'India will retaliate if faced with non-tariff trade barriers'
February 8, 2008
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/000200802081866.htm
The Hindu
Bangalore (PTI): India on Friday warned that it will retaliate against countries that seek to impose non-tariff barriers to trade on its exporters.
Without taking names, Commerce and Industry Minister Kamal Nath told exporters at a meeting here that the sub- continent nation has become a key market to some of these countries, which could not afford to lose out on it.
He was replying to questions about some countries creating hindrances to trade by invoking labour laws, packaging standards and safety measures.
Last year, some leading international clothing brands had put a freeze on sourcing of readymade garments from an Indian manufacturer citing employment of child labour. It had nearly caused a diplomatic stand-off between India and the Netherlands.
Industry estimates had pegged the growth of garment sourcing from India at 12 per cent. Other estimates suggested that clothing and textile production in India by foreign brands would touch USD 22-25 billion this year.
The textile industry, an employment intensive sector, is already said to have suffered the worst by the rupee's appreciation against the US dollar.
Nath said India's strength lies in its credibility and should be leveraged in the face of stiff competition offered by global players.
He said India was negotiating trade agreements with various countries to strengthen its position on trade.
India's inherent strength of being a large market and her ability to topping technology and innovation has made the country into a key supply source, the minister said.
Showing posts with label India. Show all posts
Showing posts with label India. Show all posts
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Are Cuban Trade Sanctions a Vestige of the Past??
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cubaecon20feb20,1,7782700.story?track=rss
From the Los Angeles Times
FIDEL CASTRO STEPS DOWN: U.S. businesses are eager to jump in
For many, the question is when, not if, trade barriers against Cuba will be lifted, a veteran observer says.
By Marla Dickerson
Los Angeles Times Staff WriterFebruary 20, 2008
MEXICO CITY — With Fidel Castro stepping aside, California vegetable growers, Alabama chicken producers and Kansas wheat farmers -- not to mention scores of other nonagricultural businesses -- see new opportunity to push for an expansion of U.S.-Cuba trade.
America has quietly become the largest foreign supplier of food products to the communist nation, thanks to a loosening of the long-standing U.S. trade embargo against the island nation in 2000. U.S. farmers sold an estimated $437 million worth of agricultural products to Cuba last year, according to the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council. The Cuban government puts the figure even higher, at more than $600 million.
Though the U.S. has limited its trade to mostly agricultural items, economic rivals such as China have been much more aggressive -- cutting deals with Cuba to develop its oil reserves and other natural resources. With a population of more than 11 million just 90 miles off the U.S. coast, Cuba is a largely untapped market for American goods and services.
"We're leaving billions of dollars on the table," said Kirby Jones, president of Alamar Associates, a Maryland-based consulting firm that advises companies interested in doing business in Cuba. "By any measure, [U.S. policy] has been a failure."
U.S. officials said Tuesday that there were no immediate plans for further easing of the 46-year-old trade embargo. Experts said American policymakers would proceed cautiously given that Castro is still alive, and given that Florida, with its powerful anti-Castro lobby of Cuban Americans, may play a decisive role in the U.S. presidential election.
Still, some veteran observers said that Castro's departure marks another small but inevitable step toward closer trade ties with Cuba, particularly at a time when globalization is forcing the U.S. to fight for market share in every corner of the globe.
"Most [American] businesspeople are thinking in terms of 'when' instead of 'if' " the embargo is lifted, said Mario Sacasa, senior vice president for international programs with the Beacon Council, a Miami-based economic development organization. "Their question is always: 'Why does the U.S. trade with other non-democratic governments but not with Cuba?' "
For nearly half a century, the trade embargo has been an unassailable feature of U.S. foreign policy, strongly supported by South Florida's conservative Cuban American community. Thousands of people lost their homes, businesses and other private property to Castro's communist regime, a bitter memory that has shaped U.S. policy ever since.
But another powerful U.S. lobby -- farmers -- has managed to crack that blockade ever so slightly.
Under pressure from agriculture groups, Congress in late 2000 approved sales of commodities and food products to the island, as long as Cuba paid upfront in cash and the transactions weren't handled by U.S. banks.
Despite those tricky terms, trade took off almost immediately. By 2003, the United States had surpassed the European Union as Cuba's largest foreign supplier of agricultural products, according to the U.S. International Trade Commission.
Major exports include corn, chicken, wheat, soybeans and rice. A parade of U.S. representatives and trade delegations have traveled to Cuba in recent years to try to strike trade deals.
