Bread for the World supports India in trade talks

from New Delhi News

This is the first that I have heard from a third party on the failed Doha free trade talks. The NGO Bread for the World sides with India. - Kale

'We need a global economy that works for everyone, rich and poor alike, and not just for a wealthy few,' David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World, a Christian organisation that strives to end hunger worldwide, said in a statement in Washington Monday.

Beckmann warned that the recent collapse of the Doha Round of talks in Geneva would adversely affect the world's hungry and poor people in more ways than the negotiators realise.

'The trading nations of the world put protectionism ahead of hungry and poor people, and it worsened their plight,' said Beckmann.

'That is the real tragedy of the collapse of the Doha Round during this global hunger crisis.'

The Doha Round talks reached an impasse after the US disagreed with the stance of India and China that developing countries can impose emergency tariffs on products like sugar, cotton and rice in case of a sudden rise in imports.

The US wanted to allow emergency tariffs when a country's imports rapidly increase by 40 percent, while China and India insisted that this threshold should be 10 percent. They offefred to settle for 15 percent.

'This latest Doha Round was a golden opportunity to reduce trade-distorting farm subsidies in wealthy nations, especially in light of soaring crop prices and record prosperity among European and American farmers,' Beckmann said.

The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation estimates that 862 million people across the world go to bed hungry.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

After Doha, What’s Next?

the Center for Global Development

This is an interview with Randall Soderquist of the Center for Global Development. It explores where global trade talks can go fom here. - Kale

The collapse of the Doha Round of multilateral trade negotiations last week was a major setback for developing countries and rich countries alike. Policymakers are now trying to make sense of what went wrong and salvage what goodwill remains. Randall Soderquist, CGD’s new senior program associate for trade, says that developing countries stand to lose the most from last week’s events, as the fragmented regional and bilateral trade agreements that will likely succeed Doha will undermine their bargaining power. In a new Q&A, he explains Doha’s impact on poor countries, discusses shifting political attitudes toward trade, and offers recommendations on steps toward a new trade agenda.

Randall previously served as director for the Economic Policy Program and the Trade and Poverty Forum at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. His work there and his eight years working on trade issues on Capitol Hill bring a wealth of policy experience to CGD’s ongoing investigation of how rich-country trade policies can be improved to make it less difficult for poor people in the developing world to escape from poverty. Welcome Randall!

Q: Is the Doha Round really “dead”? Has a global agreement just been put on hold?

A: Some argue that it’s still possible to salvage the Doha Round, noting that the Uruguay Round that preceded it was put on hold for two years before it was completed and eventually signed in Marrakesh in 1994. But lots has changed since then. Before, developing countries sat on the margins, accepting the agenda offered by the so-called Quad (EU, U.S., Japan and Canada). Emerging economies like Brazil, China, and India had none of the influence they wield today. This shift in the WTO power structure and the emergence of what is in effect a multi-polar trading system make it really hard to reach a consensus. Then, too, the issues are more expansive and complex, but the WTO continued to approach this as a single undertaking—where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. Finally, there is the changing political context in the rich countries: with growing anti-trade sentiment few politicians are willing to make trade a priority. With the upcoming elections in the United States and India and the appointment of a new Commission in the EU, there is simply not a whole lot of room to maneuver.

Q: So what happens next?

A: I suspect we will see some posturing by the key players about the need to lock in portions of the Doha Round agreement so that the talks can be revived later. Personally I think that’s unlikely. Instead I expect that the Doha Round will simply fade away as countries pursue specific sectoral and regional trade agreements that serve their individual economic interests.

Q: So, is the idea of trade for development also off the table?

A: Certainly not. There seems to be an understanding in the international trade community—public, private, and non-profit sectors alike—that poverty alleviation and economic opportunity need immediate attention. U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab, for example, stated that some components of the package might be moved forward on a multilateral basis. She cited duty-free quota-free access on most products for the poorest countries, trade facilitation, and environmental goods and services. So development is clearly on her radar screen. The idea has been floated among her counterparts, and from what I can tell there have been discussion on the side about how to “harvest” what is ripe right now. But India has objected to this approach. Since it would require consensus among all WTO members, it is hard to imagine this happening in the context of the Doha Round. It is unfortunate that India—which has gained so much from market access for its exports through existing multilateral agreements—now appears to be standing in the way of developing countries who want to make similar progress. It is a very odd and disconcerting turn of events.

Q: What will be the impact of Doha’s collapse on poor people in developing countries?

A: The real impact of the collapse is unclear as there was so much that remained to be negotiated. But if the question is whether what was on the table would have provided significant economic benefits to those living in poverty, the short answer is no. Granted the U.S. offer would have forced some real constraints on subsidies available under the current farm legislation. Similarly, reforms that are being undertaken in the EU’s Common Agriculture Policy would have been locked in. And some benefits would have been derived from cuts to bound tariff rates. But most of the important issues for developing countries remained undecided. Subsidies on cotton; tariffs on bananas, textiles, and clothing (so-called “sensitive” products excluded from tariff reductions); preference erosion on key exports; and, of course, safeguards all remained unresolved, so it is difficult to calculate whether there would have been a net gain or a loss as a result of the agreement. Indeed, one of the most sensitive issues—anti-dumping—was not even mentioned. Nonetheless, developing countries had far better leverage to negotiate with rich countries as a group in a multilateral forum like that in Geneva than they do individually. The asymmetries they will face in a post-Doha world -- asymmetries in power and in negotiating capacity -- will not necessarily be conducive to economic development or poverty alleviation.

Q: What should rich countries be doing with respect to trade policy to help developing countries in lieu of a multilateral deal?

