WASHINGTON — Question: What do beef and bananas have in common? Answer: Trade disputes with Europe.

The U.S. government must take action against the European Union unless the EU brings its illegal trade practices on beef and banana imports into compliance with international trade law, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association said last week at a news briefing here.

NCBA joined a broad-based agricultural coalition with Chiquita Brands International, the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Meat Institute, the Grocery Manufacturers of America and the Hawaii Banana Industry Association to urge EU compliance with trade laws and with World Trade Organizations rulings on beef and bananas.

"We took our disagreements with the European Union to the GATT and the WTO, and we won. Now, the European Union still refuses to conform to the rules. The time has come for the United States to take whatever action is necessary to stand up for what's right," said Dana Hauck, a cattle producer from Delphos, Kansas, and chairman of the NCBA International Markets Committee.

"These disputes aren't just about beef and bananas — these are precedent-setting test cases that will determine whether or not the WTO works the way it was intended," Hauck said. "We are watching the banana case closely because its outcome might help determine the outcome of the beef case."

The credibility of the WTO and the openness of European markets to American exports are at stake. The EU is attempting to circumvent WTO rulings, and these trade disputes threaten not only beef and banana exports, but free trade worldwide.

The groups November 16 began running advertisements in major national media, including the Washington Post, the Washington Times, and the Journal of Commerce, to inform the American public about these trade issues.

In the beef case, the WTO concluded that the EU's prohibition against imports of U.S. beef produced from cattle raised with growth promotants is not based on science and is a violation of international trade rules. The EU was ordered to end the ban or provide scientific justification for it.

In the banana case, the WTO found that the EU's policies governing banana imports are discriminatory and ordered the EU to end its illegal practices by January 1, 1999. Since these trade disputes have languished without resolution for so long, there is a lack of understanding about how vital these cases are to the WTO trading system.

In response to the WTO rulings on beef and bananas, the EU refused to change its beef policy and made its banana policy even more WTO-inconsistent. These changes, according to U.S. Trade Ambassador Charlene Barshefsky, obviously fail to bring the EU banana policy into compliance with international law. The EU response to the criticism has been to declare that if the United States wants to challenge the legality of the EU's changes, it must file an entirely new WTO case and spend years in new litigation.

"The great danger in these cases is that if the EU's position is allowed to prevail, no trade disputes will ever be resolved," said Joseph W. Hagin, Vice President for Corporate Affairs at Chiquita Brands International.

"The EU wants to create an endless loop that would permit any country that loses a WTO case to simply make domestic changes and declare it is abiding by the law. That's like saying the losing defendant gets to determine, and thereby avoid, any punishment. The WTO was not designed to be a toothless organization, but that's what it will be if the EU gets its way," Hagin said.