Question: Particularly the US Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture.

Secretary Johanns: Yes.

Question: I know that yesterday [inaudible] had been decided.

Secretary Johanns: Yes.

Question: There are certain concerns about [inaudible]. Will the US be able to arrange for the [inaudible] funding, or how much have you already done? If you can elaborate.

Secretary Johanns: We have committed funding over the next three years and the total of that funding I believe at this point is $24 million. So in terms of funding, like I said, it goes over the next three years so we’re in good shape in terms of the funding and feel like we can accomplish a lot with that funding.

Question: Concerning those four broad areas which have been identified for joint collaborative research and other things, do you think this [inaudible]? All those are a kind of areas which are cost intensive.

Secretary Johanns: There are a lot of resources that we can bring to bear that don’t have a funding requirement as such. For example, one of the things we have done for many many years, we have a program called the Cochran Program where we can provide training. We can literally bring people from India to the United States and provide training. That is funded separate and distinct from the Knowledge Initiative.

We have expertise on staff so if the Knowledge Initiative, if the Board said we need expertise in this given area, we’d come to India to work with whatever -- food safety, scientific research on plants. We have people at the USDA that we could dispatch, we could reach out to our university system. So there are a lot of resources available in addition to the funding that’s been identified.

So you put that whole picture together and I’m optimistic that really about anything that would arise in the Knowledge Initiative we’d be able to address.

Question: There has been concern expressed in some quadrants here that maybe in this [account] that we will facilitate [inaudible] US Knowledge Initiative. India has considered a lot of [inaudible] some things on [inaudible] nuclear deal. How fair is that criticism?

Secretary Johanns: I really don’t believe that’s the case at all. We look at our relationship with India as a partnership. I think there are many things that we can offer. There are many things that India can probably offer to the United States. But I don’t see it that way at all. I think the Knowledge Initiative will be a very significant and important benefit.

We have had a longstanding relationship with India in many areas. The Green Revolution really took hold here because of the work of people here in India, the work that got their normal [inaudible]. And so I don’t see it that way. I just see this as a continuation of what has been a very good partnership. We view India as an important world partner, a strategic partner. It is our hope that this relationship continues to exhibit mutual benefit. Really a two-way street.

Question: Because one of the grounds for that criticism was that India is a [inaudible] rich country and the US has the technology. Perhaps you know that makes the things different. There is a disconnect between the two things.

Secretary Johanns: Again, I don’t see a disconnect. I see opportunity to work together to build our relationship, to further our mutual interests.

We really look at this relationship with India as a mature relationship, a relationship that dates back a long time, but a relationship with tremendous potential for the future. It is a friendship and a partnership that we value and we certainly appreciate that relationships are built on a two-way street. Each side receives benefit from that relationship. Again, I would encourage people here to look at this as an opportunity to work together, to continue our friendship and build on our partnership.

Question: What about any [inaudible] sharing?

Secretary Johanns: I’m not so sure about [germ plasma]. That’s never come up in anything I’ve talked about.

Question: It’s not an issue so far. Because in the US most of the [germ plasma] is sort of patented, protected under the [inaudible], the genes. Whereas in India the public research system believes in free sharing of the [germ plasma].

Secretary Johanns: I can tell you in my area of agriculture I have not run into a single discussion on [germ plasma]. Maybe somebody out there is talking about it, but I haven’t been involved.

Question: Coming to this US trade in agriculture products, have you got an opportunity to talk about [inaudible] visit?

Secretary Johanns: Trade is an issue that always comes up. It doesn’t matter if I’m in India or Australia. Simply because we truly are engaged in the global economy, all parts of the world are.

In agriculture I can tell you that the trade has been beneficial for India. In fact there’s a trade imbalance in favor of India. India actually sells more agriculture products to the United States than we would sell to India. And I think there’s even a greater opportunity for trade.

So, but trade, yes. Of course trade comes up in our discussions. India has been very active in the WTO process. I’ve personally participated in that process. I know Kumal Nath very very well because we attended so many meetings over the last year, year and a half.

