Good afternoon, everyone. Let me thank you, GC Chair, for your report and commend you for your efforts in keeping the momentum going on – on critical issues for MC12. We are meeting at a difficult period. But at this time of difficulty, it is also good that, as a multilateral organization, we try to set an example of what it is about multilateralism that is so needed by the world. Multilateralism is one of the instruments that draws us together to address global challenges that we are all currently grappling with. We need to keep our work going for the benefit of the people we are here to serve – especially during these very trying times.

The large majority of Ministers that I have met over the past few weeks have all echoed the call for the WTO to continue its work including on many critical issues such as those we have been working on for MC12. In all my encounters, I have not heard anybody wishing to disengage. To the contrary, everyone sees trade as part of the solution to the world's most pressing problems of the global commons.

We know it cannot be business as usual because we are in very unusual time. But we have heard the GC Chair. Thus far, we have managed with delegations, Chairs of WTO Bodies, and the Secretariat to find a workable way to keep moving our work forward. I am grateful to everyone for this effort to try. I am also encouraged to hear positive feedback on the precise dates of MC12 as Ambassador Chambovey just reported. On the Secretariat's part, work of the MC12 Task Force led by DDG Ellard is continuing in coordination with the Swiss Authorities to ensure that the Ministerial Conference runs smoothly when it takes place in June. I think it is too early for us to judge what will happen before June so let us keep going. Let us keep working.

Our preparations for MC12 should not and cannot be limited to process issues. We need to prepare the substantive ground for our Ministers to deliver. MC12 will take place in the backdrop of extraordinary circumstances. This demands the business-like approach that Ambassador Chambovey referred to. But for this to work, all of us in Geneva need to act together and participate in convergence building to allow our Ministers to focus on the most essential areas that you have all determined – which thus far are – the pandemic response, fisheries subsidies, agriculture and WTO Reform. We all know there are also other issues linked to development and LDCs that we also need to look at.

WTO Reform remains a critical matter for the Membership. Finding a mutually agreeable way to advance these discussions has become an integral component of our preparations for MC12 – and should remain so.

On the negotiations, I recognize the continuation of work in agriculture and fisheries subsidies led by Ambassadors Peralta and Wills, respectively. I encourage all delegations to support our Chairs so that we can close as many gaps as possible as we move forward.

Let me also briefly mention that I attended the LDC Retreat two weeks ago chaired by Ambassador Makaila. We discussed the state of LDC economies given the current situation and reviewed trade issues of particular concern to LDCs for MC12. Given their vulnerability, LDCs face challenges related to higher food and energy prices – further compounding the economic effects of slow recovery from the pandemic. I will come back to this later. Let me at this point say that I am encouraged by the GC Chair's report about Members' willingness to constructively engage with the LDCs. I urge everyone to continue these discussions so that we could reach mutually agreeable outcomes for the benefit of the most vulnerable among us.

Pandemic response remains another critical area. The appointment of our former GC Chair, Ambassador Castillo as Facilitator is welcome news and I thank him for his report. The fact that delegations continue to reach out to each other during the Strategic Pause gives hope that we will be able to advance in this area further – and hopefully as he said, soon. As the effects of the pandemic linger, I hope that we continue to treat this matter with a sense of urgency that it deserves.

The same goes for the TRIPS Waiver. We have been talking to several delegations in the past few days and last week. We to be able to move forward on this issue soon. There are still a few issues to sort out with the Quad. But our hope is that we can move this matter forward to the TRIPS Council as soon as possible. Rest assured that whatever outcome – these will all be exposed transparently to the Membership and discussed in the TRIPS Council in a manner that we can move this forward.

