|
Get AfricaFocus Bulletin by e-mail!
Print this page
|
Note: This document is from the archive of the Africa Policy E-Journal, published
by the Africa Policy Information Center (APIC) from 1995 to 2001 and by Africa Action
from 2001 to 2003. APIC was merged into Africa Action in 2001. Please note that many outdated links in this archived
document may not work.
|
Africa: After Cancun
AFRICA ACTION
Africa Policy E-Journal
September 17, 2003 (030917)
Africa: After Cancun
(Reposted from sources cited below)
There has been extensive news coverage of the collapse of the World
Trade Organization talks in Cancun last weekend. This posting
provides several documents summarizing the outcome and the
background, particularly emphasizing the new strength showed by
developing and African nations in insisting that their priority
issues not be ignored. Note that one of the documents included from
the Africa Trade Network was written just before the final collapse
of the talks. For more background and links see the two previous
e-journal postings dated September 12, available in the e-journal
archive at http://www.africafocus.org/docs.htm
+++++++++++++++++end summary/introduction+++++++++++++++++++++++
Cancun - Destined for Failure
September 16, 2003
By Charles Cobb Jr.
Washington, DC
[reposted with permission from http://allAfrica.com]
When Kenyan and Ugandan delegations walked out of the World Trade
Organisation's meeting on Sunday afternoon and Kenya's delegate
George Odour Ong'wen declared to reporters that "the talks have
collapsed and there is no agreement," United States Deputy Trade
Representative Josette Shiner was startled; she shouldn't have
been.
The signs were there well before the meeting began. Prior to the
five-day session, South African president Thabo Mbeki had suggested
that perhaps developing nations' delegations should join
anti-globalization protestors on the sidewalks outside the
negotiations, and European Union (EU) Agriculture Commissioner,
Franz Fischler, had accused poor nations of being on a "space
odyssey" and advised them to "come back to mother earth."
It was downhill from there. Africans in particular have long chafed
at the power of the U.S., EU, Japan and Canada within the WTO.
On the issue of immediate concern to African delegations -
eliminating trade-distorting EU and U.S. agricultural subsides -
those two wealthy blocs put it on the back-burner and pressed for
acceptance of so-called "Singapore issues" - new rules that would
govern investment, competition, trade facilitation and government
procurement that many poor nations believe would amount to
surrender of their domestic authority and would further tilt the
economic playing field in favor of powerful multi-national
corporations.
In a Saturday night "green room" meeting, as the secretive ad hoc
sessions that are held on the side of regular sessions are known,
the issue was debated under the heading of "new issues" into the
early morning hours of Sunday. This meeting only included The U.S.,
EU nations, and a number of other nations including Brazil, India,
China, South Africa and Kenya now generally known as the "Group of
20 (developing countries)." It got nowhere. G-20 nations like India
and Malaysia were adamant in rejecting the G-8 attempt to force
through the trade-off.
In the plenary session later Sunday the deep division could not be
bridged. "The general feeling is that we're being taken for a ride
(by the G-8)" , said one African observer for an international
agency who asked not to be named. This participant, like many
delegates from African nations noted that the WTO's draft text on
global trade offered nothing concrete on agricultural subsidies and
nothing much on market access.
The EU refused to set a date for phasing out export subsidies and
demanded that in exchange for some concessions on tariffs that
block the export of their finished products to rich nations, poor
countries would have to agree to cut their own protective trade
barriers. The net result, says the G-20, would be a flood of cheap
food imports that would further undermine their agriculture.
Four West African nations - Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad and Benin -
asked Washington to slash the US$4bn spent annually on cotton
subsidies (more than the combined value of their cotton
production). The U.S. response was to argue that only a
comprehensive initiative that expanded the world market from fiber
to garment could improve the economic prospects for African
farmers. "Create a bigger demand for t-shirts," sneered one
participant.
During the Sunday session the EU continued to insist that it wanted
talks to press ahead on new rules governing the four Singapore
issues. African nations, in particular, felt their concerns were
being dismissed. I thought, "Why are we here?" one participant told
allAfrica.
Developing nations representatives went back to their members who
insisted they wanted the four Singapore issues dropped from the
draft declaration. South Korea and Japan said they could not
support it unless all four were retained for discussion, at which
point the chairman, Luis Derbez, Mexico's Foreign Affairs
Secretary, said the talks had effectively ended. It made no sense
to continue, he said, because the positions were irreconcilable.
