The Guardian December 8, 1999


WTO collapse: win for people

by Anna Pha

The collapse of the World Trade Organisation's Ministerial Meeting in 
Seattle last week marks a great victory for the people of the world. It is 
the second recent serious setback for the policies of globalisation and the 
WTO, IMF and World Bank and for the corporate powers driving those polices. 


The first setback was the abandonment by the OECD member countries of the 
Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI).

The failure of the WTO meeting to reach agreement on any statement, let 
alone proposals for a new "Millennium Round" of negotiations demonstrates 
that the WTO agenda and transnational dictatorship are not inevitable when 
democratic forces unite and take a strong stand defending the rights of 
people and nation states.

A number of developing countries refused to be bullied or blackmailed into 
accepting the dictate of US imperialism and, within the ranks of the 
leading industrialised countries, serious divisions emerged.

The high degree of internationalisation of the campaign to stop a new round 
of negotiations was an important factor in its success. As of November 25, 
1,448 local, national, regional and international organisations from 89 
countries had signed a Stop the Round Statement*.

November 30 was declared an International Day of Action. In Seattle, tens 
of thousands of protestors were successful in blocking access to the 
meeting centre.

People gathered at every intersection leading to the WTO venue. Barricades 
were built and people chained themselves together so that no vehicles could 
pass. The WTO was forced to cancel its morning meeting.

The police and other security forces were out in force. They used teargas, 
rubber and plastic bullets, "flash and bang" concussion grenades and 
capsicum spray in their efforts to clear the thousands of protestors from 
the streets.

By mid-afternoon Seattle's Governor, Gary Locke, announced a curfew and a 
state of emergency and called out the National Guard. The tens of thousands 
of demonstrators included workers, farmers, and environmentalists. They 
came not only from the US but from around the world.

There was a strong trade union contingent, organised by the AFL-CIO. The 
International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) shut down the docks in 
Seattle and other ports on the US west coast in solidarity with the 
protests.

ILWU President Brian McWilliams told a pre-march rally: "There will be no 
business as usual today ... demonstrating to the corporate CEOs that the 
global economy will not run without the consent of the workers 
everywhere... The interests of working people transcend international 
boundaries."

Mr McWilliams said labour was there "to tell the agents of global capital 
that we will not sit quietly by while they meet behind closed doors to 
carve up our world."

The rally was also addressed by COSATU's General Secretary Velinzima Vavi.

International actions

In Sydney there was a protest outside the office of the Department of 
Foreign Affairs and trade.

Mass protests were organised in the lead-up to the WTO meeting in many 
cities around the world.

In Geneva around 3,000 protested outside the WTO building and then in front 
of the UN building.

In France, 75,000 are reported to have taken part in actions in Paris, 
Lyon, Marseille, Strasbourg and Lille, with a message to the WTO: "the 
world is not a commodity".

In New Delhi, around 300 indigenous people forced their way into the 
premises of the World Bank office. They met with a World Bank 
representative in India and handed him an open letter addressed to the WTO 
President:

"We know that in the Seattle Round of the WTO, there is a plan to hand over 
our forests to commercial and industrial interests. We will resist this 
too, with all our might. For the World Bank and the WTO, our forests are a 
marketable commodity", the letter said.

"But for us, the forests are a home, our source of livelihood, the dwelling 
of our gods, the burial grounds of our ancestors, the inspiration of our 
culture.... We will not let you sell our forests. So go back from our 
forests and our country."

Health is another area that would be affected if the US and Australian push 
for the inclusion of services into the WTO regime had succeeded. The US 
Coalition of Service Industries has been lobbying hard for the inclusion of 
health.

"Health care services in many foreign countries have largely been the 
responsibility of the public sector — [making] it difficult for US private 
sector health care providers to market in foreign countries", says the 
Coalition, determined to force open foreign health markets.

The aim of the Coalition is to "encourage more privatisation" and "allow 
more foreign ownership of health care facilities".

Stop the Round

The Stop the Round Statement points out, "The Uruguay Round Agreements have 
functioned principally to prise open markets for the benefit of 
transnational corporations at the expense of national economies; workers, 
farmers and other people; and the environment.

"In addition the WTO system, rules and procedures are undemocratic, 
untransparent and non-accountable and have operated to marginalise the 
majority of the world's people.