But California, America's largest farm state, sells virtually nothing to Cuba. Exports in 2006 totaled a paltry $735,000, mostly in tomatoes, almonds and table grapes, according to the latest figures available from the state.
Last month California sent a large agricultural delegation to Cuba in the hopes of cultivating stronger trade ties with the Caribbean nation. Golden State growers are looking for opportunities wherever they present themselves, said Ken Gilliland, director of international trade for the Western Growers Assn.
He said critics' contention that California farmers would be propping up a communist regime by selling fruit and vegetables to Cuba just doesn't ring true with the state's producers.
"We're not talking about some sensitive technology or computers or arms or anything like that. We're talking about food," Gilliland said. "Practically the whole world is already trading with Cuba." U.S. policy "just kind of puts us growers and producers at a disadvantage."
Countries such as China and Canada are exploring for petroleum in Cuban waters and helping the country develop its nickel reserves. Spanish companies have invested heavily in Cuba's tourism sector, and Brazil is looking to build roads and other infrastructure. India wants to cooperate with Cuba in science and high technology.
Some U.S. firms complain that the Cuban government has pressed them to lobby their legislators for an end to the American trade embargo in exchange for contracts -- a price some have found too steep, according to John Kavulich, a senior policy advisor with the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council.
"The problem is when the Cubans start putting conditions" on the contracts, said Kavulich, who declined to name companies that have been pressured in such a way.
Kavulich said that so far, U.S. businesspeople have shown little excitement about the changing of the guard in Cuba. "They know that nothing has changed," he said.
Still, consultant Jones said that the real shift that American businesses are waiting for will come out of Washington, not Havana, with the U.S. elections in November.
He said the departure of Castro, an impossibly polarizing figure, combined with new leadership in the White House could lead initially to small changes such as liberalizing U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba -- and perhaps bigger ones down the road.
"It's a recipe for rethinking and change," he said.
From the Los Angeles Times
FIDEL CASTRO STEPS DOWN: U.S. businesses are eager to jump in
For many, the question is when, not if, trade barriers against Cuba will be lifted, a veteran observer says.
By Marla Dickerson
Los Angeles Times Staff WriterFebruary 20, 2008
MEXICO CITY — With Fidel Castro stepping aside, California vegetable growers, Alabama chicken producers and Kansas wheat farmers -- not to mention scores of other nonagricultural businesses -- see new opportunity to push for an expansion of U.S.-Cuba trade.
America has quietly become the largest foreign supplier of food products to the communist nation, thanks to a loosening of the long-standing U.S. trade embargo against the island nation in 2000. U.S. farmers sold an estimated $437 million worth of agricultural products to Cuba last year, according to the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council. The Cuban government puts the figure even higher, at more than $600 million.
Though the U.S. has limited its trade to mostly agricultural items, economic rivals such as China have been much more aggressive -- cutting deals with Cuba to develop its oil reserves and other natural resources. With a population of more than 11 million just 90 miles off the U.S. coast, Cuba is a largely untapped market for American goods and services.
"We're leaving billions of dollars on the table," said Kirby Jones, president of Alamar Associates, a Maryland-based consulting firm that advises companies interested in doing business in Cuba. "By any measure, [U.S. policy] has been a failure."
U.S. officials said Tuesday that there were no immediate plans for further easing of the 46-year-old trade embargo. Experts said American policymakers would proceed cautiously given that Castro is still alive, and given that Florida, with its powerful anti-Castro lobby of Cuban Americans, may play a decisive role in the U.S. presidential election.
Still, some veteran observers said that Castro's departure marks another small but inevitable step toward closer trade ties with Cuba, particularly at a time when globalization is forcing the U.S. to fight for market share in every corner of the globe.
"Most [American] businesspeople are thinking in terms of 'when' instead of 'if' " the embargo is lifted, said Mario Sacasa, senior vice president for international programs with the Beacon Council, a Miami-based economic development organization. "Their question is always: 'Why does the U.S. trade with other non-democratic governments but not with Cuba?' "
For nearly half a century, the trade embargo has been an unassailable feature of U.S. foreign policy, strongly supported by South Florida's conservative Cuban American community. Thousands of people lost their homes, businesses and other private property to Castro's communist regime, a bitter memory that has shaped U.S. policy ever since.
But another powerful U.S. lobby -- farmers -- has managed to crack that blockade ever so slightly.
Under pressure from agriculture groups, Congress in late 2000 approved sales of commodities and food products to the island, as long as Cuba paid upfront in cash and the transactions weren't handled by U.S. banks.
Despite those tricky terms, trade took off almost immediately. By 2003, the United States had surpassed the European Union as Cuba's largest foreign supplier of agricultural products, according to the U.S. International Trade Commission.
