the President at that time, Mr. Yanukovych, decided to temporarily suspend the AA’s

4

signature. It was an inconsiderate move and a big disappointment, largely felt among the Ukrainian people.

! The reasons for Mr. Yanukovych’s decision may remain a blur. Was it because of President Putin’s pressure, threats or attractive gas, financial promises? Or was Mr. Yanukovych just playing both sides, biding time, so to benefit as much as possible, personally?

! I think we can safely say ‘all of the above.’

! But more importantly it introduced a new player to the mix. President Putin’s own geopolitical project, the Eurasian Economic Union (EEU), including Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia and Kyrgyzstan as its members.

! An obvious rival to the EU’s own integration project. And he wanted,

needed, Ukraine to join to give this union the much needed weight. First the Customs Union and then the EEU.

! Mr. Yanukovych was now considering taking a bite from this ‘carrot.’

! A comparison between this initiative and that of the EU and AA/DCFTA with Ukraine cannot be ignored. They are mutually exclusive, also in their architecture, which results in the choice for one or the other, not both.

! Also I am not one to dwell too much in the past, but when the Soviet

Union broke up, the income per capital in Ukraine was slightly higher than that in Poland. 10 years later since Poland’s EU-membership the

5

country has seen remarkable economic success, with its income per capita being 4 times higher than that in Ukraine.

! This is the EU at its greatest.

! And the frustrated Ukrainian people realised these benefits, and chose

the EU project. The DCFTA was signed on the 27th of June 2014, as part of Ukraine’s broader AA.

! The Ukrainian Rada and the European Parliament ratified the

agreement simultaneously in a moving ceremony on the 16th of September 2014.

! What came next was unbelievable.

! The illegal annexation of the Crimea, Russia’s sponsored wars on Ukrainian soil, in the Donbas, it’s boycotting of EU products and militarising its EU-borders, was a blatant move of retaliation and Putin’s abuse of Russian nationalism. An attack on the territorial integrity of a sovereign Ukraine. The flexing of muscles. Politics.

! So what had started with a Trade objective, aimed at providing a strong partnership and economic opportunities, actually transformed Ukraine into a geopolitical – unfortunately bloodied - battle field, nestled between two spheres of influence, that of the EU and of Russia.

! What is to happen next in this EU-Ukraine-Russia dynamic, remains an open question.

6

China

! The events in Ukraine have pushed Russia into economic isolation from Europe and the West. And this may benefit Beijing.

! We are seeing Putin having to go against its own suspicions of the Chinese regime and seek out its economic help.

! China’s economic boom in this past quarter-century has been

impressive, and everyone seemingly wants a piece of the pie.

! China, in turn, has realised the importance of internationalisation.

! This year, China has the (historic) opportunity to demonstrate its global leadership as the G20 chair. To make its mark.

! However, the beginning of 2016 did not bring such positive financial

news.

! The recent devaluation of its currency - starting in 2015 and escalating in the beginning of 2016 - had everyone questioning the Chinese government’s motive. China has been following a hard currency policy and the sudden devaluation took everyone by surprise.

! China is desperate to gain Market Economic Status. However, this entails

meeting certain criteria, which China has not met.

7

! The plan was intended to make Chinese goods more attractive abroad,

while accelerating import substitution at home. Moving from a production to a consumption economy. However, it was poorly communicated and panic on the stock markets ensured, negatively impacting many dependent emerging markets.

! Could we read between the lines and say that the Chinese economy is

sputtering? Presently yes and may be for some time.

! Indeed China is no longer growing at a speed of double digits. However, China’s stock market is still relatively small, and even if it were to crash again, the spill-overs wouldn’t be very great.

! China remains a giant, a world player, the red dragon. The fall of China is

not for today.

! But China is finding it challenging on how to balance its domestic and international economic obligations.

! China has a gigantic production system, far too big for their current

export, and this has to be viewed with suspicion.

! Like everyone else, China has shifted its focus to economic development outside its borders by means of bilateral or preferential Trade agreements. And China is really going for it, making a spectacular demonstration in record time.

8

! In the developed world the role of the State in the economy generally stops at establishing clear rules of the game and providing infrastructure like roads and education. However, in many of today’s rising economies, like China or Russia, the government has much more control over the private sector and a powerful economic actor with its SOEs, State Owned Enterprises.

! In 2015 Chinese investors bought for a record amount of 20 billion

Euros a series of European companies. Money came from these SOEs (70%). For example, ChemChina buying up the Italian tire producer Pirelli and making a gigantic bid for the Swiss Syngenta. An overseas expansion is underway.

