The Doha Development Agenda (DDA), launched by the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, promised to recalibrate global
trade rules in favor of developing nations, yet remains unfinished after two decades of negotiations. This paper critically reflects on
the structural, geopolitical, and institutional factors that have stalled the DDA, arguing that its original mandate—development-centric
multilateralism—has been eclipsed by shifting power asymmetries, plurilateral alternatives, and crisis-driven fragmentation. Drawing

on archival records, negotiation texts, and elite interviews, we trace how North-South coalitions fractured over agricultural
safeguards, intellectual property flexibilities, and dispute settlement reforms, revealing a dissonance between rhetorical consensus
and distributive outcomes. The analysis further interrogates whether the DDA’s normative legacy—embodied in the principle of
“special and differential treatment”—can be revitalized amid rising protectionism and the erosion of WTO authority. By synthesizing
lessons from the Doha impasse, the paper proposes pathways for re-anchoring trade multilateralism: (1) redefining development as a
dynamic, evidence-based process rather than a fixed exemption regime; (2) leveraging plurilateral agreements as laboratories for
consensus-building rather than substitutes for multilateralism; and (3) institutionalizing adaptive governance mechanisms to reconcile
sovereignty with collective action. Ultimately, the study underscores that salvaging the spirit of Doha requires not technical fixes but a
paradigmatic shift toward equitable, resilient trade governance—one that confronts legacies of colonial asymmetry and anticipates
21st-century challenges such as climate trade and digital sovereignty.