|
Agriculture will remain at the core of how swiftly progress is made in the detailed negotiations on modalities in the WTO Doha Round, in the post-July 2004 package phase, Shri Kamal Nath, Union Minister of Commerce & Industry, said at an International Conference on "Liberalisation and the Future of Agricultural Policy", organised by the French Institute of International relations (IFRI) in Paris this afternoon. Emphasising that mercantilist compulsions of corporatised agriculture should not drive the negotiations in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Shri Kamal Nath made it absolutely clear that developed countries must remove trade-distorting agricultural subsidies first and market access in developing countries would only follow the removal of such subsidies, not precede it.
In a hard hitting address before a distinguished international audience, Shri Kamal Nath said "Governments have more recently resolved at Geneva to uphold the legitimate food and livelihood security and rural development needs of developing countries in the agriculture negotiations. What we are confronting is a real life situation facing real persons desperate for recognition of the condition in which they live and the pressures on them from the subsidy-laden policies of other countries. Mercantilist compulsions of corporatised agriculture cannot drive these negotiations.
I have said so publicly before, and I say so again: the Indian farmer is not afraid of the farmer from a developed country. He is willing to compete with him. But he cannot compete with the Governments of the developed countries! In the entire negotiation on agriculture, the positions we have had to take, the strategies we have had to adopt are not because we are protectionist per se. We do not deny the developed world agricultural market access on a whim, or because we do not want to engage in trade. We have been forced to turn protectionist because we have no alternative; there is no level playing field. Agriculture sustains the daily lives of the majority of our people. Subsidised products flooding in from abroad would play havoc with the social fabric. Eliminate subsidies completely and fully, in all its guises, and we would not be hesitant to liberalise substantially. But we must be clear that this is not a chicken-and-egg situation. There is no doubt as to what needs to be done first – it is the removal of subsidies. It is logical that market access can only succeed this, not precede it."
Effective reduction in subsidies and non-tariff barriers in trade in agriculture by developed countries would increase world incomes and expand world trade far more than similar progress in any other area and there had to be a social consensus on this, Shri Kamal Nath said, adding that "it is no use making tariff reduction commitments on the one hand and erecting insurmountable non-tariff barriers on the other".
Reminding the participants of the Marrakesh Agreement of the Uruguay Round which said that multilateral rules were to be designed to ensure that "developing countries and especially the least developed among them, secure a share in the growth of international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development", Shri Kamal Nath said that "central to our efforts must remain the prospect of a wider distribution of benefits for all peoples. Developed countries must effectively transfer technology, offer fair competition and generally support an enabling environment for developing societies to move ahead, to consolidate, and to move on again. It is important that the pursuit of liberalisation in global agricultural policy must create and nurture essential conditions for stimulating economic growth in developing countries, alleviating poverty, and promoting their integration into the global comity, not just as equal members, but as partners in progress and equals in prosperity".
The Minister emphasised that international policy on agriculture should not ignore the ground realities obtaining in three-fourths of the world. No doubt, there were difficulties and problems in all countries, including the developed countries. "But it is essential that the stark difference in the nature of the concerns in developed countries and those in developing countries be clearly understood and appreciated. This is a difference not merely of scale and magnitude, but a qualitative difference. Standard of living may be a valid concern for farmers in developed countries – in developing ones it is the very access to the next meal", the Minister said. "Developing countries need sufficient policy space and flexibilities in instruments to lift the large proportion of their populations employed in agriculture from their present level of backwardness. It is inconceivable for the developed countries to seek, and for the developing countries to offer, identity in treatments and commitments until all distortions in agriculture are removed", he added.
|
