Tirade By US Rep Kills Trade Talks

[Judi Lynn]

Tirade By US Rep Kills Trade Talks
Updated: 20:07, Monday July 24, 2006

The latest attempt to break the deadlock in world trade talks has collapsed after the US launched a bitter attack on its partners over farm subsidies.

No more discussions are planned after the meeting "imploded" on Sunday night, according to a World Trade Organisation official.

Trade negotiators from the "G6" group of nations - America, the EU, Japan, India, Brazil and Australia - had gathered in Geneva for a day of talks which were said initially to be making progress.

But the outburst from US trade negotiator Susan Schwab put paid to that.

She made clear Washington was giving no more ground on lower farm subsidies, and attacked the EU, India and Japan for not doing enough.
(snip/...)

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,70131-13534392,00.html?f=rss

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

US envoy slams WTO 'inflexibility'
From correspondents in Paris
July 25, 2006

US Trade Representative Susan Schwab blamed World Trade Organisation partners today for refusing to open their markets and provoking a major crisis in negotiations to free up global trade.
"We're obviously very disappointed," Ms Schwab told a news conference after talks between six leading members of the WTO had broken down.

"Unfortunately, the promises of flexibility on market access coming from (a G8 summit in) Saint Petersburg did not materialise in Geneva."

Six WTO members, Australia, Brazil, the European Union, India, Japan and the United States failed to agree on how to unblock global trade talks, with all sides pointing the finger at each other.
(snip/...)

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,19904182-31037,00.html

[Totally Committed]

1. It's Official: The Entire U.S. Government has Gone NUTS...

Unbelieveable.

TC

[goforit]

13. And boy oh boy, have they've earned it!

[ShockediSay]

2. One more gem of diplomacy from the gang that brought you the

war in Iraq, and maybe if we wait long enough, WWIII.

[harun]

20. Worst foreign policy in history of the U.S.

The current administration has not accomplished one foreign policy goal. Unless of course causing a world disaster and everyone to hate the United States is a "goal". In that they are doing quite well.

[ShockediSay]

21. Welcome aboard!

http://ksgnotes1.harvard.edu/Research/wpaper.nsf/rwp/RWP06-011

FYI

[no_hypocrisy]

3. "Compromise means doing it our way!" n/t

[leveymg]

4. And she was one of the better qualified ones

If Susan Schwab is losing it after only four months on the job, the whole outfit's gotta be in chaos. Susan Schwab's Official bio:

http://www.ustr.gov/Who_We_Are/Bios/Ambassador_Susan_C_Schwab.html
Ambassador Susan C. Schwab
06/09/2006

United States Trade Representative

Ambassador Susan C. Schwab was nominated to be United States Trade Representative by President George W. Bush on April 18, 2006, and was confirmed as USTR by the United States Senate on June 8, 2006. As USTR, Ambassador Schwab is a member of the President's Cabinet and serves as the President’s principal trade advisor, negotiator, and spokesperson on trade issues.

Prior to her appointment as USTR, Ambassador Schwab served as Deputy USTR with a portfolio overseeing U.S. trade relations with Europe and Eurasia, the Middle East, and the Americas. In addition she is responsible for USTR operations involving the WTO and multilateral affairs; services and investment; intellectual property; industry, market access and telecommunications; and intergovernmental affairs and public liaison activities. Since her arrival at USTR, Ambassador Schwab has been actively engaged in the development of U.S. strategy in the Doha Round multilateral trade negotiations, and successfully concluded bilateral free trade agreements with Peru and Colombia.

Ambassador Schwab served as Dean of the University of Maryland School of Public Policy from 1995 through 2003. Immediately before joining the Administration, she held the position of President and CEO of the University System of Maryland (USM) Foundation and USM Vice Chancellor for Advancement. Schwab came to the University of Maryland from Motorola, Inc., where she served as Director of Corporate Business Development, and where she was engaged in strategic planning and negotiation on behalf of the company in China and elsewhere in Asia. Prior to that appointment she was Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Director General of the U.S. & Foreign Commercial Service during the Administration of George H.W. Bush.

