Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pork may lead to Mexican-US trade dispute
Financial Times ^ | May 23 2003 0:32 | By John Authers and Sara Silver in Mexico City and Edward Alden in Washington

Posted on 05/24/2003 7:55:21 PM PDT by DeaconBenjamin

Relations between the US and Mexico, increasingly frayed in the last few months, now face the threat of further damage from a growing set of agricultural trade disputes.

After the elimination under the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) of tariffs on agricultural products, including pork and poultry, at the beginning of this year, the Mexican government is considering whether to block imports of US pork in an anti-dumping case brought by its hog farmers.

Mexico has also hinted that it may use safeguard provisions to restrict imports of US beef, white corn and dried beans. US apple growers were hit with a 46 per cent import duty earlier this year.

Allen Johnson, the chief US agricultural negotiator, told a Senate panel this week that US-Mexican relations on agricultural trade were at "a turning point, one way or the other". He added: "If we do not see an improvement in our agricultural trade relationship, we are prepared to take the necessary actions to protect our agricultural interests."

Some analysts say the new trade-restricting measures are part of a change in Mexican philosophy that has accelerated since President Vicente Fox came to power.

Luis Rubio, director of the Cidac think-tank in Mexico City, said: "There's been a dramatic shift in the way Mexico is working inside Nafta, and towards free trade in general. Under this administration, Mexico is no longer seeing free trade as an instrument to develop its economy. It's rather seeing it as a cost and as a problem."

Because 3m Mexican farmers grow corn to feed their families, this is a bedrock issue. "They are either protected to be able to survive in Mexico, or will be overwhelmed by subsidised imports and have to move to the US," said Carlos Heredia, vice-president of the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations.

While political pressures on both sides of the border suggest it will be difficult to avoid further conflict, Mexico is taking steps to try to defuse some of the disputes before they escalate. Luis Derbez, Mexico's foreign minister, said in a letter sent on Wednesday to Robert Zoellick, US trade representative, that Mexico would next week lift anti-dumping duties that currently block imports of US live hogs.

Mr Zoellick said he had also been promised that Mexico would try to resolve the dispute over dried beans and stone fruits.

The gestures could help in the US Congress, which has been stepping up pressure on the administration to act against Mexico.

Charles Grassley, the powerful chairman of the Senate finance committee, who represents Iowa, the largest exporter of pork, warned earlier this month that members of Congress who supported free trade "wonder why Mexican officials are so willing to jeopardise the foundation of the trading system. . . by imposing these restrictions".

But he said on Thursday that the reversal on live hogs "might provide momentum for Mexico to dismantle other trade barriers that harm Iowa producers".

The US points out that certain sectors of Mexico's agriculture industry have benefited from Nafta, mainly those in the industrial north.

But many sectors remain highly fragmented - a legacy of self-sufficient food policies and lack of credit - and far less efficient than their equivalents in the US.

Strong pressure from agricultural unions, which threatened border blockades in protest at the removal of tariffs, has been supported by both the main opposition parties.

This led the government of Mr Fox to sign the "National Agreement on the Countryside" with farmers' leaders last month, committing the government to trying to protect beans and corn, whose tariffs expire in 2008.


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; Mexico
KEYWORDS: freetrade; nafta
NAFTA, you give me lafta.
The trade's not so free, it appears to me.
Just as in the EU, farm supports are hard to undo.
1 posted on 05/24/2003 7:55:21 PM PDT by DeaconBenjamin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin

Just so you know, if it comes to relocation..

We would appreciate it if they "move" to the US legally.

As opposed to climbing a fence someplace... Eh?

2 posted on 05/24/2003 8:08:52 PM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
Mexico has also hinted that it may use safeguard provisions to restrict imports of US beef, white corn and dried beans.

That's okay, some of us want to see 'safeguard provisions' against imports of illegal aliens.

I do believe we may reach a deal here.

3 posted on 05/24/2003 8:42:21 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse (For or against us.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
Because 3m Mexican farmers grow corn to feed their families, this is a bedrock issue. "They are either protected to be able to survive in Mexico, or will be overwhelmed by subsidised imports and have to move to the US," said Carlos Heredia, vice-president of the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations.

Translation: Give us what we want, or we'll send more people your way. Or something to that effect.

