From March 26 to 29, 2026, Yaoundé will host the 14th Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization (WTO). As a reminder, the Ministerial Conference is the supreme decision-making body of this organization. This major event in international trade is being held for the second time on the African continent, following the Nairobi conference in 2015.
However, this meeting takes place in a particularly tense international context, overshadowed by the repercussions of the war in the Middle East, which accentuates economic uncertainties and geopolitical fractures. These tensions are compounded by the increasing fragmentation of value chains, the rise of strategic rivalries, and the return of protectionist policies. The recent decision by the United States to impose new tariffs on several trading partners has further strengthened these dynamics, weakening a multilateral trading system that is nevertheless essential, with WTO rules governing nearly 72% of global trade.
In this context, the 166 member states will gather in Yaoundé to address sensitive issues that continue to divide the international community. This conference thus appears as a decisive step to restore confidence in multilateralism, preserve its inclusive nature, and reaffirm the central role of the WTO as a regulator and guide of global trade.
Reform of the WTO
At the heart of the discussions is the reform of the WTO, now a top priority. A project will be submitted to the member states, not to immediately reach an agreement, but to establish a clear roadmap with specific objectives and deadlines, as indicated by facilitator Petter Olberg. This reform mainly focuses, among other things, on decision-making modalities, special and differential treatment (SDT), and the promotion of fairer competition.
The need to transform the WTO has been evident for several years, due to the persistent blockages in negotiations, exemplified by the impasse of the Doha Round. The consensus-based approach, often seen as a requirement for unanimity among members, is regularly criticized for its paralyzing effect. Several avenues are thus being explored: diversification of decision-making methods, inspiration from other international organizations, and the establishment of a “responsible consensus” limiting the use of veto.
Other proposals aim to strengthen institutional efficiency, notably through the creation of an executive body, similar to those of the International Monetary Fund or the World Bank. Furthermore, the integration of plurilateral agreements is encouraged to allow groups of willing states to move forward without being blocked, while preserving the coherence of the multilateral system. Transparency requirements are also a growing concern, with some recent agreements, particularly under the Donald Trump administration, not being notified to the WTO.
The urgency of reform has increased since the paralysis in 2019 of the Appellate Body of the dispute settlement mechanism, following the American blockade. In response, a group of members established a temporary Appellate Arbitration Mechanism (AAM) in 2020, covering a significant portion of global trade. This temporary mechanism, while illustrating the desire to preserve a functional judicial system, is awaiting a lasting multilateral solution.
As for special and differential treatment, the debate revolves around the differentiation between developing countries. The status based on a declaratory principle at the WTO encompasses very diverse economic realities. Developed countries advocate for increased differentiation, highlighting the emergence of major trading powers such as China, now a central player in global trade. According to them, uniform access to SDT creates distortions and undermines the fairness of the system.
However, many developing countries, especially the most vulnerable, advocate for the maintenance of this principle, which they consider essential for their economic integration. They fear that too strict differentiation may reduce their room for maneuver and undermine the inclusive nature of the multilateral trading system.
In this context, China’s decision to waive SDT in future WTO agreements marks a significant development. However, this commitment does not apply to existing agreements. Therefore, several members, notably the European Union, call for its retroactive application to strengthen the credibility and fairness of the system.
Despite these dynamics, the prospects for consensus remain uncertain. The United States has expressed reservations about the current project, with their ambassador to the WTO, Joseph Barloon, considering the discussions insufficiently advanced. Other actors, such as India, are also cautious, especially regarding plurilateral agreements, which are seen as fragmenting the system. In a framework where consensus remains the rule, the outcome of the negotiations appears uncertain.
Digital trade at the WTO: towards a structured global framework
In the face of the rapid growth of digital trade, members of the organization are called upon to examine proposals aimed at better structuring the governance of this strategic sector.
One of the main initiatives is the creation of a Permanent Committee on Digital Trade. Such an instance would be a first within the WTO, providing an institutional framework dedicated to regulating and monitoring issues related to the digital economy on a global scale.
In parallel, discussions will focus on the renewal of the moratorium prohibiting the imposition of tariffs on electronic transmissions. In effect since 1998, this temporary measure has been renewed several times, most recently at the 2024 Ministerial Conference in Abu Dhabi, with a deadline set either at the 14th Ministerial Conference or March 31, 2026.
The maintenance or abandonment of this moratorium is sparking increasingly heated debates. Some developing countries argue for its removal, claiming that it deprives them of potential tax revenues. However, this position is now nuanced by recent analyses. According to a UNCTAD report published in 2025, the expected tax gains would remain limited, while the introduction of taxes on digital flows could harm the competitiveness of the economies concerned and hinder trade.
On the European side, the European Parliament clearly advocates for the renewal of the moratorium. MEPs even call for going beyond the temporary nature of the measure, working towards the adoption of a permanent agreement better suited to the realities of an increasingly digitized global economy.
In the background, discussions also take place within the Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on e-commerce, which aims to establish common rules in this area. However, divergences persist, especially between developed and developing countries, with the latter pointing out inequalities in access to digital infrastructure.
The question of extending the moratorium until 2028 or its outright abandonment thus crystallizes tensions. As the host country of the conference, Cameroon advocates for a balanced approach, reconciling economic development and digital transformation.
In Yaoundé, delegations will therefore have to make a decisive choice: settle for a renewal of the status quo or embark on a real evolution towards an international trade framework fully adapted to the digital age.
Subsidies for fishing at the WTO
Adopted by consensus at the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference in June 2022, the agreement aimed at regulating harmful subsidies to fishing came into effect on September 15, 2025, after reaching the required threshold of ratifications. This text, known as “Fish 1”, represents a major advance, although it remains fragile. It stipulates that a complementary agreement, “Fish 2”, must be concluded within four years, failing which its maintenance could be called into question.
This is the challenge of the 14th Ministerial Conference scheduled in Yaoundé. The ongoing negotiations aim to go further by addressing subsidies that promote fleet overcapacity and overfishing, considered as the main causes of the depletion of fishery resources. These aids take various forms: financing for the acquisition or modernization of vessels, support for inputs such as fuel or bait, income support, or devices covering losses, including for activities conducted outside national waters.
However, discussions are stumbling over the question of special and differential treatment, i.e., how to adapt the rules to the economic realities of different countries. Differences focus in particular on the level of flexibility to be granted to developing countries and least developed countries, especially those with limited subsidy capacities. Some members argue for differentiated rules based on levels of development and the extent of aid granted.
In this context, positions remain opposed: the United States advocate for an ambitious agreement, with a limited number of exemptions, while several developing countries demand greater leeway to protect their fishing sectors and coastal communities.
Negotiations on agriculture
Agricultural discussions at the WTO have a long history, dating back to the early 2000s within the Agreement on Agriculture, and integrated into the Doha Round since the 2001 Ministerial Conference. Progress has been slow and often difficult to achieve since then. The decision of Nairobi in 2015 marked a major turning point by eliminating export subsidies for agricultural products, the most significant reform in this sector since the creation of the WTO. However, the most complex issues remain unresolved.
In Yaoundé, an agricultural text project is presented as an attempt to compromise between the divergent positions of members. Its objective is to lay the foundations for a fairer agricultural trade system, more market-oriented, and capable of addressing crucial challenges, particularly in terms of food security. It also aims to revive negotiations after several years of deadlock.
Overall, the project has been well received. The majority of members, whether from developed or developing countries, see it as a credible basis for moving towards a consensus. While the text does not fully reflect all national priorities, it is considered a necessary compromise in the current context. Some coalitions have provided collective support while calling for adjustments, while other members, such as African cotton-producing countries, regret that their specific concerns are not fully taken into account.
On all these issues, it is clear that the positions of member countries remain deeply divergent and difficult to reconcile. National interests, development issues, food security, or the preservation of natural resources continue to create fault lines within the WTO. At first glance, it would therefore be legitimate to fear that the Yaoundé Ministerial Conference will not lead to any concrete agreement.
However, as Raymond Aron reminded us, “international politics is tragic, but not desperate.” This quote invites us to qualify any pessimism: despite tensions and apparent blockages, multilateral dialogue still offers a possibility of compromise. WTO negotiations, even if slow and arduous, constitute a unique platform where countries can confront their interests, find common ground, and lay the groundwork for agreements that could have a lasting impact on global trade.
Thus, while challenges remain numerous and results are never guaranteed, CM14 represents above all an opportunity. It could help consolidate commercial multilateralism, strengthen trust among members, and send a strong signal about the ability of international cooperation to produce concrete solutions to global challenges. Even in a complex and sometimes conflictual context, the hope of progress remains tangible, and it is this perspective that gives full meaning to the holding of the conference in Yaoundé.
