Leading Article: A deal the world needs

The latest attempt to secure an acceptable deal in the so-called Uruguay round of talks to liberalise world trade within Gatt appeared last night to have failed. Few acronyms are more mind-numbing than that of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Yet no international institution has done more to remove the deadening forces of protectionism. Earlier rounds concentrated on trade in manufactured goods. In this one, Gatt's 108 members are seeking to reduce barriers and featherbedding in agriculture and services, and to win respect for rules on 'intellectual property'. It is on agriculture, subsidised by industrialised countries to the tune of an estimated dollars 229bn (pounds 135bn), that the talks have remained stalled.

The negotiations in Brussels became intertwined with domestic politics. George Bush had been hoping for a breakthrough because he thought it might have a positive effect on his electoral prospects. With US farmers poised to portray any deal as a sell-out, success could have proved to be a two-edged weapon. But he could have claimed he had used his foreign policy experience to help to stimulate the recession-bound economy, and seize another opportunity to portray his Democratic opponent as beholden to protectionist trade unions.

The French have for some time been the main obstacle to a successful conclusion. Technically, they had no standing in the Brussels talks, in which the European Commission had a mandate to negotiate on behalf of the EC; and their representative could be overruled when any potential deal came up for endorsement, since majority voting would apply. In practice, France's partners have indicated they would accept a French veto on grounds of France's national interest.

France's strategy is not entirely clear. The French may reckon the Americans are so desperate for a deal they can be frightened into weakening their demands. Or they may have decided Mr Bush is a lame duck, and that it would be better to do business with a President Clinton. Yet President Francois Mitterrand might himself be described as a somewhat locomotively challenged duck. His conservative opponents are virtually certain to win next March's parliamentary elections, and he is widely expected to find some graceful way of bringing his own seven-year term to a premature conclusion.

Not many French farmers vote Socialist. But they have an unrivalled capacity for creating disorder, by both relatively peaceful and violent methods. Such actions bring the government into disrepute. So although its ministers know that France has far too many farmers, they fear incurring their wrath again by bowing to American pressure. The two main unmet US demands - for a reduction in the volume of subsidised EC exports and for the phasing out of set-aside subsidies - would cut their incomes.

Yet the French government is not enjoying its isolation on this issue, especially at a time when the EC has been embarrassed and weakened by its discord over the Maastricht treaty. The world is in the grips of a recession, the effects of which have been as keenly felt in Europe as anywhere. A successful conclusion of the Gatt round would provide a valuable stimulus to trade. Failure would be not only a missed opportunity, but would put past liberalisation at risk.