EU Panel Deadlock May Augur
Change in Biotech-Food Stance

SCOTT MILLER / Wall Street Journal 8dec03

BRUSSELS—The European Union returned a split decision Monday in a pivotal case on whether to admit new genetically modified food, both raising hopes for biotech proponents and underlining the difficulty of resolving an issue that has strained trade relations with the U.S.

A 6-6 deadlock, with three abstentions, by a panel of food experts from the 15-nation bloc on an application to import a strain of sweet corn effectively transfers the issue to EU agriculture ministers. They, in turn, are expected to pass the decision to the union's executive arm, the European Commission, which favors the application.

Monday's decision marks the first time the EU has even considered approving a new type of biotech food or animal feed since 1998, when the bloc imposed a moratorium on genetically modified products amid Europeans' worries about the long-term health and environmental risks of biotechnology.

Genetic-modification boosters were heartened that the food experts didn't reject the application. "We are reasonably confident the sweet-corn application will be approved in the end," said Bernard Graciet, head of the Brussels office of Swiss agrochemicals maker Syngenta, which produces the corn, known as Bt11 and grown mainly in the U.S. "The commission will break the deadlock."

Though genetically modified products have been consumed in the U.S. for decades, health scares such as mad-cow disease have many Europeans distrustful of government safety assurances, and Monday's split vote shows that deep differences about biotech food remain. The United Kingdom, whose food expert endorsed the Syngenta corn, is home to advanced scientific research on genetically modified organisms, and many British farmers believe biotech crops are necessary to compete on international markets. But in Austria, whose representative voted no, farmers have campaigned to create areas free of genetic modification, in order to avoid unforeseen environmental consequences.

Germany and Italy abstained, unable to reconcile internal political differences. Germany's ruling coalition comprises the Green Party, opposed to genetically modified goods, and the Social Democrats, who tend to support biotech.

In the short run, approval of the application could ease tension between the EU and U.S. Last year Washington, frustrated that Europe wasn't carrying out tests to assess safety of genetically modified products, asked the World Trade Organization to rule the EU moratorium illegal and allow the U.S. to levy punitive tariffs on European products. A WTO panel is considering the complaint.

But the Syngenta corn, which would be imported to Europe as fresh, canned or frozen products for human consumption only, could be one of the easier applications for the EU to approve. More troublesome for Europeans are genetically modified seeds imported for planting in Europe, which Greenpeace and other groups warn could contaminate conventional crops.

Last summer, the European Parliament passed rules requiring any product made from genetically modified materials, even if undetectable in the final product, to carry a label alerting consumers. Some U.S. farm lobbyists argue that the labeling rules amount to an unfair trade practice. Speaking in Brussels recently, U.S. Under Secretary for Commerce Grant Aldonas didn't rule out a fresh WTO complaint, saying the U.S. would wait and see how the new EU rules affect market demand for the genetically modified products.

EU States Fail to Resolve Row Over Biotech Crops

JOSEPH SCHUMAN / Wall Street Journal 8dec03

Suspicion of genetically modified food in Europe is widespread, with political and emotional undertones. And despite the threat of U.S. trade retribution, European Union officials were unable resolve a dispute today over whether to lift the bloc's five-year-old moratorium on new biotech foods.

A committee of experts representing the 15 EU nations split six-six on the issue, with three abstentions, in a vote specifically addressing the sale of canned sweet corn from a strain developed by the Swiss-based Syngenta company. Britain, Spain and the Netherlands were among those voting to approve, while France, Denmark and Austria were among those that opposed it; Germany, Italy and Belgium abstained. The decision may now go back to the European Commission, which recommended approval after deciding the corn was clearly labeled and met other new requirements. The issue will first go before a council of EU ministers, but they are likely to be stymied by the same differences that confounded the more junior committee today. The freeze on the introduction of so-called "Frankenfoods" was imposed in 1998 amid public fears about long-term environmental and health effects, and after several years in which the mad cow crisis and other events undermined public confidence in how European governments are safeguarding the health of their citizens.

U.S. officials from two different presidential administrations have called the official health concerns an excuse to keep American agricultural products out of the EU. And the U.S. -- long open to biotech products that include corn, soybeans and other crops modified to resist insects or weed-killers -- took the objections to the World Trade Organization in August, arguing that the EU ban is unscientific and hurts American exporters. The U.S. also contends the ban and the fears it generates are exacerbating famine in the developing world. The commission had been hoping to settle the matter, and had assured American trade officials that the new rules, set to take effect in April, would end the de facto moratorium. Even if it doesn't happen with the Syngenta corn, the moratorium is unlikely to survive an onslaught of other genetically modified products in the pipeline. A corn from U.S.-based Monsanto was approved for food and animal feed by the European Food Safety Authority last week, and could be submitted to the national experts in February or March.