PUNE: World Trade Organisation (WTO) members opposing subsidies on agriculture by nations like India are in effect opposing sustainable development goals (SDGs) of removing poverty and hunger and to that end, India needs its minimum support price (MSP) system, but the WTO forbids the policy, said Mohan Kumar, former Indian ambassador to Bahrain and France.
“If you see the agriculture agreement of the Uruguay round, I can argue that the way they have interpreted the agreement it is against the sustainable development goals of abolition of poverty and hunger. In 1986, we somewhat foolishly agreed that the subsidies given will not exceed 10% of value of a particular commodity,” said Mohan Kumar, who is a professor of diplomatic practice at the Jindal School of International Affairs, at the Asia Economic Dialogue organised by Pune International Centre said on Saturday.
India’s position in the international trade, except IT and IT services, is highly uncompetitive, which is why we see the country becoming defensive at the WTO, former ambassador to China Gautam Bambawale said.
However, the agricultural agreement is unfair as Europe and the US were subsidising their agriculture to the tune of over Rs 8,200 crore per day and now these countries are asking India to stop Punjab farmers, Kumar said. “The WTO has no business preaching us on agriculture,” he said. Although India’s position has somewhat improved since turn of century, its expertise is lacking as compared to developed countries, he said. To bridge that gap, India can train officers from Indian Trade Service, he said. Asanka Wijesinghe, a research fellow at Institute of Policy Studies, Sri Lanka, said that the disagreement at WTO should be resolved through consensus approach, instead of voting as powerful nations can sway decision-making in their favour.
“If you see the agriculture agreement of the Uruguay round, I can argue that the way they have interpreted the agreement it is against the sustainable development goals of abolition of poverty and hunger. In 1986, we somewhat foolishly agreed that the subsidies given will not exceed 10% of value of a particular commodity,” said Mohan Kumar, who is a professor of diplomatic practice at the Jindal School of International Affairs, at the Asia Economic Dialogue organised by Pune International Centre said on Saturday.
India’s position in the international trade, except IT and IT services, is highly uncompetitive, which is why we see the country becoming defensive at the WTO, former ambassador to China Gautam Bambawale said.
However, the agricultural agreement is unfair as Europe and the US were subsidising their agriculture to the tune of over Rs 8,200 crore per day and now these countries are asking India to stop Punjab farmers, Kumar said. “The WTO has no business preaching us on agriculture,” he said. Although India’s position has somewhat improved since turn of century, its expertise is lacking as compared to developed countries, he said. To bridge that gap, India can train officers from Indian Trade Service, he said. Asanka Wijesinghe, a research fellow at Institute of Policy Studies, Sri Lanka, said that the disagreement at WTO should be resolved through consensus approach, instead of voting as powerful nations can sway decision-making in their favour.
We also published the following articles recently