 RESTRICTED  
  
WT/WGTDF/M/4 4 
 
 
24 August  2022 
(22-6402) Page: 1/7 
Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance   
 
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING OF 12 JULY  2022 
The forty -sixth meeting of the Working Group on Trade, Debt an d Finance (WGTDF) was held on 
12 July 2022 and was chaired by Mr. Donatas Tamulaitis  (Lithuania ). The meeting had been 
convened under the cover of WTO/AIR/WGTDF/1 7, WTO/AIR/WGTDF/ 17/Rev.1, and 
WTO/AIR/WGTDF/ Add.1.  The minutes of our previous meeting, held on 1 November , 2021 , are 
available in WTO document WT/WGTDF/M /43. The Chair  expressed his deepest condolences to the 
delegation  of Jap an on the passing of former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Regarding the proposed 
agenda for the meeting, it was suggested under agenda  item 2.A, that the Working Group resume d 
the discussion on trade finance, as requested by some Members. The Delegation of C ôte d'Ivoire 
confirmed its wish to see discussion on Trade  Finance continue on the basis of Document 
WT/WGTDF/W/98/Rev.1. Such a formal request  was, of course , without prejudice of other Members ' 
rights to continue proceeding in presenting p ositions as currently on the table, with the view to 
getting WTO  Members' feedback, so as to enhance the work of the Working Group and all working 
documents submitted to date, including by other delegations. Under proposed agenda item 2.B, it 
was proposed to examine any other business.  
1.1.   The Representative of the United States  of America  raised concerns pertaining to the agenda 
of meeting. As stated in the Working Group in recent meetings, the work of this body had to be 
Member -driven. The original airgram p ut forward an agenda item that appear ed to have come from 
the Chair or the Secretariat to discuss "previous submissions on trade finance made by Members in 
2021". Before the meeting, the Chair was asked to specify the proposals for discussion using 
documen t numbers. A request was also made that Members who wished to have their proposals 
discussed during the meeting formally proposed them to the Chair. The addendum to the meeting 
had been noted.  However, until 8 July  2022, requests were refused.  The Secretariat indicated that 
no rules of procedure applied to the Working Group,  and asserted that unnamed Members wished 
to continue these discussions.  No merit was found in th is explanation.  He asked why the 
Working  Group  should  not adopt longstanding best  practices in terms of setting agendas in the WTO? 
Why would it be a good idea to have agenda items that do not specify precise topics and documents 
to be discussed , and identify the Member(s) requesting each agenda item. The reason this is done 
throughout  the WTO was because it provided Members with information necessary to adequately 
prepare and engage on specific topics.  The Secretariat should not just tolerate this best practice, it 
should actively support it. The addendum only addressed part of his del egation's  concern.  
Côte d'Ivoire was thanked for taking the initiative to put forward its proposal for the agenda . The 
Representative  will engage on it today. He thought this was the standard practice , and that it took 
hours of engagement and multiple conv ersations with the Chair to accomplish. The US  delegation 
will not engage on the basis of proposals by Members who have not followed the same procedures.  
Nonetheless, the Representative  remain ed available to engage with those Members.  He hoped that 
the Cha ir and Secretariat w ould reconsider their approach to the agenda and workings of this body, 
so that one could  adequately prepare for and participate in future meetings.  The Representative also 
said that t he United States condemn ed the Russian Federation's unjustifiable, unprovoked, and 
illegal aggression against independent and sovereign Ukraine.  The Russia n Federation  had 
repeatedly tried to shift the blame for the death, destruction, and suffering for which it was solely 
responsib le. The Russia n Federation  continue d to block Ukraine 's seaports, jeopardizing the supply 
of food to some of the most vulnerable countries of the world.  The Russia n Federation  continue d to 
damage Ukraine 's transportation infrastructure, severely impeding U kraine 's ability to export key 
commodities, including agricultural and food products, fertilizers, sunflower oil, and critical minerals.  
The Russia n Federation  continue d to destroy Ukrainian agricultural storage facilities and to steal 
Ukrainian grain and farm equipment.  The Russia n Federation  continue d to spread disinformation 
that sanctions, which exempt  the Russian  Federation's  agricultural commodities, ha d worsened 
global food insecurity.  Meanwhile, the Russia n Federation  continue d to ban the import of food to 
feed its own people, and to ban the export of certain food products as well as fertilizer.  The impact WT/WGTDF/M/4 4 
 
- 2 - 
 
  of  the Russia n Federation 's actions in other countries was so obvious and foreseeable that one must 
conclude these actions were intended to curta il food production and consumption in other countries.  
