|
The
WTO ministerial meet at Seattle, from Nov. to Dec. 3, ‘99, was significant for a
number of reasons. First, it raced militant, violent demonstrations not seen in
the West since the days of the Vietnam war. Second, it witnessed even some
resistance to imperialist manipulations and bullying (specifically of the US) by
the countries of Africa, Latin America mid the Caribbeans. Third, the meeting
collapsed due to intense inter-imperialist contradictions, particularly between
the US and the EU. And lastly, at the meeting, India displayed a rare consensus
of its delegates (comprising the NDA, Congress(I) and the 'Left') in open
servility to US imperialism.
For
US imperialism it was a disastrous failure. Since the past year, the US has been
making fervent preparations for this third ministerial meeting of the WTO.
Seattle was specifically chosen as the venue, being the seat of MNC power, at
which the two giants, Boeing and Microsoft, are headquartered. Clinton himself
was to attend the Conference oil three out of the four days, to add to its
stature. Heads of state of all major powers were invited (though none attended).
But
the grandeur of 135 imperialism and MNC power was punctured by the militant
demonstrations outside the venue, and resistance to its arm-twisting within. For
those four days, Seattle was transformed, from being the headquarters of
powerful MNCs, into becoming the centre rot powerful anti-MNC protests. Slogans
of 'death to WTO’ rent the air, and thousands demanded that the WTO
be freed from the 'corporate bloodsuckers', 'MNC criminals' and 'imperialist
exploiters'. The President of the United States of America, expecting to march
into Seattle with the pomp and splendour of an international monarch, had to
sneak into the city like a petty thief under the cover of darkness.
The meeting, which was to merely agree on an agenda for a further round of
talks, could not find agreement on even a single issue. Finally, no agenda could
be fixed; and, amidst acrimonious debate and vehement protests, the meeting
collapsed, threatening to make it one of the biggest fiascos this international
body has ever faced.
THE WTO MEET
The
Third International Meeting of the 134 member-countries of the WTO was
scheduled to launch a new 'Millennium' Round (alternatively to be called Seattle
Round/Development Round) of trade negotiations. In this section we shall first
look at the contentious issues, then at the background to these issues, then the
Conference itself; and finally the protests, both inside and outside the venue.
(I) CONTENTIOUS ISSUES
These were of two types First, amongst the imperialist countries; and second,
between the imperialist countries on the one band, and the backward countries on
the other.
Amongst the imperialist, a major point of conflict was on the question of
agricultural subsidies. The list backed by the Cairns Group of countries, were
demanding reduction, or even elimination of tariffs, and wanted to negotiate an
end to export subsidies and agricultural support programmes, The E.U. and Japan
have been vehemently opposing this. US agri-business is excessively dependant on
exports and has much lower subsides — 16%, compared to the EU's 42% and Japan's
69%.
Another point of disagreement between the US and the EU was on the question of
foreign investments. While the EU and Japan were keen on having the WTO
formulate minimum rules for investment, the US has refused to agree to this.
The
contentious issues of the third world countries revolve around the
pro-imperialist biases inbuilt into the Uruguay Round (UR) rules. For example,
while both the US and the EU demand further reduction in tariffs on industrial
goods, they totally refuse to review their own protectionist policies
implemented through anti-dumping duties, environment-related rules, etc. Many of
these even go against the stipulations of the WTO.
What is more, they now seek to aggressively further their protectionist policies
by demanding linkage between trade and environment, and between trade and labour
standards. While MNCs fragrantly flout all environmental and labour standards in
the backward countries, they seek such laws so as to arbitrarily block cheap
imports (like steel, textiles, etc.) into their own countries, While both the US
and the EU are aggressively trying to bring these two issues on to the WTO
agenda, the bulk of the backward countries are opposing it.
Most of these contentious issues have arisen due to the imperialists forcing the
pace of trade/financial liberalisation well beyond even that agreed on in the UR
talks evolved in 1995.
(II) BACKGROUND
The
Uruguay Round Agreement of the old GATT came into force on Jan. 1, '95. Though
it will not be until Dec, 31, 2004, before all the provisions become part of
global trade law, the imperialists have been pushing the pace of globalisation.
At the Marrakesh meeting itself, where the UR was concluded, a decision was
taken to appoint a committee in the WTO to study the relationship between trade
and environment laying the basis for widening the trade agenda. Besides, the
UR agreement clearly called for new negotiations from Jan.2000 in the sphere of
agriculture and services. Later, this was sought to he extended into a
full-fledged new Round of trade talks. As early as 1996, the former Trade
Commissioner of the EU, Leon Brittan, began to lobby for what he christened the
Millennium Round, that would go well beyond the built-in agenda on agriculture
and services.
