U.S. grain leaders stress that the Ministerial Round of the World Trade Organization scheduled for Nov. 30-Dec. 3 in Seattle is merely the beginning of a
new round of global trade talks expected to stretch three years or more.
However, there is a big difference between this round and the last round of talks, which resulted in the General Agreement on Tariffs and
Trade. The GATT was the first attempt at trade liberalization on a global scale. This second time around, the GATT provides a benchmark for U.S. grain leaders to prepare for further negotiations. And
indeed, U.S. grain groups appear to be doing their homework.
"Obviously we want to talk about state trading enterprises (such as the Canadian Wheat Board) and also, the European Union and how the world needs to
address subsidy levels," says Chris Shaffer, a Walla, Walla, Wash. wheat grower who was elected by U.S. Wheat Associates and the National Association of Wheat Growers as their WTO representative. "Seattle is just
the start. There will be positions put on the table, but a lot of it in the beginning will be information on how we should get from point A to point B. There may be discussions on timelines. But
basically, it will establish parameters for negotiations in Geneva."
The "meat" of the negotiations will begin early next year. Shaffer says the U.S. wheat production sector has been preparing for the
actual negotiations for over a year and a half. Priorities and objectives for the WTO have been established, and conveyed to agriculture and trade officials from the U.S. and other countries. Coalitions with
other industry groups are being established. Studies are in the works to help U.S. wheat producers prove their case on key trade matters, namely, the effects of European export subsidies and the CWB.
And,
the U.S. wheat industry has hired some high-powered help to assist in its WTO objectives: The law firm of Mayer, Brown and Platt, including former U.S. Trade Representative Mickey Kantor, the U.S. negotiator at the
conclusion of the Uruguay Round of GATT.
"There was a feeling by the industry that our voice needs to be heard, and that we need to have a means to navigate the rocky seas of these negotiations. We have the
expertise to do that. So we truly have had some meaningful gains," says Shaffer.
The North Dakota Wheat Commission is exerting more leverage on the Canadian trade aspect of the WTO negotiations, by retaining
the legal services of Charles Hunnicutt, a Washington, D.C. trade lawyer who orchestrated Section 22 action that resulted in a short-term cap on Canadian grain imports earlier in the 1990s.
"These individuals know
trade law, and where the pressure points are," says Neal Fisher, executive director of the NDWC. "The CWB often puts itself off as just another grain company, and some have bought off on that. But
through such government-backed means as preferential rates and hopper cars, they are able to do things that we think helps them do business on a more aggressive basis."
In actual tonnage, the EU is probably a bigger
trade factor for the U.S. wheat industry to contend with, says Fisher. But for bread wheat, Canada is a bigger factor. "We compete with them head to head everywhere we go, and we find evidence of a standing
offer (by the CWB to wheat buyers) to undercut our price by $5 a ton and three tenths less dockage. It's impossible for U.S. wheat producers to compete with that."
Fisher says "hard lessons" were learned in the
last round, and that the wheat industry will draw on those lessons this round. "There was no real experience in the last round, because agriculture had not been a trade focus before. Everyone went
along with good faith, but obviously, we came away disappointed."
"If there's anything different about this round compared to the last, it's that we've become more focused on the problems that need to be addressed,"
says Fisher. "It's hard to say how the negotiations will go. It's no different than dealing on a tractor or land; it can be a moving target. But they have to know that we matter; that there's a
significantly beneficial industry out here."
John Mittleider, executive director of the North Dakota Barley Council, says the new round of WTO negotiations is so crucial to the future of the U.S. barley industry
that the entire five-member NDBC board of directors may attend the opening meeting in Seattle. "This could be the last chance to make a difference for barley in trade, so it's almost mandatory to be there," says
Mittleider. "We need to be in on the ground floor."
In the last round, Mittleider believes barley may have been addressed in the larger context of U.S. feed grains and corn. However, he says, the trade
dynamics for barley are much different than for corn.
"Our sole intent is to make sure that (negotiators) are more aware of (barley) issues," says Mittleider. "We might not survive another round if we don't get
what we need out of this round, given the direction of barley acres in this country."
