TRADE: All Eyes on the EU

By Gustavo Capdevila Reprint | | Print |

Gustavo Capdevila

GENEVA, Oct 20 2005 (IPS) - The Doha Round of multilateral trade talks in the WTO have found themselves once again in a deadlock, which has been nearly unanimously blamed this time around on the European Union’s disinclination to eliminate the barriers blocking access to its markets by farm products from other countries.

The key to getting the talks moving again is in the hands of theEU, said Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim, who coordinates the Group of 20 (G20) bloc of developing nations.

Intense discussions ended Thursday in the WTO (World Trade Organisation) without any agreement on agriculture, despite the new proposals recently set forth by key players like the G20 and the United States.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns complained in Geneva that ‘’we really have nothing at this point from the European Union. They have been very timid and that is worrying to all of us…for a lot of reasons, but the greatest concern at the moment is we are simply running out of time.”

Amorim, who shared that concern, issued a call to heads of state and government and other political leaders to help unlock the negotiations. ‘’I think this moment is crucial not only for trade, but the fact is that trade is important for world stability as a whole,” he added.

The lack of progress in the talks held over the past two weeks jeopardises the outcome of the sixth WTO ministerial conference, to take place Dec. 13-18 in Hong Kong, which is to give the Doha Round the final shove.

The Doha Round, launched in 2001 in the capital of Qatar, is aimed at promoting the liberalisation of trade in areas like industrial products, services, intellectual property and, particularly, agriculture. According to the agreed timetable, the talks are to be completed by late 2006.

EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson agreed that ‘’time is very short’’ for reaching agreements prior to Hong Kong.

Europe’s reluctance to offer concessions has been based on a difference in approaches within the 25-member bloc, where a group of countries led by France questioned the proposals presented by Mandelson in agriculture.

The trade commissioner admitted that the French government had demanded that the EU negotiators stop discussing agriculture and cease engagement.

Mandelson said he respected the views of France, but pointed out that his mandate came from the EU member countries as a whole, which ‘’decided on Tuesday that we should continue this negotiation, including in agriculture. And that’s what we did.” Celine Charveriat, head of Oxfam International’s Make Trade Fair Campaign, said Mandelson, acting under pressure from “certain member states, especially France,” failed to offer further concessions on agriculture during the negotiations that ended Thursday without any progress.

The frustration of this week’s negotiations was just one more failure in a long list of disappointments in the Doha Round, which initially got off to a much more enthusiastic start.

Perhaps the atmosphere at the Doha summit was different because it occurred just after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, commented Amorim. But whatever the reason, he said, ‘’we now have to conclude the job that we started in Doha.”

The Brazilian minister said the world’s leaders had to create a climate that was conducive to success in the negotiations, and that recent developments on the international scene had shown a less favourable tendency in that respect. He added, however, that he still believed in the sincerity of those who talk about development.

Although Oxfam blamed the EU for this week’s deadlock, it said the world’s two major trading powers, the EU and the United States, must both offer greater reductions in their farm subsidies.

Charveriat noted that the G20 joined with the United States in pressing the EU to offer broader market access. But, she warned, ‘’developing countries must hold out for a deal that guarantees them flexibility and does not demand too great a level of reciprocity.’’