Luis Rubio, director of the Cidac think-tank in Mexico City, said: "There's been a dramatic shift in the way Mexico is working inside Nafta, and towards free trade in general. Under this administration, Mexico is no longer seeing free trade as an instrument to develop its economy. It's rather seeing it as a cost and as a problem."

Translation: NAFTA sounds like yet another socialist redistribution scheme; Mexico says, "We like the parts of the treaty that favor us, and insist on them, but we'll nullify the parts we don't.

While political pressures on both sides of the border suggest it will be difficult to avoid further conflict, Mexico is taking steps to try to defuse some of the disputes before they escalate. Luis Derbez, Mexico's foreign minister, said in a letter sent on Wednesday to Robert Zoellick, US trade representative, that Mexico would next week lift anti-dumping duties that currently block imports of US live hogs.

Like this is the real issue. Or this:

Charles Grassley, the powerful chairman of the Senate finance committee, who represents Iowa, the largest exporter of pork, warned earlier this month that members of Congress who supported free trade "wonder why Mexican officials are so willing to jeopardise the foundation of the trading system. . . by imposing these restrictions".

.....I have an idea as to why they are bringing this up.

But he said on Thursday that the reversal on live hogs "might provide momentum for Mexico to dismantle other trade barriers that harm Iowa producers".

I have a feeling that some of the barriers are being placed as to provide leverage on non-trade issues.

This is a smokescreen. I'm sure many Freepers can guess as to what the real objective is.

4 posted on 05/24/2003 8:55:32 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse (For or against us.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
Luis Rubio, director of the Cidac think-tank in Mexico City, said: "There's been a dramatic shift in the way Mexico is working inside Nafta, and towards free trade in general. Under this administration, Mexico is no longer seeing free trade as an instrument to develop its economy. It's rather seeing it as a cost and as a problem."

They thought NAFTA was only for them, how silly.

Love you little poem, it seems when times are tough PROTECTIONISM is all the rage.

5 posted on 05/24/2003 8:59:37 PM PDT by Mister Baredog ((They wanted to kill 50,000 of us on 9/11, we will never forget!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jhoffa_
Charles Grassley, the powerful chairman of the Senate finance committee, who represents Iowa, the largest exporter of pork, warned earlier this month that members of Congress who supported free trade "wonder why Mexican officials are so willing to jeopardise the foundation of the trading system. . . by imposing these restrictions".

Bold mine. Because there is something more important to them than the trading system?

Some analysts say the new trade-restricting measures are part of a change in Mexican philosophy that has accelerated since President Vicente Fox came to power.

He has other interesting 'philosophies'...........one being that the United States grant blanket amnesty to illegal aliens in this country...........

6 posted on 05/24/2003 9:02:55 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse (For or against us.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mister Baredog
Love you little poem, it seems when times are tough PROTECTIONISM is all the rage. <>p>It's more than that, Mr Baredog.
7 posted on 05/24/2003 9:03:49 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse (For or against us.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
L-E-V-E-R-A-G-E.
8 posted on 05/24/2003 9:05:04 PM PDT by He Rides A White Horse (For or against us.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
bump
9 posted on 05/24/2003 9:37:13 PM PDT by green team 1999
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse
Move over Chriac, President Fox wants to learn what happens when little boys play games with GWB.
10 posted on 05/24/2003 10:05:19 PM PDT by bybybill (first the public employees, next the fish and, finally, the children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
I'm so glad we signed this treaty with our friends, Canada and Mexico. It's sort of like Czechoslovakia signing a treaty with Hitler in 1937. With friends like this, who needs enemies?
11 posted on 05/25/2003 7:01:31 AM PDT by Beck_isright (When Senator Byrd landed on an aircraft carrier, the blacks were forced below shoveling coal...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
Time to dump NAFTA. Would tell Mexico to go to Hell,but they're already there.
12 posted on 05/25/2003 7:28:29 AM PDT by Captain Shady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeaconBenjamin
Just more of the same old same old from Mexico: what's ours is ours, what's yours is negotiable. It's been said often, but it's true.

We should never have gotten into such a massive trade deal with that country, they were nowhere near being ready.

13 posted on 05/25/2003 7:46:47 AM PDT by Reaganwuzthebest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: He Rides A White Horse

Your heresy will horrify the free traders and globalists.

They will sit in a corner and shake for days, no doubt..

14 posted on 05/25/2003 7:50:19 AM PDT by Jhoffa_
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson