Is it necessary to submit cultural goods to the discipline of the World Trade Organization (WTO)? As we come closer to the beginning of a new round of multilateral commercial negotiations, the answer is no. Cultural goods are not merchandise like other goods.

During the previous round of negotiations which ended in 1993 in Marrakech, the European Union, standing up to heavy pressure, refused to include culture and audiovisuals in the list of liberalized sectors. In the name of "cultural exception", the EU has been able to maintain its mechanisms of financial assistance to creation and diversity in its audiovisual sector, all while conforming with our international obligations. It is imperative to preserve the points gained in Marrakech.

Cultural and political convergence can be the sign of nations' being drawn closer together. The historical advancement due to Gerhard Schröder who introduced the right of soil as the method of acquiring German nationality, is one illustration. But globalization leads to uniformity of behavior and lifestyles. In this context, the treatment of cultures in common would not allow for the preservation of linguistic and cultural identities.

Let us take as examples, to name only a few, Jean-Luc Godard, Roberto Begnini, Pedro Almodovar, Martin Scorsese, Abbas Kiarostami, Takeshi Kitano, Alain Resnais. Where does the force in their films come from? From the exploration of personal universes attached to their own cultures, and this is irreducible to an invariable formula.

Liberalization of the audiovisual and cultural sectors will not bring about any benefits. We need to mobilize everyone to stop the advent of a mono-culture.

I am convinced that liberalization of the audiovisual and cultural sectors will not bring about any benefits. Ever since Ricardo, we know that the logic of free-exchange implies that France and Europe renounce supporting their cultural and audiovisual industries, since foreign "products" can be imported at lower cost.

Hollywood films are amortized over a vast market before being exported cheaply and without being subject to the language barrier. Should Europe neglect this sector, it runs the risk of marginalizing itself. This is not admissible, given the cultural, economic and social importance of the cultural and audiovisual industries. With the digital revolution and the explosion of audiovisual proposals it entails, these industries, in fact, experience today a profound mutation engendering growth and employment.

The deficit of audiovisual service exchanges between the United States and Europe has increasingly accumulated over the last ten years: it has risen from 2 billion dollars in 1988 to 6.3 billion dollars in 1999. In spite of measures taken to support the European programming industry, the average market share of American films in movie theaters and television is superior to 60%. That of European films in the United States is only 3%.

It is thus necessary for us to react without letting down our guard. We must encourage the development of European operators and their presence on foreign markets. It is also necessary to preserve our policy in favor of European programs, whose positive effects have inspired certain countries, Korea in particular, with such success that heavy pressure has been exercised to dismantle them.

The new round of negotiations about to be opened has been preceded by initiatives bent on challenging the cultural exception. Retiring from the negotiations on the draft Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) in October 1998, France put a stop to these tentatives. This time, it is not the principle itself of multilateral negotiations within the framework of the WTO that we must combat, but the eventuality of a field of application subsuming culture and audiovisuals.

The WTO constitutes a fine tool of regulation in numerous economical sectors. In critical periods, this multilateral framework has been able to ward off the temptation of protectionist withdrawal. France, the second largest worldwide exporter of services, needs a reliable legal framework in order to draw full profit from its know-how and its technology. The possibility of seizing an impartial organization for the settlement of disputes is essential, as the appeal to the WTO by the European Union has shown in its challenge of American legislation on the matter of copyrights, which awards an exemption to bars, restaurants and stores from the payment of royalties for the diffusion of music.

Our major concern during the upcoming multilateral negotiations is to retain the States' margin of maneuver in the implementation and administration of instruments that permit the promotion of cultural diversity: regulation and financing of radio and public television, support given to the programming industries in all their forms, preservation of the different tools of assistance to creation implemented in Europe (Directive on Television without Frontiers, Media Program, Eurimages) and the preferential agreements on co-production.

The European Union should therefore not make any liberalization proposal in the audiovisual and cultural sectors and obtain the maintenance of exemptions in these sectors from the most-favored nation clause in order to allow for the preferential treatment of certain States, in particular those belonging to the EU.

Taking a lesson from the experience of the MAI negotiation, it is also necessary to be vigilant with respect to the risks of circumvention in the negotiation. The audiovisual and cultural sectors should not be included in an eventual treaty on investment. Likewise, audiovisual services diffused via internet and digital networks cannot be liberalized on the debatable grounds that we are in the presence of virtual goods or immaterial merchandise. The mode of transmission of a service does not modify its nature in any way. This principle of technological neutrality should not suffer any dispensation.

The cultural exception is not negotiable. It must be shared as vastly as possible - by the European Commission, of course, which will be mandated to negotiate in the name of the fifteen member States, but also by all the States concerned by the preservation of cultural diversity.

Consultation with audiovisual and cultural professionals will be strictly observed all throughout the negotiation. Their role is essential, in particular, to convince their foreign counterparts that this cause is also theirs. We need to mobilize everyone to stop the advent of a mono-culture.