On Tuesday, European Union Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson saw off French manoeuvres aimed at tying his hands in critical talks to liberalise world trade, winning strong backing from most European governments for his negotiating tactics.
The French government, under fierce domestic pressure, summoned an emergency meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg to discuss complaints that the former Labour Cabinet minister had exceeded his mandate in tabling concessions on farm subsidies last week. But Paris, which had pressed its allies, including Germany, to back its case, emerged alone and, sources said, even failed to repeat the charge against Mandelson and European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development Mariann Fischer Boel at the meeting.
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, who chaired the meeting, said there was broad support for Mandelson’s negotiating strategy and reining him in would only make ”World Trade Organisation [WTO] negotiations impossible”. Winning over his critics, Mandelson insisted he had stuck to the mandate laid down by the EU’s council of ministers, and gave an unequivocal pledge that the commission would not use the Doha development round talks to ”precipi-tate a new phase of CAP [common agricultural policy] reform”.
This pledge, which will displease British Prime Minister Tony Blair, his political mentor, came with a commitment to strengthen communication channels with EU governments during the trade negotiations, including at the key summit in Hong Kong in December.
French Minister of Foreign Affairs Philippe Douste-Blazy had demanded that Mandelson and his team consult governments, including technical experts, before tabling fresh proposals during the Doha negotiations — a plan that Mandelson claimed would ”stop the talks in their tracks”.
On Wednesday, in Geneva, EU experts were to discuss the economic and social impact of the proposals for a 70% cut in farm subsidies, tabled last week by Mandelson, before a meeting of the WTO general council got under way. But commission sources dismissed this apparent concession to French political sensitivities as a ”fudge” and a ”figleaf”, and insisted that the experts’ session had been agreed in advance.
”Peter is buoyant about what happened today,” his aides said. But Mandelson faces a tough struggle to keep the EU as a united bloc on his side, with Fischer Boel insisting the EU can make no further concessions on farm subsidies beyond the agreed 2003 reforms of CAP.
”The EU does not intend to, and will not, pay twice in order to conclude the round,” she reiterated. NGOs, however, urged the EU to go substantially further in meeting the demands of developing countries. WTO Director General Pascal Lamy, a former EU trade commissioner, told the Europeans to show greater flexibility in opening up their agriculture markets.
Mandelson is also under pressure from the United States to cut tariffs for farm products, with its chief trade negotiator Rob Portman demanding greater access to the EU for American beef, poultry, pork and other items. In turn, Mandelson demanded greater progress in negotiations to liberalise trade in manufactured goods and services. ”I have made it clear that no agreement will be reached on agriculture until agreement is reached on other issues.”
Calling for latitude in tactics, he said a successful Doha round would bring economic benefits worth $100billion a year, including for developing countries, and to panic now, when progress was being made, would be ”a terrible mistake”.
Oxfam International’s Celine Charveriat said the EU had avoided a damaging split but must give more to developing countries and demand less in return. ”Agricultural reform is of the utmost importance to developing countries,” she said. ”To make long-promised agricultural reform conditional on greater liberalisation of industry or services would be dangerous and contrary to the spirit of the development round.”
ActionAid said deep tariff cuts for manufacturers would lead to huge job losses and increased poverty. It accused the EU and US of using aggressive tactics at the WTO to force developing countries into signing up for a bad deal in Hong Kong. — Â