! Is Beijing using ‘check-book diplomacy’ to divide and conquer Europe?

! Previously China’s focus was on the big three: Germany, France and the

UK. Now it seems like Southern Europe, the Benelux and East European countries are on the list.

! China is also dividing its European investment capital in more regions

and other sectors ranging from real estate to recreation/culture activities to the agro-industry to IT and the financial business.

! But where is the level playing field? European companies still do not

have this same open-access to Chinese Markets. They cannot invest in Chinese banks. Not to mention that foreign companies are increasingly being discriminated against when vested in China - e.g. required to have ‘Made in China’ component, merge with local companies, feel disrespect

9

for intellectual property rights and are harassed to divulge Trade secrets.

! China is a collector. A collector of ‘partners.’ A collector of information.

All with the purpose of creating its own national champions.

! Another observation is that the race for Chinese investments is dividing Europe on key economic decisions, such as possibly granting China the Market Economic Status or blocking Commission proposals in the Council like the important International Procurement Instrument and the review of Trade Defence Instruments

! Is it buying-up or maybe bribing what China is doing in Europe? Among

friends, partners, it is custom to offer a gift in thanks for a (political) favour, no?

! As the Trade Commissioner, I had to continuously remind Members

States that Trade is an exclusive competence of the EU, and politely, insist to back off!

! In deciding to launch a solar panel case against China for their abuse of

subsidies and dumping, I asked the responsible representatives of the Member States for their advice and opinions. Only four had objections.

! A week later, the Chinese Prime Minister, Mr. Li Kechang visits Berlin.

! At the next meeting, with these same representatives, there were

suddenly twenty Member States against. Luckily stubborn as I am, and

10

gladly so, I continued with the case, pulled through and was deemed right in my perseverance.

! It is expected that China will continue to dump on the European market

and even worse if China is granted Market Status Economy. It will be even more difficult to hold them accountable for their unfair Trade practices. The Trade Defence Instruments and Mechanisms of the EU are in desperate need of reform.

! Another ‘out’ for China to get rid of these overcapacities, to dump, is as

follows:

! The Chinese like to romanticize the past. President Xi Jinping’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ (OBOR) initiative is such an attempt. He wants to resurrect and revamp the Medieval Silk Road, a Trade route that once immortalized Marco Polo.

! Introduced in 2013, President Xi’s ‘connectivity’ project has far-reaching economic, political and military consequences.

! The first phase consists of a network of overland roads and railways, including gas/oil pipelines from Xi’an - through Central Asia, including stops in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Turkey - towards Duisburg-Germany, after passing through Bulgaria, Romania and the Czech Republic.

! Yet nowhere will you find the ‘official’ route mapped-out. It’s up to

China’s discretion who’s in and who’s out. I just wonder what is the cost of joining?

11

! In Venice another part of the project, the ‘Maritime Silk Road,’ will be set

in motion, which focuses on port and coastal infrastructure. On its side it covers a suit of African ports, setting up ports in the Aegean Sea and engulfs the disputed East and South China Sea and extends outward to the Pacific.

! Conveniently, this route seems to follow the proposed trajectory of

another Chinese project, possibly re-branding the controversial military-tinted ‘String of Pearls.’ Not only does this covertly challenge the US’s naval presence in the Asia-Pacific region but could a port in the Bosphorus soon see a Chinese (military) fleet stop-by? Let’s hope not.

! China also keeps investing in other infrastructure projects in the neighbouring region, trying to establish ‘economic corridors’, like in Pakistan - up to 50 billion US$ - so to gain access to areas normally unattainable to them. In this case possibly the Indian Ocean. Now China is entering India’s sphere of influence.

! President Xi is starting to understand the importance beyond

infrastructure and construction. The idea of an ‘Information Silk Road,’ will propose integration on financial, technology and communication grounds.

! This will also give more weight to the international use of the Renminbi,

which was recently (in 2015) included in the IMF’s basket of reserve currencies.

12

! Seen all together, this is an enormous, very expensive project, which extends over three continents, oceans, financial markets, cyber-space and so forth. It is obviously designed for “Chinese goods, technology,

capital, people and culture [to] reach every corner of the globe.”

! Also we may even see a future power struggle brewing. In that the Central-Asia region now has a choice of two Eurasian concepts: the Eurasia Economic Union with Russia or be a stop on the Chinese Silk Road.

