WTO talks collapse in U.S.-India farm row

[Dover]

Source: Reuters

By William Schomberg and Robin Pomeroy

GENEVA (Reuters) - Global trade talks collapsed on Tuesday after a clash over agriculture between the United States and emerging powers, including China, India and Indonesia.

The breakdown came on the ninth day of marathon talks. The United States and India failed to find a compromise on measures intended to help poor countries protect their farmers against import surges, a diplomat said.

"We were so close to getting this done," U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab told reporters at World Trade Organization headquarters in Geneva. Global negotiators have worked on the Doha trade round for seven years.

"The U.S. remains committed to the Doha round. This is not a time to talk about a round collapsing," said Schwab, who looked frustrated. "The U.S. commitments remain on the table, awaiting reciprocal responses."

The collapse also prompted disappointment in other countries that had stood to gain from another round of trade opening.

"It's really bad news. It's sad to have lost so many years of work. For an emerging market, it is worrying to see a WTO that is not strong," said Soraya Rosar, director of international negotiations with Brazil's National Industry Confederation...cont'd

Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSL747098220080729

[SpiralHawk]

1. "We were sooo close to complete corporate takeover. Sigh." - Republicon Homelander Negotiators

"Shock and awe, baby. Through means occult or otherwise, we'll be baaaaaaack. Sneer."

- Republicon Homelander Corporate Apparatchik Negotiators

[RedLetterRev]

5. Bingoski!

I can only surmise that they've finally caught on to the Monsanto, Dow, Sygenta, Cargill, ADM, et al habit of going in and patenting-up indigenous crops and pricing them out of local farmers' hands, then commercializing the mid-sized farmers out of business. Same thing with the water. Same old story, country after country. American mega-corps go in, take the resources away from those who need and use them, then quelle surprise, the already-rich get richer, the middle class gets destroyed and the poor still have the shyte-end of the stick.

India caught on quicker than we are at home, more's the pity for us. Then again, we've got about a 50% idiot-class, willing to throw their rights, Constitution, natural treasures, health and safety away just because some high-paid, high-haired fool on Faux tells them to vote red. Rather than thinking of the consequences (because thinking for one's self is, well, just too haaarrrrd!!!), they'll just vote red and throw everything away.

[Esra Star]

7. How can Susan Schwab say she is disappointed

when the US want to maintain the right to dump subsidised farm product
into third world countries. It's just what they don't need.

[whistle]

2. So much to be stolen, so little time!

[jwirr]

3. WTO is just a one sided organization representing BIG business. nt

[bemildred]

4. "Is Globalization dead?"

:rofl::rofl:

[dipsydoodle]

6. I would think so

and more localised agreements will become the norm.

[Ghost Dog]

8. Hmm. Much one-sided obfuscation in the Reuters piece,

apart from the buried paragraphs:

The final stumbling block, which dominated talks on Monday and Tuesday, concerned the "special safeguard mechanism" -- a proposal to let developing countries raise farm tariffs in the face of a surge in imports or collapse in prices.

Developing countries like India and Indonesia said they needed the measure to protect millions of subsistence farmers from unexpected shocks arising from opening up their borders.

But the United States feared its agribusinesses would lose new markets just as it made painful cuts in its farm subsidies.

Developing country food exporters like Costa Rica and Uruguay said the measure as framed would cut them off from key markets and even reduce existing trade.

More clearly and succinctly stated here:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article4419311.ece

A row has erupted over American ambitions to secure more access to emerging markets for cotton and soya beans, two important American export crops. The opposing sides accused each other of jeopardising progress in the Doha trade talks, which are delicately poised after seven years of negotiations.

...

In response, the Chinese and Indian delegates denied that their position was putting at risk a trade deal and suggested that the US was not offering enough, notably over cotton subsidies. “The extremely high subsidies by the US have caused serious damage to cotton farmers in developing countries, including those in Africa and 150 million in China,” a Chinese official said.

The argument is over the special safeguard mechanism, a system in World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules that allows countries to raise tariffs sharply on certain products when there is an extraordinary surge in imports.