A: The next step requires innovative approaches that will allow developing countries to better integrate themselves into the global supply chain and, in this manner, obtain the investment they need to exploit trade opportunities and promote economic growth. This means taking a critical look at existing trade agreements and preference programs and examining what works and what doesn’t. In particular we should be looking for opportunities for poor countries to leapfrog past old industries and into new technologies of the future. Rich countries should work to coordinate the preferences they offer to developing countries to try to ensure that benefits obtained from one country are not squelched by another. Rich countries should also integrate their trade agreements, preference programs, and development assistance programs so that they reinforce each other. In short, there is quite a lot we can and should do, even without a Doha Round.

Click here to read more.

WTO talks collapse: the poor and farmers lose

from the Australian

This story has some opinions from farmers and poor advocates in Australia. They say the trade deal would have given the poor a chance in the worsening economy. - Kale

FARMERS and the world's poor will be the losers from the collapse of world trade talks in Geneva overnight, advocates say.

The World Trade Organisation talks, which aimed to salvage a global free trade pact, collapsed after the US, China and India failed overnight to agree on when poor countries could raise import tariffs on farm products.

National Farmers Federation president David Crombie said the breakdown would prevent farmers from selling into new and expanded markets.

"The breakdown of negotiations in the Doha Round of WTO trade talks is another dismal result for Australia's farmers and agricultural exporters," Mr Crombie said.

Agricultural domestic support limits among OECD countries would not be reduced and market access would not be improved.

With the world food shortage biting hard, Mr Crombie warned developing countries would be the "biggest long-term losers" from the world trade impasse.

Oxfam acting executive director James Ensor blamed rich countries for the impasse, saying it was not fair for them to force poorer countries into heavy trade concessions.

"They defended vested interests and put poor countries under intense pressure to make concessions that have no place in a development round," Mr Ensor said.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

WTO Talks collapse: in battle over farm aid

from the Washington Post

This story serves as an overview of this round of talks, and the issue that ended them. - Kale
By Anthony Faiola and Rama Lakshmi

International talks aimed at ushering in a new era of free trade collapsed in Geneva yesterday during a bitter split between developed and developing countries over the future shape of global commerce.

The failure of the talks after nine days of intense negotiations underscored what is likely to be the biggest challenge in coming years to expanding world trade: the reluctance of emerging juggernauts such as India and China to risk their newfound success by offering rich nations greater access to the hundreds of millions of consumers rising out of poverty in the developing world.

High-level delegations from the United States and the European Union showed fresh willingness at the World Trade Organization talks to make concessions that would have gradually curbed the subsidies and tariffs they have long employed to protect First World farmers. But India and China dug in their heels, insisting on the right to keep protecting their farmers while accusing the United States and other rich countries of exaggerating the generosity of their concessions.

"The breakdown of these talks is bad news for the world's businesses, workers, farmers and most importantly the poor," said Thomas J. Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "It's ironic that this blow . . . came from two of the chief beneficiaries of worldwide trade. India and China are emerging powers, but with great power comes great responsibility. They missed an opportunity to show leadership as key players in the global trading system."

The result is what most experts concede is at least a temporary mothballing of the Doha Round of trade talks, so named because a group of nations agreed to work toward dramatic new cuts in subsidies and trade tariffs in Qatar's capital, Doha, in 2001. The talks have floundered for the past seven years, with negotiations falling apart each time trade ministers have gathered to try to hash out an accord.

The WTO meeting of more than 35 nations in Geneva that ended yesterday had been described by officials as a "do or die" moment for the round, with the lack of agreement postponing the $50 billion to $100 billion injection such a deal was expected give the global economy. The sense that the failed talks may not get another chance anytime soon is linked to the pending exit of the pro-trade Bush administration, rising opposition to farm concessions in Europe and an upcoming changing of the guard of several key trade officials who have worked on this agreement for years.

Some analysts said the spread of free trade for now is likely to shift toward more modest bilateral agreements, or the expansion of regional trading blocs such as South America's Mercosur and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations. Yet even bilateral deals have recently faced stronger resistance during a growing global wave of protectionism, including in the United States, where free trade agreements with Colombia, South Korea and Panama are being held up by opposition in Congress.

"We are heading toward the fragmentation of the global trading system into individual trading blocs -- regional and bilateral -- which offer no guarantee for the economic benefits we have seen in the post-War era," said Randall Soderquist, senior trade program associate for the Center for Global Development.

The talks in Geneva at times took on a highly charged, personal tone that immediately cast the negotiations as a power struggle between the developed and developing worlds. Within 24 hours of landing in Geneva nine days ago, Brazil's foreign minister, Celso Amorim, infuriated First World negotiators, comparing their efforts to hype their proposed trade concessions to Nazi propaganda. His comments drew sharp reprimands, particularly from Washington's top negotiator, U.S. Trade Ambassador Susan C. Schwab, the daughter of Jewish Holocaust survivors.

Yet Brazil would later show far more flexibility than India or China, casting the Asian nations as the principle holdouts.

Schwab said negotiators were "so close" last week in reaching an agreement. But the talks fell apart over the insistence by developing nations to reserve the right to protect their farming sectors against sudden surges in cheap food imports. India's chief negotiator and commerce minister, Kamal Nath, may have played the biggest role in undoing the talks, repeatedly blocking attempts by developed nations to win greater access to India's burgeoning market.

Nath's inflexibility was cheered as heroic in India, where his refusal to offer major concessions to rich nations was being portrayed as a classic David vs. Goliath case.

"I kept saying 'No, I don't agree' at every point," Nath said in a telephone interview from Geneva yesterday. "I come from a country where 300 million people live on 1 dollar a day and 700 million people live on 2 dollars a day. So it is natural for me, and in fact incumbent upon me, to see that our agricultural interests are not compromised. You don't require rocket science to decide between livelihood security and commercial interests."

Opposition to the talks had been building in India since June, when 35 farmers groups from across that nation gathered at a conference in New Delhi to discuss the implications of the trade negotiations with trade and food policy activists. They called upon wealthy nations to remove their farm subsidies, saying such assistance to First World farmers denies a level playing field to subsistence-farming nations such as India.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

WTO talks collapse: Reaction from World Leaders

from the Raw Story

Here is another story on the WTO talks collapse. This story gathers reaction from leaders across the globe. - Kale

World powers reeled with regret and emotion on Wednesday from the collapse of WTO negotiations for a global trade pact, warning that the poorest countries would suffer.