We in the United States believe in trade. We believe that trade is truly a way to lift people out of poverty. And we also believe it needs to be mutually beneficial. Again, it needs to be a two-way street. Each side needs to see the benefit of that trade relationship.

Question: What are the broad areas that you know the US can sell more to India?

Secretary Johanns: India, for example, this year has bought wheat. We raise wheat in the United States. We have not successfully sold any wheat to India, but in those years where India purchases wheat we’d certainly love to be considered. This year, for a variety of reasons, we have not been successful in selling wheat.

Voice: There are a number of areas where we’re discussing technical barriers to trade. For example, we’d like to sell more [inaudible] here, but there are some issues with regard to phytosanitary/sanitary concerns. We’d like to have a larger dairy trade with you. There are some products that we can supply that would be augmenting some of your own production. There are some animal [dumatics] products that we’d like to sell. We sell a number of nuts, almonds. This is our biggest almond market. We’d like to see that expand above the $130 million it is now. There are other nuts that face higher tariffs -- pistachios, for example. We’re interested in that.

So there are many products where we think Indian consumers would enjoy being able to buy from the United States.

Question: But then again there are these considerations of subsidies in the US. Because of your higher subsidies maybe you’ll be able to sell at prices which would be far lower than the Indian prices, so that is a concern among farmers.

Secretary Johanns: Part of the discussions of the WTO talks have been related to subsidies. I’d offer a couple of thoughts on that.

When it comes to subsidies we in the United States are actually not the largest subsidizer of agriculture. That distinction rests with the EU. Far and away the largest subsidizer of agriculture in the world is the European Union -- 2.5 to 3 times what the United States would do.

And I think Japan is even considered a larger subsidizer than the United States. So we’re actually third.

Our President has been very very clear on this point. He wants the elimination of trade distorting subsidies. I’ve spoken in favor of that on many many occasions.

We also, as I said, believe in trade. Study after study has indicated that the real benefit of the Doha Round is not the elimination or the reduction of subsidies. The real benefit is in opening markets.

The developing countries will stand to gain the most by markets being open both in terms of south to south trade, north to south trade. So our goal is to try to achieve everything we possibly can out of the Doha Round for the world, and again, every economic study in the Doha Round has said the real benefit will come from opening up markets.

So our President has made the goal clear, but part and parcel of that we expect tariffs to come down and markets to open. That’s where the Doha Round will achieve the most success.

Question: What is your position of the status?

Secretary Johanns: India took a position in the last stages of the negotiations, you know, the negotiations have been suspended. But they indicated they wanted 20 percent of the tariff lines protected in agriculture. The WTO looked at that, and that in effect would protect 95-98 percent of the marketplace. So basically it would protect your entire marketplace.

But that position was taken in favor of not only India but the entire developing countries. So that would include India, China, South Korea, literally every developing country.

So to say that 95-98 percent of the marketplace would be protected seems way beyond what -- For one thing, the goal of the development round is to encourage development and if you’re basically shutting your marketplace, which 95-98 percent would effectively do that, it’s going to be hard to achieve anything out of the development round, the Doha development round.

So our effort is to do all we can to try to work with India and my hope is that these points of negotiation can be solved. We all want a successful round. I’m confident India does, we certainly do. I think other parts of the world do.

Question: Has India indicated any willingness to concede some more ground on this?

Secretary Johanns: We haven’t had any negotiations since last July. Negotiations have truly been suspended.

Question: How about this [inaudible]? These are also coming into [inaudible].

Secretary Johanns: These are more of a bilateral issue, but they are challenging issues. One way of dealing with these is to just sit down and try to negotiate your way through those. Part of the challenge with wheat actually, the major challenge with wheat is we just couldn’t find a solution. So we haven’t sold any wheat in India at all, although a lot has been purchased we have sold none to India. We’re hoping to continue at the technical level to solve these problems and address India’s concerns and we’d love to be able to sell wheat here if India is buying wheat. We’d love to be in the mix.

