By Rangarirai Machemedze

The expected has happened. The US said it during the consultations and the EU sang along. These countries were not prepared to stop trampling over people’s rights, particularly the right to food and survival. Profits first before people, this is what they wanted and this is what has come out of the negotiations on agriculture. But why should developing countries continue to participate in an undemocratic multilateral trading system when their concerns and needs are constantly being marginalized? It is time now for all the countries to stand up and fight against globalization and colonization.

The Draft Cancun Ministerial Text Job (03)/150/Rev.2 has been released amid anxiety, suspense and suspicion among the thousands of people who had gathered in Cancun for the five-day Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organisation. After months of futile negotiations in Geneva and after the member states disagreed on the Harbinson Text in February this year, many had thought that Cancun would offer them an agreement plausible to all members, but it is back to square one.

Domestic Support

The draft Cancun Ministerial Text is still the same text contained in the Doha Ministerial Declaration written upside down. Many submissions by different groups, particularly the G21 and the AU/ACP/LDC countries had called for the capping of the green box subsidies. The Text ignores this fact and does not commit developed countries to substantially reduce their green box subsidies to a prescribed ceiling. Annex A paragraph 1.5 states, “Green Box criteria shall be reviewed with a view to ensuring that Green Box measures have no, or at most minimal, trade-distorting effects or effects on production”. No time frame or percentages of reductions have been referred to in the text. This essentially means the developed countries will continue to provide domestic support to their farmers as long as there is no commitment on timeframe for reductions.

Export Subsidies

On export subsidies, the text commits members to eliminate export subsidies for products of particular interest to developing countries. The text goes on to say “a list of these products shall be established for the purpose of tabling comprehensive draft schedules.” This product-linked export subsidies elimination leaves room for manipulation as there will be no consensus among developing countries on the products of interest to all countries. This gives room again for an open-ended interpretation which might give the developed countries the leeway to limit on the number of products to be covered.

Market Access

Liberalisation of markets has been the language, particularly, of the US and this has been included in the draft. Developing countries have been asking for no further tariff reductions particularly on Special Products proposed by the Harbinson text. Unfortunately, this call has been ignored and the freak mention of Special Products has been subjected to a linear cut of a percentage to be negotiated. In addition developing countries had proposed for a Special Safeguard Measure to protect their farmers against sudden import surges and price shocks on the one hand, or against subsidised imports on the other. The Special Safeguard Measure would allow member countries to raise tariffs when import volumes rise above a certain level, or if prices fall below a certain level. This unfortunately had not been adequately covered in the draft as “the use and duration of the special agricultural safeguard (SSG) remain under negotiation.”

Agriculture remains at the pinnacle of the negotiations and developing countries should fight hard for a favourable outcome. Developed countries have an interest in profits while developing countries have an interest in protecting the livelihoods of their people. What is needed is an arrangement that does not subordinate people’s lives to profits.

See also earlier story – US uncompromising on Agriculture Talks