[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index ][Thread Index ]

NOTICE - THE WTO AND FREE TRADE



 .
 .           RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #673           .
 .                                                               .
 .                    ---October 21, 1999---                     .
 .                                                               .
 .                          HEADLINES:                           .
 .                    THE WTO AND FREE TRADE                     .
 .                                                               .
 .                          ==========                           .
 .                                                               .
 .               Environmental Research Foundation               .
 .              P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD  21403              .
 .          Fax (410) 263-8944; E-mail: erf@xxxxxxxxxx           .
 .                                                               .
 .                          ==========                           .
 .                                                               .
 .    All back issues are available by E-mail: send E-mail to    .
 .   info@xxxxxxxxxx with the single word HELP in the message.   .
 .  Back issues are also available from http://www.rachel.org.   .
 .    The Rachel newsletter is now also available in Spanish;    .
 .     to learn how to subscribe, send the word AYUDA in an      .
 .              E-mail message to info@xxxxxxxxxxx               .
 .                                                               .
=================================================================

THE WTO AND FREE TRADE

What is being described as "the Protest of the Century" will take place
in
Seattle, Washington, November 29 to December 3 amid teach-ins,
workshops,
and strategy sessions all aiming to send a powerful message to members
of
the World Trade Organization (WTO), who will be in Seattle for the WTO's
Third Ministerial Meeting. Activists are calling for people from all
nations and all walks of life to make the journey to Seattle, to demand
that the WTO change its ways. But what is the WTO? 

Although many environmental and community activists in the U.S. know
almost nothing about the WTO, in the 4 years since its creation the WTO
has emerged as the policy voice, the muscle, and ultimately the fist of
transnational corporations. Created by international treaty in 1995, and
now boasting 134 nations as members, the WTO has written 700 pages of
rules which add up to an enforceable commercial code governing markets
and
trade world-wide -- a code enforceable not by nation-states but by the
WTO
itself. No doubt about it, the WTO is a powerful new system of global
governance.[1]

The structure of the WTO was designed by transnational corporations, so
it
should come as no surprise that the WTO is (a) radically undemocratic,
fully insulated against pressure from ordinary citizens; and (b) a
vehicle
for transnationals to challenge and effectively repeal restrictions
imposed on them by nation-states.[1] The main idea that the WTO was set
up
to define and enforce is "the global free market" or "global free
trade."
But what is "free trade"? 

Far back in the mists of time, when humans began trading shells and
beads
with each other, the first markets emerged, but such traditional markets
were never free. All traditional markets are embedded in societies and
are
regulated and restrained by those societies for the purpose of
maintaining
social cohesion. Familiar societal controls on markets include such
things
as: 

** the Roman Catholic and Islamic religions' prohibitions against usury; 

** medieval guilds, which set minimum wages, and which set standards and
prices for goods; 

** customary prohibitions or restrictions on the sale of certain goods,
such as public spaces, sexual favors, spoiled food, and judicial
decisions, for example; 

** laws requiring government purchasing policies to give preference to
businesses run by people of a particular city or region, or by women or
minorities, or by some other identifiable group; 

** regulations requiring that products be labeled with their ingredients
or with their method of production (such as "organically grown"), and
that
the labels be certifiably true; 

** laws discouraging monopolies, to promote competition; 

** a guaranteed minimum income, regardless of employment, traceable to
1795 in England; 

** laws requiring that production methods should protect endangered
species (for example, that shrimp be harvested by methods that do not
kill
rare sea turtles); 

** prohibitions against child labor; 

** government ownership of certain public-service enterprises (municipal
and state hospitals in the U.S., or the oil industry in Mexico, for
example); 

** limits on the length of a work day; 

** restrictions on 100% ownership of businesses by foreign nationals; 

** tariffs intended to increase the price of imported goods as a way of
protecting domestic producers; 

** government subsidies to promote particular industries -- for example,
planting many thousands of seedlings to assure a domestic timber
industry
in the future; 

** Etc., etc. 

As anyone can see from this list, market restrictions can be imposed by
law, or merely by custom, with varying effects on different members of a
society. It is not possible to generalize that all controls on markets
are
good or bad (though some free trade zealots do assert that all market
restrictions are unnatural and evil). 

In sum, history shows us, beyond any doubt, that, when humans develop
markets spontaneously, such markets are subject to societal controls,
which generally are aimed at maintaining social cohesion. Governments
impose market restrictions as part of their primary duty, which is to
provide security for the citizenry. 

Free markets -- markets that are free of restrictions, regulations, and
encumbrances -- do not occur spontaneously. Free markets only appear
when
they are engineered by the relentless application of state power. As a
historical fact, free market regimes are extremely rare. 

For a very brief period, and in one country only, a free market, or
laissez faire, regime did emerge. In the latter half of the 19th century
in England, a true free market economy functioned for a brief time. It
did
not occur spontaneously -- it was imposed by the brute power of the
state,
and at great cost to the average citizen of the time.[2] (Charles
Dickens
wrote novels about life during this period.) The British "free market"
experiment collapsed into the trenches of World War I and was not heard
from again until the ruling (business) class revived the idea in the
late
1970s in Great Britain, the U.S., Australia, and New Zealand. Thus,
actual
experience with free market regimes is quite limited, principally
because
such regimes are very difficult to establish and maintain in the face of
popular opposition. If a democracy is alive and well, free markets soon
revert to traditional regulated markets because citizens demand and
expect
a modicum of security, equity, and humane treatment. Free market regimes
are arguably efficient (in the narrowest economic meaning of that word)
but the historical record demonstrates that they are exceedingly painful
and costly for ordinary working people, incompatible with democratic
institutions, and destructive of the natural environment. History shows
that, left unregulated, markets cannot take into account that species
are
disappearing at unprecedented rates, economic inequalities are growing
ominously, and the lives of families and communities are in tatters. 

