Photo: FABRICE COFFRINI/AFP via Getty Images
The selection process for the next World Trade Organization (WTO) director-general continues to roll on, surprisingly on schedule. David Walker of New Zealand, the leader of the Troika—the three ambassadors charged with running the process—had said the current round of winnowing would conclude on October 6, and the morning of October 8, Walker announced that the two remaining candidates most likely to achieve consensus were Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala of Nigeria and Yoo Myung-hee from South Korea. He also announced that the next round of consultations, which will reduce the field to a single candidate, will begin October 19 and conclude on October 27, meaning that it looks like we will have a winner prior to the U.S. election. So far, the process appears to have been smooth without visible dissent. Since the process is by consensus, making sure everyone is satisfied with the way it has been conducted, if not the result, is important. Consensus, by the way, does not mean a unanimous vote is required at the end. It simply means that no one objects.
Today’s outcome makes it certain that the next DG will be a woman—an important milestone since there has never been one—but it does not guarantee it will be an African. I had previously speculated that there was a good chance the final two would be Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and Amina Mohamed of Kenya, the two female African candidates, which would have put WTO members in the difficult position of having to choose between two well-qualified Africans. The Troika dodged that bullet, but they have nonetheless left the members with a difficult choice between two experienced, well-qualified candidates from someplace other than Europe, which has provided most of the past DGs.
Though both are excellent, they are not the same. Both either are (Yoo) or have been (Ngozi) ministers, a qualification that many members deem important. Because of her lack of direct WTO experience, Ngozi has been deemed to be the “outsider” candidate, which means, depending on your point of view, either that she is more likely to shake the institution up or that she will be at a disadvantage for not having been part of the WTO system and culture. Yoo, who is currently South Korea’s trade minister, has stronger WTO and direct trade credentials (Ngozi was finance minister), and has significant negotiating experience, including with U.S. Trade Representative Lighthizer in the updating of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement. Her challenge will be persuading members not to simply go with the African candidate and to ensure she has strong support in her own backyard. South Korea’s relations with Japan are particularly fraught at the moment, and they are not a whole lot better with China. Both those countries have been silent in the process so far, and it will be important for her to demonstrate that she has, if not their support, at least their acquiescence.
Ngozi, in contrast, likely goes into the final round with strong backing from Africa but will need to solidify her support in other parts of the world. The European Union earlier this week publicly indicated the two candidates it was supporting were the two who made it to the final round, suggesting that the fact that the EU member states stuck together gave them a good bit of influence over the process. Both the candidates will likely be spending a good of time in Brussels and European capitals over the next few weeks. Latin America is likewise up for grabs since the sole candidate from that part of the world was eliminated in the first round.
The United States, as usual, has been silent about its preferences, knowing that publicly indicating its choice would not be helpful to that candidate. Based on their histories and statements so far, it is hard to see either candidate as being objectionable from a U.S. point of view, and it may, in fact, be hard for them to choose. Ngozi knows the United States well, has lived here, and is a U.S. citizen in addition to being a Nigerian citizen. The United States has had a long and close relationship with South Korea on many levels, and the renegotiation of the free trade agreement was generally regarded as a success, albeit a modest one. One of Lighthizer’s stated criteria for the position was that the candidate have “no whiff of anti-Americanism,” and it is fair to say that they both pass that test—at least in their public statement.
Both countries are committed to their candidates, and both have cards to play in what is turning out to be an interesting, if not yet exactly exciting, battle. We can expect both to make a strong push for the job. The final round will most likely be a fierce battle, couched, of course, in the careful diplomatic phrasing that typifies international institutions, but not without the backroom horse trading that also goes on in them.
William Reinsch holds the Scholl Chair in International Business at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
Commentary is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
© 2020 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.
