Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Støre

The credibility in the WTO

Article published in the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten, 29 July 2006

Translated from Norwegian

In its editorial on 26 July on the collapse of the WTO negotiations, Aftenposten agrees with me that the major countries should have shown leadership by reaching agreement among themselves. But the editor also writes that Norway is not in a position to reproach others because “we made no attempt to exert pressure on the major countries that were in disagreement with each other”. I, for my part, have been cautious about reproaching others. In the WTO, agreement must be reached by consensus, and the responsibility for a successful outcome is therefore shared by everyone. I hope that we will eventually be able to resume negotiations, and apportioning blame today will only be counterproductive. Unfortunately this is exactly what the EU and the US are doing.

My experience of the WTO negotiations since October 2005 is, however, that the major actors do play a key role. Agreement within the G6 (made up of the US, the EU, India, Brazil, Japan and Australia) is not sufficient in itself, but without it, nothing will be achieved. Our strategy has been to position ourselves to exert an influence on decisions taken in the G6 group and then strive to safeguard Norway’s interests in the final negotiations. Our commitment to the poorest countries is reflected in the close contact we maintain with the developing countries, the groups they are part of, and the countries that serve as spokesmen for them, such as Brazil, India and Zambia.

We have pressed for a solution. But this can only be achieved if the G6 countries show willingness to compromise within the triangle that WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy believes is preventing progress: lower tariffs on agricultural goods, lower subsidies for agriculture, and lower tariffs on industrial goods and fish.

In recent months, the EU has been moving closer to the cuts in agricultural tariffs proposed by the G20 countries, with Brazil at the forefront. The final agreement would be somewhere between the EU’s starting point and the G20’s, in other words a good distance from the standpoint of Norway and the G10 countries. This would be a very tough result for Norway and would require thinking along new lines in our agricultural policy, as the Minister of Agriculture and Food has made very clear right from the beginning.

Norway went to Geneva in June prepared to negotiate, prepared to give and take, and prepared to work to find solutions that are acceptable to us. But the negotiations never got off the ground, and talks broke down in July.

Aftenposten insists that Norway is standing in the way of a WTO agreement due to its agricultural policy, and maintains that our credibility in the negotiations has worn thin. I strongly disagree. There are 150 countries taking part in these negotiations. They are all striving to find a solution that takes their particular circumstances into account. In almost all areas, Norway is an “A4 nation”; we are regarded as a constructive member of the WTO and it is for that reason that we have a place at the negotiation table. Here we have pressed for progress in the negotiations and we have promoted Norway’s views. We have also pointed out that solutions for agriculture that only serve the interests of the major exporters and international agro-business will not necessarily benefit the poor countries or the environment.

The Norwegian economy is well adapted to the WTO system and enjoys the benefits of an open world-trade system based on universally respected rules. The situation of agriculture is different for many reasons. Here it is particularly tough for Norway to make deep cuts in tariffs and subsidies. This will entail more extensive restructuring for us than for almost any other country. I believe that Norway’s credibility is strengthened by our acknowledgement of this challenge, and Norwegian farmers can rest assured that the Government is prepared to meet it. But we too have the right and the duty to safeguard our own interests and strive to find solutions that take our particular circumstances into account. As do all countries.

The negotiations have collapsed. This is serious for the issue that is really at stake here: a new WTO agreement that is primarily intended to benefit the developing countries. I am also very concerned about the political signal we are giving. One week after the leaders of the world’s most powerful nations agreed in St Petersburg to make an all-out effort to bring the WTO negotiations to a successful conclusion, the talks broke down. This is not good for a turbulent, conflict-ridden world that needs political courage, resolve and common rules.

Therefore we must not allow the process to dwindle away to nothing. Much has been achieved. Norway will continue to play a proactive role in efforts to reach an agreement that can make a substantial contribution to the fight against poverty and give a much-needed impetus to the world economy that we are all so dependent on.