URFIG Document - Analysis about WTO

 

 

WTO: ONE MONTH BEFORE THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE

 THE WESTERN EMPIRE AT WORK

 (Dr Raoul Marc JENNAR, 9 October 2001)

 

Never has the world been as deeply divided as it is at the dawn of the 21st century.  Never has the gap between the living standards of industrialised countries and those of developing nations been as wide.  Never has the abyss between the North and the South been as deep.  Never has the opposition between the governments of the North and the governments of the South been as confrontational, exactly one month before the start of the World Trade Organization’s (WTO) 4th Ministerial Conference which is due in Doha, capital of Qatar.

Industrialised countries carry the primary responsibility for a situation that can only be qualified as catastrophic for the human community.  They have deliberately compromised the incredible opportunity offered by the end the cold war and the world division into two ideological blocks.  Instead of putting in place a new world order based on law and solidarity, the winning ideology, brandished by the United States and the European Union, has sought to impose its dogmas.  These have been translated into the Marrakech Agreements, signed in 1994 at the end of the Uruguay Round.  These Agreements are unbalanced, creating obligations for developing countries of which the rich countries are exempted.  The Agreements are implemented in an unbalanced way by a WTO resolutely at the service of rich countries and their supranational corporations. 

Since Seattle, where they refused a new round of negotiations which would introduce more issues under the WTO’s control, developing countries – which make up for the overwhelming majority of the 142 Member States of the WTO – have, week after week in Geneva, asked that the commitment taken in Marrakech be respected; that is, that an evaluation of the existing agreements in relation to their socio-economic, environmental and cultural impact be undertaken and reviewed accordingly.  Rich countries, led by the European Union and the USA, have systematically opposed the most categorical of refusals.

This refusal has once again been vividly expressed on the 19 September in Geneva where the United States, showing an advanced degree of brutality, and the European Union, through the hypocrisy of presenting a document which makes show of generosity, have refused any modification whatsoever of the Agreement on intellectual property rights, a modification which developing countries had asked for so as to guarantee the access to essential medicines.  For the West, it is a matter, first and foremost, of protecting the lavish profits reaped by pharmaceutical companies.

Not only do rich countries refuse to admit the failure of their dogmas with regards to the immense majority of the planet, they persist in doing so with an arrogance that contradicts their own very appropriate declarations concerning the fight against poverty.  The European Union has taken the lead of a frantic campaign in favour of a new round of negotiations which would include the broadest issues in order to extend the most radical free-exchange throughout the planet.  Their regulation of world trade translates, in practice, to a planetary deregulation creating, for the corporations of the North, the widest space ever opened to satisfy their rapacity.  This space is nothing less than the entire globe. 

Yet, they are confronted to a resistance which their arrogance did not prepare them for: at the end of June and then, at the end of July, during meetings organised at the WTO in Geneva, it was clear that no agreement between rich countries and developing countries had been reached concerning a new round.  At the end of July, of the 20 issues that the European Union wished to include in this new round, the necessary consensus was not reached despite the many pressures of all kinds exerted by both, the European Commission and a number of governments who have chosen to silence these disagreements and hide what amounts to neo-colonial behaviour from their own public opinion.  Et the end of July, the 49 poorest countries met at a conference in Tanzania during which they declared their opposition to a new round.  In Abuja (Nigeria), on the 24 September, despite the many attempts, particularly those of the European Commission, aiming to convince these countries to change their opinion, the African ministers unanimously reiterated this position.

Africa, through a single voice, declared that “African countries are not the ones asking for new multilateral negotiations on new issues; they do not have the capacity to fulfil the obligations which would result from these negotiations; they are not convinced that the liberalisation of these new issues would be of any benefit to them; they are preoccupied by additional obligations and by the danger of an increase in the competencies of the WTO; there is no consensus whatsoever amongst the members of the WTO to launch such negotiations and that the different WTO working groups must continue examining this issue.”

In Asia, India has repeated its hostility towards any new round.  The 33 Asian and Pacific countries met in Bangkok on the 28 September.  They denounced the ambiguous character of the documents presented by the WTO concerning the upcoming ministerial conference.  They declared to prefer renegotiating the Marrakech Agreements rather than a new round.

Of this massive resistance to the demands of rich countries, the European Union cares little.  Not any more than the United States does or, for that matter, any other industrialised countries.  With the complacency, and perhaps even the complicity of the media, they have chosen to adopt the most complete silence with regards to the positions of developing countries and do not miss any opportunity to try to convince public opinion that their viewpoint is shared by the countries of the South and that the opposition stems from “irresponsible” westerners who campaign within NGOs.

It is indeed true that, recently, the fear of certain social democrat political parties with regards to the success of anti-globalisation demonstrations has incited them to declare that they wish to “humanise globalisation”.  And yet, they continue, at the same time, to support the mandate entrusted to the European Commission, a mandate which is totally opposed to any notion of humanising globalisation. As if those who once were the defenders of colonialism and the protagonists of colonial wars could be credible when they speak about humanism!  Their humanism is nothing more than the arrogant conviction of a supposedly “European civilising mission”.

On the 26 September, rich countries took a step further.  They inspired two documents prepared by the WTO which they hope to see adopted at the next ministerial conference.  The first document is the ministerial declaration draft proposal which should officially open the new round.  None of the expectations formulated by the countries of the South have been taken into account.  All of the demands of rich countries have been integrated in the text.  The second document is a document the status of which is unclear and which contains set of vague promises regarding an eventual review process of the implementation of the existing agreements.

Both texts have been considered as “a dirty slap” by developing countries.  On the 2 October, the Ambassador of Tanzania to the WTO spoke in the name of the 49 Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and reminded the assembly that the LDCs were not prepared for a new round and that they did not have the capacity to participate to such negotiations no more than they were ready to fulfil the obligations which would ensue from them.  The Ambassador of Malaysia asked that rich countries cease to exert pressures on developing countries.

No doubt in view of serving the atmosphere of the moment, the European commissioner, Pascal Lamy, declared, with utmost seriousness, that, on the 1st October, “a new round will help fight terrorism” . . .

The duplicity of European countries knows no limits.  The declarations of our governments concerning the fight against poverty are perhaps soothing.  Yet, at the same time and in the places where decisions are taken, they are adopting positions which increase the poverty and dependence of the peoples of the South with regards to the North.

It is urgent to convince each and every one of our parliamentarians and ministers to face up to their responsibilities.  Because, as a last resort, the policy implemented by the European Union and the WTO stems from decisions taken in each of our countries. 

 

Dr Raoul Marc JENNAR

Researcher within Oxfam Solidarité (Brussels) and the URFIG (Paris)