Global Policy Forum

By Andrew Osborn and Larry Elliott

The European Commission yesterday launched a ferocious attack on poor countries and development campaigners when it dismissed calls for big cuts in Europe's farm protection regime as extreme demands couched in "cheap propaganda".

In a move that threatens to shatter the fragile peace ahead of next week's trade talks in Cancun, Mexico, Franz Fischler, the EU agriculture commissioner, said Brussels would strongly defend its farmers. He said many recent attacks on the EU's much maligned common agricultural policy (CAP) were "intellectually dishonest" PR stunts.

Mr Fischler's comments came as Britain's trade secretary, Patricia Hewitt, warned that failure at Cancun would be "disastrous for the global economy" and a severe setback in the fight against terrorism and poverty. Britain believes a deal to cut farm subsidies in the west is the key to developing support for a new global trade deal, and Ms Hewitt made it clear that the government saw recent reforms of the CAP as a good basis for negotiation. "Rich countries can't preach free trade abroad and have protectionism at home. There is a danger of locking developing countries into poverty because we lock them out of our markets," she said.

Mr Fischler, speaking in Brussels, said that although the EU was keen to give developing countries a better deal he warned that they would get nothing if they persisted with their "extreme" proposals. Washington and Brussels have tabled a joint proposal on agriculture that would involve far smaller cuts in protectionism than developing countries want. The proposal has been countered by a blueprint from leading developing countries that would involve far more aggressive reductions.

"If I look at the recent extreme proposal co-sponsored by Brazil, China, India and others, I cannot help [getting] the impression that they are circling in a different orbit," Mr Fischler reporters. "If they want to do business, they should come back to mother earth. If they choose to continue their space odyssey they will not get the stars, they will not get the moon, they will end up with empty hands."

Mr Fischler accused developing countries of demanding that developed countries make drastic changes while they themselves did nothing. Widening the scope of his attack, he accused non-governmental organisations, which frequently claim the CAP damages the developing world, of "cheap propaganda". He took issue in particular with campaigners who point out that each EU cow receives $2 a day in subsidies. "This may be a nice PR stunt but unfortunately this argument is not only intellectually dishonest, it is factually irrelevant. Yes, in the developed world we are spending money on many things. Not because we are all stupid, but because our standard of living is higher.

"What next? Criticising governments for spending public money on hospital beds, costly noise protection walls or fancy trees in parks instead of sending it to Africa? Societies around the world must have the right to choose which public goods and services are important to them."

Mr Fischler also made it clear that the EU did not believe all developing world countries deserved major concessions. Some African countries were really poor, but others, he noted, were net food exporters and far more prosperous. Pascal Lamy, the EU's trade commissioner, joined the attack pointing out that 70% of customs duties paid on goods exported from the developing world were levied by other developing countries.

Ms Hewitt hinted that the failure to make progress in the trade talks since they were launched in Doha, Qatar, two years ago might now make it impossible to finish the negotiations on schedule by the start of 2005. "We didn't make nearly as much progress as we should have. There is more to be done in Cancun and subsequently. Our objective is to get as close to that January 1 2005 deadline as possible."

In an attempt to improve the mood ahead of Cancun, Ms Hewitt said rows between the US and the EU over steel and genetically modified foods should not be allowed to "poison the atmosphere for these very big negotiations".

FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.