WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION   
WT/MIN(11)/ST/14 
15 December 2011  
 
(11-6554) 
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE 
Eighth Session Geneva, 15 - 17 December 2011 Original:   English 
 
  
MAURITIUS 
 
Statement by H.E. Mr Shree Servansing 
Ambassador and Permanent Representative 
 
 
Allow me first of all to join other delegati ons in thanking the Government and people of 
Switzerland for hosting the Eighth Session of the WTO Ministerial Conference and for the warm 
hospitality extended to all of us. 
 
The Eighth WTO Ministerial Conference is taking place at a time when the global economy is 
going through grave turbulences.  As the financ ial and economic crisis gets more and more 
entrenched, a global recession is looming on the ho rizon.  Although the 200 8 financial meltdown and 
the current crisis situation are not the making of the developing countries, they remain the 
first casualties in the circ umstances because trade, which is the engine of growth for these countries, 
is the first to be affected.  World Trade contracted by over 10 per cent at the peak of the crisis in 2009 
but soared by 14.5 per cent in 2010.  In view of the current crisis situation, initial forecast of 6.5 per 
cent growth in 2011 has been revised down-ward of 5.8 per cent.  
Failing exports, failing markets, low demands have a negative impact on the developing 
world but even more so on small and vulnerabl e economies, more particularly Small Islands 
Developing Countries like mine that depend on inte rnational trade for their development.  The 
vulnerability of Small Island States stems from a contribution of several factors, including the smallness of their domestic markets, absence of raw materials, geographical isolation and lack of economies of scale, amongst others, making them vulnerable to even the slightest shocks on 
international markets. 
 
On the other hand the stalemate in the WTO Doha Development Agenda Round is 
compounding this crisis and it leaves us with a multila teral trading system that relies on the past to 
service the future.  It cannot consequently boost in ternational trade, unshackle markets, remove 
imbalances and stimulate trade to bolster ec onomic growth, create employment and generate 
development.  
While the Doha Development Round sinks further in  its ten-year stalemate, it raises concerns 
about the future of the multilateral trading system, its  rules, its capacity to adjust and above all its 
capacity to multilaterally negotiate equitable outcome s for trade enhancement and trade policy.  This 
will negatively impact on all Members of the WTO but the consequences for small and vulnerable 
economies will be dire.  It is obvious that as mu ltilateralism shrinks, the vacuum will be filled by 
bilateralism where power equations very of ten dictate who is in and who is out. 
 
In the context of this pessimistic landscape, I shall like to dwell on three areas which are 
important from an SVE perspective as we debate the nature of an y future global trading system.  
Firstly, the need to review the important linkag es between development and the multilateral trading WT/MIN(11)/ST/14 
Page 2  
 
  system.  There is no doubt that a strong rule-based mu ltilateral trading system is an important asset for 
SVEs and acts as an insurance policy against unilatera l action on the part of other Members.  Thus 
stronger trade rules and greater market openings are necessary ingredients for development.  
However, the trade liberalization paradigm has to be  seen in the context of country realities where the 
objective of trade policy is more complex and varied  than just liberalization as it has to factor in 
growth, employment, infant industries, domestic a nd foreign investment, etc.  It is important, 
therefore, for the global trading system to create the space necessary where domestic concerns can be 
reconciled with a broader vision of free trade.  We therefore must have a vision that sees the dynamic 
interlinkages between international trade and deve lopment on the one hand but also the balance and 
flexibility within the architecture of a rule-based multilateral trading system that does not stifle 
completely trade policy-making at the domestic level. 
 
A second element is the issue of governance in the multilateral trading system which raises 
the issue of accountability and responsibility.  The co mplexity of a multipolar world in a context of 
increasing globalization is an issue which is even more  visible in international trade.  From a clear 
definition of rights and obligations of Members in the GATT era, we are grappling today with 
difficulties to fix a new equilibrium where some wi sh the so-called emerging economies to be more 
accountable.  I find much of this debate terribly sk ewed as much for its inequity towards emerging 
economies as for its reductionist approach in defi ning the terms of the debate.  Globalization has 
certainly changed the world's configuration but th is change has not been one-dimensional.  While 
emerging countries have seized some opportunities, one cannot concentrate on the changes at the top 
of the ladder only.  There is at the same time a greater heterogeneisation of the developing countries 
group where LDC's and SVEs stand out at the bottom of the ladder.  It is time we think out of the box 
on how to shape a future global trading system that is  all-inclusive and equitable.  For one thing, the 
emerging countries debate must have  made one thing clear by now - "a one-size-fits-all" approach 
will not work.  It is important that we transcend th e debate on categorisation of countries and steer the 
WTO on a path that addresses needs on a menu-driven basis. 
 
Finally, the future of the negotiating agenda, more particularly of the DDA is of great 
importance to small countries like mine as well as other ACP countries.  
Concluding the DDA on its development mandate is a priority for the ACP.  Therefore, we 
cannot condone any approach that attempts to depart from the Doha mandate nor compromise the 
single undertaking.  We agree to the possibility of harvesting any low-hanging fruits but in all fairness, these must first prioritize development issu es, more particularly of LDC's and SVE's in the 
first place.  
We know full well that the round is in an im passe for some time now and we do need 
renewed efforts to unlock it.  There has been a lot of talk on new or innovative approaches.  While we 
agree that the "business-as-usual" approach will not  be productive, we must nonetheless be cautions 
of any new approach.  First of all, any new a pproach must be soundly based on a clear understanding 
of what is causing the deadlock.  If it is a questi on of process or method of negotiation, then adjusting 
these may deliver better results.  However, we believe  that the cause is more profound and political in 
nature and which will not find a solution in a mere change of approach.  There is profound 
disagreement on the market access outcomes of the round as opposed to development.  Market access, 
more particularly for developed countries, ca nnot replace the development agenda on which the 
mandate of DDA is founded.  Thus we must address fi rst the issue where we want to end up in terms 
of a balanced outcome for the round, what is the le vel of ambition we want to achieve, then only can 
we develop the appropriate approach to reach there. 
 
A few years ago, the world faced a food crisis which is still ongoing.  As per the FAO's latest 
estimates contained in the 2011 Hunger Report so me 925 million people remained undernourished in 
2010.  In this regard, Mauritius supports any initiative to address this issue as it believes that it is the  WT/MIN(11)/ST/14 
 Page 3 
 
 
  responsibility of each WTO Member State to ensure food security for its population.  
Mauritius believes that the multilateral trading system should contribute to achieving greater 
coherence for economic policy-making on food security .  In this respect, Mauritius supports the EU 
proposal to remove food export restrictions or extraordinary taxes for food purchased for 
non-commercial humanitarian purposes by the World Food Programme.  Mauritius, as an NFIDC, 
also supports the NFIDC/Africa/Arab Group prop osal calling for a comprehensive ongoing work 
programme to ensure access to LDCs and NFIDCs to  adequate supplies of basic food stuffs and to 
facilitate access of LDCs and NFIDCs  to trade financing through, inter alia , reassessing the 
possibility of establishing and ex ante revolving f und to provide financing on concessional terms to 
address the short-term difficulties they face in financing their imports of basic food stuffs. 
 
As for the ACP, we would like to state clearly that we are not part of the problem, we simply 
want to be part of the solution.  We reaffirm our commitment to the round and we underscore the need 
to safeguard the progress achieved so far in th e modalities, more particularly the development acquis 
on behalf of LDCs, SVEs and ACP countries should not be unravelled.  We need to see progress on 
our remaining issues which have not yet been r esolved, among which cotton is a major priority. 
 
__________