FTAA-WTO : Agriculture at the centre of the debate
21/07/2003
- Opinión
Agriculture is the biggest stumbling block for the
negotiators of the FTAA and the WTO, in a process which,
according to various experts of different tendencies, has
arrived at a critical deadlock provoked by contradictions
involving all the actors and factors of the issue.
Although all parties recognise that this is a highly
strategic matter, with the way in which events are
unfolding almost no one believes that the negotiations will
be concluded in-line with the planned time frame. The
differences between countries with different sized
economies, those between companies of varying sizes and
multiple interests and the heterogeneity of world
agriculture, are more visible every day, at the same time
as significant differences among the major powers are also
becoming apparent.
In the case of the FTAA, the state of the official document
(1), tarnished by some seven thousand square brackets (2),
speaks for itself about the pre-eminence of differences, to
which can be added the increasing subjugation to the
decisions taken in the framework of the WTO, where
agriculture is also a sensitive matter.
In the recent meeting of the Trade Negotiations Committee,
held in El Salvador on July 11, the demarcation of a
Brazilian position, and thus of Mercosur, reawakened the
hopes of a possible re-composition of power relations,
marked since the beginning of the process by US hegemony,
whose conditions of power enable it to manage state
policies which it plays out at the same time in scenarios
of the FTAA, the WTO, and of the multilateral and bilateral
relations which it manages.
In fact, after NAFTA, the free trade agreement with Chile
and an imminent signing with Central America, the signing
of bilateral agreements is increasingly gaining popularity:
several countries have entered the competition to "win
favour" to gain access to the US market on the strength of
concessions which are not restricted to trade, but which
imply submission to geopolitical and military designs of
the country from the north.
Scenarios
According to Ecuadorian civil servant Manuel Chiriboga (3),
the possible breakthrough in the deadlock in negotiations
regarding the FTAA could come about through four possible
scenarios: the first is the signing of an agreement outside
the negotiating tables between the US and Brazil (or
Mercosur) regarding certain conflicting matters, such as
farming, intellectual property, services, investment and
government procurement; the second is the prolongation of
negotiations for two or more years with the expectation of
resolving critical matters within the framework of the WTO;
the third implies simply holding bilateral negotiations
between the US and each country or group, increasing the
vulnerability of small countries; and the fourth (recently
revealed by President Lula) would comprise of working
simultaneously and in coordination within the FTAA, the
WTO, and the multilateral and bilateral negotiations, which
would win time in order to develop a regional position.
In the case of the WTO, one of the main, critical points
lies in the disagreements regarding the theme of
agricultural subsidies, where the US, which heavily
subsidises agriculture, paradoxically supports the
reduction of subsidies by the European Union. Meanwhile,
both speak with one voice about the fact that the other
countries, that is to say the rest of the world, should
eliminate them completely. This is also a matter of
disagreement within the framework of the FTAA, since while
the US maintains the position that this matter must be
resolved within the framework of the WTO, countries of the
region maintain that these should be part of the
hemispheric documentation, which should consider
implementing special measures for countries with small-
scale economies.
Part of this confusion lies in the actual conceptualisation
of the subsidies for exports, whose new broader definition
– in debate – extends its reach to cover the so-called food
aid, as well as the differences between instruments and
methodologies used for the measurement of volume of these
and of the product tariffs, in addition to the biased
interpretation and application of the regulations regarding
sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
In the FTAA, with different overtones, the four sections
regarding agriculture comprise part of the deadlock: access
to markets; measures not related to tariffs; sanitary and
phytosanitary measures; and export subsidies. In the theme
related to market access, for example, where negotiations
have to do with the aim of achieving a timetable of tariff
reduction to 0%, which would be applied to all goods, one
of the disagreements is the definition of a process which
would allow small economies to move towards this objective
preserving the interests of their nationals. Even as
regards measures that are not related to tariffs there are
problems of definition, as what for some is a part of this
area, is for others considered an element of the barriers
to free trade. With respect to sanitary and phytosanitary
measures – for the protection of human, plant and animal
health – there are countries that consider it a double
edged sword which could be used as a pretext for
prohibiting their products.
However, the most prickly debate concerns the matter of
subsidies for exports where, in addition to the said
conceptual problems, there are differences between those
who support their unconditional elimination and those who
believe they should be introduced to achieve greater
equality in conditions between countries. At the same time,
there are parties who maintain that this matter should
simply be transferred to the WTO for various reasons,
including the fact that it would also cover products from
countries that are not part of the FTAA. Similar
differences are expressed in the themes regarding export
credit, insurance programs, internal and food aid, which,
for some parties, constitute disguised forms of subsidy and
which, therefore, should be part of the WTO negotiations.