We believe we need to continue to work on these.

Phytosanitary/sanitary issues are huge issues worldwide. We spend a lot of time working on these issues. So I think that will continue. I don’t see those issues going away.

Question: In the food processing sector, what is the kind of [inaudible] that you foresee?

Secretary Johanns: I was just over at the Ministry -- What’s the official title?

Voice: Ministry of Food Processing.

Secretary Johanns: We had a very very good discussion on food processing and some of the things they’re doing. I see a great opportunity there for us under, as kind of a subset of the knowledge initiative to work on this issue.

Here’s the reason I got pretty excited about this. Food processing really deals with the agricultural sector. Food processing could be placed throughout India and provide jobs in the rural areas, provide investment in rural areas, and provide a place, if you will, where products grown by Indian farmers could be processed and a value-added product created and then sold. To me that is a tremendous opportunity and benefit for farmers here in India.

We pledged to work with this Ministry of Food Processing to try to help in that effort. So we committed to putting a technical group together to work with a technical group from the Ministry of Food Processing and flesh out this idea and see if there are some things we can do to be helpful.

I think that holds tremendous promise. And like I said, the nice thing about it is it creates opportunity for farmers in rural areas and that’s exciting.

Question: Do you [inaudible] India from the US industry food processing?

Secretary Johanns: It could be. It could be foreign investment. Maybe there are companies here in India that may want to make that investment. It could be a variety of things, but it could be foreign investment. There are many great food processing companies around the world that would have an interest, I believe. So that investment would be good.

Question: In concrete terms proposals are being considered but some [inaudible] US global companies in the food processing [inaudible] invest in India?

Secretary Johanns: I wouldn’t know that off-hand. We can probably reach out a little bit and see if that’s occurring.

I would say this. I would be surprised if there isn’t some interest, just simply because I think there’s interest in India these days. I think many things have occurred here which are viewed as positive, and so I’d be surprised if there isn’t some interest.

Question: And this agriculture education, what are the kinds of things [inaudible]?

Secretary Johanns: I think one of the reasons why agriculture around the world, agriculture in the United States has advanced is because of ag education. We have truly some of the most outstanding agricultural schools really anywhere. We see an opportunity, again, for a relationship that shares. Maybe it’s an exchange of expertise, maybe it’s students from India coming to the United States. It could be a variety of things. But again, we see that as a resource that could be very very helpful to India.

We see it in the United States. Our young people go to really good ag schools and then they come home to the farm and apply the latest in science and techniques and it’s very remarkable. It’s very positive.

We see an opportunity here to work with India and share this resource that we have. And likewise, there are probably some things here in India that India would love to share with us. Again, I see that as what our relationship is. It’s a mature relationship. It’s a relationship where India may have things to offer to us, we may have things to offer to them, to India.

Question: Any other issues that you would want me to take up?

Secretary Johanns: I would just say it is almost a non-existent situation that I come to a country for five days. It seems like any more I have hardly enough time to land in my own bed any more. I travel constantly. I really wanted to come here. There are meetings going on these two days, but we’ve spent a couple of days, my wife and I, just getting out into India. We visited a farm operation where I thought some really exciting things were occurring. A father and his three sons working together, employing good farming practices. They were very proud of what they were doing and very proud to show me what they were doing. And they’re enjoying I think some real good success.

We went to a place where they were auctioning ag products. I think the whole village turned out to greet me. Such a warm welcome. I mean it was really, really exciting. Little children and adults. We were all there in that open area where they do the auctioning and I actually observed an auction. I just think it’s been a great experience. I have really enjoyed it here. I’ve enjoyed the hospitality. The people here are just wonderful and I’ve really, really appreciated that.

I look forward to working with this country. I think there are a lot of things we can do together that we can get excited about, and I hope improve the economy of India and improve the economy of the United States. I just think it’s very positive.

Question: Thank you very much.