The United States continue d to support Ukraine 's courageous efforts to defend itself, uphold its 
territorial integrity, and protect its population.  The United States will also continue to work with its 
partners and allies to sustain and intensify international pressure on President Putin 's regime, and 
its enablers in Belarus, for as long as necessary. The United States, and its partners and allies, will 
continue to take all appropriate measures in de fence of the rules -based international order that the 
Russia n Federation  had so egregiously violated.  
1.2.  The proposed agenda was adopted . 
1  AGENDA ITEM 2. A: TRADE FINANCE  
1.3.  The Chair provided background remarks. Given the limited number of meetings that the 
Worki ng Group typically has every year, two or three, he wondered whether delegations wished to  
resume the discussion  from where the Working Group left it last year.  In this respect, he read section 
1.5 of the Working Group's Annual Report, approved in November : "There remained lack of 
consensus on a work program and on all aspect of the submission by the proponent. However, there 
seemed to be support on further discussions to find consensus in several areas. This may include a 
Member -driven exchange of informat ion (pillar 1), including on trade finance market developments 
and facilities, and surveying existing options for technical assistance provided by the Secretariat. 
International organizations , including multilateral development banks , might be invited to c ontribute 
if consensus can be reached. One Member requested that there be a process for such an exchange 
of information and suggested that the proponent and potential contributors spoke directly to this 
aim. One Member, representing a group of Members, sug gested that in view of the looming 
Ministerial Conference a short draft Declaration should be prepared so that Members of the 
Working  Group have enough time to review it, before consideration by the General Council. One 
Member recommended further consultat ions for clarifying actions to be undertaken by the Working 
Group, including on experience sharing ". In light of the constructive approach taken by delegations 
during the Ministerial Conference, he asked whether delegations could try to focus on areas wher e 
consensus could be found. For example, it was expressed by some delegations that they were not 
sure that the concept of a work program was one they could agree on, but at the same time they 
saw value in exploring specific elements contained in the proponents' papers, as just said, for 
example on volu ntary exchanges of information between Members , or on inviting relevant 
international organizations to inform the Working Group. Therefore, instead of reverting to positions 
already expressed, he asked Members whether:  
a. there could be consensus on minimum e lements of work which Members would be willing 
to do in forthcoming meetings. He had noted in the discussions last year that some 
Members had suggested, for example, that an exchange of information between Members 
could proceed relatively rapidly.  
b. there  could be a process, as suggested in the Annual Report by a Member, for such 
information exchanges between Members – for example, in a way to set the topics  and to 
plan interventions on the basis of what had been proposed and agreed by Members.  
c. the Working G roup could invite other speakers , from other institutions, as s everal 
Members had indicated that they would not be oppose d to it. 
1.4.  The Chair invited delegation to provide elements of answers to these questions in their 
interventions : what would be minimum c onsensu al elements of work in moving forward? What would 
be the process for a Member -driven information exchange ? Were  there volunteers for sharing 
national experiences? If a consensus was reached, should one go forward and invite relevant 
international or ganizations, and  if so, which  ones? 
1.5.  The Representative of Côte d'Ivoire  welcomed this meeting of the Working Group on Trade, 
Debt and Finance allowing Members to continue discussions on the important issue of trade finance 
for MSMEs, within the framework of the mandate enshrined in paragraph 36 of the Doha  Ministerial 
Declara tion. Côte d'Ivoire welcomed the inclusion in the agenda of a point of discussion based on 
communication WT/WGTDF/W/98/Rev.1 . It thank ed Members for their respective contributions and 
comments as well as for the consultations. It was necessary to continue the reflection on this WT/WGTDF/M/4 4 
 
- 3 - 
 
  question. Indeed, the difficulties mentioned in July 2021, in support of Côte  d'Ivoire's 
communication, remained topical , and had even been exacerbated in certain cases. His delegation 
had noted with appreciation the reference to wom en's economic empowerment and the contribution 
of MSMEs to inclusive and sustainable economic growth, as outlined in paragraph 13 of the MC12  
outcome document , which also recognize d the difference in contexts and challenges faced by these 
two categories of  players in international trade. Among these challenges , were the question of access 
to finance, particular ly that of trade finance. This was also noted during the Side Event co -organized 
on 12 June, 2022 , by the WTO Secretariat and the International Trade Centre (ITC) , before the 
opening of MC12. The WTO Secretariat and ITC  had to be congratulated  for this initi ative,  which was  
in line with the spirit and objectives pursued through communication WT/WGTDF/W/98 /Rev1.  