In pursuance of this goal, various key meetings of the WTO began extending the
trade agenda. The Ministerial Conferences, the highest decision-making body of
the WTO, held every two years; specifically sought to widen the scope of the WTO.
At the first Ministerial Conference, held in Singapore in December96, working
groups were appointed to study four new subjects — investment rules, competition
policy, transparency in government procurement policy and trade facilitation.
The second ministerial conference, held in Geneva in May 98, brought e-commerce
on the agenda of the WTO. In between, an Information Technology Agreement
(ITA-1) was concluded in order to eliminate tariffs on specific IT products. In
addition, the Singapore Ministerial Declaration made a specific reference to the
observance of internationally recognised core labour standards.
In this process a basis was laid for a comprehensive new Round of trade
negotiations whose agenda was to be finalised at the third Seattle Ministerial
Conference of the WTO.
(III) THE CONFERENCE
The Conference brought four significant factors in international relations to
the forefront:
(a) US Bullying:
This was initiated by Clinton himself through a statement before reaching the
Conference, where he called for the imposition of sanctions against countries
not following core labour standards. To add salt to injury, in the midst of the
Conference, he signed an international treaty that called for a ban on "the most
flagrant forms of child labour".
At the Conference, the US Trade Representative, Charlene Barshefsky, utilised
her status as co-chairperson, to browbeat others into accepting the US agenda.
In an amateurish display of bullying tactics, she, together with the WTO chief,
Mike Moore, arbitrarily constituted a committee to discuss and endorse the US
proposal for labour standards. When this was opposed by some underdeveloped
countries, Barshefsky arrogantly stated that she had the right to move from a
democratic process to a selective process.
(b) US-EU Conflict:
The conflict became so acute at the conference, that the EU went so far as to
put forward an alternative ministerial declaration, opposed to the 'official'
US-sponsored one. This alternative declaration was hacked by Japan, Switzerland
and even South Korea. It also sought to enlist the support of the underdeveloped
countries by going further than the US has been willing to, in addressing the
problems of the backward countries in the implementation of the existing WTO
agreements.
At the end of the conference the EU Trade Commissioner, Pascal Lamy, criticized
the "medieval procedures" that were being followed in conducting the conference
and stated that the US were "so determined to drive through their own agenda,
that they were blind to where this would lead."
(c) Protest by third world countries:
While the Indian delegation was busy helping push the US agenda, a large number
of third world countries protested against the autocratic and arbitrary methods
employed in decision-making. Expressing (heir resentment, Egyptian Trade
Negotiator, Munir Zaharan said "we have been treated like animals, keeping US
OUI in the cold and telling us nothing." A representative of the OAU
(Organization of African Unity) charged that there was no transparency in the
proceedings and that African countries were being "marginalized and
excluded."
The WTO negotiations have all along being characterized by what is known as the
'Green Room' negotiations. These 'Rooms' are nothing but arm-twisting chambers,
where the G7 countries create a 'consensus' amongst a select group of pliable
underdeveloped countries. This 'consensus' is then forced upon the entire
conference, with no discussion allowed. At the Seattle conference ministers of
many smaller countries were denied access to these 'Rooms' by menacing US
security guards. When they did manage to get past security, they found no chairs
for themselves. Entrance to these was restricted to 23 delegations (including
India) arbitrarily chosen by the WTO director-general on instructions from the
US.
At Seattle, even the usual niceties of multilateral negotiations were not
observed, and the smaller underdeveloped countries were openly treated with
contempt or simply ignored by the 'main' negotiators. But, on this occasion, the
overt discrimination and display of raw power, was too much to tolerate. It
resulted in an unprecedented revolt on the penultimate day, where two separate
protest statements were publicly issued. Never in the half-century history of
the GATT/WTO) has such open discontent being voiced.
The first statement, issued by a large number of Latin American and Caribbean
countries, ended by saying that "as long as conditions of transparency,
openness and participation that allow for adequately balanced results in respect
of interest of all members do not exist, we will not join the consensus required
to meet the objectives of the ministerial conference."
The OAU statement of all the African countries ended by saying that "we
reject the approach that is being employed, and we must point out that under the
present circumstances, we will not be able to join the consensus required to
meet the objectives of tile ministerial conference."
(iv) Mass-protests
On the eve of the WTO conference, 1000 groups signed a memorandum against the
"anti-people" policies of the WTO. The overall theme of the majority of the
50,000 demonstrators that took over Seattle, was against "corporate greed" that
was driving trade liberalisation.
