Brussels, 29/12/2000 (Agence Europe) - The third countries concerned by the banana dispute are still deeply divided over the reform the European Union recently decided to undertake to solve this situation, as painful as it is complex. The first reactions to the quota solution (of the type "first come, first served") chosen thus oscillate between satisfaction by Ecuador and "determined" opposition by Panama, along with disagreement in the American industry, which is still divided between diverging commercial interests.
Ecuador, the world's leading exporter of bananas and the number one supplier to the European market, is entirely satisfied with the "particularly significant" result of the deliberations of the EU Council of Ministers (see EUROPE of 21 December, page 13). "It implies the abolition of country quotas for producers and also quotas for firms that market" bananas, welcomed the Ambassador from Quito in Brussels, Alfredo Pinoargote. "The tariff quota system thus goes into operation without discrimination, in accordance with the recommendations of the WTO and the position maintained by Ecuador in the dispute", he added, recalling that Ecuador is the only producer country to have complained in Geneva, "since others handed over their representation [in this dispute] to the United States and others were in favour of the illegal system".
These will be the "relevant mechanisms of the WTO" which, fully transparent, will determine the compatibility of the new regime with the agreements on the trade in goods and services (GATT and GATS), he was pleased to note. Mr Pinoargote nonetheless recalled that Quito considers as "excessive" a customs tariff of 300 euros per tonne (intended to procure a preference for ACP bananas) and recommends an average of between 75 and 300 euros.
Conversely, Panama confirmed, "with the same determination as before, its deep opposition to action" decided by the Union, declared the Trade and Industry Minister concerning the regime that must take effect between 1 April and 1 July. The solution adopted, he states, will "reproduce the number of discriminatory and restrictive elements that have done so much damage to the producer countries of Latin America and which were condemned by the WTO". He felt that "the implementation of the badly named 'first come first served' system will not contribute to recovery of the markets or to the finalisation of this broad and extenuating trade dispute". "On the contrary, it will bring with it new and renewed trade disputes within the WTO", he added, warning that Panama would then be "forced" to complain to Geneva, mainly under Article 1 of GATT, of the tariff preference that the ACP countries would continue to enjoy. He went on to urge for negotiations to be resumed on the basis of the tariff regime of an historic kind recommended by the United States, the Caribbean and some Latin American countries. Also highly critical, the official United States' reaction remains mitigated by the split within American industry, divided between Chiquita's hostility and the satisfaction of the other banana multinational, Dole. The 'first come first served' system will lead to another procedure in Geneva, warned the first, while its rival gave overwhelming support to the "non-discriminatory" solution retained for the giving the right to import Latin American bananas. Finally, from Bogota an appeal was launched against this system which would endanger the "climate of peace" that has developed in Colombia thanks to the banana economy.