! Financial funding for these initiatives has been promised through the Silk Road Infrastructure Fund but notably also the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), which surprisingly, includes many European countries as its founding members.

! I see AIIB with one mission. Be a direct competition to the US-controlled

World Bank, the EU spear-headed IMF and Japan-led Asian Development Bank. AIIB has a Chinese head.

! An outlet is now available for China to have its voice heard among the

international financial institutions. We have yet to see whether AIIB will be a success, but one thing is for sure: it’s a club most want to be part of. Very much to the discontent of the US, as many of its allies account for the majority of the memberships.

! At operational level there are obviously obstacles to the OBOR project; like distance, timing, size of containers, railway reparations, ships etc. So

13

far, it has been a one-way initiative with many uncertainties as to the level of reciprocity and cooperation.

! Containers are mostly used by China to dispatch it’s over capacities and

secure its own exports. As a result, containers leave China full to the brim but mostly return back, empty, to China from Europe. The economic viability, especially due to China’s subsidization of the railway connections, is again a concern.

! Still these projects are particularly intriguing for the smaller, less

developed countries. They have the most to gain from Chinese investment, especially in the field of infrastructure and transport development.

! Not only will the OBOR boost China’s trading position in the region,

Africa or elsewhere but it will also provide a PR opportunity so that China can emerge as a ‘friend’ rather than as a threat.

! Undoubtedly gaining access to China’s political support or market is

hugely beneficial, but it also comes at a price. More Chinese presence in the construction, workforce and management of these transport and infrastructure links.

! For instance, China’s role in Africa. Can we dare equate to what Europe

did in the past? A new era or form of colonisation?

! The exploitation of raw materials, possibly even the promotion of illicit trading in ivory, alongside dumping practices of both Chinese products

14

and its labour force under the disguise of infrastructure and development projects are of growing concern.

! For me, China’s activities in Africa is not helping Africa move forward.

! The EU just made head-way by moving towards Economic Partnership

Agreements (EPAs), replacing the EU’s ‘Generalised System of Preferences,’ with Africa. It creates a partnership of equals.

! Adjusting a highly dependent relationship to one of reciprocity was not

easy. But it’s beneficial, especially in the long run. Promoting enhanced integration into the world market, sustainable growth, Trade development and poverty reduction.

! We also included an MFN clause, a Most Favoured Nation Clause. Putting

it very simple this means African countries will not be any longer in a position to grant more market access to the Chinese than to the EU.

! Therefore, China’s involvement in Africa however seems to be taking a

step back to dependence.

! So overall despite China’s foreign policy advocating for a ‘multi-polar world without a single power dominance,’ its own continued presence worldwide and current actions show that control remains firmly, and solely, in the hands of the Chinese Leadership.

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP)

15

! “We’re in the middle of an historic transformation of the economic

architecture of the whole Pacific region. There are competing models and

high politics. It’s a very complex set of balls in the air,” interesting words of Fred Bergsten of the Peterson Institute for International Economics, Washington.

! The Asia-Pacific is a busy market place, with geopolitics being at its centre. Perfect to test how Trade antics play-out in this arena. Let us hope that Trade ultimately will have the upper hand.

! As Hillary Clinton wrote in her essay, America’s Pacific Century (2011); “the future of politics will be decided in Asia, not Afghanistan or Iraq, and

the United States will be right at the center of the action.” The US’s pivot to Asia was launched.

! Asia’s unprecedented growth, is central to the US’s economic and strategic interests. Providing opportunities for investment, for trade but also it makes the US’s role in maintaining peace and security in the region, read between the lines ‘the buffer to China,’ irreplaceable.

! The Obama administration wants to strengthen this even further by concluding an enormous regional Trade pact, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), with 11 pacific states, ranging from developing countries like Vietnam to emerging economies like Malaysia to mature economies as Australia, Canada and Japan.

! A single trading community.

16

! Together they account for approximately 40% of the world economy.

This cannot be ignored.

! In the words of Mike Froman, the US Trade Representative, TPP goes beyond the traditional architecture of a Free Trade Agreement: tariffs, market access for goods and services. It is about ensuring high labour standards, exposing State Owned Enterprises (SOEs), encouraging competition with private business and including digital activity to ‘ensure a free and open internet,’ which is a very ambitious component.

! I do have my doubts whether this level of ambition can be reached with such diverse partners. Still the geostrategic relevance of TPP is obvious.

