|
|
The most contentious issue was that of Agricultural subsides provided by the wealthy United States and Europe to their farmers, creating a glut in the market, lowering prices, with excess being dumped on the third world market eventually. Such practices are costing the poor countries in terms of millions in the losses of export revenue and may even ruin their own domestic market if subjected to dumping policies of the powerful nations. Another area of contention was that of cotton. Pakistan and south Asia (produces 22% of the world cotton production) along with other African states again its primary victim.
To compound the problem all these poor nations have huge debt servicing burdens to the IMF and World Bank. Far from conceding to the reduction of export subsidies to create a more equitable environment for the poorest countries, allowing them a chance to develop and grow, they went on the offensive asking for the adoption of “Singapore issues” (Originally proposed in Singapore back in 1996). Which would facilitate greater market penetration by the Multinationals and big Corporations. No surprise as they are the real beneficiary behind the scene.
The Singapore issue has four main components -- how countries deal with foreign investment -- standards of anti-monopoly and cartel laws (competition) -- government procurement -- and trade facilitation (WTO jargon for easing red tape, customs and eliminating corruption). Naturally reservation from all the developing and least developed countries, people often forget, free does not necessarily mean fair. Countries with greater expertise, resources are easily able to out maneuver the poorer countries.
Foreign investment can undermine a nation’s fiscal policy (sovereignty) as voiced its opposition. The latter learnt how the currency traders were about to destabilize the entire economy during the Southeast Asian market crash not too long ago. In essence such a formula would prepare the local industries to be controlled by the multinationals and thereby the colonizing the countries effectively. “Free trade” is not so free after all.
It was also an ideal opportunity for the US to convince the world of its current claim of being an ideal benevolent nation by unilaterally reducing its tariffs and subsidies to a reasonable level, which would have had an enormous positive impact on the poor countries. As one Bangladeshi economist remarked in the past that “third world needs trade not aid”. The initial loss of US businesses would have been more then compensated by the over all economic growth and an increase in confidence for investors and consumers. At the stroke of a pen, the US and Europe could have liberated millions out of poverty and desperation. Such conditions have been created through the policies of their financial institutions in the first place.
This perhaps also really proves the point that Capitalist nations are not benevolent nations but rather only self-serving. When they tell you they want to liberate they are simply lying, current and historical evidences are overwhelming, if there has been the odd liberation (e.g. France, Western Europe and the Pacific nations during second the World war) it is only an unintended by-product of a struggle with rival competitor nations for securing (or defending) its own interests.
Solution or Suggestion
As for the poorer nations, they must have the will power to act in a collective manner in opposing the domination, who are only interested in getting richer at all costs and learn from its Colonial history. They must resist the seduction of short-term gains through forming bilateral treaties.
The market shares of world trade for the poorer countries are continuously decreasing and the gap between the rich and the poor nations are ever increasing; the current model is not viable for securing their own interests. Hence the poor nations should collectively look to create an alternative, and perhaps attempt to entice the oil rich Arab countries with long term visions rather then short term pragmatism.
|
Tags
You must be logged in to add tags.
|
Writer Profile
Kashif Zulfiqar
This user has not written anything in his panorama profile yet.
|
Comments
WTO and a New World Order Sardar Taimur Hyat-Khan | Aug 30th, 2004
The subject article on the WTO is an expression of frustration that is a result of rampant "Free (for all but the target consumer) Trade". However, the subject cannot be treated suprficially or even through confrontation. The World is allready riven by disent and cannot afford more rivalry. A "Us against Them" approach will yield no benefits what so ever and in fact will generate more rivalry.
Understanding Human Nature or even some slight analysis will prove that greed is not the soverign property of Developed Nations. It is inherrent in humanity to greater or lesser degrees. There is a Hindko saying "hath Lagya naheen Tey Saray Wali Allah," No opportunity for misconduct leads to the claim of Friendship with Allah.
If the Poor Countries band together and get the support of the Oil Rich arab States, what guarantee that they will not follow the same course of exploitation for personal and short term gain?
I believe that the solution lies in Globalization through Localization and also with the support and Networking of all sustainable development votaries on a Global basis. The Simultaneous Policy as outlined in www.simpol.org has some very good directions for change. However, I feel that their opposition to Biotech has to be rationalized. Also the resistance to emerging Multinationals has to cease as it is imperative for continued Human advancement. What is required is just and equitable regulation and not banishment. I ask you what if there is an opportunity to mine some badly required metal from Uranus. The power of R&D and the ability to pool huge resources can only arise from Private Enterprise that is well regulated. If Governments take on these tasks the fruit will belong to that particular Government. If the UN or some similiar body goes in for such activity it will be bogged down by the bureaucratic mess that such organizations are prey to.
To sum up, I feel that Simultaneous Policy, duly reviewed, Regulated Trade and Localization are the areas wherein we can find relief from exploitation.
Please remember that Countries or nations are not bad in themselves, it is people that are good or bad or various shades of grey. If a paryticular group has gained influence over a Nation it can be bad or good. It serves no purpose what so ever to consign every citizen of that Country to the dust bin.
Also please keep in mind that the extremely untenable situations of most Countries due to Poverty is mostly due to the corruption of its own power lobbies that have actively connived with "Greedy Capitalists" to sell their Countries and fellow citizens down the river.
Best Regards
Sardar Taimur hyat-Khan
XChairman Khidmat Foundation
(No link with Jamaat-e-Islami)
You must be a TakingITGlobal member to post a comment. Sign up for free or login.
|
|
