Talks foundered over a relatively minor point: India and China pushed for developing nations to reserve the right to protect their farmers against sudden surges in cheap food imports. The United States argued that such protection, which is not permitted now, would mean moving backwards on current world trade commitments.

India's chief negotiator and Commerce Minister, Mr Kamal Nath, was cheered as heroic in India, where his refusal to offer concessions was portrayed as a classic David-versus-Goliath case.

Mr Nath said in a telephone interview from Geneva: 'I come from a country where 300 million people live on one dollar a day and 700 million people live on two dollars a day. So it is natural for me, and in fact incumbent upon me, to see that our agricultural interests are not compromised.'

Amid the finger-pointing that followed, Japan upbraided China and India, as growing economic powers, for not shouldering greater responsibilities in the World Trade Organisation.

But Mr Peter Mandelson, the European Union's top negotiator, saved his sharpest criticism for US Trade Representative Susan Schwab, accusing her of refusing to budge even when her demands were met and then going public with her grievances too quickly.

'It is bad enough to be facing defeat in the last mile of such a marathon,' Mr Mandelson wrote yesterday in his blog. 'It's worse to realise that some of the people across the table, instead of working for success, are in reality preparing for failure.'

This latest round of negotiations saw the US demanding more agricultural export opportunities in developed and developing countries to offset the farm subsidy cuts it would have to make.

The failed talks appeared to end, for the near term at least, any hopes of a global deal to open up markets that WTO chief Pascal Lamy said would save the world economy US$130 billion (S$178 billion) a year in lower tariffs.

Supporters of the so-called Doha talks said a deal would have been a bulwark against protectionist sentiments that are likely to spread as economic growth falters in much of the world.

The collapse of the talks will not bring an end to world trade, which will continue under current agreements. Many of those agreements are between two or more countries rather than under the WTO.

But it is a big setback, particularly for smaller and poorer developing countries, which were counting on gaining more access to consumers in the US, Europe and Japan.

DBS Bank economist Irvin Seah said the collapse of the Doha talks may push countries to resort to bilateral or regional talks, so they may also be more open to bilateral negotiations with Singapore.

Standard Chartered Bank economist Alvin Liew said Singapore has already taken a 'pragmatic approach' of proactively pursuing free trade agreements with individual trading partners.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Trade and Industry told The Straits Times that Singapore's priority over the next few weeks will be to work with WTO director Lamy and like-minded countries to try to preserve the substantive gains already made. It would also renew its efforts to seek convergence on outstanding issues.

'Singapore shares the wide sense of disappointment that the Doha round negotiations have reached an impasse,' said the official. 'Nonetheless, we should not lose sight of the significant progress that has been achieved over the past few weeks. While important issues remain unresolved, the broad framework for a Doha deal is still in place.'

ASSOCIATED PRESS, WASHINGTON POST, REUTERS

WITH ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY GRACE NG

SEE MONEY