The Hindu Business Line : Protecting farm interest at WTO

FOR ONCE, INDIA has made a tactical move by expressing `disappointment' with the contents of the draft framework negotiations circulated by the World Trade Organisation among its 148 member-countries. By slamming the text for being more specific in matters of interest to developed countries and not so in case of developing nations, India has actually challenged the equity and fairness of the blueprint. Though only the first draft whose purpose was to provide a basis for further negotiations, the Indian salvo is sure to exert the much-needed pressure on the negotiating parties, especially in the context of end-July deadline for pact. The draft has come in for criticism from some major farm goods exporting countries for not going far enough to lower barriers to agricultural trade. Poor countries are unconvinced that by offering developed nations more open markets for their industrial goods and services, the latter would actually cut farm subsidies that are trade distorting. WTO members are expected to bargain hard while trying to evolve a consensus; clearly, the road to completion of Doha Round of trade liberalisation talks is going to be long and tortuous.

The Indian position that the provisions on agriculture miss the sensitivities of developing nations is credible and tenable. Nearly 70 per cent of the country's over 100 crore people depend on agriculture and related activities for income and livelihood. Resource-poor farmers already face serious uncertainties and internal challenges on production, marketing, prices and incomes. Allowing liberal market access to highly subsidised low-price imports will mean introduction of an external challenge which a majority of Indian farmers are just not equipped to cope with. It is not unreasonable to expect, nay insist, that reforms in the distorted global farm trade, instead of being simultaneous, need to be sequential. Right the wrongs first. Developed nations have to demonstrate their honest commitment to reducing trade distorting supports by actually setting a timeframe themselves and implementing the commitments. The current inequality between developed and developing countries must be first set right, the initiative for which lies squarely with developed countries.

Even if developed nations reduce farm subsidies, India is unlikely to reap any notable benefit from the action; but by allowing greater market access, New Delhi is sure to further weaken the fragile agricultural economy. It is politically correct and expedient for India to be a part of the G-20 for voicing the concerns of poor countries. But very real too is the possibility of differences arising within G-20 once livelihood concerns and market access come up for negotiation. In the ultimate analysis, on international negotiating tables, `enlightened self-interest' should be the guiding thought for everyone to obtain the best deal. Hopefully, the new Commerce Minister will carry forward his predecessor's good work <137>his predecessor did<137> at Doha. Meanwhile, a holistic approach to building competitiveness in agriculture is the need of the day.

More Stories on : Editorial | WTO | Agriculture

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Minimum wage — key to UPA's employment programme

Protecting farm interest at WTO

Budget: No good harvest, really

The growing discontent over globalisation

Water wars and the real message

Amazing phenomenon

Another VIP IPO

NSS 1987