A new politics of confrontation? Brazil and India in multilateral trade negotiations

Global Society

Volumn 20, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 415-433

  Hurrell, Andrew ^a   Narlikar, Amrita ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DEVELOPING WORLD; FOREIGN POLICY; MULTILATERAL TRADE; NORTH-SOUTH RELATIONS; TRADE POLICY;

ASIA; BRAZIL; EURASIA; INDIA; SOUTH AMERICA; SOUTH ASIA;

EID: 33750499984     PISSN: 13600826     EISSN: 1469798X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13600820600929762     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Hedley Bull and Adam Watson (eds.), The Expansion of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985).
2. Up to now most of the literature on the resistance to globalisation has concentrated on social groups and the anti-globalisation movement (see, for example, David Armstrong, Theo Farrell and Bice Maiguashca (eds.), Governance and Resistance in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003)), and has tended to neglect the role of major developing states.
3. "Statement by H.E. Mr Arun Jaitley, India", WT/MIN(03)/ST/7 (10 September 2003), available: see also "Statement by H.E. Mr Lu Fuyuan, China", WT/MIN(03)/ST/12 (11 September 2003), available: (accessed on 3 November 2005).
4. Bangladesh, Cuba, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, Nigeria, Pakistan, Venezuela, Zambia, and Zimbabwe.
5. Comments on the EC communication (WT/GC/W/491) on the modalities for the Singapore Issues, WT/GC/W/501 (8 July 2003), available at www.wto.org; accessed on 3 November 2005.
6. Available: .
7. "Poverty Reduction: Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton", TN/AG/ GEN/4 (16 May 2003).
8. Bridges Daily Update (13 September 2003).
9. This fear was expressed to us repeatedly in interviews that we conducted in Geneva in May 2003.
10. Wall Street Journal (25 September 2003).
11. Phone interview, delegate from a leading African country, October 2003.
12. Amritha Narlikar, International Trade and Developing Countries: Bargaining Coalitions in the GATT & WTO (London, Routledge, 2003).
13. The G10 in its hard-line version comprised Argentina, Brazil, Cuba, Egypt, India, Nigeria, Nicaragua, Tanzania, Peru, and the former Yugoslavia. For a detailed account of coalitions in the Uruguay Round, see Amrita Narlikar, International Trade and Developing Countries, 2003.
14. "Market Access for Non-agricultural Products", TN/MA/W/65 (8 November 2005), available:
15. "Reclaiming Development in the Doha Development Round", WT/COMTD/W/ 145 (1 December 2005), available: .
16. John Odell, Negotiating the World Economy (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2000).
17. Amrita Narlikar and John Odell, "The Strict Distributive Strategy for a Bargaining Coalition: The Like-minded Group in theWorld Trade Organization", in John Odell (ed.), Negotiating Trade: Developing Countries in the WTO and NAFTA (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 115-144.
18. Interview with Indian negotiator, New Delhi, 3 January 2006.
19. Interview with Indian trade negotiator, December 2005.
20. Lok Sabha Debates, available: (accessed 13 March 2006).
21. Whether developing countries will still be able to overcome differences among themselves in the current negotiations remains to be seen. Potential rifts lie between the LDCs and other developing countries, as well as issue-specific differences between countries that have a more aggressive and liberalising interest versus those with more defensive interests in agriculture, services, and NAMA.
22. John Odell and Susan Sell, "Reframing the Issue: The Coalition on Intellectual Property and Public Health in the WTO, 2001", in John Odell (ed.), Negotiating Trade: Developing Countries in the WTO and NAFTA (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 85-144.
23. Ernst Haas, "Collective Learning: Some Theoretical Speculations", in George W. Breslauer and Philip Tetlock (eds.), Learning in US and Soviet Foreign Policy (Boulder:WEstview, 1991), pp. 62-99.
24. Note, however, that the definition of "learning" is contested, with Philip Tetlock adopting a much more expansive definition that includes adaptation within it. See Breslauer and Tetlock, Learning in US and Soviet Foreign Policy.
25. Narlikar and Odell, op. cit.
26. Interviews with delegates from developing countries, Cancun, 9-14 September 2003.
27. Amrita Narlikar and Diana Tussie, "The G20 at the Cancun Ministerial: Developing Countries and their Evolving Coalitions in the WTO", The World Economy, Vol. 27, No. 7 (2004), pp. 947-966.
