Mar 10, 1990
THIRD WORLD PERCEPTION OF IMBALANCES INCORRECT, BUT...
GENEVA, MARCH 8 (BY CHAKRAVARTHI RAGHAVAN) -- The perception of Third World countries about the imbalances in the Uruguay Round negotiating processes is not correct, but it is there and has to be taken account, since perceptions are important and determine the attitudes and positions of the people concerned, the top EEC official responsible for external relations admitted Thursday.The European Commission Vice-President and External Relations Commissioner, Frans Andriessen, who made this comment at a press conference made clear that the EEC saw no reason at this stage to be more specific about the modality for integrating Textiles and Clothing trade into GATT, and that it was ready to liberalise this trade but only on basis of "fair competition" and exporting countries too liberalising access to their markets. He also seemed to envisage negotiations on Agriculture, where there is a large gap between the U.S. and EEC positions, going on right till the Brussels final meeting of the Round. Andriessen who paid a one-day visit to Geneva, held talks Thursday with GATT delegates, and later with the GATT Director-General, to assure them that the EEC's preoccupations with its Single Market and events in East Europe had not reduced its commitment or priority for successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round. At his press conference, Andriessen said that his talks with heads of missions of EC member-states, as well as a number of Ambassadors of the EEC's partners in the negotiations would be helpful in bringing the round to a successful conclusion at Brussels at the final session 3-7 December. The Community, he said, would fully assume its responsibility and play a leading role in the final phase of the negotiations. In parallel, the Community would continue to concentrate its efforts on the establishment of a single market, on extension of the principles of the single internal market to the EFTA partners and for intensified cooperation with Eastern and Central European countries. "But it would be entirely erroneous to assume that these historic efforts could in any way detract the Community from its unequivocal commitment to a successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round negotiations", he said. In fact, he added, the multilateral economic and trading system presented the necessary framework to bring together all the other reform processes under a common roof. The multilateral system must be based on a philosophy of cooperation, mutually beneficial balance of rights and obligations and an efficient mechanism ensuring the correct application and enforcement of results of the negotiations. Asked about the EEC's response to the call from Third World countries that the Community should put on the table its ideas for phasing out the MFA restrictions and integrating the trade into GATT, as well making forward moves in other negotiating groups, Andriessen said the EEC had been the most specific among the IC's on the issue of textiles and clothing and there was no reason for it to be more specific at this stage when others had not been specific. This appeared to be a reference to the U.S. and Japanese positions and proposals in the negotiating group on textiles and clothing. The EEC, Andriessen added, was prepared to liberalise the trade in Textiles and Clothing and bring it into GATT. But there had to be a mutual approach and liberalised market access, not only in the EEC markets, but in exporting countries as well. "We also want fair competition conditions. If we cannot get this, I do not think I can preserve my textile constituency". Asked whether the EEC was not in effect saying that in the old areas of comparative advantage to the Third World there should be "fair trade", while in new areas it should be "free trade", Andriessen agreed that there was a feeling among Third World countries of imbalances in the actual state of the round and this had been strongly communicated to him at his luncheon meeting. "Of course perception does not always reflect reality. But even if that is so, very often perceptions are more important than other things since perception determines the attitude and position of people concerned". "In textiles, and ‘goods’ in general, we are dealing in the negotiations with matters already known, but in matters like Intellectual Property, Services, TRIMs, etc., we are entering completely new domain and more work has to be done. That can create the idea of imbalance", Andriessen argued. "We know we have to negotiate a final balanced result. The Community has always accepted the notion of the ‘globality’ of the negotiations. We will stick to it. But in textiles we are in a specific situation and we are trying to liberalise that situation. That is what we are doing". Asked about the logic of the Community and other ICs wanting a transition of 10-15 years for changing from the 30-year old "managed" trade in textiles and clothing, but demanding that Third World countries should give up their century-old rights of national autonomy in intellectual property protection under the present international system and that Third World countries should not follow the successful methods of the ICs for their own industrialisation, a visibly embarrassed Andriessen said: "I do not think I can add anything to what I have said". On agriculture, Andriessen said that the "zero option" approach of the U.S. was not a serious point of departure for negotiations. The EEC wanted to negotiate a substantive and progressive reduction of support. At the same moment that the U.S. was negotiating here, the U.S. Congress was discussing a farm bill which provides for the continuance of its existing system of support. "If there is too great a gap between what you propose in the negotiations and what you practice at home there is difficulty". He agreed with a questioner that serious negotiations in agriculture had not taken place, and there was a large gap between the positions of the EEC and the U.S. "But when we come closer to the final stage, there will be an incentive to narrow the gap", he said. As for the U.S.-EEC differences on the structure of a framework on services, particularly on the question of inclusion of financial services, Andriessen said the Community saw no reason to exempt any service, and particularly the financial services from the scope of the framework. It was very important for the Community to liberalise the market for financial services. It was the strong position of the Community that financial services were an important component of the entire services framework. When he was asked about the U.S. view that it wanted to regulate the market before liberalising financial services, Andriessen replied: "On this we have a very strong position ... It should be part and parcel of the framework". Asked about the EEC proposals for an International Trade Organisation, as suggested by the Italian Minister, Andriessen said it was first necessary to achieve substantive results before deciding on how to implement them. The essential conditions for modernisation and strengthening of the multilateral trading system were: * More adequate and effective substantive rules and disciplines in the traditional GATT areas covering trade in goods; * Adequate disciplines in new areas - trade in services, intellectual property protection and investment policies in order to liberalise trade and to avoid trade distortions; and * An unequivocal commitment by all to abide by a strengthened multilateral dispute settlement and enforcement mechanism. The Community, he claimed, was prepared to make "fair compromises" and make concessions in areas where it faced internal difficulties. This was particularly true in some areas of market access of special interest to the Third World countries. The Third World countries would not be left out of the process of modernising the multilateral trading system and the weakest economies would not be losers in the international game. But on the other hand, the Third World countries would have to realise that they could only gain in the short run and in the long run by effectively assuming the basic obligations and GATT as well as the additional obligations consistent with their level of development and accepting adequate disciplines in new areas.