! Strategic and commercial concerns are overlapping in this case. Some may even go as far as to call the TPP, a ‘containment policy’ rather than a Trade agreement. ‘EBC’: Everyone But China. Surprising, as the pivot to Asia, included strengthening US ties with China.

! Not including one of the biggest economies in the region in TPP sends out a clear signal. One that China will not take lightly.

! For the moment the EU is also not party to the TPP. But the EU’s interest in the area is also not military or security based. The same cannot be said for China. As we have all noticed the current increase in its military muscle and island-building in the South China Sea, for instance.

17

! And for what? Above sea level: access to the world’s busiest maritime Trade routes ever. Below sea level: yes the fresh fish stocks to feed the growing population but it’s deeper down where you will find Pandora’s Box... one of the biggest, untapped, oil and gas reserves in the world. Estimated 17,7 billion ton in the Spratly Island region alone. Imagine China having control over both.

! Still the EU has not sat completely quite in the corner. It has been negotiating comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreements with the Pacific Islands, concluded DCFTAs with South Korea and Singapore, is negotiating with Japan, attempting to negotiate an Investment Agreement with China and recently in December 2015 concluded the negotiations with Vietnam for a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and launched FTA negotiations with the Philippines, among others.

! Going further, if the EU were to accomplish a regional Trade agreement with ASEAN, once the group is an economic community with its own single market, TPP will either gain an ally or a huge opponent. For the moment, the bilateral FTAs with ASEAN members will be the building blocks to this potential region-to-region agreement.

TTIP

! But the EU can possibly gain an ‘in’ to TPP through the Transatlantic

Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), it is negotiating with the US.

! The partnership between the EU and the US has always been a special, obvious, one. The current economic crisis, the reliance on protectionism,

18

the rise and fall of the emerging markets and the Human Rights abuses worldwide has only asked for a stronger cooperation between the two powers.

! The TTIP may be part of the answer. Negotiated since 2013 and currently held its 12th round of negotiations, “TTIP has always been more

than a Trade agreement.” It certainly has been for me.

! Understandably, the TTIP is a complex negotiation. It is the largest, most important bilateral Trade initiative ever negotiated. It involves the world’s two largest, most open, economies, with over 800 million consumers and exceeding 40% of the global GDP (in value terms) just between the two of them. An estimated 2 billion in goods and services goes across the Atlantic every day.

! However TTIP has not always fully, or rather ‘correctly,’ been understood by the public. Statements that TTIP is ‘a huge corporate wish-list’ or ‘a blank cheque for US companies’ are misleading, I my opinion largely exaggerated, but unfortunately do gain attention and a following.

! The European parliament did vote on the TTIP in July 2015 (8th July). A clear message, ‘yes,’ (approx. 61%) was given to the European negotiators to move forward. In June 2015, the US Congress, in turn, adopted the Trade Promotion Authority, giving political impetus and support to Trade negotiations.

19

! This opportunity must be grasped swiftly and positively, especially if negotiating the technical aspects of the deal, otherwise we risk losing the US’s motivation.

! Not only is the US occupied with the 2016 Presidential elections but the Obama administration has seemingly been pushing more for the TPP, possibly becoming Obama’s political legacy. TTIP, on that note, risks being pushed aside

! Unfortunately, the EU’s continuing portrayal as a divided entity is not helping either. Riddled with crises from the lack of solidarity shown during the Greece financial negotiations, the uncertainty of the euro, to the chaos in responding to the refugee influx to the possibility of a Brexit, the EU is risking losing its influence sphere and voice in the international community. The EU’s credibility as a partner is on the line.

! If the support for the TTIP continues to waiver, especially within Europe, the EU will fall behind and damage its place, most importantly its negotiation leverage, within the world market.

! The world is changing fast and countries like China are creating growth but are largely disrespectful towards the rights of people, animals and the environment (e.g. China in Africa). By working together with the US, the EU can set higher standards worldwide, especially in the areas of environment, health, consumer protection and industrial products of the future.

20

! But without an ambitious instrument like TTIP, the EU and US risk countries like China to swoop in and set their own standards, undoubtedly of a lower calibre than what the EU or US have envisaged. In turn the EU and US would be forced to abide to these standards once they gained global recognition. The EU and US must therefore continue to retain their upper-hand and influence sphere to make the global Trade policy fair, open and respectful of rights, the environment and sustainable development.

! As a result, third countries then wishing to boost exports to both sides of the Atlantic would need to adopt TTIP’s high standards and regulations. They would have to abide to the global standards, set by TTIP.