Major exports include corn, chicken, wheat, soybeans and rice. A parade of U.S. representatives and trade delegations have traveled to Cuba in recent years to try to strike trade deals.
But California, America's largest farm state, sells virtually nothing to Cuba. Exports in 2006 totaled a paltry $735,000, mostly in tomatoes, almonds and table grapes, according to the latest figures available from the state.
Last month California sent a large agricultural delegation to Cuba in the hopes of cultivating stronger trade ties with the Caribbean nation. Golden State growers are looking for opportunities wherever they present themselves, said Ken Gilliland, director of international trade for the Western Growers Assn.
He said critics' contention that California farmers would be propping up a communist regime by selling fruit and vegetables to Cuba just doesn't ring true with the state's producers.
"We're not talking about some sensitive technology or computers or arms or anything like that. We're talking about food," Gilliland said. "Practically the whole world is already trading with Cuba." U.S. policy "just kind of puts us growers and producers at a disadvantage."
Countries such as China and Canada are exploring for petroleum in Cuban waters and helping the country develop its nickel reserves. Spanish companies have invested heavily in Cuba's tourism sector, and Brazil is looking to build roads and other infrastructure. India wants to cooperate with Cuba in science and high technology.
Some U.S. firms complain that the Cuban government has pressed them to lobby their legislators for an end to the American trade embargo in exchange for contracts -- a price some have found too steep, according to John Kavulich, a senior policy advisor with the U.S.-Cuba Trade and Economic Council.
"The problem is when the Cubans start putting conditions" on the contracts, said Kavulich, who declined to name companies that have been pressured in such a way.
Kavulich said that so far, U.S. businesspeople have shown little excitement about the changing of the guard in Cuba. "They know that nothing has changed," he said.
Still, consultant Jones said that the real shift that American businesses are waiting for will come out of Washington, not Havana, with the U.S. elections in November.
He said the departure of Castro, an impossibly polarizing figure, combined with new leadership in the White House could lead initially to small changes such as liberalizing U.S. travel restrictions to Cuba -- and perhaps bigger ones down the road.
"It's a recipe for rethinking and change," he said.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
The Time For Doha Is Now
http://www.merinews.com/catFull.jsp?articleID=129745
2008 is ‘make or break’ for Doha trade talks: World leaders
MeriNews, India
Amidst fears of a worldwide fiscal depression mounting, trade leaders at the WEF pressed businesses to push their governments to seek a successful conclusion to the Doha Round of trade talks this year or risk rise in new barriers to international business
WITH FEARS of a global economic recession growing, trade leaders at Davos urged businesses to press their governments to seek a successful conclusion to the Doha Round of trade talks in 2008, or risk seeing a rise in new barriers to international commerce.
“If it’s not concluded this year, it won’t be concluded next year - and by 2010 the caravans will have moved on elsewhere,” Peter Mandelson, commissioner, Trade, European Commission, Brussels, told participants at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008. “Not only will the caravans have moved on in different directions of trade negotiations, but what has already been on the table, which in my view is quite substantial, will have been put into deep freeze.”
After more than six years of stop-start negotiations, the Doha talks between members of the World Trade Organization have ground to a halt. With less than a year before US President George Bush leaves office, time is rapidly running out for reaching an agreement to reduce tariffs, subsidies and promote freer and fairer trade, panelists said.
The plenary session “Threats to the Global Trading System” followed an informal lunch meeting of trade ministers in Davos. Despite important progress on technical issues over the past six months, panelists revealed, the group remains no closer to an agreement and scepticism is high. Concerns persist among developing countries that lower tariffs will unfairly expose poor rural farmers to global competition and jeopardise growth that would be a potential buffer against a global slowdown.
“The content of this Round must deliver to healthy economies in Asia, in Africa, in the Pacific and in Latin America because that’s the goose that’s laying the golden egg,” said Kamal Nath, minister of Commerce and Industry of India.
But the cost of failure is rising, panelists said. Failure in the Doha Round would be likely to increase protectionist pressures around the world and result in a rollback from the progress already made towards freer global trade. Mandelson said the negotiations had become a prisoner to some extent of the American political calendar. Campaigning is already underway for elections to replace Bush next January, and a new president is unlikely to be able to put the Doha Round at the front of the US policy agenda, he said. The new President is likely to want to review any commitments that have already been made.
President Bush remains strongly committed to reaching a trade deal, insisted US representative Susan Schwab, and bipartisan support for a deal in the US Congress means there is still time to ratify a deal if one can be reached, she said.