"It is particularly distressing for us that we find ourselves without an agreement today," US Trade Representative Susan Schwab told a news conference, as delegates reviewed the wreckage of nine days of talks.

She lamented that tense talks had broken down on deadlock over special import tariff measures, after certain countries rejected WTO proposals.

"It would have worked, and yet there were others who demanded more. and more included a tool to close markets," Schwab said, without naming names.

Delegates who went into many late nights in an attempt to reach a deal affecting the lives of populations around the globe, said that deadlock had centred on a row between the United States and India over tariffs.

Kenya's trade minister meanwhile warned that the breakdown of talks "gravely undermined" efforts by African countries to fight poverty.

Ministers had struggled for nine days to reach consensus on subsidy levels and import tariffs for a new deal under the WTO's Doha Round, which has foundered repeatedly since it was launched seven years ago.

Delegates said negotiations stumbled on proposals for so-called SSM measures to protect poor farmers that would have imposed a special tariff on certain agricultural goods in the event of an import surge or price fall.

"Africa's opportunity to achieve fair trade has... been gravely undermined by the lack of progress in these negotiations," the minister, Uhuru Kenyatta, told a news conference, speaking on behalf of a grouping of African countries at the World Trade Organization talks here.

"Africa critically needs to realise development and get itself out of poverty through the establishment of fair trade rather than aid," he said.

Several delegates hoped on Tuesday for further moves to salvage the negotiating process in light of progress that had raised spirits over the weekend. But momentum seemed to have ground to a halt.

"It's extremely difficult to find words to express the disappointment," said EU Commissioner Mariann Fischer-Boel in an emotional address on Tuesday. "It's a truly sad day for the developing countries that had so much to gain."

"We will need to let the dust settle a bit," the World Trade Organization's Director-General Pascal Lamy said. "WTO members will need to have a sober look at if and how they bring the pieces back together."

The world's economic superpower, the United States, and India, one of the world's biggest emerging economies, were sharply divided over the SSM -- the special safeguard mechanism.

"I feel very disappointed that this had to be left unresolved in the last miles," India's Commerce Minister Kamal Nath told reporters. "It's unfortunate that in a developing round, the last miles we couldn't run" due to the SSM.

India and other developing countries wanted the mechanism to kick in at a lower import surge level than has been proposed in order to protect their millions of poor farmers from starvation. Nath said that about 100 developing nations backed his position.

Others wanted it to take effect at a higher rate so as not to hurt exporters.

Ministers avoided publicly pointing the finger of blame. European Union Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson said on Tuesday that the collapse was a "collective failure."

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

WTO talks collapse: a reaction on how it effects Africa

from AFP via Google

The WTO talks have collapsed due to an arguement between India and the US. Here is a reaction on how the absence of an agreement will effect Africa. - Kale

GENEVA — The breakdown of talks on a world trade pact has "gravely undermined" efforts by African countries to fight poverty, Kenya's trade minister warned on Wednesday.

"Africa's opportunity to achieve fair trade has... been gravely undermined by the lack of progress in these negotiations," the minister, Uhuru Kenyatta, told a news conference, speaking on behalf of a grouping of African countries at the World Trade Organization talks here.

"Africa critically needs to realise development and get itself out of poverty through the establishment of fair trade rather than aid," he said.

"Most of the key issues of interest to the African continent were not even discussed, especially the issue of cotton."

WTO Director-General announced on Tuesday that the latest negotiations for a much-delayed trade liberalisation deal under the so-called Doha Round had broken down after nine days due to unresolved differences.

Delegates said the deaddlock centred on a row between the United States and India over special tariff measures to protect poor farmers from surging imports or price falls.

Click here to read more.

WTO talks break down as blame is being pushed around

from the Florida Times Union

A tiny issue has stalled global trade talks. One that is hardly worth even arguing about .... sigh... - Kale

by BRADLEY S. KLAPPER

GENEVA — The world's largest commercial powers came into crucial talks on a new global trade pact pledging to assume the shared responsibility needed for solving planetary problems from climate change to food and energy prices.

But they are close to letting an arcane dispute over a seldom-used safeguard on farm imports spoil a trade deal worth billions of dollars to the global economy.

With huge question marks remaining on provisions to open up farm and industrial markets, the World Trade Organization's leading members on Monday were sharply divided over an issue worth practically nothing to the global economy.

A number of trade officials described the debate pitting the United States against China and India as one of principle — and not just hard economics.

"This is an issue that really concerns the livelihood of many developing countries," said Sun Zhenyu, China's WTO ambassador.

India, heavily criticized by the United States and Latin American countries Monday, said the standoff was the result of unreasonable demands from the U.S. and other rich nations.

"If blocking means not accepting whatever the developed countries say, so be it," Trade Minister Kamal Nath told reporters, adding that he has made his position clear on the subject since last week.

He said the idea of a "special safeguard" to deal with a sudden surge of imports or drop in prices had wide support: "It's not only India. We have 100 countries saying the same thing. It's the large economies that are isolated."

Earlier, the United States slammed the two emerging powers, saying they were threatening to scuttle the entire Doha trade round launched in the Qatari capital in 2001.

David Shark, a U.S. trade official, told the WTO's 153 members that the United States has "swallowed hard and accepted" a compromise proposal that includes tighter limits on farm subsidies to American farmers.

But he criticized India for rejecting a package of provisions laid out by WTO chief Pascal Lamy, and China for backing out of terms it committed to last week.

"Their actions have thrown the entire Doha round into the gravest jeopardy of its nearly seven-year life," Shark said.

While farm import safeguards currently exist in rich and poor countries, they are rarely used. The dispute over the current proposals concerns the threshold for when developing nations could spike their tariffs, and how high those taxes could rise.

