In the run up to Seattle, many interested groups like industry, agriculture and government have put forth strongly their views on what India should be trying to achieve. It is good to see a national consensus slowly falling in place. It is likely that such consensus will get sharpened further in the next few weeks. While all of us know what the US and the European Union want from us in terms of relaxation of investments, patent law, transparency in government contracts etc, we should try and focus on what we want out of Seattle. It is my conviction that exports, agriculture and services are the areas where we should be looking for pickings.

Our top priority would be to get through with the unfinished agenda for it is obvious that there are many things which the West promised to do during previous negotiations but which they have not done. For example in the area of textiles the peak duties in US are still very high even though the average tariff may appear reasonable. Further there is a strong case to demand that quantitative restrictions be removed earlier than 2005. It is important for us to negotiate hard because textiles is a great generator of employment and export. The West is also being well niggardly when it comes to tariffs on many labour intensive low technology products from India. True they have given zero tariffs for some of our products but these are only natural resources that they themselves want. Our negotiators should ask for elimination of peak tariffs on low technology products since that can again make a big difference to our exports.

Agricultural exports is going to be a messiah for us in the years to come. There is a high level of protection which industrial nations continue to maintain on agriculture. We should fight hard against that and also object to the concept of bound tariff levels since these are so high and reduction from such high levels will still give them high protection. Unfortunately due to historical reasons our own duty levels are low and moving away from bound levels will be very much in our interest.

The biggest item in our wish list for would be liberalisation of movement of skilled and professional persons. This is the quid pro quo that we should ask from the West for any concessions we give in industrial tariffs. We should try and increase the number of services that can be included. We can try to get construction personnel, chartered accountants, management consultants, lawyers, persons skilled in art and culture to be brought within the head services. We Indians have the best quality and lowest cost manpower in the world and we should try to push that as our main product.

We have been short-changed as a country in the area of intellectual property rights. It makes one a bit sick to see patents being awarded in the West for turmeric and other products which were used from Vedic times. We should insist that IPRs should be granted on products where there is traditional knowledge in developing country only after ensuring the prior informed consent of that country. One could think in terms of some prior WTO notification which would enable a developing country to notify its traditionally rich products that are in the public domain, There should then be a mechanism by which once a product is in public domain in a developing country patenting of that should not be possible.

It is obvious that the West is going to push through for new negotiations on investments, reduction of import duties, incorporation of labour standards, a new competition law, etc. True they will have their agenda but in a globalised environment it will be nave for us to appear negative. We should make counter-demand knowing fully well that we may have to give in on some counts. Therein lies our skill. Seattle is a great opportunity for India to become a global player in agriculture, services and may be the price to play would be a faster opening of our own markets.

The author owns an investment banking firm in Delhi and is a former country head of Citibank's merchant banking division