Still on this topic, I wish to inform you that the Multilateral Leaders' Task Force met again on 1 March. We had a productive meeting with all ten CEOs of vaccine manufacturers present. We know that we now have enough in terms of production but there is a persistent issue of inequity of access that is there as well as the future diversification of production capacity. We have distribution problems, infrastructure issues with cold chains and personnel shortage, among others. There are also a lot of discontinuities on the ground and supply fragmentation. We need to solve these issues – now. And I think that the discussion we had with the CEOs and the promise to work on these issues together later before the next meeting gives us some hope that, together with the other multilateral Heads, we will be able to see concretely on the ground in the countries how we deal with these issues and move forward on the issue of equity of access to vaccines.

Chair, these are the main observations I wanted to make on the issues that you and Ambassador Castillo have raised in your reports to Members. But while I still have the floor – with your permission, I wish to address an equally important issue – that of the Global Food Crisis. I would like to say few words about the food and agricultural crisis confronting the world today and looming potentially large for the future if action is not taken to mitigate and manage the situation.

On 23 March, the G-7 Trade Ministers invited me to join their meeting where I shared some thoughts on the situation including how WTO Members can assist. Since then, the G-7 Leaders have also released a very helpful statement on how they intend to act to help mitigate the looming global food crisis and its impact on Ukraine and on poor vulnerable countries. Let me share some thoughts and recommendations I shared with the G-7 Trade Ministers.

In addition, let me also share with you that, on 23 March, the UN Secretary-General set up a three-tier steering committee at the level of Heads of Government, Heads of International Organizations and technical experts to deal with the issue of surging energy and food prices and their impact on developing countries and to come up with recommendations. The WTO is expected to play a key role in finding solutions to the food crisis. So, it is in that spirit that I thought it would be good to make some comments on this today.

The Committee on Agriculture had an important debate on this issue of the food crisis. Ambassador Peralta continues in her capacity as Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session to tackle this issue. In fact, we are looking forward to an important food security conference that she is aiming to organize with the help of Secretariat staff at the end of April which will also give an opportunity for Members to really debate these issues. Secretariat staff have been carrying out some excellent analysis on these issues and we hope to share some of these with Members very seen. In fact, much of what I have to say today is based largely on this analytical work.

In summary, we at the WTO have a solid basis on which to consider workable solutions to the present crisis. Let me begin though by saying that the WTO is an organization based on the rule of law and the principle of peace. It was founded as GATT post World War II to foster greater interdependence and a peaceful coexistence. Let us use this founding ideals of global solidarity to help mitigate the suffering of many in this global crisis.

The war in Ukraine has caused immense human suffering and loss of life and unleashed an ongoing humanitarian crisis. It has also dealt a severe blow to the global economy still recovering from the impacts of a pandemic that is not yet behind us. Ukraine and Russia taken together may account for barely 2% of global GDP and 2.5% on merchandise exports. But they are key suppliers of food, energy, fertilizer and certain metals. As a result, the economic shocks emanating from the Black Sea region starting with higher food and energy prices have implications first and foremost for the people of Ukraine but also for the lives and livelihoods of people around the world.

For dozens of poor countries and tens of millions of people, basic food security is in danger. These countries who are already having some of the slowest economic recoveries from the pandemic, an international cooperation on trade is necessary to help mitigate risks of poverty, hunger – even famine and social unrest.

For Ukraine, real GDP was forecast to grow this year by 3.5%. The WTO now estimates possible declines in GDP growth of as much as 25% depending on the extent of the wartime destruction. The IMF had projected that the global economy would expand by 4.4% this year. Our projection shows the conflict and related policies could knock 0.7 to 1.3 percentage points of global GDP growth – bringing it to somewhere to 3.1% and 3.7% this year. Using the same simulation model, global trade growth this year could be cut almost in half from what we forecast last October – from 4.7% to 2.5%.

Prices for food, fertilizer and energy have already risen sharply. This will have major impacts on developing countries. Food and energy account for a high share of the consumption basket of poor households. Russia and Ukraine account of around 25% of traded wheat and 73% of world exports of crude sunflower oil. Russia accounts for 9.4% of fuel exports and, together with Belarus, 20% of world supply of fertilizer. Africa and the Middle East are major markets for food exports from Ukraine and Russia.

