This column summarises the arguments in the latest eBook. If the Doha deadlock is to be broken this year, US and Chinese leaders must find more room for compromise by loosening their domestic political constrains. To do this, they must challenge the premise on which the deadlock is based – the view held by special interest groups that Doha is mostly about tariff cuts. These narrow special interests should not be allowed to jeopardise the world trading system and the benefits Doha would bring to all nations. This is critical; the eBook argues that if Doha fails this year, it can’t be done before 2020.

The Doha Development Agenda (DDA) has made very little progress in ten years. If it fails to be completed, the impact on world trade and the global economy could potentially be very damaging, with serious implications for the credibility and future of the WTO. Many commentators suggest that the Doha Round is dying of political neglect and that its revival requires the immediate intervention and committed support of G20 leaders; others argue that gaining such support at this very late stage is unrealistic. CEPR held a high-level trade seminar in London on 14th April to discuss the issue.

If trade diplomats thought they knew one thing, it was how to cut industrial tariffs. Yet the Doha deadlock rests squarely on the inability to compromise on industrial tariff cuts. This column says that the arguments made for higher levels of ambition don't stand up to much scrutiny and should not be allowed to provide a basis for a continuing impasse.

The eight trade rounds that have taken place to date have helped define the world we live in. This essay argues that political leaders must now commit resources and time to concluding the Doha Round or they will bear the responsibility for serious damage being caused not merely to globalisation but to the process of multilateralism more generally.

The Doha Round has been going on for ten years and its fate is now in jeopardy. This column argues that governments should not let it fail as it could bring down with it the whole WTO-based world trade system. As there is no potential replacement for the WTO, and without it the threat of trade wars would become more serious.

The Doha Round is again in a crisis. What is left to say after so many disappointments and loss of credibility? This essay argues that concluding the Doha Round in 2011 presents many unique opportunities on the economic front, on the symbolic front, and on the systemic front. But asking the key players behind today’s deadlock to move would be naive.

For developing countries, following the principles of sound economic policy and establishing the appropriate institutions of a functioning market economy is a very challenging task. This column says that completing the Doha Round could help them follow at least some of the principles of sound economic policy and establishing some of the appropriate institutions of functioning market economies.

At the end of this week the world will know whether, after ten years of negotiations, the Doha Round is still stuck in a “game of chicken”. This column argues that the agreement in goods still offers a good basis for a deal as it provides the most precious virtue, i.e. certainty and insurance. Moreover the likely alternative to Doha – rampant regionalism – will not help the US and China achieve more than they could with Doha because their trade partners find FTAs with these two particularly difficult.

America’s best chance at getting better access to the world’s fastest growing economies is on the table – it is called the Doha Round. The US should push hard for a conclusion as the alternatives are much worse. The US faces great domestic and foreign problems in pursuing the regionalism alterative. In particular, US faith in the Trans-Pacific Partnership seems to be based on unclear thinking about political constraints at home and political reactions abroad.

Another suspension of the Doha Round is the likely outcome of the upcoming meeting. This essay argues that such a failure is now more dangerous than ever. For domestic political reasons unrelated to trade, the US will be in no position to lead on international trade issues for some years. As the US is still the “indispensable nation” for WTO talks, this means 2011 is the last good opportunity for many years.