Greenpeace dismisses WTO ruling and predicts Europe will stay closed to GMOs
Brussels - Greenpeace tonight dismissed as irrelevant a WTO ruling that reportedly backs the US, Canada and Argentina in
their efforts to force Europe to accept genetically modified organisms (GMOs); according to first press reports, the WTO
decided that EU national bans contravened trade rules. The environmental organisation considers that just as the WTO
case did not challenge EU laws designed to protect the environment, it could not be used to undermine existing
international agreements on biosafety.
"U.S agro-chemical giants will not sell a bushel more of their GM grain as a result of the WTO ruling. European
consumers, farmers and a growing number of governments remain opposed to GMOs, and this will not change - in Europe or
globally," said Daniel Mittler, Greenpeace International trade advisor. "The $300 million lost exports for US GM maize
growers per year (1) will continue, and remain a warning to exporting countries that GMOs are not wanted in Europe."
"This verdict only proves that the WTO puts trade interests above all others and is unqualified to deal with complex
scientific and environmental issues. The US administration and agro-chemical companies brought the case in a desperate
attempt to force-feed markets with
GMOs, but will continue to be frustrated," said Daniel Mittler.
In August 2003, the US, Canada and Argentina took the EU to the WTO for suspending approvals for biotech products, and
for six member states' national bans on EU-approved GMOs.
Despite the ongoing case in Geneva, European governments voted with a clear majority in 2005 to retain existing national
bans on GMOs (2) and individual countries continue to reject GMOs. Greece last week announced an extension of its ban on
seeds from a type of GM maize produced by Monsanto. Austria also recently announced its intention to ban the import of a
GM oilseed rape. These bans, in addition to those imposed last year by Hungary and Poland, 172 regions in Europe which
have declared themselves GMO-free zones, and a Swiss moratorium decided by public referendum, show that Europe is
steadfast in rejecting GMOs.
EU legislation on the approval and labelling of GMOs is not at stake and will remain unaffected by the outcome of the
WTO case.
Notes
1. The US claims $200 million lost sales for corn products alone, $300 million for corn and soy products. See "European
Commission Opts Not To
Push For End of GMO Moratorium," INSIDE U.S. TRADE, January 25, 2002 ; or http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/wrs984/wrs984e.pdf
2. The EU Commission tried to use the WTO case to force five European countries (Greece, France, Austria, Luxembourg and
Germany) attacked by the US to lift their national bans (Italy, the sixth, lifted its ban two years ago). When the EU
Commission put its proposals aimed at the lifting of bans to a vote at the EU Council of Environment ministers on
24 June 2005, 22 countries out of 25 voted against the Commission's proposals and decided that the bans were justified
and should remain in place. This forced the EU Commission to withdraw its proposals. Greenpeace briefing on national
safeguard clauses ('bans'):
3. A Greenpeace briefing on the WTO dispute on GMOs is available at