Now transnational corporations -- working through the governments that
they dominate[3] -- have spent roughly 20 years exporting the "free
market" model to all the nations of the world -- a utopian experiment in
social engineering that takes your breath away for its scope, scale, and
boldness. Even the most ruthless social engineers of the 20th century --
Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong -- did not attempt social engineering
projects
on the scale of the experiment that the free traders have undertaken
today. And the World Trade Organization (WTO) is the vehicle for
enforcing
this colossal attempt to remake all of the world's economies according
to
a single utopian idea. 

In principle, WTO rules are established by consensus of all 134 members,
but in practice the so-called QUAD countries (U.S., Japan, Canada and
the
European Union) can meet behind closed doors and influence the rules.
Within the WTO, the QUAD countries are the 900-pound gorilla. Within the
QUAD countries, transnational corporations wield enormous influence,
comparable to the influence of the Christian Church in medieval
Europe.[3]

The WTO allows countries to challenge each other's laws and regulations
as
violations of WTO rules. Cases are heard and decided by a tribunal of
three trade bureaucrats, usually corporate lawyers. There are no rules
on
conflict of interest, nor is there any requirement that the three judges
have any appreciation of the domestic laws of the countries involved.
The
judges meet in secret at locations and times that are not disclosed.
Documents, hearings, and briefs are confidential. Only national
governments are allowed to participate, even if a state law is being
challenged. There are no appeals to anyone outside the WTO. Once a WTO
ruling has been issued, losing countries face 3 options: They can (1)
amend their laws to comply with WTO rules; (2) pay annual compensation
to
the winning country; or (3) face non-negotiated trade sanctions
(penalties
imposed on goods that the losing country exports to other WTO
countries). 

In its short history, the WTO has already begun to repeal environmental
regulations and policies that took citizens 30 years to enact. For
example, the WTO ruled in 1998 that the precautionary principle (see
REHW
#586) is not a valid basis for restricting markets because it is
"non-scientific." When the European Union banned the sale of
hormone-treated meat within EU countries, the U.S. lodged a formal
complaint to the WTO. Despite a lengthy report by independent scientists
showing that some hormones added to U.S. meat are "complete carcinogens"
-- capable of causing cancer by themselves -- (see REHW #666) the WTO's
3-lawyer tribunal ruled that the EU did not have a "valid" scientific
case
for refusing to allow the import of U.S. beef. The losing countries are
now required to pay the U.S. $150 million each year as compensation for
lost profits. 

The WTO grew out of an earlier organization called the GATT (General
Agreement on Tariffs and Trade). The GATT mainly focused on repealing
tariffs, which are taxes on imported goods intended to protect domestic
producers against foreign competition. But when the GATT merged into the
WTO, the WTO gained the new responsibility of opposing "non-tariff
barriers to trade." Non-tariff barriers to trade include such things as
food safety laws, product standards, rules on the use of tax dollars,
and
investment policies. 

Example: WTO has ruled that a nation cannot refuse to import goods based
on the methods by which those goods were produced because such refusal
constitutes an illegal "non-tariff barrier to trade." Thus the WTO in
1998
declared illegal a U.S. environmental regulation requiring that imported
shrimp must be caught by methods that minimize harm to endangered sea
turtles. In 1997, the WTO overturned part of the U.S. Clean Air Act,
which
prevented the import of low-quality gasoline with a high potential for
air
pollution. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has acknowledged that
this
WTO ruling "creates the potential for adverse environmental impact."
Thus
at the behest of transnational corporations the WTO can -- and will --
repeal any nation's environment al protections. 

Now the WTO is meeting in Seattle Nov. 29-Dec. 3 to initiate a new round
of talks, the Millennium Round. In this new phase, the corporations that
support the WTO intend to expand the WTO's power and reach even further. 

Activists are demanding that the WTO be opened uo to scrutiny and that
its
record of performance be formally evaluated before any new talks begin. 
They see the WTO as threatening democracy, quality of life,
environmental
integrity, environmental justice, and every nation's control of its own
destiny. Clearly, a titanic clash has begun. For information about
attending the Seattle protest, phone 1-877-STOP WTO. More next week. 

==========

[1] Lori Wallach and Michelle Sforza, WHOSE TRADE ORGANIZATION?:
CORPORATE
GLOBALIZATION AND THE EROSION OF DEMOCRACY (Washington, D.C.: Public
Citizen, Inc., 1999). ISBN 1582310017; telephone (202) 588-1000. 

[2] John Gray, FALSE DAWN (New York: The New Press, 1998). ISBN
1-56584-521-8, and Karl Polanyi, THE GREAT TRANSFORMATION (Boston:
Beacon
Press, 1944). Paper edition ISBN 0-8070-5679-0. 

[3] David Korten, WHEN CORPORATIONS RULE TO WORLD (West Hartford,
Connecticut and San Francisco: Kumarian Press and Berrett-Koehler Press,
1995. ISBN 1-887208-00-3. And see Charles Derber, CORPORATION NATION
(New
York: St. Martin's Press, 1998). ISBN 0-312-19288-6. 

Descriptor terms: free trade; free markets; utopianism; corporations'
wto;
world trade organization; seattle; protests; 

################################################################

                             NOTICE

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes.
Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic
version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge
even though it costs the organization considerable time and money
to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service
free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution
(anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send
your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research
Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do
not send credit card information via E-mail. For further
information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F.
by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or at
(410) 263-1584, or fax us at (410) 263-8944.

                                        --Peter Montague, Editor

################################################################