Indeed, women entrepreneurs invited to this meeting dwelt on financing as one of the major 
obstacles to managing and d eveloping their activities. Henc e, there was a clear  interest for the 
Working Group to look further into the issue , so that results could be  perceived as a significant 
contribution by the Organization to the resolution of this problem , which was prevalent  in developing 
countries and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) . In this regard, Côte D'Ivoire  invite d Members to 
examine , in a pragmatic, constructive manner and with the utmost attention , the proposals on the 
table, with a view  to arrive at an early consensus for the adoption and diligent  implementation of 
the actions proposed according to the different pillars.  
1.6.  In this regard, Côte d'Ivoire wished to  provide the wished to clarify certain points ; Côte d'Ivoire 
had noted the convergence of Members on the relevance  of pillar one of its proposal . Therefore, it 
urged Members who were in a  position to do so, to kindly confirm or specify, on a voluntary basis, 
the aspects or subjects on which they could exchange information and good practices regarding their 
own experie nces, relating to the various aspects of trade finance.  This pillar could be implemented 
according to several approaches without them being mutually exclusive, particular ly through  
thematic seminars bringing together several presentations by Members at onc e, or through 
individual presentations by Members within the framework of the Working Group.  With regard s to 
the second pillar, it was important to specify that the intention  of Côte d'Ivoire was  not to confer 
new missions to the WTO Secretariat , but rathe r to revitalize its traditional missions of technical 
assistance, support for Members , and cooperation with other international institutions in the area of 
trade finance . This was the time to thank the Secretariat of the Working Group for its support and 
interest , but also to welcome  the productive cooperation between the WTO and the 
International  Finance Corporation (IFC)  which ha d enabled the joint organization of a national 
workshop on trade finance and small and medium -sized enterprises  in May 2022, in Côte  d'Ivoire, 
at the request of the Ivorian Government. In this context, Côte d'Ivoire wished to extend s pecial 
thanks to the Director General of the WTO and the Director General of the IFC for their opening 
remarks during the workshop. Côte d'Ivoire  encourage d other developing Members to request such 
activi ties which were highly rewarding in many respects for national stakeholders.  With regard s to 
pillars three  and four of Côte d'Ivoire's proposal , it was appropriate to point out that the  aim was 
not to confer to the WTO missions , other than those appearing in its Agreement s, or to exercise  new 
prerogatives. On the contrary, it was a question of reaffirming the principle of cooperation between 
the WTO and other institutions, which ha d always been part of WTO's core  functions and to appl y 
this in  the field of trade financ e, as had been the case in the fight against COVID -19 where the WTO 
collaborated effectively with the  World Health Organization ( WHO) and the World Intellectual 
Property Org anization (WIPO). The WTO collaborates with the World Food Program (WFP) and the 
World Bank concerning food security.  