Shark accused China and India of insisting on allowances to raise farm tariffs above even their current levels. That violates the spirit of the trade round, the U.S. and other agricultural exporters argue, because it is supposed to help poorer countries develop their economies by boosting their exports of farm produce.

But China and India were not alone. Faced with rising food prices, a number of developing nations have sought wide loopholes against opening up their farm markets — either by blocking certain strategic products such as rice or grains or through rules that would allow them to raise tariffs sharply if faced with a sudden flood of imports.

Farming in the developing world is "not like manufacturing," said Trade Minister Mari Pangestu of Indonesia, the world's fourth most populous country. "It's not a machine you can just turn on or off."

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

An update on the WTO talks: some progress

from Report on Business, Canada

Agreement on the global trade pact could ad anywhere between $60 to $300 billion to the world's economy. - Kale

by JULIANE VON REPPERT-BISMARCK

GENEVA — World trade ministers appear to be finally making progress in seeking a sweeping new global trade agreement.

Although critical to a deal, disputes in several areas still did not prevent a sense of optimism over the multiyear process as officials continued week-long negotiations at the World Trade Organization in Geneva yesterday.

"We're closer to an outcome than we've ever been before," New Zealand Trade Minister Phil Goff told reporters after an evening session of talks. "People have differences. We need to work through those differences."

Protection for farmers in developing countries, U.S. cotton subsidies, European Union banana duties and industrial exports to China were still holding up a deal that has been seven years in the making, diplomats said yesterday at the end of a day spent in one-on-one and group negotiations.

U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab and negotiators from China warned a deal can still unravel given extreme sensitivity over opening up trade in national staples such as food and industrial products. Decisions at the WTO are made by consensus and can break down if one country dissents.

Tensions have been high during the past week, with rich nations refusing farm aid cuts and developing countries wanting to keep industrial tariffs in place. Brazil's negotiator, Celso Amorim, angered many by denouncing rich-country tactics as worthy of Nazi propaganda chief Joseph Goebbels, and Indian Industry Minister Kamal Nath almost walked out of a meeting.

A compromise plan drafted by WTO chief Pascal Lamy on Friday averted a breakdown that could have postponed a WTO deal for several years. According to this plan, the EU would cut trade-distorting farm subsidies by 80 per cent and the United States by 70 per cent, bringing the U.S. aid ceiling to about $14.5-billion (U.S.) from more than $48-billion now.

The plan would allow developed and developing countries to exempt parts of their farm sectors from high tariff cuts. It also suggests sudden import surges should trigger temporary tariff hikes, a move designed to protect vulnerable farm sectors.

The compromise would allow developing countries such as China and India room to protect to a limited extent industries such as textiles and car production - markets the United States and EU want to tap.

Negotiators praised the plan for averting disaster. On Saturday, ministers unveiled for the first time promises to open up global-services trade that makes up almost three quarters of gross domestic product in rich countries - from telecoms and banking to energy and the booming global shipping sector.

Yet negotiators still want changes to the farm and industrial trade plan. More than 80 countries, including China and India, are calling for stronger protection against sudden surges in farm imports.

Diplomats - many showing signs of exhaustion - spoke of horse trading going on behind closed doors. European negotiators are considering a financial sweetener for Caribbean banana planters hurt by European import tariffs, according to trade officials and diplomats.

The United States is resisting pressure from poor African cotton farmers to cut its annual $2-billion in cotton subsidies, calling on China to first admit U.S. cotton, a trade official said.

Brazil - the world's biggest ethanol producer - is pushing for access to the United States and Europe's booming biofuel markets. Beijing's negotiators are at odds with EU car and textile exporters who want cuts to steep Chinese tariffs.

Representatives of Canadian poultry and dairy farmers insist exemptions to tariff cuts available to developed economies be broadened from the 4 per cent currently on the table to 7.3 per cent.

"Any deviation from our position would be extremely negative for poultry and dairy farmers and for rural areas of Canada," said Peter Clarke, Director of the Canadian Egg Marketing Agency.

Barring the collapse of talks, ministers are expected to reach an agreement by Thursday. But the shape of any final treaty is still unclear and unlikely to emerge before the end of 2008. Services, trade and other issues must be formalized. U.S. commitments must pass congress, while France and Italy have threatened to veto a deal that threatens European farmers.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

U.S. offers farm subsidy cut, is asked for more

from the Washington Post


A concession is being proposed by the US to try to save the global trade talks. - Kale
By Doug Palmer and William Schomberg

GENEVA - The United States sought to kickstart efforts to rescue a global trade deal on Tuesday by offering to cut a ceiling on its contested farm subsidies, but leading developing countries said it was not enough.

U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab announced Washington was ready to cap its trade-distorting farm subsidies at $15 billion a year, on condition countries like Brazil and India also make concessions to save the World Trade Organisation talks.

"This is a major move, taken in good faith with the expectation that others will reciprocate and step forward with improved offers in market access," Schwab told reporters.

The long-awaited U.S. move came on the second day of a week-long push by ministers for a breakthrough on farming and manufacturing -- core trade issues that have dogged the WTO's nearly seven-year-old Doha round of world trade talks.

Developing countries have long complained that huge U.S. subsidies squeeze their farmers out of the market, reducing food supplies and contributing to the recent spike in global prices.

But high prices have lowered U.S. spending on farm programs that encourage production -- which distort trade -- to about $7 billion last year, well below the $48.2 billion allowed under existing WTO rules.

Schwab said Tuesday's offer would require the U.S. Congress to rewrite new farm legislation. President George W. Bush vetoed a 2008 law that boosts subsidies but was overridden by Congress.

Tom Harkin, head of the Senate's Agriculture Committee welcomed the U.S. move, saying in a statement it showed the United States was ready to negotiate in good faith and complete the round but other countries now had to make concessions too.

Stressing the value of the new offer, Schwab said U.S. trade-distorting support was $18.9 billion in 2005 and close to $25 billion in both 1999 and 2000, before the food price surge.