Schwab spent most of the 1980s as a trade policy specialist and then legislative director for Senator John C. Danforth (R-Mo.), playing a major role in numerous U.S. trade policy initiatives, including landmark trade legislation that Congress enacted in 1984 and 1988. Previously, Schwab served as a Trade Policy Officer in the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo. Her first job was as an agricultural trade negotiator in the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

Ambassador Schwab is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and a Fellow of the National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA). She previously served on the Board of Visitors of the U.S. Air Force Academy, Board of Trustees of the Council for Excellence in Government and the National Selection Committee for the Innovations in American Government Awards program. She holds a B.A. in Political Economy from Williams College, a Masters in Development Policy from Stanford University, and a Ph.D. in Public Administration and International Business from The George Washington University.

Ambassador Schwab has published articles and a book on U.S. trade policy and legislation (“Trade-Offs: Negotiating the Omnibus Trade Act,” Harvard Business School Press, 1994), as well as articles on U.S.–Japan trade relations, trade politics, and public policy education.

In addition to the time she has spent working overseas, Ambassador Schwab is the product of a Foreign Service family and grew up in Africa, Europe and Asia. She currently resides in Annapolis, Maryland.

[The Blue Flower]

5. Why would any of our 'partners' cooperate with us?

How could anyone doubt that this government has destroyed every last shred of comity with the world community?

[jwirr]

6. My guess is that those other countries are trying to save their

own agricultural base. If they open trade their own farmers will not be able to compete and they will go out of business. When that happens food prices rise and more people starve.

[krkaufman]

7. Apparently a graduate of the John Bolton Academy. n/t

[Sherman A1]

10. and charm school

[BrotherBuzz]

14. I may be wrong, but I think the charm school is run by Karen Hughes

;)

[warrens]

8. It's almost certainly dead now

With Bush's fast-track authorization running out next July, it will be almost impossible to salvage this unless they get an agreement in the next couple of weeks. After a "tirade," it's not likely to happen.

The EU really couldn't compromise any more anyway. Farmers are very powerful here, but they're much moreso in Europe, and they weren't going to let cheap imports of key crops in no matter what the other advantages are. And it was unlikely that Congress would ratify the agreement if we gutted farm subsidies; some of those billionaires have a lot of clout. They're the ones behind the "death tax" crap and so on, and they get paid a TON of money not to grow anything. They weren't about to give that up without a fight.

[cliss]

9. Here's what's really going on.

It will put Ms. Schwab's tirade in perspective.

The US is losing in negotiations. This is happening all over the world. There was an article on this topic about 6 months ago on Counter Punch. The author is apparently someone who goes to these trade negotiations, strategy meetings and so on.

He said that something odd was going on. The US was losing. Massively. In meeting after negotiation after summit, the US was given its walking papers, or the plans collapsed before they even started. This is serious stuff: the US is losing out on deals, and other countries are making plans, sweetheart deals are being made. This is why Schwab was probably feeling desperate, unable to get any results.

WE ARE BEING LEFT OUT IN THE COLD>

Why? It's a variety of reasons. Empire, we are so god-damned bad at negotiating, it's 100% me and 0% you, that kind of thing.

BEWARE as the Empire sways back and forth....

[jimshoes]

11. So other countries are telling the US

to go piss up a rope. I'm not surprised at all. It appears we're not the power we once were.

[cliss]

16. Yes, that's exactly what is happening right now.

Just the fact that Ms. Schwab is acting like this is a clear indication. When you yell or go into a tirade, you are NOT at the top of your game. You have entered a level of desperation, you simply don't have many options left.

It's NEVER a sign of strength to behave like this.

And of course, your tirade will get you absolutely nowhere with these people.

I myself am involved with exporting. We export US-made products to other countries. You would not believe the comments I hear. The hostility is just amazing. I just patiently talk to them..... but there is no doubt, we are facing an uphill battle....

[bemildred]

12. Iraq, the gift that keeps on giving. nt

[donco6]

15. Yes.

I've observed the same thing. We used to be an integral part of ANY trade partnership, and more and more we're being asked to participate, then dropped after some diplomatic bungle at the negotiations table. It seems all of our negotiators are from the "my way or the highway" school of debate. No one is amused.