Already, in Africa, prices of key commodities have risen by 20% to 50% between January and March according to the African Development Bank. Prices will also increase for crops not only exported by Russia and Ukraine but also crops that can serve as substitute – as countries attempt to fill gap in imports with alternatives. The price of rice has increased by 12% since the beginning of the year while the price of oats has risen by 8%.

35 countries in Africa import food and 22 import fertilizer from one or both countries. Some depend heavily on the two countries for key staples like wheat. In 2019, Egypt sourced 73% of its wheat imports from Ukraine and Russia. The Republic of Benin sourced 100% of its wheat imports from Russia – and Rwanda, Uganda and Namibia are other countries heavily dependent on the two countries for wheat imports. Outside Africa, Middle Eastern countries like the United Arab Emirates and Lebanon are heavily dependent while Mongolia, Georgia, Afghanistan and Nicaragua are also dependent. Ukraine alone accounted for 49% of Tunisia's wheat imports and 31% of Ethiopia's.

In the near term, international cooperation on trade is necessary to minimize the impact of supply crunches in key commodities for which prices are already high by historical standards and to keep international markets functioning smoothly. Consider wheat. Skyrocketing prices have already led some governments to introduce export controls. Our monitoring system shows that about 12 countries have imposed export restrictions and prohibitions. While this is not yet a large number of our Membership, it is important to share this information so Members can focus on policies likely to help mitigate or help solve the present crisis.

Only through coordination can governments avoid the repeat of the cascading export restrictions that have exacerbated price increases in the food price crisis of 2008 to 2010. Similarly, countries buffer stocks who can afford to share could coordinate the release of wheat, barley, other cereals and grains and oils into the international market thereby alleviating the supply squeeze. Trade facilitation measures could also be brought into play to ease the free flow of goods. This will assist in the short term.

Certainly, efforts should be made to allow the World Food Programme full access to humanitarian purchases. Transparency through prompt notification and information sharing can help the international community better manage the situation. For a decade, sharing information about food supplies and stockpiles through the Agricultural Market Information System has enabled leading exporters and importers to prevent panics and keep markets functioning smoothly.

In the longer term, alternative suppliers could come online. For instance, several countries could increase wheat cultivation. Others could increase fertilizer production. Even in the long term, Members could still help improve food security outcomes by immediately communicating in a transparent manner any information that could affect trade and markets of food and agricultural commodities. It is important to note that certain areas can also produce more.

Africa can produce more. It certainly has the land and resources to do so. The African Development Bank just released their plan to support countries to build on its agricultural technology transformation platform to produce more heat-tolerant and adaptable varieties of wheat, maze and other crops. It has earmarked USD 1.5 billion for a two-year period for this.

The war in Ukraine is further disrupting supply chains that were just beginning to recover from pandemic-induced challenges. These supply chain issues also need to be managed to avoid disrupting trade at a time when it is needed to build food supply resilience in food deficit countries. On 21 March, we brought together top Executives from the full range of supply chain actors – shipping companies, ports, logistics firms and users – to look at what the WTO can do to ease supply chain disruptions and enhance the free flow of trade. The Chairs of several Committees participated in this discussion.

Let me conclude by emphasizing that supply resilience will ultimately be best served by deeper and more diverse international markets anchored in open and predictable rules. Concentrating sourcing and production at home while understandable could also create new vulnerabilities and may not be the best risk management strategy. A region's wheat crop could be destroyed by drought, flooding or other weather based phenomena. A harsh winter and an earthquake could knock out electricity and factory production.

Trade has been and will remain a critical means of adaptation to the mounting global shocks that the world is currently experiencing. This is not the time to retreat inward. This is the time for well thought-out diversification, de-concentration and other risk management strategies. This is the time to stress the importance of multilateralism, global solidarity and cooperation.