. /.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/REG72/M/2
10 August 2000
(00-3275)
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements
Twenty-Sixth Session
EXAMINATION OF THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN TURKEY AND BULGARIA
Note on the Meeting of 7 July 2000
Chairman:  Mr. Jae Gil Lee (Korea)
1. The meeting was convened in document WTO/AIR/1339.
2. Under Agenda Item D.VII of its Twenty-sixth Session, the Committee on Regional Trade
Agreements (CRTA) took up the examination of the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between Turkey
and Bulgaria. The following topics were discussed.
A. G ENERAL REMARKS
B. S ECTION II - T RADE PROVISIONS
A. G ENERAL REMARKS
3. The Chairperson noted that was the second round of examination of the Agreement, which
had already been examined on 30 March 2000 during the Twenty-fifth Session of the CRTA, under
his Chairmanship.  The proceedings of that m eeting had been distributed under document symbol
WT/REG72/M/1.  The written replies by the Parties to questions made during the first round of
examination had also been recently distributed as  document WT/REG72/6.  Prior to that, additional
information had been provided by the Parties in documents WT/REG72/4 and Corr.1, and
WT/REG72/5.  In addition, statistical informati on on "Imports of Bulgaria from Turkey, 1996-99, by
different levels of duty" was available in the meeting room that day;  they had been misplaced and
because of that were being circulated at a late stage.1  The Committee had the Standard Format,
document WT/REG72/3, to guide the debate.
4. The representative of Turkey said that the first round of examination conducted on the basis
of the Standard Format had covered every aspect and significant progress had been made through oral
questions.  The Parties had supplied answers to the written questions submitted by Members, which
had also been distributed.  Based on the examination and the written questions, he wished to
summarize a few topics, which were most debated.  First, he underlined that the Agreement covered
trade in all industrial products.  In addition, within the context of the Agreement, the Parties had
granted each other preferential market access possibilities on a number of agricultural and processedagricultural products under the positive list.  Moreover, an open-ended liberalization of trade in
agricultural products was an important component of the Agreement:  the Parties were committed to
grant further concessions within the Joint Comm ittee.  Therefore, an interpretation that the
agricultural sector was excluded from the coverage of the Agreement was not justifiable.  Regarding
the application of safeguard measures, the related provisions of the Agreement were in full conformity
                                                     
1 The statistical information was subsequent ly circulated in document WT/REG72/4/Add.1WT/REG72/M/2
Page 2
__________with GATT Article XXIV and with the WTO Agreement on Safeguards.  Considering that the
Agreement under examination fully complied with the principles of the multilateral trading system,
and that while facilitating trade between the parties, it did not raise barriers to third parties, the factual
part of the examination could be considered complete.  Still, they were prepared to answer any
additional questions.
B. SECTION II - T RADE PROVISIONS
5. The representative of Australia said that despite the remarks of the representative of Turkey,
his delegation continued to be concerned about the treatment of agriculture in the Agreement.  In the
period immediately after the Agreement had entered in to force, only 13 per cent of Turkey's
agricultural imports from Bulgaria received duty-free access to Turkey, while 68 per cent faced the
MFN rate.  In paragraph 17 of document WT/REG72/M/1, the representative of Turkey had stated
that in 1998, Turkey's total agricultural imports from Bulgaria had accounted for 14 per cent of totalimports, which in his delegation's view was not as significant as the Parties claimed.  Furthermore,
there did not appear to be a time-table for the Parties to undertake further liberalization to meet the
requirement of "substantially all the trade".  Article 12 of the Agreement only stated that the Parties
should examine the possibilities of granting each other further concessions on agricultural products
depending on developments in future WTO negotiations, among other factors.  His delegation wasdisappointed by the answer provided in response to the concerns expressed about the treatment of
agriculture.  He wondered how the Parties could meet the requirement for "substantially all the trade"
when the Agreement essentially only covered industrial products, and asked what concrete steps the
Parties could take to undertake further liberalization in the agriculture sector.  While the
representative of Turkey had alluded to that in his introductory remarks, he would appreciate somefurther elaboration.
6. The representative of the United States noted that the Agreement provided for non-zero,
better than MFN, treatment for certain products at full implementation, which his delegation did not
believe was provided for in GATT Article XXIV.  He also stated that he might submit additional
questions on the statistics provided that day.
7. The representative of Turkey said that the total coverage of the Agreement was more than
90 per cent and that agricultural products were partly covered at the time of the examination.
However, an open-ended liberalization of trade in agricultural products was an important component
of the Agreement and was going to be discussed in the Joint Committee meetings, depending on the
Parties' agricultural policies.  In the future, all products would be covered.
8. The representative of the United States asked whether there was a commitment by the Parties
to complete the open-ended agricultural liberalization within the ten year period contemplated by the
Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 .  The representative of Turkey
replied that there was no such commitment; however, in the future, depending on the agricultural
policies of the Parties, these products would mostly be covered.
9. The Chairman said that the Committee had concluded the second round of examination of the
Agreement.  There were a number of questions, particularly on agriculture, which would be submitted
in writing.  He suggested that outstanding questions be submitted to the Secretariat by 21 July 2000
and that Parties submit replies before 13 September 2000.  That would enable the Committee to retain
momentum in the examination process.  The examination of the Agreement could then be resumed at
a later date.
10. The Committee took note of the comments made.