“Peace Clause” for India to Apply until 2017 – Pak Opposes

The revised texts include a draft “peace clause” on public food stockholding, likely to take the form of a ministerial decision, and a draft declaration that would exempt from WTO ceilings certain subsidies that cause only minimal trade distortion.

Negotiators are also close to reaching a deal that would see WTO members agree to refrain from bringing trade disputes on food stockholding schemes that could cause developing countries to exceed current ceilings on trade-distorting farm subsidies, in exchange for more information and transparency about how these programmes function.

India, supported by other developing countries in the G-33 coalition, has been adamant that WTO farm subsidy rules should be updated to account for price inflation since thresholds for measuring support were agreed some twenty years ago. New Delhi is keen to ensure it can purchase food at administered prices when implementing its recently-approved food security law, and that it will be able to do so without sparking legal challenges in Geneva.

Negotiators in Geneva had scrambled to resuscitate an outline deal on food stocks that seemed to have been placed in jeopardy following a letter from Indian commerce minister Anand Sharma to his US counterpart Michael Froman.

The letter - reported by Reuters in New Delhi, seemingly before a copy had reached Washington - cautioned that the proposed outline deal “falls well short of our requirements and would place onerous conditions which would restrict its use significantly.”

Many developed countries have nonetheless expressed concern that countries should not be allowed to provide unlimited amounts of trade-distorting farm subsidies to build public food stockpiles - with some developing countries also worried that the proposal could undermine their own farmers’ livelihoods and food security if proper safeguards are not included.

At this meeting, Pakistan, Thailand, Ecuador, and Uruguay expressed fears that the duration and product coverage outlined in the draft text were too expansive. India warned against upsetting the “delicate balance” reflected in the text as currently drafted, while Bolivia and Cuba spoke in support.

According to the latest draft text, the new agreement would remain in force until the global trade body’s eleventh ministerial conference in 2017: governments would then “decide on next steps” on the basis of a report from the General Council, and the outcome of a work programme on this issue aimed at making recommendations for a permanent solution.

They also included new language on “anti-circumvention” and safeguards aimed at avoiding trade distortion.

Support Programmes in Green Box

There were minimal changes to a separate text which clarifies that a number of support programmes should be included in the WTO’s “green box” - intended to cover farm subsidy measures that are exempt from any ceiling on the grounds that they cause no more than minimal trade distortion.

Developing countries had pressed for recognition of these programmes, arguing that the current rules mostly reflected the types of programmes that developed countries use. However, the proposal had not generated much controversy among WTO members.

The new language would cover general services programmes related to land reform and rural livelihood security, such as land rehabilitation; soil conservation and resource management; drought management and flood control; rural employment; issuance of property titles; and farmer settlement programmes.

Export subsidies and similar measures

The G-20 developing country group had also proposed that ministers agree to cut ceilings on export subsidies and other measures with equivalent effects, as a step towards the goal of eliminating these payments. At the WTO’s Hong Kong ministerial conference in 2005, governments had agreed that all such subsidies would have ended this year.

The latest drafts would commit WTO members to “ensure, to the maximum extent possible,” that progress is maintained towards the elimination of all forms of export subsidies and other measures with equivalent effects. It would similarly commit members to keep these measures “significantly below” current commitments.