1.7.  In this context , Côte d'Ivoire note d with satisfaction  that the joint statement produced on 
29  November,  2021 by the WTO and the IFC , aimed at strengthening their cooperation in trade 
finance with a view to improve ment, I quote : "the analysis, identification and detection of gaps in 
trade finance in order to better target capacity building and other resources whe re unmet demand 
is greatest, particularly in Africa ". The implementation of this approach , as well as the contribution 
of other international institutions involved in the reflection and action in favo ur of trade financ e, 
would undoubtedly make it possible to resolve, for example, the lack of information suffered by 
developing countries, LDCs and MSMEs , and to channel into one single framework, that of the 
Working Group, a flow of relevant information on the instruments and initiatives available at an 
intern ational leve l and the best means of mobiliz ing them for the benefit of MSMEs. Côte d'Ivoire  
would  welcome the collaboration of other delegations in making drafting suggestions in its proposal,  
and it thanked other delegations which had already been in contact with Côte d'Ivoire . In conclusion, 
Côte d'Ivoire reaffirm ed its openness and its commitment to work constructively and in synergy with 
all Members, in order to advance the cause of trade finance within the Organization within the limits 
of the mandate of its work.  WT/WGTDF/M/4 4 
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.8.  The Representative of Canada  thanked the US delegation for its comments about maintaining 
the approach of having Member -led items on the agenda.  She agreed that the intent was for the 
work of the Working Group to be Member-led and the agenda needed to clearly set out which 
member was putting forward a proposal for consideration and which documents were being 
considered.   She also thanked Côte d'Ivoire for its addendum on this i tem and said that one should 
continue to use this practice moving forward. Regarding this item, in the fall, the Working Group 
had useful discussions about the path forward, and the areas of focus that Canada continued to 
support as the way forward were th e following:  1) Member -to-Member exchange of information on 
a voluntary basis; 2) Secretariat sharing information about its activities, including on technical 
assistance; 3) international organizations being asked to share information on activities, includ ing 
on legal entity identifiers. These areas would enable members to improve mutual understanding of 
resources and best or emerging practices on trade finance in line with the objectives of this 
committee and to avoid duplication with other international b odies.  She said that  Canada stood in 
solidarity with the people of Ukraine and strongly condemned President Putin 's unjustifiable invasion 
of Ukraine. This illegal and unprovoked war has had catastrophic effects on Ukraine, its neighbours, 
and people acros s the globe. No amount of misinformation c ould hide the Russia n Federation 's 
culpability; it was solely responsible for this crisis, not the sanctions designed to stop the 
Russia n Federation 's unjust and brutal war in Ukraine. Canada called on the Russian  Federation  
leadership to abandon this path of war, immediately withdraw its troops back to the 
Russia n Federation , and live up to its responsibility to restore and maintain international peace and 
security. Canada 's support for Ukraine and its people was unwavering . Canada would work to find 
ways to use trade to support Ukraine to rebuild its economy and its society.  
1.9.  The representative of Fiji, wished to reflect on  the arrangement of the meeting , responding to 
some delegations having spoken earlier . When the airgram  had been  circulat ed, the object of the 
discussion was quite clear to its delegation. He did not understand what was meant by other 
Members  when suggest ing that t he process  had not been Member -driven. Prior to the issuance of 
the airgram, h is delegation had c onsult ed the Chair and the Secretariat about its desire to resume 
the discussion on trade finance in the Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance. It was quite clear 
which submission s had been  on the table at the end of the  previous meet ings in November  2021. In 
his understanding, proposals ha d not to be mentioned again , simply because they had emanated in 
2021 from only two delegations. So , any delegation having followed the discussions and submission s 
would have understoo d that . There  was a proposed suggestion to continue the discussion on the 
basis of such proposals, th us it must have been clear to other delegations following the  
Working  Group which proposals had to be discussed . When the airgram  was released, the focus of 
the discussion was quite clear to his delegation , and he prepared accordingly.  In consult ing with  the 
Chair and the Secretariat , his delegation had been quite clear that the Working Group needed to 
continue work based on existing proposal s, noting that one could not start again from ground zero, 
in view of the discussions that had already been held in 2021 under these proposals. He also wished 
to recal l that 2021 had been very busy period  for small delegations  like his, particular ly in the period 
leading to MC1 2. With th is and with COVID -19 related  restrictions, he had wished to have more 
discussions with other Members, but this proved to be very difficult. Even after the General Council 
had postponed MC12 in Novembe r 2021, the pace of work in the WTO  has been s o busy , that  his 
delegation could not really have reviewed what ACP group had put forth to other Members  by way 
of a written submission . So, reinitiating the discussions in the WTO was particularly important  to 
move forward and improve proposals. W hen the  proposed  agenda came out according to the 
demand s of his delegation , it was  clear that this was the right  avenue to further discussions  with 
other delegation s, so as to move forward and reach  a meanin gful outcome when it comes to the 
next Ministerial Conference.  
