Arun Jaitley, India?s commerce minister, and Pascal Lamy, the trade supremo for the 15-nation European Union (EU), are not the best of friends – certainly not after Cancun, when Jaitley led the opposition to Mr Lamy?s battle plan for agriculture. Even so, Mr Jaitley could do worse than follow the example of his opposite number and open a regular dialogue with European civil society. The EU?s Trade Commissioner learnt the importance of listening to grassroots organisations after the ?battle in Seattle,? which brought the third meeting of WTO trade ministers to an ignominious end in 1999. And European non-governmental organisations (NGOs) are taking full advantage of the opportunity Mr Lamy has offered them.

The message that organisations such as EuroCommerce, on the one hand, and the Danish 92 Group on the other, have delivered to the EU?s Trade Commissioner can only reinforce the message that India, and the G-20 group of developing countries, tried to put across during the Cancun meeting of WTO trade ministers in September.

This was evident during the latest round of consultations between European civil society and Mr Lamy. The Danish 92 Group made it clear that agriculture must be the main issue on the Doha Development Agenda, the official name of the Doha round of trade negotiations. It pointed out that the concessions offered by the EU and the US in Cancun made a few demands on European and American farmers, and required ?no major overhaul of their present agricultural policy.?

?One major reason for the breakdown in Cancun was the EU?s minimalist approach to offering concessions itself, while presenting maximalist demands to others,? a Copenhagen-based NGO noted in its postmortem on Cancun. ?The EU,? it added for good measure, ?is setting a bad example by failing to live up to commitments and pledges made in Doha.? EuroCommerce wants the EU?s Trade Commissioner to tackle the reasons why developing countries apparently do not favour a multilateral approach to trade problems.

The Brussels-based organisation, which represents the European retail and wholesale trade, believes that this is because of the failure of developed countries to implement previous agreements, like the Uruguay Round, and the lack of concessions on ?sensitive? products like textiles and agriculture, for example.

NGOs do not speak with one voice, of course. Even while NGOs like the Danish group were telling the EU?s trade representative to do much more to open up the EU market to imports of agricultural products from developing countries, the spokesman for European farmers was indignantly demanding why the EU?s credibility on agricultural issues was being questioned.

The EU, he pointed out, had carried out three major reforms of its common agricultural policy in the last 10 years. European agriculture, in other words, had changed fundamentally. What was needed, however, was a clearer definition of developing countries. Otherwise the main beneficiaries of trade liberalisation will be the large developing countries, like Brazil and India.

The need to ?discriminate? between developing countries was echoed by the representative of a Spanish organisation. Argentina, for example, was a superpower when it came to food production and export, yet one-third of its population goes hungry.

You cannot consult with others and yet keep quiet yourself. The EU Trade Commissioner responded boldly to the arguments of European civil society organisations. He noted that the EU cannot raise the issue of classifying developing countries according to their level of industrialisation or competitiveness. If it did, it would be accused to seeking to ?divide and rule.?

He suggested instead that emerging developing countries, like India, China, Brazil and South Africa, could offer tariff preferences to the 49 least developed countries, a category recognised by the UN. The Doha Development Agenda, Trade Commissioner Lamy, told the NGOs, is so-called because of its constant references to development. Trade, in other words, must be made to work for development, which meant going beyond the WTO?s requirements for special and differential treatment for developing countries.

By consulting European civil society on a regular basis the EU?s trade representative has made it possible for even smaller development NGOs to make their voices heard, at the same time and in the same room as the powerful, EU-wide employers? organisations, for example.

India?s Commerce Minister can strengthen their hand by following Trade Commissioner Lamy?s example and consulting with NGOs regularly. He can do this very easily through India?s diplomatic mission to the EU in Brussels. EuroCommerce, for example, is only a phone call away.