“The US idea to “facilitate TBM of used equipment” is not a good idea as in many cases TBM is not advisable and indeed very harmful. First, any trade which is unecessary [sic] exacerbates the burning of fossil fuels currently and all local markets should be preferred for that reason. Further if equipment is moved to locations that lack collection and recycling infrastructure you are dooming areas of the world to a serious hazardous waste legacy from discarded e-waste. Of course this needs to be weighed against the social and economic value of bridging digital divide for example. Second, much used equipment is what is known as "near-end-of-life" and while technically not a waste, will become so very soon, and thus has very limited value for bridging a "digital divide.”
“Regarding US statement, again we do not necessarily want to facilitate trade. Trade is not inherently good as noted above. Without context we cannot know whether facilitation of trade is a good idea or not.”
From p. 5 of BAN response to Basel Secretariat. 2012. ‘Draft Technical Guidelines on Transboundary Movement of E-Waste, in Particular Regarding the Distinction between Waste and Non-Waste (Version 8 May 2012)’. http://www.basel.int/Implementation/Ewaste/TechnicalGuidelines/DevelopmentofTGs/tabid/2377/Default.aspx.