On the opening day of the conference the streets of Seattle were taken over by
the protestors. Delegates were holed up in their hotels and were unable to move
out. A few who attempted, were jostled around and spray painted. Even the four
major speakers at the inaugural function -US Secretary of State, Madeleine
Albright; UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan; WTO Director General, Mike Moore;
And US Trade Representative, Charlene Barshefsky — were unable to move out of
their hotels and could not reach the hall. De-facto, the high profile
ministers and delegates had become prisoners of the masses. The situation
deteriorated to such an extent, that the elaborate inaugural function had to be
cancelled. The conference too, was unable to start as scheduled as delegates
could not reach the hall.
It is then that a massive police force, armed to the teeth, and backed by
National Guards and State Troopers began their counter-attack, to cease back the
city, in order to allow the conference to proceed. For the first time in post
World War II history the Mayor of the city declared a 'State of Emergency' and a
curfew was imposed. Seattle was turned into a 'war-zone.'
The police launched their attack using truncheons, tear-gas, pepper sprays,
plastic bullets and even concussion grenades. The people fought back smashing
shops, cars, etc. and using guerrilla methods to battle the police. Pitched
battles ensued, and the police had to fight inch-by-inch for control of the
streets. Demonstrators retreated, and attacked from the flanks. Masked activists
set up road-blocks and took control of major intersections.
Though the streets were finally cleared and the conference started, the battles
continued into the next day, with police brutality stepped up. 600 were arrested
and hundreds more injured. Tear-gas canisters were fired directly into the
protester's faces, jaws were smashed, bones broken, eyes were damaged, prisoners
were tortured, and even ordinary bystanders were beaten. The demonstrators put
on plays; sang songs; occupied vacant houses; heckled dictators of third world
countries as they got out of their limousines; conducted tribunals indicting
Shell, Cargill, The Gap, Union Carbide, Monsanto, etc. for crimes against
humanity; formed human chains; and shouted slogans - against the third world
debt, against the sweat-shops of Asia, against genocide and corporate greed,
etc.
On the third day, the character of the demonstrations changed - focussing on
police brutality, against the suppression of the freedom of speech in Seattle,
and for the release of those arrested. The Seattle jail was gheraoed by
thousands of demonstrators. Even the martial law declared in Seattle was unable
to stop the protests, which continued right through the entire period of the
conference.
Though the media has mainly focussed on some of the demonstrators' demands for
labour standards and environment-linked trade issues — which coincided with
Clinton's agenda — the reality is that most of the demonstrations attacked both
the WTO and the MNCs that control it.
Besides Seattle, protests occurred in many other cities of the world.
Particularly significant were the massive demonstrations in London, Paris and
even far away Manila.
The demonstrations in Central London against the WTO were linked to the
privatization of Railways in Britain. The demonstrators seized Houston Railway
Station and paralyzed London's underground train service. Here too, pitched
battles were fought with the police, before train services could be restored. In
Paris too, thousands marched, demanding that the WTO put people before profits.
INDIAN 'CONSENSUS' & PRO-US SERVILITY
Jaswant Singh's secret agreements 'with Strobe Talbott tied the BJP-led
government to toeing the US line at the WTO. But the delegation at Seattle
comprised representatives not only of the government, but also those of the
opposition. At Seattle, Murasoli Maran of the NDA, Kamal Nath of the Congress(I)
and Biplab Dasgupta of the CPI(M) sang the same tune.
The grounds for capitulation to the US were laid well before the Seattle meet :
At the winter session of the LokSabha, as many as seven bills were introduced to
amend Indian laws to bring it in conformity with the WTO. Successive governments
had already reduced tariffs, even well below the figures stipulated by the WTO.
Financial liberalisation and even the opening out of insurance to foreign
capital has gone well beyond imperialist expectations.
Besides, for a full month prior to the meet, an intensive media campaign was
conducted, for India to meekly acquiesce to all imperialist decisions, even if
it be against national interests. While the Association of Industries was
blatantly vocal about it, the politicians presented the same views in subtle
overtones.
The CII/Assocham/FICCI and their media mouthpieces have openly been ridiculing
India becoming a spokesperson of the backward countries and have unashamedly
been calling for India to tie its policies to US apron strings.
While making a pretense of opposing the US, and fighting against trade-linked
labour standards and environmental issues, the politicians have systematically
been kow-towing to US demands. Prior to the Seattle meet, the Prime Minister
himself stated that India will adopt a 'flexible' approach this time at the WTO,
compared to the 'closed' approach earlier. Considering that 'earlier' India
virtually signed on the dotted line dictated by the WTO, one can imagine what
these words of the PM would entail. Besides, the government had systematically
been toning down its language saying there was no need to resort to "opposition
for opposition sake".
At the conference itself India supported US-proposals on e-commerce and
information technology, on the reduction/removal of agricultural tariffs and
subsidies (though Indian farmers are being destroyed by cheap imports; e.g.
wheat, edible-oil, rubber, sugarcane, etc.), and even supported the 'official'
US draft declaration and opposed that presented by the EU though the latter
draft contained some of the 'implementation issues' that it was seeking.
