Too Serious For Trade Minsters?(The Last Word; CELSO AMORIM)(Interview)

Byline: Juliane von Reppert-Bismarck

Celso Amorim, Brazil's foreign minister and long-serving trade chief, is not one to dodge a spat. At World Trade Organization talks in Geneva last week over a global rulebook slated to boost world wealth by billions and lift millions out of poverty, he compared the U.S. and Europe's tactics to those of Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. But when the talks collapsed in acrimony over protection for farmers in developing nations, Amorim was shocked. He spoke to NEWSWEEK's Juliane von Reppert-Bismarck. Excerpts:

Von Reppert-Bismarck: What went wrong in Geneva?

Amorim: It was a big failure. When we were in our final meeting--the European Union, the U.S., Brazil, China, India, Australia, Japan--it was the Europeans, ourselves, the Australians and Japan trying to push the deal. But in the end there was no agreement. It will take a long time, three or four years, to come as close to a deal as we were this time. The problem is, most trade negotiators respond to lobbies, they count their votes in Congress, in Parliament. Maybe we need people who deal more politically with this. It was the September 11 attacks that launched these talks--it was supposed to be about economic, but also about political, accord. A French politician last century said, "War is too serious to be left to the generals." Maybe trade negotiations are too serious to be left to the trade negotiators.

What role did China play?

The Chinese were much more proactive. In the past, when a minister arrived in a negotiating room, it was a very static thing, with the minister reading a statement and not really interacting. Now it was different; he was saying things that hadn't been scripted. The Chinese were also more active talking to other developing countries. You can't yet say they were a leader. But they were very engaged.

Does it matter there's no deal?