Quote:

---

1. India has been a vocal backer of world trade reform...

2. India's veto may be the beginning of the end for the WTO ... if the WTO's 20-year-old rulebook does not evolve, more and more trade will be governed by new regional agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership... [which] could lead to a fragmented world of separate trade blocs.

3. India's new government was widely seen as being pro-business. And yet it blocked a deal on "trade facilitation", a worldwide streamlining of customs rules that would cut container handling times, guarantee standard procedures for getting goods to and from their destinations and kill off vast amounts of paperwork at borders around the world.

4. Nobody else was negotiating....

5. India did not object to the deal it vetoed. Its objections were unconnected to trade facilitation. It blocked the trade facilitation deal to try to get what it wanted on something else: food security.

---

Quote:

---

6. India had already got what it wanted on food security. At Bali, it forced a big concession from the United States and European Union, which initially strongly opposed its demands, but agreed that India could stockpile food at subsidised prices, reversing the trend of trying to reduce and remove trade-distorting food subsidies globally. The arrangement was temporary, but the WTO agreed to work towards a permanent solution within four years, by the end of 2017.

7. India's demands reversed its previous position....

8. India's veto could put it in legal danger...

9. India was isolated. Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia voiced support, but diplomats say other big developing countries such as Russia, China and Brazil, as well as India's neighbour Pakistan, were among the chief opponents of its veto.

---