! If the EU and the US work towards harmonisation and standardisation, it would be easier and cheaper for (less) developing countries to access both markets at the same time, only having to adhere to one set of rules.

! And without a doubt, increased Trade between the EU and the US will raise the demand for raw materials, components and inputs produced in other countries. EU and US Trade with the rest of the world would increase by over €33 billion, resulting in an increase in the rest of the world GDP of almost €100 billion. Thus, other countries will benefit from TTIP too.

! TTIP can therefore be a benchmark for global standards, order and may be a catalyst to bring back others to the Doha-negotiating table, possibly reviving the multilateral (WTO) system.

21

! So the practical reality of the TTIP is simple: we go for an ambitious deal that creates genuine new opportunities for both parties, remaining true to our high values, or we fail.

! As Daniel Hamilton rightly underlines in his paper on ‘The Geostrategic Implications of TTIP,’ “taken together, these elements underscore that

TTIP is not just another Trade agreement, it is a new generation

negotiation aimed at repositioning the US and European economies for a

more diffuse world of intensified global competition.”

WTO

! Finally, where is the WTO, the World Trade Organisation, in all of this?

! The objectives of the WTO clearly come the closest to the ideal of free

Trade. Every WTO agreement with the aim of reducing or removing Trade barriers would involve about 161 countries, which is almost the whole world economy.

! The strongest proof the WTO is not moribund is that countries continue

to join. And none have left.

! The WTO is in a way, also the anti-dote against (big) countries carving up the world in spheres of influence.

22

! Therefore, finding a solution to the stalemate to the WTO negotiations and establish a multilateral trading system is the most favoured and priority approach.

! To do this we need to understand the root cause, which is not

institutional, technical or even economical but deeply political.

! The majority of WTO members are developing countries. But all WTO members agree that there has been a major shift in the relative economic power among them.

! Where the disparity lies is between the expectations of developed and

emerging economies. Today the most important players are not necessarily the most economically advanced. More and more emerging countries, like China, India and Brazil, number among the most competitive in the world. But these governments still see themselves as developing and therefore maintain they are not obliged to contribute concessions and to the liberalisation process.

! The WTO approach of a 'one-size-fits-all' is no longer a viable option for

most economies. The DOHA round is still on the table but in bits and pieces.

! We however cannot afford to see the multilateral system weakened. It is

and remains the global forum for Trade rules setting and governance.

! But there are reasons for hope.

23

! As the European Commissioner for Trade, I advocated hard for a successful WTO deal. We were able to reach a break through with a compromise on ‘Trade facilitation,’ adopted in Bali in 2013. The agreement to streamline customs and border procedures has the potential to boost the world economy by a trillion Euros. Hard work is still needed, but the process has taken off.

! The recent Nairobi Ministerial Conference, marking the 10th anniversary

of the WTO, brought another moment of optimism. Also being organised in Africa was special.

! Safeguards and assistance for the Least Developed Countries in securing

its integration and participation in the multilateral trading system and global economy are central. A series of six Ministerial decisions on agriculture, cotton and issues related to the LDCs were adopted as part of the Doha Development Agenda.

! I recognise this as reaffirming the strong commitment of all members to

advance negotiations on the remaining Doha issues.

! In the meantime, WTO Members still work and reach agreements in bilateral and plurilateral formats. Nearly all WTO members are party to at least one bilateral or preferential Trade agreement. ITA, Green Goods Initiative, the GPA....you name it.

! I must reiterate that these should only be provisional until we finally get

out of this WTO-deadlock.

24

! Free Trade agreements between individual countries or regions remain narrow. A country - or regional economy, such as the EU - that wants to open up its market to different multiple partners means that they would have to close many deals. A confusing tangle of overlapping and different rules and products will develop. This would make it more difficult for companies and investors to navigate through and very difficult for smalleler or even medium sized countries to administer.

! However, these Trade agreements are expanding to cover a wide range

of activities and processes, including services, intellectual property, foreign direct investment, licensing, internal taxation, and focus on the health of plants and animals, industrial and non-industrial products as well as respect for human rights, labour standards and environmental protection.

! They are becoming broad and comprehensive tools. We can even say

potentially becoming more WTO-compatible and mutually enforceable.

! Through bilateral agreements we can try to work out solutions on a smaller scale before they are tested at a global level. We however still best interpret these Trade agreements as complementary to the WTO agenda and not as substitutes. Preference remains for the multilateral system.

***

Thank you for your attention and I am keen to hear your thoughts on this too.