From: Andrew Lang <lang@igc.apc.org>
Subject: TRADE.NEWS 11-18-92
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: daemon@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: ?
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 02:47:39 GMT

/* Written  2:06 pm  Nov 18, 1992 by kmander@igc.apc.org in igc:trade.news */
/* ---------- "TRADE.NEWS 11-18-92" ---------- */

TRADE NEWS BULLETIN
Wednesday, November 18, 1992
_________________________________________________________
GATT News Summary
_________________________________________________________
EC-US TALKS BEGIN TODAY - FRENCH MAINTAIN OPPOSITION

Just hours before the United States and European Community were 
set to begin key agriculture trade talks in Washington, a statement 
from the office of French President Francois Mitterand reiterated his 
opposition to any agreement that goes beyond the subsidy and 
production cuts outlined in the EC's Common Agricultural Policy 
(CAP). The office also announced the French parliament would be 
asked to debate the trade issue and approve a government-drafted 
position on the negotiations.

U.S. and EC negotiators planned to meet today to avert a looming 
trade war over EC subsidies, which the U.S. claims cost American 
farmers $1 billion in sales a year.  Still in question is what France's 
reaction would be if the EC and U.S. reach a deal without France's 
blessing.  The French government announced their continued 
opposition after an emergency inner cabinet meeting on the talks.  
"The inner cabinet recalls that France has always wanted a global 
and balanced agreement beneficial to the world economy.  It notes 
that the conditions for this do not currently exist."

On Monday night, EC agriculture negotiator Ray MacSharry was 
granted a "clear benediction" by the EC to achieve a deal with the U.S.  
At a farm ministers meeting, France tried to shore up support from 
other EC members by presenting studies of the predicted effects of a 
new agriculture deal, but according to UK Agriculture Minister David 
Curry, "Nobody endorsed the French figures."  Ireland and Spain 
expressed some concern that a GATT deal would, as France claims, go 
beyond the recently reformed CAP.  But France's support has 
declined since last week.  MacSharry disputed French claims that a 
deal would require that more land be taken out of production than 
the 15 percent "set-aside" agreed under CAP.

French farmers, who export 50 percent of their agriculture 
production and oppose U.S. demands for further reductions, staged 
protests today in France, including a large one in front of the U.S. 
embassy in Paris.  Some fear a completed GATT would set off 
massive, destructive protests.  Farmers already object to reforms in 
the EC's Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and say that an 
agriculture deal would further cut their exports.  EC trade negotiator 
Frans Andriessen contends a new deal would remain within the 
framework of CAP.

The French wheat growers' association, AGPB, said the U.S. demand 
for cuts would more than halve the EC's share of the world grain 
market by the year 2000.  "The issue would no longer be only 
economic, but also strategic, since grain exports are a food weapon," 
AGPB said in its monthly newsletter.  

France's largest opposition party, the neo-Gaullist RPR, called on the 
French government to veto any GATT deal because of its effects on 
French agriculture.  In a separate statement, the Senate economic 
affairs commission also called on the government to exercise its right 
of veto if a trade accord set quantitative restrictions on agricultural 
production or exports.

The U.S. rejected an EC proposal to reduce EC oilseeds production to 
9.5 million tons and the volume of its subsidized wheat exports by 
21 percent.  

Source: ICDA UPDATE, URUGUAY ROUND IN GATT AND TRADE 
RELATED ISSUES, May-October 1992, "GATT Deal Would Halve EC 
Grain Market Share - Group," REUTER, November 18, 1992; "Trade 
Talks," AP, November 18, 1992; Martin Crutsinger, "Trade," AP, 
November 17, 1992; Andres Wolberg-Stok, "France Slams Possible 
Deal in Key Trade Talks," REUTER, November 18, 1992; David 
Gardner, "France Fails to Block Farm Accord," FINANCIAL TIMES, 
November 17, 1992, p. 1; "French Opposition Party Urges Veto of 
GATT Accord," REUTER, November 18, 1992.
_________________________________________________________
CHINA DENIES GATT ENTRY MEANS CHEAP IMPORTS

A senior Chinese official denied widespread reports that China's 
possible re-entry into the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 
would mean a flood of cheap imports into the country.  "Once China 
joins GATT, it doesn't mean there won't be any import controls," 
Ministry of Foreign Economic Relations official Long Yongtu told the 
LEGAL DAILY.  Long said there were a number of safety valves China 
could employ if domestic industries were threatened but that any 
controls China places on imports would be consistent with GATT 
guidelines.

Source: "China Denies GATT Membership Means Import Flood," 
REUTER, November 17, 1992.
_________________________________________________________
NAFTA News Summary
_________________________________________________________
MEXICO NOT PUSHING NAFTA, WAITING FOR CLINTON

Mexico has stopped pushing for quick passage of the North American 
Free Trade Agreement amid signs the Clinton Administration may 
want to focus on the domestic economy first, the NEW YORK TIMES 
reports today.   Apparently the Mexican government will not push 
President-elect Bill Clinton nor the 121 new members of Congress 
into a rapid decision on the trade pact.  Rather, Mexican officials say, 
they will discuss any of Clinton's objections to the pact at his 
convenience.

At a hearing, Canadian Trade Minister Michael Wilson said he 
expected NAFTA to remain on schedule despite the election of 
Clinton.   Wilson said the leaders of Canada, the United States and 
Mexico will probably sign the NAFTA toward the end of December.  
"We will, however, be watching the developments in the United 
States and in Mexico closely and will work both with the outgoing 
and incoming administrations as well as (Mexican) President Salinas 
and his team to ensure that we have a coordinated approach to 
implementing the agreement," Wilson said.   The agreement, which is 
scheduled to go into effect January 1, 1994, must still be approved 
by the legislatures of the three countries.

Clinton, who believes in free trade in principle, has expressed 
concern that NAFTA may encourage an exodus of U.S. jobs to Mexico, 
as businesses take advantage of Mexico's lax environmental 
regulations and labor laws.  Clinton has said he would not seek a 
renegotiation of NAFTA, but that he would enact "supplemental" 
agreements.  In listing his top priorities upon assuming office, Clinton 
has noticeably not mentioned completing the NAFTA or GATT accords 
trade pacts.

Meanwhile, the International Trade Commission began conducting an 
independent review of NAFTA yesterday.  The six-member 
commission, which was asked by Congress to conduct an 
investigation, heard testimony from a variety of supporters and 
opponents of NAFTA.

Source:  Keith Bradsher, "Trade Pact May Have to Wait," NEW YORK 
TIMES, November 18, 1992, p. C1; "NAFTA to be Signed Next Month," 
Canada Says," REUTER, November 17, 1992.
_________________________________________________________
Resources:

Just released is the May-October 1992 edition of ICDA UPDATE: 
URUGUAY ROUND NEGOTIATIONS IN GATT AND TRADE RELATED 
ISSUES.  It's available from the International Coalition for 
Development Action (ICDA), Rue Stevin 115, B-1040 Brussels, 
Belgium.  Tel: 32-2-230-04-30.  Fax: 32-2-230-03-48.
_________________________________________________________
Other On-line Conferences:

trade.strategy - a discussion of trade issues
trade.library - a repository of trade information
eai.news - a news summary of Latin American trade topics
susag.news - a news summary of sustainable agriculture issues

Produced by:
Kai Mander    
The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP)
1313 Fifth Street SE, Suite #303
Minneapolis, MN 55414-1546 USA

Telephone:(612)379-5980 Fax:(612)379-5982 
E-Mail:kmander@igc.org
_________________________________________________________
Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive