Printer Friendly

WTO rules against U.S. in cotton case.

A World Trade Organization panel ruled on April 26 that U.S. cotton subsidies are in violation of the WTO's global trade rules. Brazil had brought the case to the WTO, claiming that U.S. subsidies had harmed Brazil's cotton industry by driving down world cotton prices. Other cotton-producing areas--Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, the European Union, India and Venezuela--joined Brazil as third parties in the case.

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick told a House Agriculture Committee hearing on farm trade issues on April 28, "We're going to fight for U.S. ag interests, whether it be litigation or negotiation." If the decision is upheld by the WTO in June, "you can be 100 percent sure we're going to appeal this and press this all the way," Zoellick said. Appeal "all the way" to where? Under the WTO system that the Clinton and Bush administrations have embraced, the WTO's "courts" are the last word. The Bush administration also vowed to fight the WTO's recent ruling against steel tariffs, only to cave in to the global bureaucrats shortly thereafter.
COPYRIGHT 2004 American Opinion Publishing, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2004, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Insider Report
Publication:The New American
Article Type:Brief Article
Date:May 17, 2004
Words:178
Previous Article:Amnesty rush escalates.
Next Article:NORAD drills foreshadowed 9-11 attacks.
Topics:


Related Articles
World Trade Organization caught in the middle: are TEDS the only way out?
Tricky Trade Balancing Act.
U.S. export rules in question; dispute over international trade agreements continues.
America's sorry trade performance: whatever happened to all that talk about rule of law?
WTO to enforce Kyoto restrictions?

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2020 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters