India’s Curbs on Broken Rice Export Face Criticism at WTO
After wheat, India’s
decision to ban the export of broken rice and also impose 20% export duty on
some varieties of the cereal, has come under attack from Senegal, a large
importer, as well as the United States and
the European Union.
Responding to the
criticism during a meeting at the World Trade
Organisation (WTO)
last week, India defended the action, arguing that it was necessary to ban the
export of broken rice, used as poultry feed, as shipments from the country had
soared in recent months, creating pressure in the domestic market, sources
familiar with the deliberations said.
Officials said the
position of several WTO members on India’s food export is self-contradictory as
they criticise New Delhi for “exporting too much” and then attack it for
stopping exports.
The US and the EU
acknowledged that India had the policy space to undertake the steps, but
Washington sought to blame the action for creating fresh uncertainty in the
global market. Senegal asked India to keep trade open, according to sources.
The ban on wheat
exports too came under scrutiny with Ukraine chipping in to say that it had not
stopped exports while India maintained that the move was temporary, officials
said.
The US and the EU,
which have traditionally attacked India’s trade policy, along with Brazil,
Thailand and Australia, also sought to link the recent bans to question the
government’s decision to invoke the “peace clause”, which allows members to
provide more than the prescribed ceiling on procurement.
For close to a decade
now, some of these countries, especially the US, EU, Australia and Canada, have
sought to block a final decision on reworking the trade agreement to ensure
that developing countries are not at a disadvantage on the procurement front,
something that India has sought to push to ensure that the minimum support
price regime is not hit.
While nine countries
had sought consultations, questioning the peace clause, they are now seeking
group meetings instead of meeting bilaterally, which India is keen on.
In 2013 in Bali,
trade ministers had agreed not to drag a country to the WTO’s dispute
settlement body in case the support for public stockholding exceeded 10% of the
value of production. But it was an interim solution and so far
India is the only country to invoke the provision so far, causing discomfort to
developed nations, which are trying to keep the terms of trade in their favour.