Washington, DC
May 13, 2003
EU's illegal, non-science
based moratorium is harmful to agriculture and the developing
world
U.S. Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick and Agriculture
Secretary Ann M. Veneman today announced the United States,
Argentina, Canada, and Egypt will file a World Trade
Organization (WTO) case against the European Union (EU) over its
illegal five-year moratorium on approving agricultural biotech
products. Other countries expressing support for this case by
joining it as third parties include: Australia, Chile, Colombia,
El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru and
Uruguay.
Joining Zoellick and Veneman at the Washington announcement were
Dr. C.S. Prakash (organizer of a
pro-agricultural biotech declaration signed by 20 Nobel
Laureates and over 3,200 scientists); T.J. Buthelezi, a small
farmer of biotech crops from South Africa; Dr. Diran Makinde,
DVM, Ph.D., Dean of the School of Agriculture, University of
Venda for Science and Technology, South Africa; Dr. Ariel
Alvarez-Morales, Principal Scientist, Department of Plant
Genetic Engineering, Center for Research and Advanced Studies,
Irapuato, Mexico; and, representatives from countries
participating in the case.
"The EU's moratorium violates WTO rules. People around the world
have been eating biotech food for years. Biotech food helps
nourish the world's hungry population, offers tremendous
opportunities for better health and nutrition and protects the
environment by reducing soil erosion and pesticide use," said
Zoellick. "We've waited patiently for five years for the EU to
follow the WTO rules and the recommendations of the European
Commission, so as to respect safety findings based on careful
science. The EU's persistent resistance to abiding by its WTO
obligations has perpetuated a trade barrier unwarranted by the
EC's own scientific analysis, which impedes the global use of a
technology that could be of great benefit to farmers and
consumers around the world."
"With this case, we are fighting for the interests of American
agriculture. This case is about playing by the rules negotiated
in good faith. The European Union has failed to comply with its
WTO obligations," said Veneman. "Biotechnology is helping
farmers increase yields, lower pesticide use, improve soil
conservation and water pollution and help reduce hunger and
poverty around the world.
Farmers here and elsewhere must be assured that their crops
won't be unfairly rejected simply because they were produced
using biotechnology. The EU actions threaten to deny the full
development of a technology that holds enormous potential
benefits to both producers and consumers worldwide, while also
providing a very significant means to combat hunger and
malnutrition that afflict hundreds of millions of people across
the developing world."
"The U.S. and the EU have a large and important economic
relationship, and disputes such as this,
while very important, make up only one part of that
relationship. The United States will continue to work with the
EU to manage this and other disputes in an appropriate way, and
we look forward to advancing our shared objectives in the Doha
global trade negotiations and other fora," Zoellick added.
The WTO agreement on sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS)
recognizes that countries are
entitled to regulate crops and food products to protect health
and the environment. The WTO SPS
agreement requires, however, that members have "sufficient
scientific evidence" for such measures, and that they operate
their approval procedures without "undue delay." Otherwise,
there is a risk countries may without justification use such
regulations to thwart trade in safe, wholesome, and nutritious
products.
Before 1999, the EU approved nine agriculture biotech products
for planting or import. It then
suspended consideration of all new applications for approval,
and has offered no scientific evidence for
this moratorium on new approvals. As EU Environment Commissioner
Margot Wallstrom said almost three years ago (July 13, 2000):
"We have already waited too long to act. The moratorium is
illegal and not justified...the value of biotechnology is poorly
appreciated in Europe."
Agricultural biotechnology is a continuation of the long
tradition of agricultural innovation that has
provided the basis for rising prosperity for the past
millennium. Humankind has historically progressed in boosting
agricultural productivity, quality and choices by harnessing
science to develop new forms of crops.
More than 145 million acres (58 million hectares) of biotech
crops were grown in the world in 2002.
Worldwide, about 45% of soy, 11% of corn, 20% of cotton and 11%
of rapeseed are biotech crops. In the United States, 75% of soy,
34% of corn and 71% of cotton are biotech crops.
Numerous organizations, researchers and scientists have
determined that biotech foods pose no
threat to humans or the environment. Examples include the French
Academy of Medicine and Pharmacy, and the French Academy of
Sciences, the 3,200 scientists who cosponsored a declaration on
biotech foods and numerous scientific studies including a joint
study conducted by the seven national academies of science (the
National Academies of Science of the United States, Brazil,
China, India, and Mexico, plus the Royal Society of London and
the Third World Academy of Sciences).
Background:
In October 1998, the EU stopped approving any new agriculture
biotech products for planting or import. This moratorium had no
effect on any previously-approved products, such as corn and
soy, which are still used and are available in member countries,
but it froze the approval process in the EU. No biotech product
has ever been rejected for approval in the EU.
Since the late 1990's, the EU has pursued policies that
undermine agricultural biotechnology and trade
in biotech foods. First, six member states (Austria, France,
Germany, Italy, Greece & Luxemburg) banned modified crops
approved by the EU, and the Commission refused to challenge the
illegal bans. In 1998, member states began blocking all new
biotech applications. This approval moratorium is causing a
growing portion of U.S. agricultural exports to be excluded from
EU markets and unfairly casting concerns about biotech products
around the world, particularly in developing countries.
The first step in a WTO dispute, which the United States and
other countries are taking today, is to
request and conduct consultations in the next 60 days. WTO
procedures are designed to encourage
parties to resolve their differences. If at the end of the 60
days, no resolution has been achieved, then
the U.S. and the cooperating countries may seek the formation of
a dispute settlement panel to hear
arguments. Dispute settlement procedures, including appeal,
typically take a total of 18 months.
Fact sheets and other information are available at
www.ustr.gov,
www.usda.gov.
|