But the move failed to impress some WTO players key to the complex trade-offs needed this week to prevent the Doha round being put on hold, possibly for a couple of years.

Supporters of a WTO deal say it could send a morale-boosting signal to the slowing global economy.

OFFER FAILS INDIA'S "LAUGH TEST"

"My immediate response is it doesn't pass the 'laugh test'," a senior Indian official told Reuters.

Brazil said it wanted deeper cuts. "This is only the second day of the talks here, so we imagine there is room for maneuver to reduce them further," a Brazilian diplomat said.

Brazil and India are key to the negotiations because the United States and the European Union want big developing economies to open up their markets in industrial goods as well as farm products in return for their agriculture reforms.

The EU said the U.S. offer was reasonable but could go deeper depending on how this week's trade talks progress.

After around 30 ministers met to discuss the U.S. proposal and other areas of the talks, European trade chief Peter Mandelson said the emphasis was shifting to industrial goods where "there is a lot of disagreement, a lot of heat but where we have to find an outcome in order to get a deal."

Costa Rican Trade Minister Marco Vinicio Ruiz said ministers would split into small groups on Wednesday to try to find a breakthrough. Senior trade officials said the talks were likely to overshoot their original end date of Saturday.

Proposals by a WTO mediator proposed capping U.S. spending on farm subsidies at between $13 billion and $16.4 billion.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

Trade powers struggle to save WTO round

from the Financial Express

Wealthy nations are under pressure to cut tariffs, but many still want to keep tariffs in place for most products. It could be the undoing of trade negotiations going on now. - Kale

The United States, the European Union and emerging economic heavyweights will try again on Tuesday to line up the long-elusive trade-offs needed to save a deal to dismantle export barriers around the world.

The United States resisted calls on Monday to announce a cut in its ceiling for farm subsidies as a critical week of talks opened, saying it was ready to act as long as others do likewise, especially developing economies like Brazil and China.

The World Trade Organisation's Doha round of negotiations risks years of further delay without a breakthrough this week.

But some top trade officials doubted that would be possible, given the range of issues to be resolved and the fundamental differences that still separate rich and poor countries.

"I have to say that after today's meeting I am less optimistic than before," said Egyptian Trade Minister Rachid Mohamed Rachid after WTO chief Pascal Lamy summoned more than 30 ministers to spell out what they can do to secure a deal.

He said more talks might have to be scheduled in the coming two weeks, before Europe shuts down for the summer.

After that, the US presidential election campaign is likely to put the Doha round on ice and it could be a year or two before it can be revived, officials say, dashing hopes for a rare piece of good news for the slowing global economy.

The round was launched shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States to bolster the global economy and offer a chance to poor countries to export more and fight poverty.

But the negotiations remain bogged down, largely because many poor countries insist their rich counterparts must bear the brunt of the concessions by scaling back farm protections while Brussels and Washington are leaning increasingly on big emerging nations to open up their economies.

TRADE NOW, CLIMATE TOMORROW?

The battle at the WTO is seen by many as a test of how other global deals can be done, notably next year on climate change, given the shifting balance of power as new heavyweights such as India and China grow in confidence.

Many ministers in Geneva will be seeking a lead from the United States on Tuesday when it will again come under pressure to say how far it will lower its ceiling on farm subsidies.

"I'm sure it will come tomorrow...Otherwise it will be difficult to move a bit forward," said European Agriculture Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel.

But US trade chief Susan Schwab said Washington would not be rushing into playing its key card in the negotiations without signs that the big emerging economies were ready to move too.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

Oxfam slams 'breathtaking hypocrisy' of WTO stances

from Reuters Africa

Oxfam is speaking out on the global trade talks. They make issue with the lack of progress, and the proposal that don't give enough support to poorer farmers. - Kale

By Laura MacInnis

GENEVA, The suggestion by top U.S. and EU trade officials that emerging economies need to make big concessions mean there is little hope of reaching a global trade deal this week, the head of Oxfam International said on Monday.

Statements from U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab and EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson saying such concessions were needed to forge a World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreement, were "outrageous", Jeremy Hobbs said.

The aid advocacy group's executive director said the food and fuel price crisis, combined with looming economic trouble, had created hardship in poor countries and made it unreasonable to expect them to give even more at the WTO.

"The hypocrisy is breathtaking and Oxfam is skeptical a deal is possible in that context," he told journalists in Geneva. "It is extremely important that people do not get away with spinning this as 'the developing countries are blocking.'"

The WTO's Doha round was launched in 2001 with the stated aim of helping fight poverty and spur economic development by enabling poor-country producers to sell more of their wares abroad.

But the multilateral negotiations -- which require consensus among all 152 WTO member governments -- have struggled to overcome many countries' resistance to exposing sensitive industries to more foreign competition.

On the first day of a high-stakes negotiating push among ministers in Geneva, rich and poor nations turned the spotlight on each other over who should move first, and by how much.

Anti-poverty activists and development campaigners said they were concerned that Brazil, India and other emerging countries would be squeezed in the talks chaired by WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy, which include about 30 ministers representing a range of interests in the Doha talks.

Nathan Irumba, Uganda's ambassador to the WTO from 1996 to 2004, said he was concerned that developing-country parties to those exclusive, closed-door talks would be pressured to accept proposals that would hurt poorer countries.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

WTO deal among keys for food security - UK government

from Reuters


Even prosperous countries are growing more food due to food secuirity concerns. As this Reuters article explains, the British government has a new report on ways to tackle the global food crisis. - Kale

By Nigel Hunt

LONDON - More fertiliser in Africa, a global trade pact and maybe even genetically modified crops could help tackle global food security as rising prices drive millions into poverty, Britain's farm ministry said on Thursday.

Britons are increasingly growing their own food as prices rise and fears mount about future supplies, the ministry said in a report launching a debate on food security.