What amounted to a mutiny on Sunday, may mark a new determination
by developing countries strongly to assert their interests in an
arena in which they are usually manipulated or bullied by the rich
powers. "For the first time in the WTO, the developing world,
united not on ideological grounds but on key and well articulated
interests, acted in concert to advance its developmental agenda,"
says South Africa's minister for trade and industry, Alec Erwin.
The Group of 20, now being called the group of "20 plus" began as
the group of 16. "It is a new coalition of developing countries
that can negotiate on their own," explained one official. "They
will be listened to if they make noise." [E-journal note: in a
press conference following Cancun, it was announced that Nigeria
and Indonesia had also joined the group.]
Statement on the collapse of the 5th Ministerial Conference of
the WTO
Africa Trade Network (ATN)|9/15/2003
http://www.twnafrica.org
The 5th Ministerial Conference of the WTO has collapsed. African
and other developing countries refused to bow to combined
pressure and manipulation of the quadrilateral countries led by
the EU'US to give in to the issues promoted by the developed
countries at the expense of the interests of the African
countries.
The Africa Trade Network salutes this victory of the united
strength of the weak against the blatant bullying and disregard
by the strong and powerful countries in the WTO. The collapse of
this ministerial, following from that of Seattle for similar
reasons, should serve notice to the rich and powerful countries
in the international trading system that the time is running out
for their imposition of their narrow interests on the rest of the
world. It should signal the beginning of a new way of interaction
in international affairs based on a relationship of genuine and
mutual respect.
The Africa Trade Network salutes ministers of Africa and
ministers of their allies in the Africa, Pacific and Caribbean
group of countries, as well as in the Least Developed Countries,
for holding firm, and standing up to the untold arrogance,
manipulation and pressure exerted by the developed countries. We
also salute all other developing coiuntries.
We salute all civil society organisations in Africa, the South
and the North for their valiant efforts and contributions to help
the weak turn the tide against the bullies.
We call upon the governments of the powerful to learn the lessons
of this collapse and turn to ways of interaction more appropriate
to genuine international cooperation in future trade
negotiations.
Contrasts and Counter-Positions in Cancun
Dot Keet, African Peoples Caucus in Cancun
September 14, 2003
http://www.twnafrica.org
Report from Dot Keet on behalf of the African Peoples Caucus in
Cancun
Over the past few eventful days, dozens of activists from South
Africa have been on the streets of Cancun, Mexico, immersed
amongst thousands of small farmers and fisher people from all
over the world, indigenas from Chiapas and workers from Mexico
and neighbouring Latin American countries, and hundreds of trade
unionists, development and environmental NGOs and other civil
society organisations from Africa and the Caribbean, Asia and
Europe, and even the United States, Canada and Japan.
What is amazing and inspiring is that the many colourful banners
and placards, flags and chants, songs and drumming, each with
their distinctive cultural characteristics, all carry similar
messages against the World Trade Organisation, against the unjust
and destructive economic system it is being used for, against the
damages to the world environment, to peoples livelihoods and to
their very lives - as expressed so dramatically in the symbolic
suicide of the Korean farmer, Lee Kyung Hae.
With their own unique style of political expression, singing and
toyi-toying South African activists were drawn to the forefront
of the farmers march. There they witnessed up close the ultimate
act of protest by the Korean farmer. That night we sent our
solidarity message to the Korean brothers and sisters and joined
in the vigils at the fountain where most demonstrations converge.
And, far away, even within the very WTO conference centre itself,
'accredited' NGOs protested with the same message that 'The WTO
Kills!'
The following day, when the African Peoples Caucus held their own
demonstration expressing their opposition to the theft by the
World Theft Organisation of Africa's development resources,
rights and prospects, we received enthusiastic support from other
activists, from Korea to Canada, from Mexico to the Middle-East,
and from everyone who witnessed our toy-toying, singing, chanting
procession and colourful placards.
With our distinctive black and green T-Shirts and banner
proclaiming that 'Africa is Not for Sale, Africa no esta a la
venta', the African peoples organisations present in Cancun are
sending a clear message to the WTO and to all African governments
that we are here to demand that the needs and rights of our
people are not sold off by our governments.
We are deeply suspicious that in the exclusive Convention Centre
from which we are barred by twelve foot steel and concrete
barriers ten kilometers away - symbolic of the vast gulf in
understanding and experience between officials on 'the inside'
and the people on 'the outside' - the insider
wheeling-and-dealing between governments might produce yet
another sell-out of their countries and their peoples.
