OPINION | Reforming the WTO for a more complex world

WTO reform is one of those issues where everyone strongly supports the concept

The world of 1995, when the World Trade Organization (WTO) was created, was a far simpler place. Global supply chains were shorter, geopolitics was relatively quiet, and the internet was still in its infancy. Few policymakers were thinking about issues like digital trade, cross-border data flows, or the growing importance of services in international commerce. Trade policy itself rarely dominated political headlines.

Today, that world feels very distant. Trade, technology, and geopolitics have become deeply intertwined. Governments increasingly see trade not only as an economic issue but also as a strategic one. Political leaders across the world now speak frequently about tariffs, supply chains, industrial policy, and economic security. Trade policy has moved from the technical corridors of commerce ministries into the centre of domestic politics.

This shift is not an overtly positive development. When trade policy becomes overly politicised, it can create uncertainty for businesses and increase tensions between countries. In such an environment, strengthening the global trading system becomes even more important.

Everyone supports WTO reform, but….

There is now near-universal agreement that the WTO needs reform. But agreement on the need for reform does not mean agreement on what those reforms should look like. In fact, WTO reform is one of those issues where everyone strongly supports the concept, especially when it involves reforms that other countries should undertake.

But the moment discussions turn to specifics, the consensus quickly becomes less clear.

In some ways, this debate resembles the discussions that preceded the launch of the WTO’s last major negotiating effort, the Doha Development Round. Before the round began in 2001, governments around the world broadly agreed that a new negotiating agenda was necessary. Everyone had ideas about what should be included. Yet many of these proposals lacked clear priorities.

The final negotiating mandate became extremely ambitious - often compared to a “Christmas tree” on which every country hung its preferred issues. The negotiations that followed turned into one of the longest-running efforts in international economic diplomacy. More than two decades later, the Doha Round remains unfinished.

Indeed, the negotiations have lasted so long that some of the younger trade diplomats discussing them today were still in school when the talks began.

Granularity prevails in trade negotiations

Trade negotiators are, in many ways, a unique community. They can spend hours debating the wording of a single footnote and still feel they have had a productive day. This attention to detail is important; international agreements often hinge on precise language. But it also highlights a risk: if WTO reform discussions get lost in procedural debates, momentum could quickly fade.

Three priorities for meaningful reform

This is why the focus must remain on practical outcomes that strengthen the system rather than simply producing lengthy negotiating texts. To keep the reform discussion focused, three broad areas deserve particular attention.

First, the role of developing countries needs to be re-examined. When the WTO was created, the gap between developed and developing economies was much wider than it is today. Since then, several emerging economies have become major players in global trade. Yet the framework governing responsibilities and flexibilities for developing countries has not evolved at the same pace. The debate should not be about eliminating special provisions for developing countries, but about ensuring that responsibilities and flexibilities reflect current economic realities. A more balanced approach could help rebuild trust among members.

Second, the governance of the WTO needs strengthening. For the organisation to function effectively, its processes must be perceived as fair, transparent and inclusive. Smaller economies must feel their voices are heard, while larger economies must believe that the system remains credible and rules-based. Improving transparency, decision-making processes and institutional effectiveness would help ensure that the WTO continues to function as the central pillar of the global trading system.

Third, the private sector must be brought closer to the conversation. Trade rules may be negotiated by diplomats, but they are tested every day by businesses trying to move goods, services and data across borders. If the rules do not work for businesses, they probably are not working for the system either. Greater engagement with industry — from large multinational companies to small and medium enterprises — could help ensure that WTO rules remain practical and relevant.

India’s stakes in WTO reform

For India, the debate about WTO reform is not merely an academic discussion about global governance. It is directly linked to the country’s long-term economic strategy. India is now one of the world’s largest economies and an increasingly important participant in global trade. Its ambitions to expand manufacturing, grow services exports and integrate more deeply into global supply chains will inevitably depend on the stability of the international trading system.

A predictable, rules-based system benefits countries like India that rely on open markets for their exports.

At the same time, India has traditionally been cautious in WTO negotiations, often focusing on protecting policy space for development. That approach was understandable when the global trading system was dominated by advanced economies. But the world has changed. India today is not just a rule-taker — it is increasingly a rule-shaper.

For that reason, India should approach WTO reform not defensively but proactively. India has both the credibility and the experience to play a bridging role between developed and developing countries. It understands the development concerns of poorer economies while also engaging actively with major trading powers.

Moreover, India’s economic ambitions require a stable and predictable trading system. A weakened WTO would lead to more unilateral trade actions and greater uncertainty for exporters. Taking a leadership role in WTO reform would reinforce India’s broader aspiration to play a larger role in global governance. Rather than merely reacting to proposals put forward by others, India could help shape a reform agenda that balances development priorities with the need for a modern and effective trading system.

(Views are personal, and do not represent the stand of this publication.)