CAMBRIDGE, MA., Aug 19 (IPS) – Closing arguments are in in the U.S. trade complaint against Mexico’s restrictions on genetically modified (GM) corn, with the three-arbitration tribunal set to rule on the issue in November. The legitimacy of the trade deal itself hangs in the balance.
Over the course of a year-long process, Mexico has dismantled U.S. claims. It has shown that the precautions it is taking are permitted under the terms of the trade agreement, that the restrictions have had little impact on U.S. exports, and that it has a mountain of scientific evidence to support its precautions.
Will the panel allow the US to use a trade deal to stop a policy that has little effect on trade?
The U.S. government requested this formal dispute resolution process a year ago under the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Trade Agreement (USMCA) over the Mexican Presidential Decree of February 2023 which banned the use of genetically modified corn in tortillas and the use of the herbicide glyphosate, which is used on 80% of US corn. Mexico quoted evidence of both genetically modified corn and glyphosate in tortillas and other common corn preparations and documented the risks of such exposure, particularly for the Mexican population, which eats more than ten times as much corn per capita as the United States.
Where is the trade restriction?
The American claim has been deceptive from the start. his complaint it incorrectly characterized Mexico’s presidential decree as a “Tortilla Corn Ban” and a “Substitution Instruction” to phase out imports of genetically modified yellow corn for animal feed. Mexico has repeatedly objected to these terms in its written submissions in the case.
By calling it a “tortilla corn ban,” the U.S. is implying that Mexico has banned U.S. exports of white corn, the kind commonly used in tortillas. They have not done that. They have only banned the use of genetically engineered corn in tortillas and in other foods made from minimally processed (ground) white corn. It is a use ban, not an import ban. Exports of white corn, including genetically engineered white corn, still flow from the U.S. to Mexico. They just cannot be used in the tortilla/cornmeal food chain.
Because the vast majority of U.S. corn exports are yellow varieties for animal feed and industrial use, the restriction has little impact on U.S. corn producers. Where is the trade restriction?
Much of the U.S. case rests on the misleading characterization of the Substitution Instruction as a restriction on trade. It is not.
The U.S. claims the 2023 executive order calls for the eventual phaseout of all imports of genetically modified corn, threatening Mexico’s $5 billion-a-year market for U.S. yellow corn—97% of U.S. exports—predominantly genetically modified varieties used primarily as animal feed. While Mexico currently has no restrictions on such U.S. exports and none are planned, the U.S. claims the Mexican mandate threatens the future profits it expected to receive from the trade deal.
Commercial lawyer Ernesto Hernández López adopted the American deception, pointing out that there is no mandate (instruction) to stop using GM corn, only to grow more alternative non-GM feed sources and use them as they become available. The original decree uses the term “progressive substitution” (paulina substitution) and makes it clear that this depends on the availability of stocks.
As Hernández López points out, the trade panel should not accept a U.S. argument based largely on hypothetical future reductions in Mexican imports of genetically modified corn. The U.S. case is further weakened by data showing that US feed corn exports to Mexico have increased significantly since the 2023 decision, a result of poor harvests due to drought.
Consider the facts
The USMCA tribunal must consider the following facts:
The Mexican government has also highlighted how lax and conflict-of-interest the U.S. regulatory process for genetically modified corn is, a charge echoed by the American Center for Food SafetyThis means that, as a Reuters headline put it in March, “Mexico is waiting for evidence from the US that genetically modified corn is safe for its population.”
After hundreds of pages of documents and two days of hearings, Mexico is still waiting for that evidence. Hopefully the tribunal will weigh the facts, reject the U.S. claim, and not allow the U.S. to abuse a trade agreement to stop a policy it doesn’t like.
Timothy A. Wijs is a Senior Research Fellow at the Global Development and Environment Institute at Tufts University and author of Eating Tomorrow: Agribusiness, Family Farmers and the Battle for the Future of Food.
IPS UN Office
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram
© Inter Press Service (2024) — All rights reservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service