A/HRC/33/40 products, and have yet to implement the abolition of those subsidies to which they agreed nearly 10 years ago.” 63. Implementation of those commitments would be facilitated if WTO were incorporated into the United Nations system and subordinated to the purposes and principles of the United Nations. Incorporation pursuant to articles 57 and 63 of the Charter would ensure that WTO not only actively contributes to the work of the Economic and Social Council, as it can proudly claim, but also gives proper weight to human rights as part of its own constitutional law. 64. The Nairobi Ministerial Conference reached some agreements on agricultural export subsidies, food aid and other issues. However, the Information Technology Agreement, covering products like Global Positioning System navigation systems and medical products such as magnetic resonance imaging machines, was primarily drafted by high income countries. None of the countries from the Group of Least Developed Countries was represented and only one of the lower-middle-income countries was represented. 65. It would have been desirable and in keeping with commitments to reduce poverty to adopt a clear statement on the legitimacy of public stockholding for food security that would allow countries to hold food stocks and enable them to deal with food shortages and fluctuations in global market prices. 66. While some developing countries were successful in securing concessions on cotton, an important issue for West African States, the rich countries won the deal on agricultural export subsidies, which did not abolish general subsidy schemes like the European Union Common Agricultural Policy. Observers noted that “the uneven WTO playing field, whereby rich countries’ subsidy schemes are categorized as being ‘allowable’ while poorer countries are prevented from subsidizing their farmers, will continue”.48 67. Barely three months after agreement on the Sustainable Development Goals, the Nairobi Ministerial Conference failed to implement target 17.10, pursuant to which States would “promote a universal, rules-based, open, non-discriminatory and equitable multilateral trading system under the World Trade Organization, including through the conclusion of negotiations under its Doha Development Agenda”. That paradox highlights the need to rethink the global trading system and the skewed ideological approach taken by some negotiators. One problem with WTO, beyond Doha and Nairobi, is the prevalent vision that equates “progress” with the growth of trade volumes and exports or with a higher gross domestic product. The Charter of the United Nations advocates another vision of progress as development, solidarity and human rights in a progressively more democratic and equitable international order. 68. Notwithstanding press comments in the United States and the European Union declaring the Doha Development Agenda “dead”, paragraphs 30, 31 and 34 of the Nairobi Declaration give reason for hope.49 While acknowledging the stalemate, they indicate that the Doha Work Programme is a single undertaking, meaning that Western countries cannot cherry-pick which parts to prioritize. It appears relevant for the developing countries to continue the struggle on the negotiating agenda of the single undertaking of that Programme. Under no conditions can any conditional plurilateral agreements, as envisaged by the United States and the European Union, be incorporated into the WTO treaty 48 49 GE.16-11938 www.globaljustice.org.uk/blog/2015/dec/23/what-really-happened-wto-summit. www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc10_e/mindecision_e.htm. 15