Pascal Lamy, director general, World Trade Organization (WTO), Geneva, said a failure in the talks could exacerbate the impact of a slowing global economy and heighten geopolitical tensions. Celso Amorim, minister of Foreign Relations of Brazil, echoing these concerns, said failure to reach a deal in 2008 would “give the wrong signals to the global economy. And this will be detrimental to everybody, most of all the developing economies.”
Indeed, continued delays had lost the negotiators’ credibility among voters and companies, said Doris Leuthard, federal councillor of Economic Affairs of the Swiss Confederation. “When we don’t get a result, national protectionism is a big threat,” she said.
While businesses may be frustrated with the lack of progress in the Doha Round, companies still have a great deal to gain from it, Mandelson stressed - and a great deal to lose if a deal is not reached. “There is very significant economic value in binding the existing openness in the global economy,” he said.
Companies, therefore, most overcome their scepticism to push for a successful deal, panelists said. “The capacity of any one of us to deliver such a package through our political systems will depend in large measure on what the private sector is doing and saying, and whether they hold accountable leaders in their countries,” said Schwab.
2008 is ‘make or break’ for Doha trade talks: World leaders
MeriNews, India
Mineguruji, 27 January 2008,
Amidst fears of a worldwide fiscal depression mounting, trade leaders at the WEF pressed businesses to push their governments to seek a successful conclusion to the Doha Round of trade talks this year or risk rise in new barriers to international business
WITH FEARS of a global economic recession growing, trade leaders at Davos urged businesses to press their governments to seek a successful conclusion to the Doha Round of trade talks in 2008, or risk seeing a rise in new barriers to international commerce.
“If it’s not concluded this year, it won’t be concluded next year - and by 2010 the caravans will have moved on elsewhere,” Peter Mandelson, commissioner, Trade, European Commission, Brussels, told participants at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2008. “Not only will the caravans have moved on in different directions of trade negotiations, but what has already been on the table, which in my view is quite substantial, will have been put into deep freeze.”
After more than six years of stop-start negotiations, the Doha talks between members of the World Trade Organization have ground to a halt. With less than a year before US President George Bush leaves office, time is rapidly running out for reaching an agreement to reduce tariffs, subsidies and promote freer and fairer trade, panelists said.
The plenary session “Threats to the Global Trading System” followed an informal lunch meeting of trade ministers in Davos. Despite important progress on technical issues over the past six months, panelists revealed, the group remains no closer to an agreement and scepticism is high. Concerns persist among developing countries that lower tariffs will unfairly expose poor rural farmers to global competition and jeopardise growth that would be a potential buffer against a global slowdown.
“The content of this Round must deliver to healthy economies in Asia, in Africa, in the Pacific and in Latin America because that’s the goose that’s laying the golden egg,” said Kamal Nath, minister of Commerce and Industry of India.
But the cost of failure is rising, panelists said. Failure in the Doha Round would be likely to increase protectionist pressures around the world and result in a rollback from the progress already made towards freer global trade. Mandelson said the negotiations had become a prisoner to some extent of the American political calendar. Campaigning is already underway for elections to replace Bush next January, and a new president is unlikely to be able to put the Doha Round at the front of the US policy agenda, he said. The new President is likely to want to review any commitments that have already been made.
President Bush remains strongly committed to reaching a trade deal, insisted US representative Susan Schwab, and bipartisan support for a deal in the US Congress means there is still time to ratify a deal if one can be reached, she said.
Pascal Lamy, director general, World Trade Organization (WTO), Geneva, said a failure in the talks could exacerbate the impact of a slowing global economy and heighten geopolitical tensions. Celso Amorim, minister of Foreign Relations of Brazil, echoing these concerns, said failure to reach a deal in 2008 would “give the wrong signals to the global economy. And this will be detrimental to everybody, most of all the developing economies.”
Indeed, continued delays had lost the negotiators’ credibility among voters and companies, said Doris Leuthard, federal councillor of Economic Affairs of the Swiss Confederation. “When we don’t get a result, national protectionism is a big threat,” she said.
While businesses may be frustrated with the lack of progress in the Doha Round, companies still have a great deal to gain from it, Mandelson stressed - and a great deal to lose if a deal is not reached. “There is very significant economic value in binding the existing openness in the global economy,” he said.
Companies, therefore, most overcome their scepticism to push for a successful deal, panelists said. “The capacity of any one of us to deliver such a package through our political systems will depend in large measure on what the private sector is doing and saying, and whether they hold accountable leaders in their countries,” said Schwab.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
