IRELAND WILL NOT VETO WTO DEAL DESPITE PROMISE TO

C O N F I D E N T I A L DUBLIN 000361

SIPDIS

STATE FOR USTR
USDA FOR FAS - OCRA
LONDON FOR FAS/MCSHERRY

E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/13/2018
TAGS: EAGR ECON ETRD PREL PGOV EI
SUBJECT: IRELAND WILL NOT VETO WTO DEAL DESPITE PROMISE TO
FARMERS

REF: A. DUBLIN 356

B. DUBLIN 324

C. DUBLIN 219

Classified By: PEO Chief Ted Pierce. Reasons 1.4 (b/d).


1. (C) Summary: On June 3, Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen
said he was "prepared" to veto a WTO deal that is
"unacceptable" to Ireland (Ref B). The Irish Farmers
Association (IFA),upset with the EU's handling of the WTO
negotiations (Ref C),had put pressure on Cowen to promise a
veto. On the same day that Cowen announced his decision to
veto, the IFA agreed to urge its members to vote 'Yes' in the
June 12 Lisbon Treaty referendum. However, senior Irish
government officials have made it clear to us that Cowen has
no intention of vetoing a WTO deal and that his promise was
simply a mechanism that allowed the IFA to support a 'Yes'
vote. Given the defeat of the Lisbon referendum (Ref A),the
question now is whether the IFA's support was too little, too
late. End Summary.


2. (C) Aidan O'Driscoll, Assistant Secretary at the
Department of Agriculture, told us that he and another
government colleague wrote the brief press statement on the
veto in close consultation with two senior IFA officials.
Over an eight-hour period they agreed with the IFA on the
following text: "The Taoiseach (Prime Minister) today assured
the IFA that he was prepared to use the veto if a deal that
is unacceptable to Ireland is put to a vote." O'Driscoll
pointed out that this statement does not commit the
government to a veto and that it does not make reference
specifically to agriculture. Further, he said that the IFA
leadership is "fully aware" that the possibility of a veto is
remote but that they needed political cover in order to sell
their membership on the virtues of voting 'Yes' in the Lisbon
Treaty referendum. According to O'Driscoll, the IFA realizes
it needs a 'Yes' vote on Lisbon as a way to ensure continued
favorable treatment for Irish farmers in Brussels.


3. (C) We spoke with two other senior Irish officials who
confirmed this position. Gerard Monks, lead trade negotiator
at the Department of Enterprise, Trade, and Employment, said
that Ireland would look for a "balanced" WTO deal, meaning
that his government would look at the entire package and not
just the agricultural aspects. He expected that, in the end,
Ireland would not veto a deal, especially if it meant
alienating its major trade partners. Kevin Cardiff of the
Department of Finance (and an aide to Cowen when he was
Finance Minister) doubts whether Ireland would actually use
its veto. This would, "use up too much political capital,"
he said.


4. (C) Comment: The veto promise was an elegant way for each
side to get what they needed. However, given the Irish
electorate's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty on June 12, the
question is whether the government waited too long to bag the
farmers' support. A June 6 poll showing that 11 percent of
the 'No' voters were voting against the Treaty in order to
"help Irish farmers in the WTO talks" suggests that Cowen may
have benefited from acting earlier. End Comment.
FOLEY