VZCZCXRO9192
PP RUEHAG RUEHAP RUEHDE RUEHDF RUEHGI RUEHHM RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHMR
RUEHPA RUEHPB
DE RUEHTC #1560/01 1951355
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 141355Z JUL 06
FM AMEMBASSY THE HAGUE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 6320
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE
RUCNWTO/WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION COLLECTIVE
RUEHRC/DEPT OF AGRICULTURE WASHDC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUEHGV/USMISSION GENEVA 1340
RUEHBS/USEU BRUSSELS 0342

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 THE HAGUE 001560 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EB/TPP/BTA, EUR/UBI, EUR/ERA 
STATE PLEASE PASS TO USTR 
USDA/FAS (ROBERTS, YOUNG) 
USEU FOR CWILSON 
GENEVA FOR USTR (ALLGEIER/SHARK) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD USTR WTRO ECON EAGR EU NL
SUBJECT: WTO/DOHA: DUTCH ATTRIBUTE GENEVA FAILURE TO U.S. 
UNWILLINGNESS TO LOOK FOR AGREEMENT 
 
REF: STATE 109374 
 
THIS MESSAGE IS SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. PLEASE HANDLE 
ACCORDINGLY. 
 
¶1. (SBU)  SUMMARY/COMMENT. In recent statements to the 
parliament and press, Dutch Foreign Trade Minister van Gennip 
attributed the failure of recent WTO/Doha talks to USG 
unwillingness to negotiate an agreement, a signal of Dutch 
frustration with the current stalemate, according to senior 
trade officials.  The Dutch remain "one of the few" within 
the EU that continue to push for more ambitious offers.  At 
the same time, they question the depth of proposed cuts to 
U.S. agricultural subsidies and the ability of USG 
negotiators to win U.S. Congressional approval of its WTO 
offer.  Dutch senior trade officials are still hopeful for a 
successful outcome and suggest that the time has come for 
serious negotiations between the U.S. and EU on what each 
side seeks in specific improvements and respective "margins 
for maneuvering."  END SUMMARY/COMMENT. 
 
--------------------------------------------- 
Van Gennip Blames U.S. for WTO/Doha Stalemate 
--------------------------------------------- 
 
¶2. (U)  In a July 7 letter to the Dutch parliament, Karien 
van Gennip, Dutch Minister for Foreign Trade, outlined her 
views on the July 28 - July 1 gathering of high-level trade 
officials at WTO in Geneva (ref A).  Van Gennip described the 
European Commission's proposals in the ongoing Doha 
negotiations as constructive, while attributing the current 
stalemate to a U.S. unwillingness to look for an agreement. 
In statements to the press, van Gennip said the U.S. offer on 
agricultural farm subsidies was largely cosmetic, adding that 
the U.S. proposal would not reduce actual spending and would 
leave key subsidy programs intact. 
 
---------------------------------- 
EU Willing to "Move," if Others Do 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU)  On July 11, Econoffs followed up with Ministry of 
Economic Affairs officials Tjerk Opmeer, Senior Trade Policy 
Advisor, Trade Policy Department, Max Simonis, Policy 
Advisor, Trade and Investment Policy Department, and Taco 
Westerhuis, Senior Policy Advisor, North American and Energy 
Affairs Department, to discuss van Gennip's statements and 
Dutch views from the Geneva meetings.  (NOTE: Opmeer drafted 
van Gennip's letter to parliament, serves as the main Dutch 
representative to the EU 133 Trade Committee, and was part of 
the Dutch delegation in Geneva. END NOTE.) 
 
¶4. (SBU)  Opmeer said EU Trade Ministers had met June 29 to 
discuss the potential for "moving" on an EU WTO offer. As a 
result, the EU indicated on June 30 that it was flexible on 
Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA) and sensitive product 
lists, and that it was "willing to go to the G20 offer of 51 
percent" on agricultural market access.  Opmeer clarified 
that the "EU was willing to move" on agricultural market 
access, but that "everyone else had to move a little too." 
He said the EU had been disappointed by the USG negotiating 
team's unwillingness to "improve" its agricultural offer and 
said it was a "pity" that USTR had taken such a rigid stance. 
 
-------------------------------------- 
Dutch Question U.S. Agricultural Offer 
-------------------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU)  Opmeer said the U.S. offer did not include real 
cuts in agricultural subsidies and was too ambitious in 
market access.  According to GONL calculations, U.S. 
agricultural support would remain unchanged at $20 billion 
under the U.S. proposal.  He suggested that a reduction 
closer to $12 billion might "induce the G20 into compliance" 
in other areas of the negotiations. "Real cuts for real 
market access" should remain the basis for negotiations. 
Opmeer said the EU was also concerned that the U.S. $6 
billion counter-cyclical payments program would remain 
"untouched." Meanwhile, U.S. cotton subsidies needed to be 
 
THE HAGUE 00001560  002 OF 002 
 
 
part of a final deal "or there would be no African support 
nor would we achieve Doha's development objectives," he 
added. Opmeer noted that the EU intended to change all 
trade-distorting agricultural subsidy programs to non-trade 
distorting by 2013. 
 
¶6. (SBU)  Simonis shared his concern that USTR's position on 
agricultural subsidies was unrealistic. Getting Congress to 
pass reductions and a Trade Promotion Authority extension as 
elections approached "would be difficult," he added.  Even 
with a 2.5 percent cap, the U.S. could "shift everything from 
the amber to the blue box."  The EU was seeking greater 
discipline in the use of the blue box, he said. 
 
¶7. (SBU)  Econoff countered that our agricultural proposal 
would require real cuts to U.S. farm subsidy programs, 
including a reduction to $12.6 billion, according to USG 
figures.  However, he stressed that such an offer was still 
contingent on receiving ambitious responses from others, 
something that had not yet occurred. 
 
----------------------------------------- 
Dutch Remain Hopeful for Balanced Outcome 
----------------------------------------- 
 
¶8. (SBU)  Despite these differences, Opmeer said the Dutch 
still saw opportunities for a successful outcome and 
continued progress, including perhaps negotiations on the 
margins of upcoming G8 meetings in Russia.  He proposed that 
the U.S. and EU "lay their cards on the table" and share the 
specific improvements they sought and their respective 
"margins for maneuvering."  Van Gennip's recent statements, 
he argued, did not reflect a change in Dutch policy, as the 
Dutch continue to be "one of the few in the EU that are 
pushing for more ambitious proposals and for WTO Director 
General Pascal Lamy to go forward."  However, van Gennip's 
statements were a signal that the Dutch also have limits. 
Other EU countries had "reached their limit earlier," he said. 
BLAKEMAN