"We oppose any further liberalisation negotiations, especially those which 
will bring new areas under the WTO regime, such as investment (the MAI by 
another name), competition policy and government procurement.

"We commit ourselves to campaign to reject any such proposals. We also 
oppose the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 
Agreement. We call for a moratorium on any new issues or further 
negotiations that expand the scope and power of the WTO.

"During this moratorium there should be a comprehensive and in-depth review 
of the existing agreements. Effective steps should be taken to change the 
agreements. Such a review should address the WTO's impact on marginalised 
communities, development, democracy, environment, health, human rights, 
labour rights and the rights of women and children. The review must be 
conducted with civil society's full participation...

"A review of the system will provide an opportunity for society to change 
course and develop an alternative, humane and sustainable system of trade 
and investment relations", concludes the Statement.

Differences inside the WTO

On the eve of the Seattle meeting, US President Bill Clinton made a strong 
plea for labour standards to be part of the WTO regime and for countries to 
be subjected to "sanctions" for labour-rights breaches. 

Such a provision would give major industrialised countries like the US, the 
European Union and Australia open slather to "legally" (in WTO terms) put 
up barriers to cheap imports from third world countries. This is the real 
aim of the exercise.

Clinton has not suddenly become the champion of workers' rights. As 
Chakravarthi Raghavan, writing in the South-North Development Monitor 
(SUNS), pointed out:

"Ironically, the site of Mr Clinton's address [to the WTO] and the luncheon 
was the `Four Seasons Hotel', one of the two five-star hotels in Seattle 
that are `union free', which means that there is no union, and the 
management can hire and fire workers at will."

Agriculture is another area where there are sharp differences. One group of 
members (including the US and Australia) want the complete integration of 
agriculture into the same rules as other products, thus compelling 
governments to remove all export subsidies and open up their markets to 
imports.

On the other side are the European Union, Japan and south Korea and a group 
of 25 developing countries fighting to maintain export subsidies to protect 
their agricultural workers.

Proposals from the European Commission for negotiations on investment and 
competition policy were opposed by India, Kenya (co-ordinator of the 
African group), Zimbabwe and others.

One of the most heated contests was at the Biotech Working Group. Despite 
the proposal coming from the European Commission, the Environment Ministers 
from 15 European countries (including Denmark, Britain, France, Belgium and 
Italy) are reported to have expressed opposition to the establishment of a 
new WTO working party on biotechnology, arguing that it would undermine the 
Biosafety Protocol.

Developing countries, including India, and environmental and development 
groups, who see it as an act of betrayal of the Biosafety Protocol, were 
also strongly opposed.

Despite this strong opposition, the US delegation continued to lobby other 
countries to accept it. The US authorities oppose laws such as the 
Biosafety Protocol because they require the labelling of Genetically 
Modified Organisms (GMOs) and ban such products or the commercial planting 
of GMO crops.

Corporate sponsors

The costs of holding the WTO Conference in the US were footed by corporate 
sponsors who made private donations. A host committee headed by Microsoft's 
Bill Gates and Boeing's President Bill Condit raised the funds, exposing 
"the nature of the relationship between corporations, governments of 
powerful countries and the WTO which they control and run from behind", 
said Chakravarthi Raghavan.

"In exchange for the funds to run the conference donors were promised free 
publicity and privileged access to the assembled delegates. And there were 
attempts to get foreign corporations to contribute funds too, though this 
misfired when NGOs got hold of the circular and publicised it."

There were six classes of donor, from emerald (more than $250,000) down to 
bronze. Benefits were graded accordingly.

The Seattle team of Australia's Trade Minister Mark Vaile included eight 
big business representatives. Offers from non-business groups like the 
ACTU, Australian Council of Social Services, and the Australian Council for 
Overseas Aid to provide advice were rejected.

The WTO and the corporate forces behind it and their government stooges 
will not let up. They have suffered a serious setback in their plans. They 
will continue to push their agenda in every corner of the globe, through 
the IMF, the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and where-ever else 
they can.

But the defeat of the new round at Seattle and the forced abandonment of 
the OECD-sponsored MAI are great victories for the people with which to 
enter the new millennium.

* * *
Acknowledgements to Third World Network for information used in this article
* * *
Details of the Stop the Round Statement are available on the following web sites: http://http://www.onelist.com/ http://http://www.antenna. nl/foei/campaigns/indexwto.html http://http://antenna.nl/aseed/trade/index.html#statement

Back to index page