[anotherdrew]

17. good! we've earned it. the US must suffer for what it's done

One day people will realise they have no one to blame but the republican party and all the fools who have enabled and empowered them. Then there is going to come a rackoning that will come knocking on a lot of doors.

[RDANGELO]

18. What Schwab doesn't understand

What Schwab doesn't have a clue about is that these other countries are looking out for their people, while she is looking out for U.S. corporations.

[Judi Lynn]

19. US blamed abroad for WTO collapse

US blamed abroad for WTO collapse
25 July 2006

WASHINGTON: The Bush administration faced blame from US trading partners today for the collapse of world trade negotiations, but won praise at home for holding firm in the talks.

European Union Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson accused the United States of "stone-walling" by refusing to offer deeper cuts in US trade-distorting domestic farm subsidies, which now total about $US20 billion ($NZ32.2 billion) annually.

"Surely the richest and strongest nation in the world, with the highest standards of living, can afford to give as well as take," Mandelson said.
(snip)

The impasse, after nearly five years of negotiation, prompted a decision to "suspend" the talks, increasing the chance a final deal will never be reached.
(snip/...)

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3743419a12,00.html

[xchrom]

22. bushco continues to drive the economic bus over the cliff.

[Vidar]

23. Diplomacy by temper tantrum.

[OKNancy]

24. kick

[TriSec]

25. G6 talks collapse

http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-07-24T093526Z_01_L23881357_RTRUKOC_0_UK-TRADE-TALKS.xml">G6 talks collapse

GENEVA (Reuters) - Talks by major trade powers to save the World Trade Organisation's Doha Round collapsed on Monday, leaving the future of negotiations on a global free trade deal in doubt.

A well-placed trade diplomat said: "The G6 talks have collapsed. It's not immediately evident what options are available other than suspension (of the Doha Round)."

WTO Director General Pascal Lamy told ministers from the six trade powers late on Sunday he would halt the Doha Development Agenda -- launched in 2001 to ease poverty and boost the global economy -- without a quick end to the deadlock, diplomats said earlier.

"Lamy said that if there was no breakthrough he would propose to suspend the DDA (Doha Development Agenda round)," one of the diplomats said, adding Lamy's announcement could come as early as Monday morning.

The ministers from the G6 group -- Australia, Brazil, India, Japan, the European Union and the United States -- failed to make a breakthrough at a 14-hour negotiating session on Sunday and had been due to resume talks on Monday.

[DELUSIONAL]

26. Well some good news

This world Trade Organization stuff is wrong . . .

This give all power to the corporations -- I don't see the average/ordinary -- people like us benefiting at all.

[Robbien]

27. I am so glad the developing countries

didn't let the US/UK steamroll over them. This is great news.

[Judi Lynn]

28. WTO global trade talks collapse

WTO global trade talks collapse
Monday, July 24, 2006; Posted: 7:12 a.m. EDT (11:12 GMT)

GENEVA, Switzerland (Reuters) -- A global deal to free trade was in doubt on Monday after talks by major trade powers to save the World Trade Organization's Doha Round collapsed.

Ministers from the so-called G6 -- the United States, the European Union, Australia, Brazil, India and Japan -- had made a last ditch bid to overcome differences on reforming world farm trade, which lies at the heart of the round.

"The WTO negotiations are suspended," Indian Commerce and Industry Minister Kamal Nath told journalists. When asked how long the suspension could last, he replied: "Anywhere from months to years," he said.

WTO Director General Pascal Lamy told the G6 late on Sunday he would halt the Doha Development Agenda -- launched in 2001 to ease poverty and boost the global economy -- without a quick end to the deadlock, diplomats said earlier.
(snip/...)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/BUSINESS/07/24/wto.talks.reut/index.html

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,564908,00.jpg

[IndianaGreen]

29. Those are creepy pictures of Bush and Merkel

As to WTO, good riddance!

[Buns_of_Fire]

33. The look... Of love... Is in... His eyes...

http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,564908,00.jpg
Condi's gonna have a FIT!!!

[FILAM23]

36. Good news

Now if the UN, IMF, NAFTA and other institutions that strip away
a countries soverign rights would also disappear then the world
would be a better place.

[5X]

30. Link needs editing. n/t

[muriel_volestrangler]

31. Corrected link - and why do people think this is such great news?

Wroking link for the Reuters article: http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-07-24T093526Z_01_L23881357_RTRUKOC_0_UK-TRADE-TALKS.xml

From the Reuters article:

But Sunday's negotiations failed to make progress in the key area of farm subsidies, known as domestic support, where the United States is under pressure to make further concessions.

"There was no movement at all on domestic support. We will meet again tomorrow (Monday) to see if things have changed overnight, whether new ideas have popped up," European Union Agriculture Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel said on Sunday.

The United States had no immediate comment. Washington has been insisting that the EU and other WTO members that it calls "protectionist" go further in agreeing to lowering farm tariff barriers before it moves further on subsidies.

From The Guardian article on it:

Aid groups criticised both the US and the EU.

Aftab Alam Khan, the head of ActionAid's trade justice campaign, said: "The US refusal to move has been a fatal blow for these talks, while the self-interest displayed by the EU and US during these negotiations puts the blame for this collapse squarely at their doors. But this need not be a disaster for the world's poor - there is now an historic opportunity for much needed reform of the World Trade Organisation."
...
For their part, the developing countries refused to cut manufacturing tariffs until the industrialised states cut their farm subsidies.

The Brazilian foreign minister, Celso Amorim, expressed his disappointment and concern, saying there was always a risk of some unravelling of the progress achieved so far. "The silver lining is that all those who spoke continue to be committed," he said.

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1827825,00.html

This isn't a victory for developing countries - it's the EU and USA managing to preserve the status quo, under which their farmers get huge subsidies. I wish people here on DU would stop thinking that the current situation is somehow good for the poor of the world. We need some way of getting the trade situation easier for developing countries - and the WTO is more likely to do that than the World Bank, IMF or Security Council.

[On the Road]

32. Thank You, I Was Going to Ask What the Issues Are

Free-trade is a two-way street. The logic of the market is for US companies to cede much of their agriculture to the third world, and they don't want it to happen. All well and good, if but you have that philosophy, you can't legimitately practice protectionism. It was the same with NAFTA -- Mexico was opened up to US goods, but when Mexican tomatoes undercut Florida tomatoes, the US screamed and put controls on it.

[Xithras]

34. I personally couldn't care about the poor third world farmers.

The position of the people who want to eliminate the subsidies is that it's OK to harm the American farmer if it benefits the poor third world farmer. Sorry, I don't buy it. Contrary to common belief, a huge number of the farms in the US are still owned by families, not mindless corporate conglomerates. By eliminating the subsidies, you force American farmers, who work American land and use American processors, and who have to pay American bills, to compete with imported food that is produced at a fraction of the cost. Just as the manufacturing and technology industries have learned, it's very difficult to compete with someone who can do the same job for 10% of the cost. Competition isn't even an issue for many American farmers...there is NO way to produce a product that can compete with third world agriculture and still meet stringent American safety and environmental protection laws.

The choice here is simple. Do I support my neighbor (I live in an agricultural area where 1 out of 4 jobs is tied to ag, and half the local economy is dependent on agricultural income), or do I support some farmer on the other side of the world? I'll support my neighbor.

BTW, some of the side effects of eliminated subsidies will be more environmental destruction and urban sprawl. When the land is no longer profitable for agriculture, it will lose its value for everything except development. Housing developers will be able to buy and convert ag land for signifigantly wider profit margins than they achieve today, because ag land values will crash. No environmentalist should ever support free trade.

[Robbien]

35. The reason why is it good is not about farm subsidies

which is the only issue the media keeps prattling on about. The main issue is that the US/UK is requiring developing countries to open up their natural resources and infrastructure to privatization. The developing countries want privatization taken off the table and are willing to negotiate on farm subsidies. The US/UK will not budge on privatization.

That is the issue not being reported in the media and is the main reason I feel this is a bad trade agreement.