RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/REG141/M/1 
28 April 2004 
 
 (04-1892) 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements 
Thirty-Sixth Session  
 
 
 
EXAMINATION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES - JORDAN 
EURO-MEDITERRANEAN AGREEMENT 
 
Note on the Meeting of 29 March 2004  
 
Chairman: Mr. R. Saborío (Costa Rica) 
  
1. The meeting was convened in document WTO/AIR/2276/Rev.1. 
2. Under Agenda Items C.III of its Thirty-S ixth Session, the Committee on Regional Trade 
Agreements (hereinafter CRTA or  the Committee) took up the first round of examination of the 
European Communities (EC)-Jordan Euro-Mediterra nean Agreement.  The following topics were 
discussed: 
 A. G
ENERAL REMARKS  
 B. S ECTION I - BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE AGREEMENT  
 C. S ECTION II - TRADE PROVISIONS  
 D. S ECTION IV - OTHER  
 A. G
ENERAL REMARKS  
3. The Chairman  said that the EC-Jordan Euro-Mediterran ean Agreement had entered into force 
on 1 May 2002 and had been notified to the WTO on 20 December 2002, as document 
WT/REG141/N/1, with the text of the Agreement appearing in document WT/REG141/1.  The terms of reference for the examination had been adopted  by the Council for Trade in Goods on 23 January 
2003 and were contained in document WT/REG 141/2.  He proposed to use the Standard Format, 
document WT/REG141/3, to guide the debate. 
4. The representative of the European Communities
 stated that the Parties were pleased to 
present the Association Agreement under which the tw o Parties had agreed to establish a Free Trade 
Area between them. The text of this Agreement had been circulated to WTO Members on 24 December 2002 under the document reference WT/REG 141/1. As the basis for the examination by the 
Committee, the Parties had also prepared a notif ication on the basis of the "Standard Format" 
developed by the Committee. This material ha d been circulated on 19 March 2004 under document 
WT/REG141/3.  He would start by placing this Ag reement in the wider context of the Barcelona 
Process, so called the "Euromed Process".  In 1995,  27 countries in the Mediterranean area, the 15 
Member States of the European Union (EU) and Mo rocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, 
Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Lebanon, Turk ey, Malta and Cyprus had signed the Barcelona 
Declaration.  The Barcelona Conference, held on  27-28 November 1995, had marked the start of a 
new "partnership" phase in the relationship betw een the European Union and its Mediterranean 
Partners, characterised by intensified bilateral a nd multilateral regional co-operation.  The aim of the 
Barcelona Process was to create an integrated area of peace and prosperity on both sides of the Mediterranean.  Euromed partners had agreed among themselves to create a partnership in order to WT/REG141/M/1 
Page 2  
 
 ensure stability and socio-economic development in  the region.  One of the major goals of the 
Barcelona Process was to create an Euro-Mediterra nean Free Trade Area by 2010.  Mediterranean 
partner countries had concluded association agre ements with the EU, which allowed for the 
progressive elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade in manufactured products in accordance with negotiated timetabl es;  the EU from its side grante d duty-free access to industrial 
products originating in the Mediterranean part ner country.  Trade in agriculture would be 
progressively liberalised through reciprocal preferen tial access among the parties, taking into account 
traditional trade flows, the constraints of the vari ous agricultural policies, and developments within 
the GATT negotiations.  Trade in services, including right of establishment, would be progressively liberalised, with due regard to the GATS.  The key elements of the Association Agreement with 
Jordan were therefore consistent with the Barcelona Declaration and similar to those of other 
association agreements concluded with the EU Med iterranean partners.  The representative of the 
European Communities continued saying that this  Association Agreement had been signed on 24 
November 1997 and had entered into force on 1 May 2002.  It established an association between the 
Parties and a free-trade area over a transitional period lasting a maximum of 12 years starting from the 
date of entry into force.  It covered industr ial and agricultural products but was not limited to 
elimination of tariff and non-tariff restrictions on bilateral trade with the view of establishing the 
conditions for the gradual liberalization of trade in  goods, services and capital. The Agreement also 
had the objective of providing an appropriate fra mework for the political dialogue;  fostering the 
development of balanced economic and social rela tions between the Parties through dialogue and co-
operation;  improving living and employment cond itions and enhancing productivity and financial 
stability;  encouraging co-operation with a view to  the consolidation of peaceful coexistence and 
economic and political stability; and promoting co-ope ration in others areas which are of reciprocal 
interest.  As regards trade provisions, the EU had granted duty-free access to industrial products 
originating in Jordan, as it was already the case in  the Co-operation Agreement replaced by this 
Association Agreement. For produc ts originating in the EU, custom s duties on imports into Jordan 
and measures having equivalent effect were elim inated according to a sch edule starting from entry 
into force and spreading over a transition period depending on the products.  Quantitative restrictions 
and measures having equivalent effect on trade be tween the Parties were abolished upon entry into 
force of the Agreement. Trade in agricultural produc ts and processed agricultural products originating 
in Jordan was liberalized, duties were reduced or eliminated, sometimes within the limits of tariff 
quotas;  Jordan also applied reduced duties to EU goods.  The Agreement was not limited to the 
elimination of duties and non-tariff restrictions on b ilateral trade in goods;  it created an Association 
and included trade related provisions concerning right of establishment and services; competition 
matters; trade defence measures; investment and related payments; an adequate and effective 
protection of intellectual property rights.  It al so foresaw liberalization of public procurement 
contracts, and co-operation in customs, financia l, and social and cultural matters, among others. 
5. The representative of Jordan
 stated that since the entry into force of the EU-Jordan 
Association Agreement on 1 May 2002, Jordan  placed more emphasis on strengthening and 
expanding its bilateral co-operation w ith the EU in the various fields of industry, agriculture, science 
and technology, environment and othe r fields of mutual interest.  The Association Agreement was not 
only limited to economic and trade co-operation but also entailed political, social and cultural co-
operation.  It heralded the culmination of the re lationship between Jordan and the EU, and reflected 
the advancement of the Parties' bilateral co- operation based upon common interests and shared 
perceptions for the welfare of their peoples. A ke y objective of the Association Agreement was the 
progressive creation of a free-trade area between the EU and Jordan by the year 2014, and in 
conformity with the provisions of the GATT.  Over the last two years, Jord an had been undertaking 
great efforts for achieving a successful implementati on of the Association Agreement in its various 
pillars.  His country believed that the Association Agreement provided some of the basic ingredients 
of an effective paradigm within which the various  sectors of Jordan's economy could, if efficiently 
managed, be better prepared for an era of enhan ced productivity, competitiveness and export-oriented 
markets.  Furthermore, the Agreement stipulated progressive co-operation between Jordan and the EU  WT/REG141/M/1 
 Page 3 
 
