WASHINGTON, March 4: Developing countries with export sectors that compete with US farm goods should be subject to certain restrictions as part of any global trade agreement to reduce farm subsidies, US farm groups said.
In a letter dated Feb. 28 to US Trade Representative Rob Portman and Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, commodities groups warned they would not be able to support any deal that expected them to accept program cuts but did not include curbs for less developed countries where farm trade is booming.
Our producers will find it difficult to support a final WTO agreement that requires substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support for US farmers while allowing our largest and fastest-growing competitors in the world to continue or further stimulate their competitive export sectors, the letter said.
Farm groups have been worried about Brazil in particular. While still classed under world trade rules as a developing country, its agriculture sector is booming and exports of soybeans and some grain are a growing competitive threat to US producers.
Disciplines should be applied to commodities sectors in developing countries which have a share of 5 per cent or more of world trade for commodities and semi-processed products, the letter said.
Whatever is agreed for the developed world should be applied to developing country major exporters to the same degree. If they are a major player they shouldn’t hide behind developing country status to escape the disciplines that we’ll be subjected to, said Jack Roney, director of economics and policy analysis for the American Sugar Alliance, one group that signed the letter.
A senior US trade official, speaking on condition of anonymity, told Reuters the United States was trying to persuade export-competitive developing nations to make more concessions in farm reform, but that it was a very politically sensitive matter.
We want to distinguish some of the export-competitive countries, we have higher expectations for them, the official said. How we do that is still a very open question, but it’s certainly not unreasonable to expect.
Negotiators from the United States, the European Union, Australia, Japan, Brazil and India have been meeting to prepare the way for a key ministerial gathering on March 10 in London. That meeting could prove crucial to whether the full 149-state World Trade Organization meets its target of a draft deal by the end of April on freeing up farm trade.
Talks among WTO member countries have made only fitful progress in the 4-1/2 years since the so-called Doha round was launched to negotiate a deal that would throw open markets for farm, industrial and services products around the world, with the aim of boosting the world economy and lifting millions out of poverty.
Agriculture has been a particular stumbling block, with rich nations arguing among themselves about the best way to proceed and poorer nations refusing to present proposals on cutting tariffs on other goods until farm issues were resolved.
The US official told Reuters that “serious differences” still remained among countries on the thorny issue of sensitive products, referring to politically sensitive commodities, about which the commodity groups’ letter also expressed concern.
The European Union has proposed nominating 8 per cent of its tariff lines as sensitive products and therefore subject to smaller cuts. The United States wants to limit sensitive products to 1 per cent of tariff lines.
We are very concerned that the sensitive products issue will be resolved in the modalities agreement in a manner that offers only minimal benefits to our industries, said the letter, which was signed by groups representing US growers of soybeans, wheat, corn, cotton and rice, as well as sugar, milk and pork producers, among others.
A spokesman for the rice industry said farm groups had wanted to remind the Bush administration of the importance of getting new markets in any WTO deal.
There is concern among many commodity groups that countries may be using self-designating developing country status ... to take on less stringent disciplines in terms of cutting trade-distorting domestic support, increasing market access and eliminating export subsidies, said Bob Cummings, vice president of international policy at the USA Rice Federation.—Reuters
