Ambassador Susan C. Schwab, USTR Post State of the Union Roundtable -- 29 January 2008
Ambassador Schwab: Good morning...The President said it all last night. The President was very clear in his intent and ambition when it comes to the trade agenda. We know we have a lot we need to get done in 2008. He talked about the Doha Round...he talked about the importance of seeing enactment into law of the three pending Free Trade Agreements. He talked about Trade Adjustment Assistance.
Question: Nestor Ikeda, AP reporter for Latin America. This is in regard to those three Free Trade Agreements pending discussion in Congress. The President has said that the U.S. administration is sending the Colombia agreement first. Does it mean that the President is looking to press the Congress for this discussion without even having the votes for in favor of the agreement?
Ambassador Schwab: Clearly our approach to the Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement is to work in conjunction with the congressional leadership to make sure that the Colombia FTA gets a vote. Colombia deserves a vote and deserves a vote sooner rather than later...So the answer to your question is we look forward to working with the congressional leadership, Republicans and Democrats, to make sure that there’s a timely vote on the Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement, and we hope a strong bipartisan endorsement of that agreement.
...
Question: [Financial Review]. What...are real prospects for the Doha Round? I noticed the President made just a one-line reference, it seemed almost a glancing reference.
Ambassador Schwab: ...I think the prospects for Australia and the United States to continue working closely together to achieve a Doha Round outcome this year are pretty good...the President’s reference last night [to completing the Doha Round] was very substantive and very significant and a signal, designed as a signal not just to the Congress and to the American people but also to our trading partners. So I hope they picked it up.
Question: A quick follow-on. Could you discuss a little bit more on Doha with the mini-ministerial targeted for around Easter. What do you see as the scope of the horizontal discussion? Agriculture, NAMA, services? Or do you think it should be broader? And when the Trade Ministers inquired at Davos about the prospect for TPA, what is your answer?
Ambassador Schwab: You’ve asked a couple of questions. The conversations that I had last week in Europe, and you’ll recall I started out visiting Brussels, then went to Geneva for a day and then concluded a couple of days at the World Economic Forum. At the World Economic Forum I think we had a dozen and a half, perhaps two dozen Trade Ministers, so it was an opportunity for a lot of bilateral discussions as well as the panels that took place. One was sort of a closed panel with some business people. Then the public panel. Then the three hour meeting over lunch that the Ministers normally do.
A lot of the conversation had to do with timetable and scope. We had lengthy conversations about the juxtaposition of scope and speed and substance, which is to say if as we all appear to agree we want a successful conclusion of the Doha Round in 2008, and if you work backwards from a document that could be initialed at the end of the year then you need six to eight months to finalize schedules. So first to develop schedule and then to negotiate differences associated with the schedules, because no one’s going to, when we talk about flexibilities, there will be a negotiation as to what is or is not included or sheltered by virtue of flexibilities, whether it’s in agriculture or in NAMA for developing countries...
So you work backwards, and then during that six to eight month period you also have to negotiate in all of those negotiating groups where you aren’t going to have a conclusion as part of your modalities exercise.
...
You asked a question on Trade Promotion Authority. I have made a commitment, my approach to Trade Promotion Authority in terms of conversations with ministerial colleagues hasn’t changed, namely no one on the Hill is going to be willing to have a serious conversation with me about TPA unless and until we get a modalities breakthrough. At that point if we get a successful outcome on [Doha Round] modalities the Chairman of the Finance Committee and the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee have both indicated their willingness to work with us on Trade Promotion Authority. Therefore, as soon as we have a breakthrough, if we have a breakthrough, I would intend to go up to the Hill and actively pursue Trade Promotion Authority. Recognizing at that point any vote on Trade Promotion Authority becomes de facto a proxy for the Doha development agenda.
...
Ambassador Schwab: At minimum, there was a lot of discussion last week among Ministers about the lack of balance in the ag and NAMA texts. Now depending on who you talk to, they’re either talking about technical balance, meaning level of specificity, or they’re talking about substantive balance. From the U.S. perspective, any lack of substantive balance is that there’s far more ambition in disciplining agricultural subsidies than there is in market access, either in agriculture or NAMA. We see that currently as a lack of balance.
...
Question: All three legs -- ag, NAMA and services have to be teed up?
Ambassador Schwab: In ag and NAMA, definitely; and in services, because the -- The answer is yes on services except the process is different. And the next major substantive process with any specificity in it is going to be the next exchange of offers. That exchange of offers is not likely to take place in advance of a ministerial...
Question: Rangel last night in his response to the State of the Union said that considering the Free Trade Agreements isn’t ripe because the administration hasn’t sent them up for consideration. What do you make of that?
Secondly, have you heard anything from the Democratic leadership specifically in terms of what they want from Colombia in order to support it? What I’ve heard is you want more. Have you heard specifically what more means?
Ambassador Schwab: I’m sorry to say I did not hear or read Chairman Rangel’s remarks so I can’t comment on them. I’m looking forward to going up and calling on the Chairman again in the near future so I can make sure I have a sense of how he would like to see this play out. I’ll be going up to visit Chairman Baucus. I’ll be going up to visit Senator Grassley, Congressman McCrery, and others in leadership positions. Again, to talk about calendars, positioning, and what we can be doing to make sure that this is a bipartisan, coordinated effort rather than something that’s confrontational.
In terms of the “to do” list, I think there is not enough clarity. I think there are a lot of individuals who are asking for “more” who have been reluctant or unable to define it. And one always has this issue of goal posts. And this, by the way, is true of the Doha Round, just as it’s true of any other kind of negotiation. You can set goal posts that are realistic but tough. You can set goal posts that are so extreme as to make it utterly impossible to meet them. You can set goal posts and keep moving them. And all three of those approaches are tried and true in any kind of negotiation. We’ll see how the conversations play out.
I think we do have a sense of things that Colombia could be doing more of. I think President Uribe has articulated some of them and Colombia, the government in Colombia has expressed their intent and desire to continue doing more because it’s the right thing to do. So our effort will be trying to bridge that gap.
Question: On the Doha Round, can you count backwards on TPA and estimate when you need to send the Colombia agreement to Congress?
Ambassador Schwab: I think we’ve pretty much covered that.
Ambassador Schwab: Jutta asked a question about the Andean preference extension, and obviously trade adjustment assistance, Andean preferences, are all part of the mix.
Thank you.
# # # #