India wants the trigger volume for safeguard measures to be low, arguing that it needs to protect its subsistence farmers from being priced out of their livelihoods. The US insists that it must have better access to the growing Indian and Chinese markets in exchange for any cut in subsidies.

“We believe that the US is not in a position to discuss with developing members on cotton tariffs until they eliminate their cotton subsidies,” the Chinese official said...

[CHIMO]

9. They Can Read

They have seen that the WTO doesn't help one whit when dealing with the US. They have seen the Softwood Lumber dispute.

They are just waiting until they have an equal voice in control.

[Ghost Dog]

10. For more detail on this, and especialy on China's role,

See Daniel Altman's (IHT) blog " China decides to speak up, finally": http://blogs.iht.com/tribtalk/business/globalization/?p=772 including Peter Mandelson, the European Union’s trade commissioner, quoted in the comments.

...Part of the reason they’re angry is that they already went through long, intense negotiations with China to seal the agreements that led to China’s membership, which actually happened several months after the Doha round was launched. In the first year or two of the Doha talks, it would have seemed downright impertinent for China to try, essentially, to renegotiate its membership deals through the new round. But after seven years, China can claim the same right to negotiate as everyone else. And whose fault is it that enough time has passed to put China in this powerful position? Why, the same countries who stonewalled through all those years and now complain that China is standing in the way of a deal. Trade karma!

See also "Balance of power shifts to China at global trade talks": http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/28/business/wto.php

GENEVA: As seven years of global trade talks approach another nervy climax, China is emerging as a central player - and coming under heavy criticism from the United States and others for its tough tactics.

But no one should be surprised to find the Chinese trade minister, Chen Deming, playing hardball. In 2004 Chen studied at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, and he has said privately that he learned all his negotiating skills in the United States.

Now, with the latest trade talks dragging into their second full week, China is fighting hard for last-minute concessions, including the right to shield important farm products from competition and to delay implementing some of its tariff cuts for years.

"What we are seeing is the emergence of a new power pole," said Joe Guinan, a trade expert with the German Marshall Fund, a public policy group. "It is finally being felt at the WTO. They have begun to throw their weight around - and this is a glimpse of the future."

Such a development has, Guinan added "been coming a long time - and it is not going away."...

[NashVegas]

12. Western Elites Were FOOLS To Think China Would Let a Repeat of the Boxers / Opium Wars Happen

It was idiocy to think China would suck very long on whatever tit the West offered it, without eventually turning the tables.

[NashVegas]

11. Fantastic Quote Here

"This deal did not collapse over small technicalities. It was doomed to fail from the start. There is no political support for what is on the table: not from India or France or Argentina or South Africa. Following the same WTO model is impossible now: governments are no longer willing to sacrifice other concerns strictly for the sake of trade. People are on the streets rioting over food and energy prices. The business world is in a state of shock over the financial crisis. These are the problems that governments have to focus on. And the Doha Round cannot help them." - Carin Smaller, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.

[CHIMO]

13. Tariffs: WTO talks collapse after India and China clash with America over farm products

The talks came perilously close to collapse last Friday, but limped into a second week after Lamy tabled a draft agreement and exhorted ministers to keep talking. However, a war of words broke out between America and key developing countries on Monday, and the atmosphere remained sour as ministers reconvened yesterday.

The US objected to the details of a "special safeguard mechanism", designed to protect farmers in the developing world against temporary surges in cut-price imports of cotton and rice.

This safeguard mechanism has long been a key demand of the G33 - a group of countries including Indonesia, India and China, concerned about the livelihoods of their subsistence farmers.

Yesterday morning, trade officials scrambled to draw up a compromise that would satisfy both sides. But America insisted the issue was a matter of principle. "We're committed to not going backwards," a US source said. Schwab has faced fierce political pressure from Capitol Hill to secure fresh markets for America's rust-belt manufacturers.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/30/wto.india

[Ghost Dog]

14. Can anyone say, "unraveling"?

Interesting times...