1) Are the migration and mobility partnership agreements, which have often been in the news in recent times, an agreement between India and? It is said that if such a strong regional agreement (TPP and RCEP) emerges, reflecting the divergent views of the different countries, negotiations between these two groups will begin and be consolidated over time within the WTO. However, there is concern that the United States is likely to use its dollar muscle to encourage developing and least developed countries to join these less equitable contracts. As we have read in the General Agreement on Trade in Services, the Mode 3 classification covers services provided by a foreign trade agency by physical presence in a country concerned. As a result, Western countries insist that, in this way, they have unlimited access to the Indian education sector, and once again India is on the defensive. India has already submitted some offers to the WTO prior to the Nairobi meeting. The topics are still being negotiated and discussed. The most important was a fixed timetable for the dismantling of the Multifibre Agreement (AMF) on textile trade, enshrined in the Textile and Clothing Agreement (ATC) and the Agriculture Agreement (AOA). Look at each one after the other. On the other hand, the interest of the EU and the United States lies rather in mode 3 of supply, which requires the establishment of a commercial presence in developing countries. As a result, calls have been made for a more liberal policy on foreign direct investment in sectors such as insurance. These developed countries are lukewarm to calls for a more liberal system for the free movement of people.
With the initial agenda of concluding trade negotiations in four years, it took seven and a half years for the trade negotiations of the Uruguay round to advance the final agreement, called the Marrakesh Agreement. The main points of the Uruguay Round are: 53 WTO members approved a seven-year period in Nairobi to remove all tariffs on 201 computer products, which represent an annual trade of $1.300 billion. Such a pact is being rewarded for lowering the price of items ranging from video cameras to semiconductors. However, India had opposed such an agreement, fearing that the agreement would only benefit countries (particularly the United States, China, Japan and Korea) that have a solid production base in these products, not India. This information technology agreement is called ITA-II. Original ITA was signed in 1996. The new ITA aims to expand the list of covered positions and completely eliminate tariffs within a seven-year period. Since 1996, many new products have crept into the electronics industry, which remains outside the ITA. The current dark state of the Indian electronics industry is often attributed to itA of 1996. This has forced India to maintain certain electronic goods duty-free, which has given us a famous “reverse tariff structure.” Domestic products are subject to higher excise duties than import tariffs.
This situation has seriously penalized Indian producers compared to foreign suppliers. The conclusion of a free trade agreement or the creation of a customs union can sometimes violate the WTO principle. As a result, most of these agreements are concluded with exceptions allowed by the MFN in mind. Agreements with few members should not create new barriers to trade for non-members. Given that the WTO is based on consensus, it is extremely difficult to reach agreement on reforms among the 164 members. One possibility that could move forward could be a multi-lateral agreement with a group of like-minded countries on a new set of rules that would complement the broader WTO. Coverage of higher education within the GATS will promote the treatment of education as a commercial commodity. Any agreement may limit the Indian government`s authority to provide subsidies and assistance to the sector. In addition, this will likely affect India`s booking policy. In addition, the foreign university