December 12, 2005
EGALITIE FOR ME, NOT FOR THEE:
So much for égalité (LA Times, December 12, 2005)
AT THE TIME OF THE INVASION of Iraq, the idea of boycotting French products — freedom fries, anyone? — was all the rage among American conservatives. Well, maybe liberals around the world should soon issue their own call to boycott French products. That's because France, inexcusably, is blocking a global trade deal that would benefit the world's poor. [...]The United States has plenty of trade-distorting farm subsidies and import quotas, but the European Union is the real villain here, thwarting any progress. While the Bush administration has made proposals that would dramatically overhaul Washington's support to American farmers, the European Union's trade negotiators made it clear before the Hong Kong meeting that they would not go beyond current proposals, which the rest of the world find laughably insufficient.
France's government considers even the current weak-kneed EU position too aggressive and is defiantly threatening to renege on any deal. Britain, the Netherlands and many other EU members have been struggling to roll back the unsustainable Common Agricultural Policy, which eats up nearly half the EU's budget, hurts the developing world and disproportionately benefits French farmers. But French President Jacques Chirac, a former agriculture minister, obstinately insists that he and then-German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder cut a deal in 2002 to freeze farm support in real terms until 2013. Never mind all those people around the world struggling to get by on $1 a day.
France plays a pivotal role in EU trade policy. It likes to think of itself as a champion of the developing world, but its posture in these trade talks belies that claim and is a moral stain on the nation.
Does one notice when a tatterdemalion patches a hole? Posted by Orrin Judd at December 12, 2005 8:41 AM
Does one notice when an Italian makes a pizza pie?
Posted by: AllenS at December 12, 2005 9:06 AMThis really doesn't make sense. Those French farmers seem to have far more to say about their fate than peasants usually have. Do they own their own land, or is it owned by the aristocracy and farmed out to farmers to till the soil?
Posted by: erp at December 12, 2005 9:36 AMin europe, the uk, and here, lots of politicians and big contributors own farming operations and benefit directly from the subsidies. the family farmer image is a media smoke screen. this is the reason the uk waited so long to deal with mad cow -- the politicians who owned dairy cattle didn't want the hit to their pocket books.
Posted by: eu going down at December 12, 2005 10:21 AMThat's what I thought. Talking about poor farmers is a joke. They're doing the bidding of their masters just as they've been doing since time immemorial.
Posted by: erp at December 12, 2005 2:59 PMHere's my clever anti-subsidy tactic: propose capping farm subsidies at a level aimed at agribusiness but which shouldn't hurt (too much) a family farm or small business, say $2 million/year. How could voters possibly think that would hurt any family farm? Then dial the subsidy down in future years.
Posted by: PapayaSF at December 12, 2005 3:17 PM