Q&A: SUSAN G ESSERMAN

‘Engage early and vigourously, and seek market access’

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) expert seems to be in love with India’s forts. When (then) US president Bill Clinton came here in March 2000, as his deputy US trade representative (USTR) Ambassador Susan G Esserman went around the Agra Fort. She returned awestruck! This time, as part of Ambassador Frank Wisner’s US-India Business Council team, Ms Esserman decided to do a dekko of Delhi’s Red Fort. She returned disappointed! “Could do with repairs,” she says. But her experiences may come in handy, for her enduring stop is ‘Fortress India’.

Ms Esserman has held four top-level positions with the Office of the USTR and the commerce department, including as USTR general counsel. She played a lead role in devising US litigation strategy in the early years of the WTO dispute resolution, and in developing anti-dumping and countervailing duty trade legislation, besides negotiations with the former Soviet Union, African, the Middle East, and the WTO itself. Ms Esserman spoke to Rohit Bansal of The Financial Express.

You spent time with commerce minister Murasoli Maran. What’s the connect with the objectives of Steptoe & Johnson? (The firm offers multi-disciplinary services and counselling to international businesses).
We assist clients with their international business challenges. We provide legal and strategic advice on expanding access to foreign markets, and facets of international trade litigation and dispute resolution. My message to Minister Maran was that WTO represents a great opportunity for India. The negotiations are shaped towards India’s interests.

Not everybody here would agree...
Then consider this. India has this great opportunity now to play a lead role in cutting down the distortions in the world’s agriculture markets. Then, as a leader in hi-tech, India now has a critical stake in the services negotiations. My message to Minister Maran was, ‘let’s work together to open up world markets’.

But India too will get a taste of this bitter pill!
The new negotiations are in India’s interests. You aren’t part of any major regional block. The (new) negotiations represent potential opportunity to benefit from a genuine free trade agreement (FTA), encompassing 145 countries. I urge India to engage early and vigourously. India and the US have a common interest, stepping from our common democratic heritage, our prominence, and our leadership in high-tech. If we work together, this would send a strong signal to the world. We have much in common...in our interests in lowering global barriers on agriculture, services, and industrial tariffs.

But what about Indian industry?
Rather than be defensive and resistant, India should launch a series of requests for market access across various countries. The world would be better off if India is proactive in this exercise, and not defensive.

That’s easier said. Take neighbouring Pakistan. India has given them most favoured nation (MFN) status. But there’s been no reciprocity. Instead, what’s given in return is access to 602 non-descript items. Just two days back, former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto told The Financial Express that the semantics of MFN aren’t right! That translated to sabse pyaara mulq or ‘most beloved country’, it is hard to justify MFN status to India.
Did she make that point? She’s very right! We faced this problem when we were cutting the deal with China. To the credit of Senator Patrick Moynihan—he was once our ambassador to India—we called the bill by a different and more accurate name, PNTR. This stands for Permanent Normal Trade Relations.

Interesting! And did an average American bother?
Very much so. It was a simple case of America’s political leadership articulating a vision to its people. PNTR explained how our relations with China were uniform to our relations with other nations. It labelled that uniformity far better than MFN.

It’s interesting that you haven’t spoken to us as someone whose party is out of office! From your use of ‘we’ on joint negotiations, etc, it was as if you were still with the USTR.

True. The broader relations, the change in tone, the warming up have all come out of the Clinton-Vajpayee visits. It was my privilege to be part of this cooperative, shared heritage. (US President) Mr Bush has carried that perspective of warmth. So, the preceding message and the one from (USTR) Ambassador (Robert) Zoellick is similar: a) open markets, b) WTO has great benefits for India.

So the Democrats don’t seem to grudge anything Mr Zoellick conceded at Doha?
We support Ambassador Zoellick, for his overall thrust was positive. Mr Clinton wanted a new round. That’s been launched. What added further urgency is basically two things. a) the economic downturn, where people felt a greater risk, if the process was derailed, and b) the greater sense of commonality and purpose in the face of the terrorist attacks on September 11. In international negotiations the mood is very important. Naturally, we are gratified to see the mood for trade liberalisation.