"High energy prices, poor harvests, rising demand from a growing population, use of biofuels and export bans have all pushed up prices and ... have sparked riots and instability in a number of countries around the world," the report said.

"The effects of these price increases are pushing millions of people in developing countries further into poverty and hunger," it added.

The ministry said global stability depended on there being enough food in the world to feed everyone and for it to be distributed in a way that was fair to all, criticising farm subsidies in the European Union and the United States.

"EU and U.S. tariffs and subsidies hinder the development of the agricultural sector in poorer economies," the report said, adding a world trade pact could lift millions out of poverty.

"They offer unfair incentives to farmers in developed countries to produce food, they deny poorer countries access to markets through protecting tariff barriers and they undermine local production in poorer countries."

Trade ministers from around the world are due to meet at the World Trade Organisation from next Monday as they seek to make a breakthough in the Doha round of negotiations.

The report said average the tariff on non-agricultural goods was 4 percent but tariffs of 70 percent were not uncommon for commodities such as sugar and beef under the European Union's Common Agricultural Policy.

AFRICAN FERTILISER

It said increasing productivity in developing countries would require more fertiliser. Fertiliser use in Africa was the world's lowest at 8 kg per hectare, against 311 kg in Britain.

Genetically modified (GM) crops could also have a role in helping meet future demand for food.

"It is possible that GM crops may be able to make an important contribution to improving crop yields and resilience. We need to see how the technology develops but we must not compromise safety or harm the environment," the report said.

The ministry said there was some evidence that growing demand for biofuels had contributed to rising food prices although the extent of the contribution was unclear.

Britain now produces 60 percent of its food, down from about 80 percent in the mid-1980s when output was boosted by European Union subsidies and trade barriers.

Link to full article. May expire in future.

Click here to read more.

Doha Talks Can Send Signals to Stem Food Prices, Schwab Says

from Bloomberg

By Naila Firdausi

A successful global agreement among members of the World Trade Organization would ``send positive signals'' that might help stem increases in food prices, U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab said.

WTO negotiators are in the seventh year of talks on an accord to trim farm aid, cut tariffs and lower industrial trade barriers to buoy the global economy and ease poverty. Efforts to reach an agreement this year come as prices of food, including rice and wheat, soar to records.

``Only by letting comparative advantage operate do you have the opportunity to really bring supply and demand back to a better balance,'' Schwab said in an interview today in Nusa Dua, Indonesia.

The price of rice, staple for half the world's population, doubled in the past year in Chicago as farmers harvested less of the grain than is being consumed. Wheat prices jumped 69 percent in the period.

Yesterday, the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, or Asean, said they would ``work closely'' with trading partners to reach a global agreement within the WTO framework this year, and to cooperate in rice supplies as some countries, including India and Vietnam, curbed exports.

``Because of high prices of food, it should be easier to cut trade barriers, it should be easier to cut subsidies,'' Schwab said today. ``We're seeing also however efforts by governments to control exports are hurting the round.''

Schwab affirmed the commitment by the U.S. to see a conclusion of talks this year among WTO members, while the world's biggest economy ``acknowledges'' issues regarding its own subsidies to its farmers.

Click here to read more.

‘India will not trade farmers’ interests for Doha deal’

from The Daily Times

NEW DELHI: India will not sacrifice the interests of its millions of subsistence farmers to clinch a deal in global trade talks, the country’s trade minister warned.

Trade Minister Kamal Nath’s strong stand came after the head of the World Trade Organisation Pascal Lamy declared late last week he hoped to finally secure an agreement in the Doha round of international trade negotiations by the end of 2008 — four years later than initially scheduled.

While admitting that the United States, a key player in the talks, has “sensitivities” in agriculture, Nath said, “We in India also have sensitivities of 650 million subsistence farmers” and will safeguard their interests at all cost.

“We cannot have a subsidised market access which destabilises our farmers,” Nath told 750 delegates of the India Economic Summit organised by the World Economic Forum in the Indian capital late on Sunday.

“We cannot negotiate subsistence” in the Doha development round — billed as a once-in-a-generation chance to raise the standard of living of millions of poor people.

“We have already told the United States that if they commit on lowering their (agricultural) subsidies by just one dollar ... the deal is acceptable to us,” he said. “But I have not got any response so far,” said Nath, a vociferous critic of what he says are efforts by the United States and other developed countries to perpetuate distortions in the trade talks.

The United States says it has made concessions on its trade-distorting farm subsidies and that tougher demands could torpedo a deal but developing nations say the US moves are not enough.

Developing and emerging nations are seeking cuts in farm subsidies and on import tariffs for farm produce, particularly by the United States, while rich countries want more access to markets in poorer economies for industrial goods.

Agriculture comprises around eight percent of total global exports but it is crucial to unblocking the Doha round aimed at boosting the world economy and allowing poor countries to use trade as an exit from poverty.

India also needs a deal that will ensure its “small and infant industries” do not have to face competition from cheap goods in industrialised countries.

A rule-based multilateral trading system is as key to India as it is to the United States and the European Union and in fact, “we need it more than any other stronger player,” Nath said.

“A multilateral rule-based system is here to stay. Bilateral agreements are only building blocks and they can not replace the multilateral system.”

Nath said he was “optimistic we will conclude” a new global pact but set no timeframe. However, he said trade distortions must be resolved as the round was not about perpetuating an uneven playing field.

India had unilaterally reduced its tariffs substantially over the last few years to “10 percent and lower” but developed nations want India to make cuts above what it has already made, he added.

The 151 WTO members have been deadlocked since the Doha Development Round was first launched in 2001.

Click here to read more.

IMF, World Bank urge courage to achieve Doha deal

from Yahoo News

GENEVA (Reuters) - The heads of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) said on Tuesday a quick conclusion to the long-running Doha trade talks was essential to help poor countries grow out of poverty.

World Bank President Robert Zoellick said rich and poor countries had made considerable progress in negotiations since the start of the trade talks, which he helped launch six years ago in the Qatari capital as U.S. trade representative.

"You have the elements of an excellent deal on the table. With political will -- and a little courage -- you have a package here that would be a lasting improvement for the trading system," he told a WTO conference on aid for trade.

IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said export-orientated policies were necessary for growth although a stable macro-economic framework, where the Fund could help developing countries, was also essential.

"The prompt conclusion of the Doha Round is one of the conditions that will make it possible for all of us to take advantage of the growth opportunities in front of us," he said.

The much-stalled Doha talks picked up momentum in September.

Trade diplomats and officials believe the chairmen of the agriculture and industrial talks will now not issue revised negotiating texts -- the foundations for any deal -- until early next year.

But the apparent lack of progress is belied by intense backroom talks on the key farming sector, with rich and poor countries asking for more time to crunch the numbers because a deal may be within grasp.

Zoellick said the agriculture reforms from a Doha deal, both in terms of cutting trade-distorting subsidies and opening up markets by cutting tariffs, could be historic.

"The cuts in barriers in goods will offer benefits throughout the global economy for years to come, in ways you can only partially perceive today," he said.

"Given the changing nature of global production and farming, developing countries could be major beneficiaries."

The conference is being organised by the WTO to help developing countries improve their trade capacity, prioritise projects that will help trade and ensure trade is embedded in their development strategies.

Zoellick said the World Bank was expanding its own work on trade to support this effort.

In trade finance the bank plans to nearly double its volumes under the programme helping small and medium-sized exporters in developing countries to $2 billion, from an expected $1.3 billion this year supporting about $1.9 billion in trade flows.

The number of banks in this programme will also double to 260, he said.

Click here to read more.

EU Trade Chief Says Talks in Jeopardy

from Yahoo Business

EU Trade Chief Says Dispute Over Industrial Goods Could Sink Global Trade Deal

BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) -- India, Brazil, South Africa and other emerging economic powers were put under pressure by European Union trade chief Peter Mandelson on Monday to compromise on opening up their manufacturing markets in world trade talks.

The EU's trade commissioner said the countries were risking a failure of ongoing negotiations at the World Trade Organization in Geneva.

"On industrial tariffs, the negotiation is now in danger of going wrong," Mandelson told lawmakers at the European Parliament. "Emerging countries have to exercise responsibility commensurate with their importance and relative strength compared to the poorest. To some extent, they now hold the key to a conclusion of the talks."

A large group of developing nations, which also include Argentina, Indonesia, the Philippines and Venezuela said last month they were seeking new exceptions for the manufacturing products that make up the vast majority of goods traded internationally.

Mandelson said such a position would put them in a position where they "will end up making next to no contribution to new trade flows" in the new trade round.

"That is simply not acceptable," Mandelson said. "Not just for the EU, but because this would negate any gains" for trade between poor nations.

He added that demands made to the emerging economic powers "are modest and proportionate" in cutting industrial tariffs under current trade proposals.

The United States has also criticized Brazil and others for refusing to open up their manufacturing markets, warning that could spell failure of the six-year WTO round to liberalize world commerce.

In September, the US said it would accept a WTO proposal to limit its trade-distorting farm subsidies to a range between $13 billion and US$16.4 billion if emerging economies do more to free up trade in manufacturing goods.

The global trade talks known as the Doha round aim to add billions of dollars to the world economy and lift millions of people out of poverty through free trade. But they have repeatedly stalled since their inception in Qatar's capital in 2001, largely because of wrangling between rich and poor nations over eliminating barriers to farm trade and, more recently, manufacturing trade.

Click here to read more.

WTO trade talks slanted against poor nations: Brazil

from the Khaleej Times

GENEVA - The long-running Doha round of trade talks cannot succeed unless developing countries get a fair deal reflecting their needs, Brazil’s Foreign Minister Celso Amorim said on Wednesday.

Amorim told a news conference that the talks were still slanted too much in favour of rich countries.

‘I can’t come to a place in which everyone’s sensitivity is taken into account and my own sensitivity is not taken into account,’ he said. ‘That’s not fair and one thing that we’ll be demanding is fairness.’

The Doha round has made faltering progress on the complex and technical rules governing world trade. But the key outlines of any deal are clear.

The United States would cut its trade-distorting farm subsidies and the European Union would cut its farm tariffs, both creating more opportunities for developing countries on the global market for agricultural produce.

In return developing nations would cut tariffs on industrial goods to open their markets to companies from rich countries.
Big gains

As an emerging agricultural superpower, Brazil stands to be one of the big gainers of the Doha round, launched six years ago to free up world trade and help developing countries export their way out of poverty.

But Amorim said the benefits for developing countries were still not clear in the current negotiations, based on compromise texts issued in July by the chairmen of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) talks in agriculture and industry.

‘With the European Union the way the formulas are being calculated we don’t know what we will get. I know what I won’t get—I won’t get opening because the tariff cuts will still be very limited,’ he said.

If rich countries are allowed to treat only 4 percent of products as sensitive, or reserved for special treatment, that would be enough to exclude almost all the products Brazil is interested in selling, he said.

Rich countries say major developing countries like Brazil are resisting meaningful cuts in their industrial tariffs.

But Amorim said that a deal would involve Brazil cutting many of the actual industrial tariffs it applies, not just the maximum potential levels countries agree to bind in the talks.

‘Even when you take the applied rates ... we are offering more in NAMA than the rich countries are offering in terms of trade creation as a proportion of our total trade,’ he said, referring to industry by the WTO term Non-Agricultural Market Access.

Amorim was speaking after meeting the WTO ambassadors of the Group of 20 (G-20) developing countries, which groups major players like China, India and South Africa as well as Brazil.

Brazil has invited G-20 ministers to meet in Geneva on Nov. 15. Amorim said he hoped this would ensure their voice was heard in the revised texts that the WTO negotiating chairmen are issuing in the middle of next month.

Click here to read more.

Nations must save WTO round: US

from Bathurst

A long-delayed global free trade deal can still be done but countries such as Japan, Brazil and China must show flexibility or risk being blamed for failure, the top US negotiator said.

"A successful agreement in the Doha round is within reach," US Trade Representative Susan Schwab wrote in a comment piece published in the Financial Times.

"But it could slip through our fingers unless a handful of major developed and developing countries demonstrate their willingness to confront difficult choices."

The World Trade Organisation launched the Doha round of free trade talks in 2001, hoping to give the world economy a boost and help poor nations ease poverty through more exports.

But the talks now risk several years of further delays if there is no breakthrough soon.

Schwab said the United States had shown flexibility by agreeing to negotiate within a range for cutting US farm subsidies drawn up by a WTO mediator, and the European Union, Singapore, Chile, Mexico and others had "stepped up" also.

"Lamentably, most of the other leading members have yet to state their intentions," she said.

"Even worse, some have signalled an unwillingness to negotiate within the texts' ranges or a desire to nullify market-opening commitments through loopholes."

Schwab said Japan, Switzerland and other rich nations which shield their farmers must now show they can negotiate within the ranges spelt out by the WTO mediator.

Developing economies such as Brazil, China, India, Argentina and South Africa must do the same on cutting farm and industrial tariffs, she said, adding "anything short of this commitment should turn the spotlight on any nation risking the round".

Negotiators from the WTO's 151 member countries have been meeting in Geneva in recent weeks in a bid to narrow their differences, possibly paving the way for a ministerial-level meeting in the coming weeks.

Click here to read more.

Trade diplomats intensify talks despite frictions

from Yahoo News

By Jonathan Lynn

GENEVA (Reuters) - Diplomats sought on Monday to overcome the strains in global trade talks with intensified negotiations, but some warned that growing frictions could further delay a deal.

The World Trade Organization's (WTO) 151 members will hear this week an update on progress in agriculture, and the industry talks' chairman Don Stephenson has scheduled meetings to help solve rich-poor tensions that boiled over last week.

Stephenson, Canada's ambassador to the WTO, is set to hold intensive talks with small groups of developing countries to ease their tough stance on manufacturing tariffs that triggered sharp rebukes from the United States and European Union.

The latest tensions may have set back efforts to wrap up the broad outlines of a Doha round accord by the end of this year.

"We are hoping to have the framework for the final stages of negotiation, particularly in agriculture and industrial products, by the end of the year," the U.S. ambassador to the WTO, Peter Allgeier, told Reuters.

Diplomats had previously been talking in terms of narrowing their differences in revised texts for agriculture and industry texts by late October or early November.

Indian Trade Minister Kamal Nath planned to meet WTO chief Pascal Lamy in London late on Monday to discuss India's views on industrial goods as well as the position with U.S. fast-track trade legislation, which lapsed in June.

Lamy, speaking at the London School of Economics, said last week's heated exchanges between developed and developing countries could be a good sign.

"We are in a period where the temperature is high which in many ways is good. I interpret these signals as ... positioning at a time where we may be reaching a crucial point. I take this as a sign that things may be becoming really serious," he said.

DOHA DEVELOPMENT AIMS

Launched nearly six years ago, the WTO's latest free trade round is meant to boost the global economy and help developing countries grow out of poverty by removing barriers to trade. It was first meant to be concluded by January 2005.

To come into effect, negotiators must reach consensus in all areas of the talks, which also include services.

Last week's disagreements turned on the cuts in tariffs that developed and developing countries would make under a compromise proposal issued by Stephenson in July.

A large number of developing countries said the proposed formula required them to make bigger cuts than rich countries, contradicting the development aims of the Doha round.

Others also say that opening their markets to manufacturers from rich countries will keep them from building their own industries, condemning them to be suppliers of food and raw materials to the rich world.

But as the poorest and smallest developing countries would be exempt from all or most of the proposed tariff cuts, some developed powers said such arguments may be exaggerated.

"I'm concerned that they are going to overplay their hand. But maybe many of them have decided that they don't want a deal," one rich-nation diplomat said.

Diplomats now expect the revised texts on industry and agriculture in late November. That may not leave enough time for ministers at a big WTO meeting on aid for trade on November 20 to bed them down into a broader agreement, though a deal could be possible in December.

(Additional reporting by Sujata Rao, Jeremy Gaunt and Adrian Croft in London)

Click here to read more.

Nations must save WTO round: US

from Yahoo

A long-delayed global free trade deal can still be done but countries such as Japan, Brazil and China must show flexibility or risk being blamed for failure, the top US negotiator said.

"A successful agreement in the Doha round is within reach," US Trade Representative Susan Schwab wrote in a comment piece published in the Financial Times.

"But it could slip through our fingers unless a handful of major developed and developing countries demonstrate their willingness to confront difficult choices."

The World Trade Organisation launched the Doha round of free trade talks in 2001, hoping to give the world economy a boost and help poor nations ease poverty through more exports.

But the talks now risk several years of further delays if there is no breakthrough soon.

Schwab said the United States had shown flexibility by agreeing to negotiate within a range for cutting US farm subsidies drawn up by a WTO mediator, and the European Union, Singapore, Chile, Mexico and others had "stepped up" also.

"Lamentably, most of the other leading members have yet to state their intentions," she said.

"Even worse, some have signalled an unwillingness to negotiate within the texts' ranges or a desire to nullify market-opening commitments through loopholes."

Schwab said Japan, Switzerland and other rich nations which shield their farmers must now show they can negotiate within the ranges spelt out by the WTO mediator.

Developing economies such as Brazil, China, India, Argentina and South Africa must do the same on cutting farm and industrial tariffs, she said, adding "anything short of this commitment should turn the spotlight on any nation risking the round".

Negotiators from the WTO's 151 member countries have been meeting in Geneva in recent weeks in a bid to narrow their differences, possibly paving the way for a ministerial-level meeting in the coming weeks.

Click here to read more.