 
 in various trade-related areas to remove technical ba rriers to trade;  simplify controls and procedures 
of customs clearance;  harmonize regulations and st andards on quality, metrology, and conformity 
assessment procedures, with the long-term view to  establishing mutual recognition agreements;  and 
approximate the respective legislative and re gulatory frameworks to facilitate an effective 
implementation of this Partnership Agreement.  The EU continued to  be one of his country's major 
trade partners with trade levels reaching over 1.8 b illion Euro on an annual basis.  While the EU was 
the source of about a third of Jordanian imports, its market received less than 4% of Jordan's exports. 
It was his country's belief that the advancement of  co-operation between the Parties, as embedded in 
the Association Agreement, would enable Jordan to  increase its trade volume while reducing the trade 
gap.  In today's world of globalization, achie ving sustained and equitable economic growth was 
closely connected with both the process and goa ls of human development. Trade and economic 
liberalization policies were driven by Jordan's desire  to fully integrate into the global economy, and its 
need for technology transfer and inward investment .  For his country, the Association Agreement was 
not only about bringing down trade barriers, but al so about developing the a ppropriate regulatory and 
legislative framework for the establishment of an investment-friendly environment.  Jordan had a 
vision of creating a modern economy, based on knowledge and successful global integration, for 
which it had adopted an aggressive, yet comprehensiv e and integrated approach towards development 
that relied on the active participation of the private sector, as well as the creation of a strong investment climate.  Jordan's reform agenda had clearly corresponded to the evolving global trends, 
and success had already been attained in molding a progressive export-orientated policy, as well as a 
lucrative investment climate, in which businesses coul d thrive by tapping into the vast world market.  
Finally, he thanked the Committee for its attention and noted that he would be delighted to address 
any inquiries. 
6. Referring to the statement made by the represen tative of the EC, the representative of the 
United States
 indicated that she had a had follow-up qu estion on the Euromed process and that she 
would like the reply to be fully reflected in the minutes.  She understood that there were Association 
Agreements by the members of the Barcelona Group with the EU, as it was the case of this 
Agreement.  She asked what plan s existed for fulfilling the integration objectives of the Barcelona 
meeting.  In particular, she questioned whether th ere existed agreements as between those countries 
and whether there existed any stages planned for inte gration as between the countries rather than what 
it would seem up to now as a "hub and spoke" approach , whereby many agreements existed with the 
EU but maybe not as many agreements among the othe r countries.  It was her delegation's view that 
the latter process would more fully realize the in tegration objectives.  The representative of Jordan  
replied that the process was undergoing;  extensiv e efforts were being made by the Mediterranean 
countries and the EU in this aspect.  So far, a major accomplishment ha d been made with the 
completion of the Agadir Agreement, establishing a free-trade area involving four countries, namely 
Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia and Morocco.  This Agreem ent had been signed some weeks before that day 
and it was hoped that it would enter into force by the beginning of next year.  In due course, it would 
be notified to the WTO.  His delegation believed that other initiatives would be taken to further 
deepen economic integration in the Mediterranean countries. 
B. SECTION I - BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE AGREEMENT  
7. The representative of Japan  expressed his delegation's appreciation for the general statement  
made by the Parties.  Noting the seven month dela y from the time the Agreement entered into force 
and the time of notification, the representative of Japan  asked what was the reason for not having  
notified the Agreement earlier.  The re presentative of the European Communities  requested that the 
question be submitted in writing so that an appropriate written repl y could be provided. 
8. Referring to paragraph 3 of th e Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXIV of the 
GATT 1994, the representative of China  noted that the duration of the "reasonable length of time" 
referred to in paragraph 5(c) of Article XXIV should exceed ten years only in exceptional cases, and WT/REG141/M/1 
Page 4  
 
