“The broader aims and objectives of WTO are to manage and promote international trade in the era of globalization. But the Doha round of negotiations seem doomed due to differences between the developed and the developing countries.” Discuss in the Indian perspective.

The Doha Development Agenda (2001) promised to put development at the centre of trade liberalisation. Two decades on, the round is effectively moribund because developed and developing members disagree over who should adjust.

Fault lines

• Agriculture: developed countries retain large domestic support while pressing developing countries to cut tariffs; the refusal of the US and EU to slash farm subsidies stalled the modalities.
• Public stockholding for food security: India secured only an interim peace clause at Bali (2013); a permanent solution remained elusive even at MC13 in Abu Dhabi (2024).
• The outdated 1986–88 external reference price inflates India's computed subsidies under the 10% de minimis cap, threatening MSP-backed procurement for the NFSA.
• Developed members declined to reaffirm the Doha mandate at Nairobi (2015) and push new issues — e-commerce rules, investment facilitation — sidelining the development agenda; the Appellate Body has been paralysed since 2019, weakening enforcement for weaker traders.

Indian perspective

• India needs policy space for food security procurement, a Special Safeguard Mechanism against import surges, protection of Mode 4 services interests and preservation of special and differential treatment.
• India leads the G33 coalition, resists plurilateral rule-making outside consensus and seeks restoration of binding two-stage dispute settlement.

For India, Doha's demise argues not for abandoning the WTO — a rules-based system protects weaker traders — but for reforming it: settle public stockholding permanently, revive the Appellate Body and retain development at the core, even as India hedges through bilateral FTAs.