28. Etel Solingen, Regional Order at Century's Dawn: Global and Domestic Influences on Grand Strategy (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998);
29. Jeffrey Friden, Debt, Development and Democracy: Modern Political Economy and Latin America, 1965-85 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991).
30. Miles Kahler (ed.), Liberalization and Foreign Policy (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997).
31. Jeffrey Casson, "Democracy Looks South: Mercosur and the Politics of Brazilian Trade Strategy", in Peter R. Kingstone and Timothy J. Power (eds.), Democratic Brazil: Actors, Institutions and Processes (Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press, 2000) pp. 204-216;
32. Ben Schneider, "Business Politics and Regional Integration: The Advantages of Organization in NAFTA and Mercosur", in Victor Bulmer-Thomas (ed.), Regional Integration in Latin America and the Caribbean (London: ILAS, 2001);
33. Kurt Weyland, "The Fragmentation of Business in Brazil", in Francisco Durand and Eduardo Silva (eds.), Organized Business, Economic Change and Democracy in Latin America (Miami: North- South Center Press, 1998).
34. Maria Regina Soares de Lima, "Instituiçõces Democráticas e Política Exterior", Contexto Internacional, Vol. 22, No. 2 (2000), pp. 265-303.
35. Maria Izabel V. De Carvalho, "Estruturas Domésticas e Grupos de Interesse: A Formação da Posição Brasileira para Seattle", Contexto Internacional, Vol. 25, No. 2 (2003), pp. 363-401.
36. Interviews with government officials, April 2004.
37. Elisabeth Jay Frideman and Kathryn Hochstetler, "Assessing the Third Transition in Latin American Democratization. Representational Regimes and Civil Society in Argentina and Brazil", Comparative Politics, Vol. 35, No. 1 (2002), pp. 21-42.
38. For example, in the Uruguay Round, even after most of the members had defected, India continued for a while to pursue the G10 agenda single-handedly; see Narlikar, op. cit. Similarly, at the Doha Ministerial in 2001, the Like Minded Group fell apart in the endgame, and India stood alone as the vanguard of resistance;
39. see Narlikar and Odell, op. cit.
40. Phone interview with a former ambassador from a developing country, 21 October 2003.
41. Suma Athreye, "Trade Policy, Industrialization and Growth in India", in Simon Bromley, Maureen Mackintosh, William Brown and Marc Wuyts (eds.), Making the International: Economic Interdependence and Political Order (London: Open University, Pluto Press, 2004);
42. Rob Jenkins, Democratic Politics and Economic Reform in India (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999);
43. Atul Kohli, State-directed Development: Political Power and Industrialization in the Global Periphery (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004).
44. Interview with a member of the Indian delegation, Geneva, 20 May 2003.
45. Interviews, Geneva, May 2003 and New Delhi, April, 2004; Julius Sen, "Lessons Not Learned: India's Trade Policymaking Process from Uruguay to Doha", Working Paper, Globalization and Poverty (August 2003).
46. Interviews, New Delhi, April 2004; S. Narayan, "Trade Policy Making in India", Paper presented at the Workshop on Trade Policy Making in Developing Countries, International Trade Policy Unit, London School of Economics, 25 May, available: (accessed 12 June 2005).
47. Interviews, New Delhi, April 2004.
48. Sen, op. cit.
49. For an overview of the foreign policy options available to second-tier states see Andrew Hurrell, "Hegemony, Liberalism and Global Order", International Affairs, Vol. 82, No. 1 (2006), pp. 1-19.
50. Zairo B. Cheibub, "Diplomatas e Construção Institucional: O Itamaraty em uma perspective histórica', Dados. Revista de Ciências Sociais, Vol. 28, No. 1 (1985).
51. Horrell, Andrew (2001). "The Foregin Policy of modern Brazil", in Stephen Hook ed., Comparative foreign policy: Adaption Strategies of the Great and Emerging Powers Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall: 137-154.
52. Guimarães, Samuel Pinheiro (1998). "Desafios de dilemas dos grandles países periféricos: Brasil e India". Revista Brasileira de Política International 41, 1: 108-131.
53. Celso Amorim, interview Folha de Saõ Paulo (16 May 2005).
54. The Brasilia Declaration was signed between Brazil, India and South Africa in June 2003; see .
55. Celso Amorim, "The Foreign Policy of the Lula Government", Speech, London School of Economics, 17 March 2004.
56. Stephen Cohen, India: Emerging Power (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 2001), p. 74.
57. C. Raja Mohan, Crossing the Rubicon: The Shaping of India's New Foreign Policy (New Delhi: Viking Books, 2003).
58. Note that the deal remains contested, and has attracted bitter opposition within India.