By DOUG SCHMITZ
Iowa Correspondent

JEFFERSON, Iowa — After a delegation of U.S. soybean officials returned home in December from a mission trip to Brussels, Belgium, they had hoped to have accomplished one major goal: Persuading the European Union (EU) to embrace biotechnology, which has slowly been gaining acceptance in other parts of the world.

“Early on, various nongovernmental organizations, such as Greenpeace, the Union of Concerned Scientists and others, proliferated doubts and questions regarding the long-term effects of GMOs (genetically modified crops),” said Jim Andrew, a Jefferson soybean grower and board director for the Iowa Soybean Assoc. (ISA) and the American Soybean Assoc. (ASA).

“This led to zero tolerance in soybean shipments from the U.S., food and grocery labeling regulations and widespread concerns amongst the consuming public in the EU regarding GMOs in their meat and groceries.”

Coordinated by Brussels-based consultant Benno vander Laan, the mission included meetings with European Parliament (MEP) members, political leaders, the European Commission and representatives of European trade associations. The trip, which was Dec. 7-9, 2009, wasn’t the first time the ASA has discussed the safety of GMOs at the EU.

In fact, for the last several years, the ASA and several biotech companies have been striving to educate farmers, political leaders, the media and EU government officials to overcome what the ISA said was “resistance and regulations regarding the acceptance of genetically modified grains in international trade and in processing.”

Over the course of the three-day trip, the delegation met with several parties to discuss the benefits of the new soy biotech events scheduled between through 2020, urging the MEPs to pressure the European Commission to hurry the EU’s approval process and to set reasonable tolerance levels for traces in grain shipments, Andrew said.

“We are slowly gaining acceptance of GMOs in Europe,” he said. “However, many politicians are scared to go against the wishes of their constituents after the propaganda (that) voters have been subjected to by the press and environmental groups.”

In an effort to convince the EU, the ASA is focused on developing access for European farmers to the benefits of GMOs, to be competitive, as well as developing a key support base among European politicians and regulators. As a result, recent proposed legislation – such as bills introduced to allow member countries to individually cultivate GMOs within their borders – have shown hope, Andrew said, as long as other member countries could opt out of any internal production.

“Overall, the mission was extremely rewarding,” he said. “We were able to capitalize on the work done over the years toward overcoming a problem that has existed in U.S.-EU trade relations for years.

With the easing of the rigid positions of the past, the ASA should continue to cultivate the pro-GMO constituency we have already developed within the EU and take full advantage of the thaw that presently exists.”

Andrew said the eventual resolution of this trade issue would greatly expand world trade, with many other developing countries following the EU’s lead in regulating GMOs.

“With the number of GMO grain events in the future pipeline, failure to rapidly resolve these issues will lead to trade gridlock in a hungry world,” he said. “It behooves the soybean industry to continue all efforts possible to resolve this issue as soon as possible.”

Last month, the ASA supported the recent decision by the United States government to give the EU more time to implement a science-based approval system for biotech-derived agricultural products, but warned of “dire consequences for European livestock industries” if the EU didn’t move forward with approval.

“The ASA supports the decision of U.S. trade officials to temporarily suspend action to withdraw concessions for the failures of the European Union to bring its biotech approval process into compliance with the WTO panel ruling,” said ASA First Vice President Johnny Dodson, a Halls, Tenn., soybean grower who chairs the ASA’s Biotechnology Working Group.

In May 2003, the U.S. filed a World Trade Organization (WTO) case against the EU’s failure to implement a timely, science-based approval system for food and feed products enhanced through biotechnology. Joining the U.S. in the complaint were Argentina, Australia, Canada, Chile, Colombia, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru and Uruguay, which also wanted to ensure that science-based determinations were applied to regulatory decisions, Dodson said.

In September 2006, the WTO ruled that the EU had failed to meet its WTO obligations of implementing the approval of biotech-enhanced agricultural products – a decision that finalized a preliminary WTO ruling made in February 2006.

“The ASA has been in close contact with the U.S. trade representative urging this course of action,” Dodson said. “This is only a temporary suspension to allow the EU to demonstrate through action that it is making its system timely, and that decisions are being made on the basis of science, not politics.”
Dodson said the continuing failure of the EU to bring its biotech approval system into compliance not only would result in massive retaliation on EU exports to the U.S. market, but also devastate the EU livestock and feed industries that depend on imported oilseeds and feedstuffs.

“We hope the EU will respond quickly and positively to this latest gesture from the United States,” he said.