1.10.   Speaking on behalf of the African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP)  countries , he also  said that the 
ACP Group wishe d to welcome the appointment of the new Chair . He commend ed and thank ed the 
former Chai r of the Working Group, Ambassador Spencer of Jamaica , for her contribution s during 
her tenure. A  few weeks ago, MC12 had accomplished an unprecedented success which Ministers  
could take pride in, showing that when working together, irrespect ive of differe nces, common goals 
could be achieved. Such an historical moment should remain the guiding light for this Working Group, 
so that it has  something to celebrate at the next Ministerial Conference. The ACP Group was fully 
committed  to this objective;  it had tabled a proposal last year . It had engaged constructively in view 
of other proposals and suggestions . It looked forward to maintaining this momentum or even doing 
better.  As a basis for moving forward, one should not neglect the  hard work that culminated in the 
submission of meaningful proposals , including the rich discussions that resulted . The ACP  Group, in 
the spirit of constructive engagement and in line with other proposals, submitted its proposal WT/WGTDF/M/4 4 
 
- 5 - 
 
  WT/WGTDF/W/101 as one explo red meaningful means to assist MSMEs and other businesses recover 
from the remanence of the C OVID -19 pandemic , especially to access trade finance.  These proposals 
are still on the tabl e. The ACP Group support ed the resumption of discussion s based on such 
proposals with the inclusion of comments and submission from Members , as a way forward for this 
Working group. The ACP Group agree d with the continuation of the discussion on the road map or 
work programme for issues relating to access to trade finance for MSMEs as submitted by 
Côte d'Ivoire in document WT/WGTDF/W/98/Rev.1 . With a view to moving forward, the ACP Group 
proposed that the Working Group agreed on a schedule of meetings, and during meetings to have 
robust discussions aimed at addressing and clarifying arising issues. On this basis, a draft framework 
outlining the way forward for discussion s was  pivotal to allow for better coordinat ion of  schedules 
and for meaningful engagement.  The ACP Group , whilst agreeing to the significant gaps in 
development as the result of lack of access to tools such as trade finance, wishe d to e nvisage ways 
in line with paragraph 36 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1 of 
20 November  2021) "to explore concrete solutions that could be implemented to enable firms to 
have easier access to trade finance, especially small and me dium -sized enterprises (SMEs) ". The 
WTO in this regard ha d a role "to explore " in partnership with other organizations. Whilst the 
ACP Group agreed  that WTO was not a financial institution, trade did not  exist in a vacuum, trade 
finance act ed as a conduit  to facilitate trade, a facility that developing and least  develop ed countries 
found challenging  to mobilize . The ACP Group  encourage d Members to engage and review the road 
map including how it could be strengthened and operationalized.  The ACP Group  was encouraged by 
the continued participation of other organizations as critical to fulfilling the WTO  mandate. The 
ACP Group  also believe d that the Secretariat ha d a critical role in this regard. Their advi ce was 
important to assist Members in understanding the approaches in fulfilling the objectives of this 
Working Group and guide Members towards avenues that would assist  them in accessing trade 
finance.  The ACP Group also a ppreciate d hearing from Member States and partner Organi zations 
with experience accessing and providing trade finance support during  the pandemic and beyond to 
share some of their experiences. The ACP Group would also seek guidance from C ôte d'Ivoire on its 
proposed way forward.  Finally, the ACP Group look ed forward  to a successful year , hoping that  this 
sets the group  up for a meaningful outcome for the Working Group at the next Ministerial Conference.   
1.11.   The Representative of the European Union  welcomed the new Chair  and thank ed the outgoing 
Chair. As Members  gather ed in the Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance to discuss pertinent 
questions around trade finance in particular, one could  ignore other obstacles to trade, which were 
of an illegal and unjustified nature. The European Union resolutely condemn ed the 
Russia n Federation's  brutal and premeditated invasion of Ukraine, an independent and sovereign 
European country. The war was also having a devastating impact on Ukraine 's economy and ability 
to trade. The destruction of a significant part of Ukraine 's transportation infrastructure , including 
roads, bridges, ports and railroads , was substantially impeding Ukraine 's ability to produce, export, 
and import. One needed to ensure t hat the trade routes, especially sea routes and ports, were not 
blocked by the threat or the use of force. In this war context, trade finance was also under threat, 
and EU  exporters to Ukraine face d problems with access to export credit support. There ha d already 
been changes in insurance policies for freight caused by serious security threats resulting from 
aggressive action by the Russian  Federation  and pro -Russian  Federation  armed forces, targeting the 
means of transportation necessary for Ukraine to exp ort grain and other agri -food products, which 
also ha d adverse effects on trade -related finance and exports of these commodities to countries that 
needed them, with potential dramatic effect s on global food supply chains.  The European Union and 
its member States were taking all possible measures to support Ukraine 's economy as it struggle d 
to maintain access to export markets while facing the Russia n Federation 's aggression on its 
territory. Turning to the agenda item, the EU remain ed supportive of initiatives aimed at reducing 
trade finance gaps, especially for developing countries, and of efforts to advance the cause of MSMEs 
in international trade. The EU acknowledg ed that it was important to respect existing mandates and 
competenci es of WTO bodies and other international organizations , such as the Organization for 
Economic Co -operation and Development and multilateral development banks. The WTO should not 
be turned  into a "world trade -finance organization " in any way. The EU continu ed to support 
Member -to-Member activities . It remain ed ready to invite European actors to make presentations. 
