OVERVIEW OF THE 2003 WTO
MINISTERIAL IN CANCUN When trade ministers from different member nations of the World Trade Organization (WTO) met September 10-14, 2003, in Cancun, Mexico, a group of developing, poorer countries refused to continue with the Free Trade agenda. Instead, they created new networks to work for a more just trade system. The Symbolic Setting: The Resort and the Slum The Hotel Zone of Cancun, where the WTO ministerial was held, is a clear example of how trade-driven privatization of water and other essential services hurts the poor. Through the years, the ground water in the region of Cancun has become too polluted to drink, so the water for the hotel area is piped in from elsewhere by a private company. This has resulted in an unjust pattern of water distribution. The hotels have all the water they want, not only for drinking but also for their swimming pools. The zone where hotel workers must live, however, does not have enough water. 20 to 30% of the people of this city of 500,000 people have no water. The rest have running water only 2 to 5 hours a day. The hotel workers make $3 to $5 per day - the cost of two small bottles of drinkable water. In addition, the hotels dump their waste into the lagoon in the "poor" part of Cancun, resulting in stench and pollution. Cancun is a graphic illustration of the growing gap between the rich and the poor in a globalized world, where some live in luxury while many others struggle in terrible living conditions. Voice for the Poor at Cancun The Cancun round of WTO talks was to focus on helping poor countries develop economically. That did not happen. Developed countries were not willing to give up the systems they had in place to help their own corporate sectors, especially agribusiness. The U.S. and E.U. want to continue to keep subsidizing their own business at the same time they are demanding that developing countries cut tariffs on goods sold by the developed world. Developing countries, supported by the solidarity of many non-governmental organizations, refused to agree to a ministerial document that did not reflect their perspective. A coalition called the "Group of 20+," led by India, South Africa, China and Brazil, and representing over half of the world's population and 63% of the world's farmers, refused to back decisions that were made without their voices being heard about subsidies. A different group of 33 developing countries, led by the Philippines and Indonesia, formed the "Friends of Special Products and Special Safeguard Measures," declaring that all governments should have the right to protect their own farmers and food security with tariffs and other measures. Finally, a group of four African countries made a proposal that the U.S. reduce its cotton subsidies. In the past, tactics such as threatening to cut off foreign aid were used to break up trade coalitions of developing countries. However, this time developing countries' groups stood firm. Faced with their resolve, the WTO chair called an early halt to the meeting because no agreements seemed likely. The Road Ahead to Trade Justice Developing country trade negotiators will still participate in continuing WTO talks in Geneva. One increasing concern is "policy coherence:" the WTO Free Trade policies are being supported by World Bank and IMF (International Monetary Fund) policies directed at developing nations. The U.S. and E.U. still need to be challenged to fulfill their promises to focus on trade policies that will genuinely help poor countries. Outside of the WTO structure, the U.S. and other developed countries will seek regional and two-country trade pacts, modeled on NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement). [Small farmers in Mexico are suffering from the effects of NAFTA, which was implemented almost 10 years ago. In Mexico, 800,000 small corn producers have lost their land and jobs because of this trade agreement. During the WTO meeting, almost 20,000 small farmers from Mexico and other countries gathered to protest Free Trade.] Negotiations are underway for a Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) and a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA). The Catholic Bishops in Latin America have spoken out about the negative impact these agreements would have on the poor. Faith-based organizations and Inter-Faith networks are working with others to educate U.S. citizens on the issues and have them speak out for Trade Justice.
|
||
|
|
||