Servility reached to such an extent, that when Maran was asked why the meeting
had failed, he had no independent view, except to state that the causes had been
outlined by the US Trade Representative, Charlene Barshefsky!!
The slavishness of the Indian rulers have reached such depths that, while the
US has not agreed to even one of the 'implementation issues' raised by India, it
has accepted US/WTO demands blindly. Not only has the US maintained its high
tariff on textile imports from India (25% compared to its average tariff of 5%),
increased the number of anti-dumping duties on Indian products, but just prior
to the conference it banned the import of bidis, which had begun to flood the US
market, saying that it was made with child labour. Yet, the Indian rulers have
not even raised a whimper of protest they continue to bend over backwards to
please their American masters, bowing to their every wish.
And in this slavishness all parliamentary panties were united. At Seattle, what
was particularly interesting was that the BJP alliance, the Congress(I) and the
'Left' spoke in one voice. For all the CPI/CPI(M) rhetoric, Biplab Dasgupta
meekly followed Maran in dancing to the American tune. While the African,
Caribbean and some Latin American delegations at least voiced some protest, the
Indians came out as pathetic, servile chamchas.
FUTURE OF WTO
Not only the WTO, but even the Seattle meet was clearly in the vice-like grip of
the multinationals. At Seattle, the key body involved in the organisation of the
meet, the Seattle Host Organisation (SHO), was co-chaired by the heads of Boeing
and Microsoft. The entire conference was funded by corporate sponsorships, which
rose to new heights. The sponsors were allowed special privileges to interact
with ministerial delegates to further their business interests. The sponsors
included the top MNCs like Boeing, Microsoft, General Motors, Ford, Honeywell,
Hewlett Packard, Motorola, IBM, Caterpillar, Lufthansa, etc. They provided $9
million (Rs.40 crores) for the meet.
It is also well established that the MNCs have played a major role in chalking
out the UR Agreement. For example, the Intellectual Property Committee, a forum
of 13 US corporations, including Monsanto, Du Pont, General Motors, etc., worked
to incorporate TRIPS into the UR. The Financial Leaders Group(FLG) played a key
role in "identifying barriers to trade in other countries". The FLG
included some of the world's biggest financial players — Barclays, Chase
Manhattan, ING Group, Ford, Goldman Sachs, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi, etc. Since
its formation in 1995, the Transatlantic Business Dialogue (TAB D), in which the
biggest corporates from the EU and the US participate, has dictated the agenda
that governments' should take up at the WTO. The ICC, which represents the
interests of some of the biggest MNCs, was a major player in the controversial
move to float the Multilateral Agreement on Investments (MAI). Lobbying by
business played a key role in clinching the three international agreements that
were signed at the WTO in 1997 — on Information Technology products, on
telecommunications, and, most significantly, liberalisation of finance.
From this it is quite clear that the WTO is nothing but an instrument to further
the business interests of the MNCs…….. to enable them to spread their tentacles
to all corners of the globe, to extract maximum profits. Behind the facade of 'liberalisation'
lies the butcher's knives of cut-throat competition. Behind the veneer of WTO
respectability, 'democratic functioning', etc., exist the criminals of finance
capital, dictating terms. The Mike Moores, Charlene Barshefskys and Pascal Lamys
are nothing but agents of these international sharks.
What the demonstrators at Seattle did, was to bring this fact to the forefront.
They targeted, not only the WTO, but also the MNCs behind it. Though they may
not have any methodology to smash the imperialist system, that, in fact,
generates both the WTO and the MNCs, they displayed the level mass anger has
reached against these institutions of power……. the fact that people are no
longer willing to tolerate these international blood-suckers. The violent
demonstrations were, no doubt, a beginning in the right direction…….. a step
forward in the struggle against imperialism and its institutions.
Also, in spite of the varied forums of the MNCs, their contentions continue to
grow. This is increasingly reflected in the trade-wars between the US and EU. At
present it is confined to a few products like airplanes, bananas, beef, etc. But
the intensity of conflict has already disrupted one of their major international
forums…….. the WTO. In the future these contradictions will grow. With the
increasing crisis in the world economy, the scramble for markets will intensify;
protectionism will increase; and bodies like the WTO will be made redundant.
Already the USA has its Super 301 laws, which explicitly states that in case of
conflict between the WTO and US laws, the latter would prevail.
Finally, the people of the third world countries will no longer tolerate the
ruthless rape and loot of their countries, even if their governments continue to
capitulate to the imperialists. The imperialist storm-troopers will arouse the
indignation of all self-respecting people in the backward countries leading to a
new round of national liberation struggles. Then, no WTO will be able to mask
the fangs of the MNC vipers.
|
