Friday at the WTO Delegates

Friday at the WTO

Delegates received a 20 page draft framework for continuing negotiations this morning ("WTO Mediators Make Final Bid for Accord") . This text is available at the WTO site: "Second draft of post-Canc�n decision for the General Council".

Negotiations begun on Thursday continued until 4 AM this morning. An informal 2 1/2 hour "Heads of Delegation" meeting started at 7 AM - shortly after the new document was circulated. The meeting is described here: "Members comment on new draft as chair warns of overload".

Channel NewsAsia reports on the new document here: "WTO lays out last-ditch compromise to unlock global trade talks". Peter Gallagher has some early thoughts on the draft here: "Second Grosser text ". Here is some early analysis from the High Plains Journal as well: "Details Of WTO Proposal ".

African countries are reported to be pleased with the result: "African Nations Happy With U.S. Agreement".

"...The agreement would establish a special subcommittee to look at issues related to cotton as part of the WTO's agriculture negotiations.

It also instructs WTO Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi to work with other
international agencies, like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, to "direct effectively existing programs and any additional resources toward development of the economies where cotton has vital importance."

Most importantly, the agriculture agreement as a whole - if approved - would see an end to export subsidies globally and major cuts in domestic subsidies paid by rich nations...

He [Ousmane Ngom, Senegalese minister of trade - Ben] acknowledged that the African nations also had to make some compromises. They had originally demanded that cotton be treated separately from other agricultural issues, and that African nations be compensated until subsidies were eliminated..."

This story, "India rejects revised WTO draft" indicates that India, one of the "Five Interested Parties" that negotiated the agricultural section of the draft, has rejected the draft released today. However, the Indian trade minister, who was in Bangkok is returning to Geneva to see if acceptable revisions can be made. This story from India's Business Standard elaborates a little more on Indian concerns: "India scuttles US WTO move". This story by Ritu Sarin in The Indian Express ("India, Thailand ink FTA pact") indicates the nature of India's concerns today:

"...He [Kamal Nath, India's trade minister - Ben] also admitted that it was the prickly problems of Aggregate Market Support (AMS) and the amber box formulae being postulated by the US, that India was objecting to. The position being taken by India is as a developed country, the US should have a more drastic reduction of subsidies to agriculture. Secondly, EU had agreed to reduce subsidies to a nil level, the US had asked for a slow pace of reduction, necessitation from India�s viewpoint a redrafting of the proposed WTO agreements."

One final story on India's role, from the Times of India: "New WTO draft 'unacceptable' to India".

"Explaining the rejection of the draft, Indian officials said the document pushed through by the US would have allowed it to get away with a lower reduction of subsidies and at a slower pace.

At the same time, the US had insisted that India should commit itself to reducing its aggregate support for agriculture from 5 per cent allowed now to nil.

The current round of negotiations has seen India using deft footwork, switching allegiances to further its interests.

It was only on Thursday that it was seen leaving its familiar perch among the "developing countries" to join the so-called NG-5 (Non-group-5) with the US, the European Union, Brazil and Australia. The NG-5 is described as such because of their conflicting interests."

Peter Wilson writes, in The Australian ("Australia blamed for hiccup in Geneva"), that the deadline for completing the negotiations has offically been pushed back until midnight on Friday to Saturday.

"...The first three days of this week's four-day meeting in Geneva were basically put on hold to wait for an agreement behind closed doors between Australia and four other major players in agriculture -- the two biggest distorters of farm trade, the US and the European Union, and two representatives of developing nations, Brazil and India.

They finally agreed on a draft for future negotiations under which Europe's promises to eventually end export subsidies would be matched by a US vow to reduce its huge domestic supports for American farmers and an Australian promise to study whether state trading enterprises for commodities such as wheat were hidden forms of government subsidies..."

Elizabeth Becker, reports in the New York Times ("U.S. Will Cut Farm Subsidies in Trade Deal") that U.S. concessions were an important element today:

"GENEVA, July 30 - The United States yielded to pressure from developing countries on Friday and agreed to make a 20 percent cut in some of the $19 billion in subsidies it pays to American farmers each year, as members of the World Trade Organization met round the clock here to win approval for a new deal governing world trade.

Working until 4:00 a.m. on Friday, Robert B. Zoellick, the United States trade representative, reached an agreement to cut subsidies for such crops as corn, rice, wheat and soybeans. He also reached an accord with four cotton-producing countries in West Africa for eventual cutbacks in subsidies paid to American cotton growers...

In exchange for reducing agricultural supports, the wealthy nations are asking the developing nations to reduce their tariffs on manufactured goods. That issue was left in general terms for more precise negotiations in later talks. Mr. Zoellick so far has failed to get significant concessions to open up new markets for American agricultural and industrial goods."

The EU foreign ministers met this morning, and there was general agreement that the new draft framework is an improvement. Only France found objected to approving the agreement: "France stands alone among EU states opposing WTO accord".

Revised 9:30 PM Juneau time