The EU consider ed that international organizations other than the WTO, including development 
finance institutions , could share relevant informatio n with Members. The EU was not against the 
WTO Secretariat continuing to provide information and expertise to WTO Members at their request.  
With MC12 behind us, the EU was not wedded to any particular form that WTO exchanges on trade 
finance might take. Also, it would  be important to see where consensus might emerge , thus t he EU 
was ready to play a constructive role.  WT/WGTDF/M/4 4 
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.12.   The Representative of the United Kingdom  joined other delegations in condemning in the 
strongest terms the Russia n Federation 's invasion of Ukraine, which violate d international law, the 
United Nations  Charter, and the principles of the Organization.  The Russia n Federation's  illegal war 
in Ukrain e was causing food and energy crises around the world, hitting the poorest and most 
vulnerable people hardest. The United  Kingdom repeat ed its  calls for the Russian Federation to end 
its aggression against Ukraine immediately. The United Kingdom thank ed Côte d'Ivoire for their 
proposal in WT/WGTDF/W/98/Rev.1, which provide d useful impetus to reinvigorate work in this 
Group. It recogni zed the issue of the increasing gap in trade finance, it has listened carefully to the 
presentation made by the Delegation of  Côte d'Ivoire in this meeting and discussion on the proposal 
that ha d taken place in previous meetings. The U nited Kingdom  was generally supportive of the idea 
of experience sharing between WTO Members , as contained in sub -paragraph 1.1, and would be 
open to exploring the format for exchanging information on topics relevant to trade, debt and 
finance. Regarding sub -paragraph 1.2, it would welcome further clarity on what is meant by "a more 
systematic approach " to technical assistance. As raised by other Me mbers, the United  Kingdom 
would be interested to hear the details of relevant ongoing technical assistance work provided by 
the WTO Secretariat. The United Kingdom wished to reiterate a point made by other delegations at 
this meeting and in previous meetings, that the Working Group  on Trade, Debt and Finance should 
not duplicate work in other fora. The sharing of expertise between international  organizations is 
often a useful means of preventing this sort of duplication, and the United  Kingdom  would  be 
interested to hear further det ails on how the WTO c ould add value due to the work being done by 
international financial institutions and multilateral development banks. Within the WTO itself, the 
United Kingdom  welcome d further details on how the proposal complements the work being don e in 
the Informal Working Group on MSMEs. Finally, the United Kingdom  reiterate d its thanks to the 
Delegation of Côte d'Ivoire, and look ed forward to discussing a revised proposal, taking into account 
Members ' comments over the past few meetings.  
1.13.   The Repre sentative of the United States  share d views with the delegation of Côte d'Ivoire on 
its proposals.  He thanked the delegate of Côte d'Ivoire for meeting recently to share more details  
about these proposals . He also view ed the first pillar, collaboration among Member -States , as being 
ripe for further explor ation. He had  exchanged some views as to how to get more clarity on what 
topics might be of most interest to Côte d'Ivoire and developing countries , and those in which the 
United States had expertise, so  he looked forward to further pursuing th is. Despite the first pillar of 
Côte d'Ivoire  being the most promising area, he agreed with Côte d'Ivoire on areas in the other 
pillars that he thought consensus could be found in. He looked forward to deepening these 
conversations and to reach ing a consensus.  
1.14.   The Representative of Switzerland  echoed other delegations in condemning  in the strongest 
possible terms  the Russian  Federation's  military aggression against Ukraine and called  on the 
Russia n Federation  to de-escalate the situation immediately, cease such activities and withdraw its 
troops from Ukrainian territory with out delay. The Russia n Federation 's actions violate d the 
prohibition of the use of force and the territorial int egrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, as enshrined 
in international law. Turning back to the subject of trade finance, Switzerland  thank ed Côte d'Ivoire 
and the ACP  Group for having highlighted the content of their respective submissions . Switzerland's 
intervention would be limited to  proposals on the topic of access to trade finance as it believe d that 
the best use of the resources allocated to cover this Working Group  was to focus on one area of 
work instead of stretching over multiple topics. There was no doubt that improving access to trade 
finance for firms operating in the developing and least developed  countries would contribute to 
enhancing the participation of these countries in the global economy. This was indeed an objective 
that Switzerland pursue d in the framework of its foreign economic policy. On the proposal to 
establish a work program or a road map on trade finance and access to it, Switzerland welcome d 
this idea, and was ready to engage as long as this program remain ed within the boundaries of the 
mandate of this Working Group. As indicated in previous meetings, Switzerland st ood ready to share 
its goods  practices in terms of  technical assistance to facilitate access to finance in LDCs. Out of the 
three pillars proposed for  a possible work program, Switzerland s aw experience -sharing between 
Members as the pillar attracting the most interest.  
