The European Union on Thursday attacked India and the framework charted by the group of 20 countries while trying to split the developing world saying New Delhi's proposal would limit market access for developing and least developed countries.
Addressing the media from Brussels via a video conference, EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy said though India and Brazil had prepared a joint framework on agriculture, they had different priorities.
On the other hand, the US and the EU had a consistent approach on various issues such as agricultural support, he added.
Lamy also accused India of creating a north-south divide. He said there was a greater need for trade liberalisation among developing countries.
EU Commissioner for Trade and Rural development Franz Fischler said two-thirds of the existing trade barrier had been erected by developing countries.
At the same time, the EU also accused countries such as India of not showing enough flexibility in negotiations.
Fischler said the EU-US joint paper had tried to break the ice on agricultural negotiations that had not progressed for 18 months due to differences among WTO members.
"Look at our improved offers to do more on opening markets, reducing export subsidies; trade distorting farm support and export subsidies. Unfortunately, I have not seen the same flexibility in other camps so far. In fact, I have seen no flexibility on the part of those who shout the loudest," Fischler said.
On demands for limiting subsidies through the green box, which are subsidies extended to limit the production of a particular commodity to maintain market equilibrium, Lamy said such support was outside the ambit of the WTO.
Lamy further added that India had one of the highest tariffs among developing countries, particularly with regard to industrial products, and this came more in the way of trade liberalisation than the tariffs in developed countries.
The EU trade commissioner also proposed an 'opt out' clause in the case of Singapore issues with countries against a multilateral framework on investment, competition policy, trade facilitation and transparency in government procurement, given the option to choose if they would follow multilateral rules.
He said India was unnecessarily raising sovereignty concerns when it had itself undertaken liberalisation in excess of its commitments.