 that in such cases the parties should provide a fu ll explanation. He thanked the Parties for the 
comprehensive information provided on the Agr eement;  his delegation would however appreciate 
receiving an explanation on why this Agreement would take a maximum of twelve years to establish a free-trade area.  The representative of Jordan
 replied that both Parties had agreed that Jordan would 
need twelve years in order to provide the need ed time to improve the competitiveness of Jordan's 
economic sectors and allow na tional exporters to adjust to the new requirements. 
9. The representative of Japan  wished to know the coverage of the Agreement in terms of both 
trade volume and tariff lines.  In particular, he said th at they would be interested in learning the tariff 
lines of those industrial products that were not cove red by the Agreement.  The representative of the 
European Communities  indicated that the reply would be provided in writing. 
C. SECTION II - TRADE PROVISIONS  
10. The representative of the United States  had a question with relation to Annex 4 as referred to 
in Section II:1.1 of the Standard Format (Duties a nd Charges).  More specifically, she was interested 
in learning from the Parties which were the products referred therein, the value of trade between the 
Parties they represented, as well as to the reasons for leaving open the timetable for the elimination of 
customs duties and charges having equivalent effect  on those products.  The representative of Jordan  
indicated that the reply would be provided in writing. 
11. The representative of the United States  wondered whether the Parties could provide a 
description of the concept of "origi nating products" as set out in Prot ocol 3 to the Agreement, as well 
as a description of the cumulation of origin that wa s foreseen in the Agreement.  The representative of 
the European Communities  indicated that the reply would be provided in writing. 
12. The representative of Canada  noted that the Agreement referred to two types of safeguard 
measures: exceptional measures of limited duration wh ich could be taken by Jordan, and appropriate 
measures which could be taken by either the EC or Jo rdan.  In that respect, he asked the Parties for an 
explanation with regard to the differences betw een the two measures, whether the "appropriate 
measures" referred to cases of serious injury wher eas the "exceptional measures" referred to serious 
difficulties and, if that was the case, how the la tter differed from serious injury, and whether those 
different safeguards foresaw different types of remedies.  The representative of Jordan asked for the 
question to be submitted in writing. 
13. The representative of Australia  had a number of questions with respect to Section II:8 of the 
Standard Format dealing with "sector-specific provisions".  With respect to the heading on 
agricultural products, she first asked the Parties wh ether they could provide more information on 
Protocols 1 and 2 of the Agreement; secondly, noting that for certain products the rates of reduction 
only applied to the ad valorem  duties, she asked the Parties to provi de additional information;  thirdly, 
she wished for an update with respect to the ne gotiations expected to start after July 2002, as 
mentioned in Section II:8(c); and finally, she asked  the Parties whether they could provide further 
explanation with respect to the paragraph on pr ocessed agricultural products.  The representative of 
Japan  sought clarification from the Parties with respec t to the timing envisaged for the gradual greater 
liberalization in agricultural products as referred to in Section II:8(c) of the Standard Format.  He 
wondered whether that timeframe corresponded to th e twelve-year transition period provided by the 
Agreement and, if so, whether by the end of that  period almost all products, including agricultural 
products, would be liberalized.  The representative of Jordan  indicated that replies to the questions 
would be provided in writing.  Ho wever, regarding the negotiations referred to under Section II:8(c), 
he said that, due to the delay in the ratification pr ocess of the Agreement, both Parties had agreed to 
postpone the agricultural negotiations in order to gain experience with the trade provisions under 
Protocols 1 and 2.  He informed Members that the Pa rties had started a dialogue with the objective to 
establish a framework and set a new time frame for those negotiations.  WT/REG141/M/1 
 Page 5 
 
 
 D. OTHER  
14. The representative of the United States  had two questions.  One concerned public 
procurement, where the Agreement foresaw that the Association Council would take steps necessary 
to ensure reciprocal gradual liberalization of public  procurement contracts.  She wondered what steps 
had taken place and what precise plans were foreseen .   The other question concerned provisions on 
the right of establishment in services.  Her dele gation would appreciate receiving more information, 
perhaps in writing, on these provisions and how they  fitted in with the GATS.  The representative of 
Jordan  replied that both Parties had agreed to postp one negotiations on public procurement until such 
time as Jordan concluded its negotiations fo r accession to the WTO Government Procurement 
Agreement.  The replies to the other qu estions would be submitted in writing.  
15. The Chairman  said that although the meeting had allowed the Committee to clarify some 
questions regarding the EC-Jordan Euro-Mediterra nean Agreement, a number of issues remained 
pending.  He asked delegations wish ing to submit written questions to do so by 16 April 2004 and for 
the Parties to provide written responses by 28 May 2 004.  The examination of this Agreement would 
continue at a future Session of the Committee.   
16. The Committee took note  of the comments made. 
 
__________