Illusion
Important interrelated themes, such as environmental
themes, are not considered directly by either the FTAA or
the WTO and the synchrony of these instruments with other
previous instruments, such as human rights, has not been
defined either. What is more, the tendency to approach the
liberalisation of trade as one end in itself is noticeable,
with the theory that the market would regulate everything,
including social relations in the country and throughout
all spheres, as agriculture is directly related to way of
life and consumer patterns.
Likewise, the claim that poor countries could make
incursions into the market in conditions of equality and
thus improve their competitivity is an illusion: the facts
prove that these countries, which lack resources, subsidies
and technology, principally support themselves through
small-scale agriculture, it is the transnationals bloc that
increasingly holds the export market; hogging the best land
and access to water; almost completely holding the monopoly
on seeds and the management of genetic materials and
technology; controlling distribution routes and
commercialisation, and imposing its regulations regarding
the quality of products. A total of 60% of the products
that are dispatched in supermarkets in the biggest cities
in South America, for example, are provided by no more than
five large transnational companies.
According to data supplied by the WTO, the European Union
and the US hold 51.8% of agricultural exports worldwide,
81.4% of which is to just 15 countries: the most
significant in Latin America are: Brazil, with 3.4%;
Argentina, with 2.2%, Mexico, with 1.7% and Chile, with
1.3%. As concerns imports, the European Union and the US
comprise 51.2% of the total, while in Latin America the
most noteworthy is Mexico with 2.2%. On a world level, the
importance of other essentially agricultural countries in
this area is virtually unnoticeable: moreover, the
countries in the Equatorial zone, located between the
tropics, which have the greatest quantity of farmers, are
classed rather as a market where incursions are
increasingly made by transnationals products.
With these and other unresolved issues on the table few are
expecting conclusive results in the upcoming ministerial
meetings, such as that of the WTO to be held in Cancun
(Mexico) next September and that of the FTAA in Miami (US)
in November. Furthermore, in the words of Uruguayan
government negotiator William Ehlers (5), important
political engagements are needed, especially by the US, in
order to reach a consensus regarding these scenarios, as
without agriculture there will be no FTAA. And who knows,
the fruit may drop under its own weight, as countries which
at one moment confused integration with unconditional
adhesion to unequal normative frameworks might draw a fresh
breath in the light of new proposals of regional
integration with more solidarity. (Translation by ALAI)
Notes:
1) Acuerdo de Libre Comercio de las Américas, Second draft
of the Acuerdo, Chapter: Agricultura, www.ftaa-
alca.org/ftaadraft02/spa/draft_s.asp
2) Regarding the brackets used when negotiating official
documents to denote the fact that the agreement is pending
3) Paper presented during the Seminar "Los retos para el
Ecuador en las negociaciones sobre la liberalización
agrícola en el ALCA", Quito, Ecuador, 14 to 16 July, 2003,
organised by CORDES
4) The major proportion of agricultural subsidies is in the
European Union, totalling 100,668 million dollars; the US
65,113 million and Japan 30,114 million (figures WTO/98).
However, US calculations do not include meat products and
therefore omit areas of pastureland. In addition, the new
US agriculture law states that subsidies planned for the
period 2003 – 2009 will be 80% greater than during the
period 1996 – 2002.
5) Idem 2
https://www.alainet.org/fr/node/107965?language=es
Del mismo autor
- Ecuador: Rebasa crisis del Covid-19 07/04/2020
- The Feminist Spring and the Patriarchal Counter-Offensive 17/03/2020
- La primavera feminista y la contraofensiva patriarcal 06/03/2020
- Simulacros, suplantaciones y luchas por el conocimiento libre en el capitalismo digital 23/07/2019
- Ecuador en la arquitectura del golpe neoliberal en América Latina 26/10/2018
- El berrinche de la derecha y la máquina de post verdades 13/04/2017
- Ganar o ganar: la apuesta del autoritarismo ordinario 01/04/2017
- La victoria de País y la... “suspensión” de la lucha de clases 24/02/2017
- Ecuador: entre batallas políticas y comunicacionales 16/02/2017
- Chevron in Ecuador: a question of power 22/08/2016
Clasificado en
Clasificado en:
![S'abonner à America Latina en Movimiento - RSS](https://www.alainet.org/misc/feed.png)