DISCUSSED CONCERN OVER EC/SWISS POSITIONS ON GEOGRAPHICAL

UNCLAS STOCKHOLM 000666

C O R R E C T E D C O P Y (ADDING ADDR)

SIPDIS

DEPT PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR TANUJA GARDE AND DAWN SHACKLEFORD

SENSITIVE ENTIRE TEXT
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD PREL EU SW
SUBJECT: DISCUSSED CONCERN OVER EC/SWISS POSITIONS ON GEOGRAPHICAL
INDICATIONS WITH SWEDISH TRADE DIRECTOR

Ref: STATE 104985


1. (SBU) Summary: The GOS has come to the conclusion that the
Geographical Indications issue (GIs) is hugely important to some
five EU Member States; it is perhaps the primary Doha issue for some
MS. The GOS determination is that it can "stomach it", as a
necessary component of an EU-wide compromise. Trade policy Director
Ambassador Teppo Tauriainen urged the USG to be creative in helping
the Commission to find a compromise solution on GI's. In the view
of the EC, this is not a large stumbling block. On a positive note,
the GOS feels that the EU as a whole is more positive to a Doha deal
than it was in 2008, partly due to the effects of the financial
crisis. End summary.

GI's
--------------


2. (SBU) On October 22, we met with Ambassador Teppo Tauriainen,
Director of MFA's Division for International Trade policy. He was
sympathetic to our concerns and explained that Sweden is not pushing
the issue of GIs but that the issue is very important to some 4-5 EU
member states (France, Italy, Greece, Spain, and Portugal).
However, his assessment is that a Doha deal needs to offer something
on the GI issue, otherwise 4-5 Member states will refuse to sign on.
In a negotiation, you need to give them something (although Sweden
would be happy with "nothing," but it will not work, in Tauriainen's
opinion). Tauriainen urged the USG to be creative in helping the
Commission to find a compromise solution on GI's.


3. (SBU) Sweden was pleased with the developments in the G8, G20,
and the Delhi meeting this summer, feeling that momentum was gained.
However, since then, the GOS has been disappointed to see that not
much has resulted in Geneva. At this rate, it is not really
realistic to conclude by 2010. Ambassador Tauriainen said he hopes
to see the EU urge the U.S. to actively engage -- together with the
EU.


4. (SBU) The EC is trying to down-play the importance of the GI
issue, and instead focus on potential gains in market access -- in
NAMA and Agriculture. There is a difference in views about what is
on the table, according to Tauriainen. Currently, the EU is more
positive than the U.S. Sweden is very positive about the systemic
effects of a concluded round, and feels that a concluded Doha round
would be a very important contribution to economic recovery.


5. (SBU) The level of expectations has changed over the last year,
with the effects of the financial crisis. In the Swedish view, to
lock down commitments, given the difference between bound and
implemented levels of tariffs, would be an improvement over where we
are today. Sweden and the EU are afraid that there will be a roll-
back of the implemented levels to the bound levels, something which
would hurt all of our economies.

Patent issues
-------------- --------------


6. (SBU) Tauriainen told us that Sweden is proposing and
supporting an alternative sanction on the disclosure requirements.
Although sanctions would be needed for the patent disclosure, such
sanctions could be limited to fines. Possible sanctions would thus
not include nullification of the patent. This is an alternative
that is "in the back of the minds" of all EU member states. The
disclosure proposal tabled in WIPO in 2005 is the bottom-line for
what EU Member states can accept, according to Tauriainen.


7. (SBU) Tauriainen said that Sweden, like the U.S., is not keen
on compromising patent rights. Therefore, Sweden is focusing on
trying to find alternative solutions that would prevent us from
compromising patents. This is also a central issue in the climate
negotiations.


8. (SBU) According to Tauriainen, it is important to many
developing countries to establish compulsory licensing and create
more transparency. Sweden is focusing on alternative means of
facilitating technology transfers, which they believe is the
developing countries' main goal. Our Swedish interlocutors warn
that if we do not listen to developing countries we risk a clash.
Sweden is trying to find a way to avoid a clash without undermining
IPR. Sweden expressly mentions that they have no intention of
undermining patent rights.

Multilateralism vs. bilateral negotiations
-------------- -------------- -------------- --------------


9. (SBU) We discussed U.S. efforts to push for market access via
bilateral talks. Tauriainen responded that Sweden believes in
multilateral agreements, but to reach multilateral agreements it is
necessary to take advantage of bilateral talks. Tauriainen said he
does not see a conflict -- it is really the same thing. Although

China says they want no bilateral talks, Sweden believes that the
Chinese are in reality prepared to talk one on one. Multilaterals
would otherwise not be possible, you cannot have 153 states talking
to each other at once.

BARZUN