1 Uncorrected/ Not for publication- 08.12.2009 SSS-AKG/11.00/1A ...

125Uncorrected/ Not for publication- 08.12.2009supreme national interest and also, if I may say so, enough role for ournegotiators to initiate an agreement which eventually serves the interestsof the developing countries, of our vulnerable industries of our farmers.Sir, on meaningful market access, I had deviated a bit from there, I willgo back. On meaningful market access, I was mentioning what theUnited States wants. The countries make their positions. They comewith their positions but they negotiate. They try to harmonise positions.It should be very clear. Harmonising our positions without compromisingour interest is something which we are for. But not harmonising ourposition where our interests gets affected, there is no question ofdilution. There is no question of negotiation when it comes to that.But, Sir, even in United States of America, developed countries and USand EU, it is true that they also have their expectations. Like we haveour aspirations and concerns, they have their own expectations. But, itdoes not mean that they will get what they demand in a statement. It isa general statement which is made. Our negotiators know what themandate is and what they are negotiating for. Sir, one issue which wasrightly raised is about the services. It is true that India has its strengthin the services sector and it is not a question that we have not givenpriority to the services negotiations. The negotiations are very much on.The same Hong Kong Ministerial which had taken the decision, which Ireferred to on the sectorals, also took a view on sequencing and in thesequencing agreed to in the 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial it wasagriculture, NAMA and services. When we had the meeting in Delhi wemade it abundantly clear to the key interlocutors from the developedcountries and also to the DG of the WTO that services negotiations have