|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Jul24/09) Geneva, 9 Jul (D. Ravi Kanth) — Many developing countries, including India, Indonesia, as well as several developing country coalitions, on 5 July rallied behind the African Group’s draft text on agriculture at the World Trade Organization, in an apparent setback to Brazil’s informal process over its own proposal, said people familiar with the development. In contrast, major developed countries like the United States and the European Union, the Cairns Group of farm- exporting countries, and even China threw their weight behind Brazil’s proposal, with the US having raised a “red flag” over the African Group proposal, said people familiar with the development. A large number of developing countries – the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group, the Cotton-4 countries (Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, and Mali), the G33 developing country coalition, and India – expressed full support for the African Group’s proposal to achieve “meaningful and concrete” outcomes at the WTO’s 14th ministerial conference (MC14), scheduled to be held in Cameroon in 2026. Many developing countries had opposed Brazil’s informal process on grounds that it could undermine the established and mandated institutional structures at the WTO, said people familiar with the discussions. The US appears to have raised a “red flag” against the draft text on agriculture (JOB/AG/260) submitted by the African Group at the Doha negotiating body on agriculture on 5 July, stating that it represents a “rolling back from the high degree of convergence” achieved on the Chair’s negotiating text. At a meeting of the Doha negotiating body on agriculture, also referred to as the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session (COASS), the US seems to have urged the African Group to exercise “restraint” from repeating its “extreme” positions and to “restore the balance of the text”, said people familiar with the development. The US extended its support to Brazil’s proposal, which is being pursued in the ongoing informal meetings, even though many countries distanced themselves from the Brazilian process on grounds that it could undermine the established institutional structures at the WTO, said people familiar with the development. China, as well as the EU, seem to have expressed mixed concerns about the African Group’s proposal. China seems to have welcomed the priority issues highlighted in the African Group proposal but cautioned against insisting on a roadmap that pushes for a sequencing of the mandated issues. At the WTO’s 13th ministerial conference (MC13) that concluded in Abu Dhabi on 2 March, China supported the final draft text. Several South American countries, including members of the Cairns Group of farm-exporting countries, as well as China and the EU have so far not opposed Brazil’s informal process, said people familiar with the discussions. Following a “green room” meeting convened by the WTO’s Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, on 4 July, apparently between Brazil and some members of the African Group, Brazil said it is ready to immediately engage with the African Group to “incorporate the key elements” of the latter’s new submission into a Brazil- proposed roadmap for the talks. The new African Group proposal comes two months after Brazil spearheaded an informal process aimed at garnering support for a roadmap on agriculture to be adopted at the General Council meeting on 22-23 July. The African Group’s draft text on agriculture remains in square brackets. The preamble to the draft text emphasizes “the critical role that a rules-based, non-discriminatory, open, fair, inclusive, equitable and transparent multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core can play in addressing contemporary challenges faced by the food and agricultural systems including climate change and its impacts.” The African Group expressed deep concern that “the share of people facing chronic hunger in the world was more than 9% and moderate or severe food insecurity in the world was around 29% of the global population, concentrated predominantly in developing countries, including least developed countries (LDCs), as recently estimated by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.” The African Group underscored the need for “policy space” to make progress towards the achievement of a fair, equitable and market-oriented agricultural trading system, ending hunger, achieving food security and improved nutrition, promoting sustainable agriculture and food systems, in an equitable manner, and promoting the adoption of resilient agricultural practices. It said such progress can lead to the “fulfilment of Sustainable Development Goal 2 of the United Nations, taking into account the interests of small-scale food and agriculture producers in developing countries.” The 45-member group reiterated its “commitment to take concrete steps to promote domestic production, facilitate trade and improve the functioning and long-term resilience of global markets for food and agriculture, with a view to achieving equitable rules that enhance global food security and ensuring that the agriculture sector has the policy tools to contribute towards addressing contemporary sustainability challenges.” It expressed concern over the lack of progress “on most agriculture negotiating issues to date and recognizing that much work remains to be done especially in areas where mandates are overdue to successfully conclude the negotiations.” Against this backdrop, the African Group called on other members to “commit to continue the agriculture negotiations in accordance with the reform objective of Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) and subsequent Ministerial and other Decisions on agriculture, in particular building on the progress made under the current Doha Round of negotiations.” It reminded the major developed countries, including the United States, the European Union, and the Group of Ten (G10) farm-defensive countries led by Switzerland, Norway, and Japan, that the Doha Round of negotiations remains on the table. The African Group called on members to acknowledge “the Report prepared by the Chair of the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture (CoA-SS) under his own responsibility, which summarizes the state of play in the negotiations.” It called on members to “welcome the work done by the CoA-SS as reflected in the Chair’s Report and commit to revitalize and intensify the negotiations on outstanding issues.” “The negotiations shall build on the work undertaken thus far and be based on discussions among Members, and their existing and future submissions.” It urged members to “reaffirm the importance of predictable agricultural and input markets and of facilitating trade in these products, including by reducing the time and procedural costs related to their importation and exportation, in conformity with WTO agreements.” More importantly, the African Group said unequivocally that “Special and differential treatment for developing countries shall be an integral part of all elements of the negotiations and shall be embodied in the Schedule of concessions and commitments and as appropriate in the rules and disciplines to be negotiated, so as to be operationally effective and to enable developing countries to effectively take account of their development needs, including food security and rural development.” Against the backdrop of an alleged assault by the Group of Seven industrialized countries on the continuation of special and differential treatment (S&DT), the African Group emphasized that “protection of existing S&D provisions and expansion of S&D will be part of the negotiations. LDCs shall be exempted from undertaking reduction commitments.” The African Group proposed the following timelines for outcomes to be accomplished at MC14 in Cameroon: * The Trade Negotiations Committee shall regularly review progress in these negotiations. * Senior Officials will review the progress achieved in the negotiations especially on PSH, SSM and Cotton, one year after MC13, particularly in relation to the definition of the elements and the methodology of implementation of the reform and make recommendations for the way forward. * Members shall adopt an intermediate framework of the agreement four months before MC14. This framework shall provide a comprehensive view of the basic structures of the agreement or other outcomes to be delivered by MC14 including a permanent solution on PSH and may include texts with different levels of maturity. * Members shall adopt a decision on modalities by MC14 and shall adopt a permanent solution on PSH in accordance with paragraph 9 by MC14. * Modalities of each respective negotiating topic shall be implemented in a timeframe to be decided by Members taking into account the possible differences in maturity of discussions in negotiating topics. At the COASS meeting, Brazil said that members “still have time to make progress before the July General Council meeting.” Brazil indicated its plan to consult with the African Group starting from 5 July. “(Our) experts have been getting into considerable (technical) details, discussing (subsidy) reduction formula, product specific limits, green box, Public Stockholding, etc,” Brazil said. The G10 farm-defensive countries, including Japan, Switzerland, and Norway among others, highlighted the importance of transparency in export restriction measures. They emphasized equal treatment for all agriculture reform topics, particularly export restrictions, alongside domestic support and market access, said people familiar with the development. Significantly, the chair of the Doha negotiating body on agriculture, Ambassador Alparslan Acarsoy of Turkiye, informed members of his recent consultations with several members. The chair said that he is going to start “Quad-Plus” meetings after the summer break. The “Quad-Plus” is a negotiation forum dedicated to cotton involving the Cotton-4 countries and several major cotton players, such as Australia, Brazil, China, the EU, India, Pakistan, and the US among others. +
|
||
