US-INDIA SUBSIDY ACCORD (ON WTO) SEEMS GRAINY---
NEEDS GREATER CLARITY
CLICK LINK BELOW
http://epaper.
OR
INDIA –USA DEAL ON WTO ; MORE CLARITY NEEDED
TEJINDER NARANG
India has issued a statement on
13.11.2014 that there is an understanding
reached with USA for inclusion of
“perpetual peace clause” in place of interim “peace clause up to 2017” agreed
for India at WTO’s Bali conference of December 2013. With this development, Indian
understanding is that no legal action for penalties can be initiated against
India by WTO members if India violates WTO conditions on Food Security and
subsidies on Public stocks holdings; and that USA is now expected to garner
support on the basis of this perpetual peace clause with other members for signing
of TFA (Trade Facilitation Agreement) on multilateral basis at WTO by December
2014, which was deferred in July 2014.
Though
the text of understanding reached between USA and India is still not available,
transcript of press conference of USTR (United States Trade Representative)
Ambassador Michael Froman of 13.11.2014, on the website, mentions “The
agreement consists of two basic elements. First is a specific agreement to move
forward with the full and immediate implementation of the WTO Trade
Facilitation Agreement. And second, there’s an understanding about “specific”
food security programs agreed to in the Bali accord. We eliminated any ambiguity
in Bali about the duration of the “so-called Peace
Clause”, provided
that food stockpiling programs meet the agreed upon conditions in Bali.” (http://goo.gl/pF5pyp ).
USTR statement is explicit that
the USA has merely sorted out the “ambiguity”. It remains unclear if USA has “altered”
their basic position. India may still
not be immune from legal action if the condition of subsidy beyond 10% of MSP
price levels of base year 1986-88 on food stocking programs is breached without indexing for annual inflation. (India has been very vocal to USA and WTO that
annual food inflation should be accounted for determining breach in the limit
of subsidies before deciding any penal action). Neither USTR has unambiguously
stated that peace clause will be applied till perpetuity until India’s concerns
on Food Security and subsidies on Public stocks holdings issues are settled, as claimed by the Indian officialdom.
Are India, USA, and WTO moving
from one ambiguity to another ambiguity? More details and data need to come out
in public domain before the radical departure of USA position can be confirmed.
A simple reading of above quoted
comments signifies that the first priority of USA remains to secure TFA at WTO
and that legal action before 2017 cannot be ruled out. As per Bali agreement,
peace clause is an interim arrangement and so long as USA continues to speak
about adherence of “conditions in Bali”, perhaps status –quo remains.
NDA government may be right in
interpreting the Bali agreement as the one exposed to limitation of peace
clause till 2017 while they (NDA) themselves have aggressively initiated reform
in food policies/stock holdings. USA has thus addressed Indian concern by
“modifying” the language rather than shifting their position of unlimited
access to India on exceeding subvention limits provided under WTO provisions.
If the USA position is
“Modified”, then the very objectivity of Obama Administration on WTO becomes
questionable. All issues raised by USDA on Indian subsidies and trade
distortions get annulled automatically. WTO members who have already undertaken
reforms will feel embittered if India alone stands excluded. Another poser that
arises is--- if there is change of heart in USA vs India due to some distinct
understanding on geo-political realities and economic cooperation, is it
incumbent upon other nations to follow suit and endorse policies that distort
the trade!!
Here is an explanation of how Indian public procurement policy of grains
leads to trade distortion in import, export and domestic market. There is 90% subvention under Food Security Act.
Heavily subsidised grains discourage or deter import into India at world’s market
prices. Thus India as a market remains closed or blocked to other exporting
nations.
On the export front India has unfair advantage. Since India’s PDS
system has leakage of 45-50%, the pilfered pipeline enables local traders to
procure cereals at below the market prices, which enhances Indian export competitiveness
to the disadvantage of other competing nations. Despite India claiming its sovereignty
in its food policy management, the other nations are inimical to this flawed
system because it certainly tramples on their sovereignty to trade globally.
The Indian Government also knows that hoarding of stockpiles by
FCI/State agencies sucks surpluses that would have otherwise gone to the
market. These dead stocks induce food inflation and generate financial losses
apart from rot of grains.
WTO agreement attempts to put all
nations on equal footing. India and USA have moved forward, as claimed by both
sides, but need to come out openly and transparently so that more clarity is
arrived at in the public domain to assess the terminal outcome of the deal at
WTO.
Thank you for sharing this wonderful blog with us.This is really helpful and informative blog.keep sharing these kinds of blogs.
ReplyDelete