1.15.   The Chair suggested  that it seemed that there could be emerging consensus on pillar one 
(experience -sharing between Members). Therefor e, he asked  whether all delegations agreed on 
"pillar one " exchange s of experience among members , and whether there was an explicit consensus ; 
if so, he asked whether there were any members volunteering to share such experience s. WT/WGTDF/M/4 4 
 
- 7 - 
 
  1.16.   The Representative of the United States  said that he was not sure that the Group was at the 
point of reaching a consensus . It was unclear what the topics would be. His delegation  had discussed 
some possible ideas with Côte d'Ivoire , but until enough clarity emerged on topics, it was too early 
to declare consensus. However, this seem ed a promising path to pursue.  
1.17.   The Chair  wished to raise a second question concerning the third pillar, regarding exchanges 
with international organizations. He asked whether there was any Member against it.   
1.18.   The Representative of the United States  suggested that the Working Group was  not there yet 
on consensus on any of those topics. Progress had been m ade during this meeting . He did not have 
the clarity he needed to declare that the Working Group was  in consensus.  
1.19.   The Chair  asked whether there were question s for the Secretariat regarding recent activities. 
There were none .  
1.20.   The Representative of Fiji said that his delegation agree d on pillar one and pillar three, in line 
with previous positions. He also supported initiatives that would encourage other internationa l 
organizations , in partnership with the WTO, to conduct presentations so that Members could draw 
lessons from  them, in accordance with the proposals from Côte d'Ivoire. His delegation was also 
favourable to proposals  on assistance from the Secretariat  (pillar two) .  
1.21.   The Chair concluded that he heard that  were was  progress in the discussions . He suggested 
that momentum  was good , as the WTO agenda was less busy than in the year 2021 and the first 
half of 2022, ahead of MC12. There fore, there  was no doubt tha t this Working Group could move 
forward only if Member s wanted to do so and made some efforts  towards this . He invited proponent s 
to work with the interested Members, and said that he would be happy to work with Members and 
intervene if his assistance was requested.   
2  AGENDA ITEM 2. B: ANY OTHER BUSINESS   
2.1.  The Chair wished to know whether  any Member wished to raise any other business.  
2.2.  The Representative of Fiji raised a couple of questions. A s his delegation was the focal point of 
the ACP Group, in which there were many delegations , he wished to have more information and 
possibly assistance about the scheduling of future meetings and content. He wondered what the way 
forward was for the Working Group, as well as how soon  and frequently , the Working Group would 
meet. This was important for planning purposes, internal coordination , and better prepar ation of 
substance , hence engagement . He asked whether, informal meetings could be organized  between 
formal meetings , not only to  make  progress  with other Members , but also to better understand the 
issues at play,  so that  Members  of his Group  could be briefed on the themes discussed. He also 
asked a question regarding  the engagement of international organizations , as a next step . To date, 
his understanding was that the Working Group ha d not yet agreed to invite international 
organizations  into the Working Group . 
2.3.  The Chair said, that regarding the first question (planning), as the Group was Member -driven, 
there should be some requests from proponents  who wanted  to have a meeting and discuss topics . 
If the ACP Group  or other proponents reach ed some progress in informal consu ltation and want ed 
to share this with the Working Group, that would be a good reason to organize a formal meeting . 
Regarding the second question , concerning the exchange with international organizations,  he 
confirmed that  for the moment the Working Group  did not  have a consensus , so he suggest ed that 
the ACP Group discuss informally among the Membership to agree on which  topic and which  
organization,  so that the Working Group might  be in a position to reach agreement on organizing  
some kind of seminar or workshop , inviting  identified international organizations.   
2.4.  With this, he closed  the meeting.  
__________  