And we have reason to be suspicious. While we are demanding that
there be 'No New Issues' to expand the powers of the WTO; while
we are determined to 'Stop the GATS-Attack' on our public
services; while we are warning our governments not to accept
further Industrial Tariff Liberalisations that will destroy more
jobs at home; we are told in a meeting here with South African
Deputy Minister of Trade, Lindiwe Hendrikse, that the SA
negotiators are preparing to make 'trade-offs', although she
'cannot as yet tell what these will be'.
In contrast, African activists are urging all African governments
to stand firm on their own agreed positions, and on the issues
that African peoples organisations prioritise. Some African
governments, led by Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, Nigeria, Zambia and
Zimbwabwe, are playing a leading role in developing country
alliances against the power of 'the majors', drawing developing
countries such as India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines and
many others around them.
But activists from South Africa and the rest of the continent are
concerned about the role of South Africa within Africa and more
generally. From afar it appears that South Africa has at last
taken a stand after a recent phase of inaction reflecting their
loss of their own chosen strategic direction. The intransigence
of the majors in Geneva over the pat two years has blown apart
the compromise so-called 'development agenda' that South Africa
had helped to broker in Doha.
But out of the initiatives of the heavy-weight developing
countries, Brazil, India and China a new centre of gravity has
emerged for developing countries in the WTO. This is the Group of
21, which has drawn in a range of other Latin American and Asian
countries, and South Africa has decided to 'find shelter' amongst
these.
The G-21 position is a direct challenge to the deal between the
US and the EU in defense of their respective policies supporting
their agricultural producers and exporters. As an unprecedented
counter-weight to the majors within the WTO this grouping is
receiving the solidarity of African countries.
But no African countries [apart from South Africa and Egypt] have
joined this group because it essentially reflects the interests
of big agricultural exporters and does not support the needs of
small producers. There is not even a mention of the Special and
Differential Terms (SDTs) that are key to the defense of the
policy flexibilities of smaller and weaker countries in the WTO,
and that should be at the centre of the Cancun agenda, as
promised in the Doha declaration..
Most problematically, the G-21 has adopted the overall position
that, if there is 'movement' (a rather ill-defined notion) on
agriculture by the majors, they will then consider negotiating
their other demands. This flies in the face of the position of
the African and other developing countries in Asia and Latin
America (numbering more than 70 in total) that the controversial
new issues must not be linked to any possible agriculture
'concessions'. In fact, these new issues, above all towards the
global liberalisation of international investment and capital
flows, must NOT become negotiating subjects in the WTO.
African non-governmental organisations met with South African and
Senegalese Ministers, on 12th September, to convey their views
and present some probing questions to them. Unfortunately, the
meeting was turned into a formalistic 'briefing' by the Ministers
rather than the reverse that was expected. But there was at least
a sense that the Minister from Senegal was listening to the views
expressed and took clear positions in defense of the 34 Least
Developed Countries in Africa, for whom she is the official
spokesperson in the WTO.
There was a very different message from the South African
delegation, with their reference to the compromises they are
already preparing to make. And as the final disturbing touch, the
African NGOs - who are highly knowledgeable on the details of
each and every issue in each and every 'text' being negotiated -
were informed by the SA Minister for Arts and Culture, who is a
member of the South African 'negotiating team' in Cancun, that he
'does not know anything about trade'.
These are some of contrasts and contradictions in Cancun
Bridges Daily Update
September 15, 2003
CANCUN COLLAPSE: WHERE THERE'S NO WILL THERE'S NO WAY
[brief excerpts only. The full text of the Bridges Daily Update is
available on the ICTSD website at http://www.ictsd.org]
The Cancun Ministerial Conference ended abruptly and early on
Sunday without consensus on any of the items on its agenda and
amidst bitter divisions over the launch of negotiations on the
Singapore issues and over agriculture. ...
Reactions
G-22: Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, Ecuador and Egypt,
speaking for the G-22, said that although the failure to reach
agreement at Cancun was a setback, the group had solidified and
shown that it was a serious and professional party in the
agriculture talks, concentrating on issues of interest to a large
part of the population of developing countries. ......
ACP/LDC/AU: This alliance of poorest countries regretted that the
final negotiations started off by addressing "an issue on which
[its members] had a very, very strong" position. All three of the
alliance's constituent blocs had affirmed their opposition to
launching negotiations on any of the Singapore issues in recent
ministerial declarations, and thus felt they had no option but to
reject the EC's offer to drop just two of them. The alliance was
also disappointed that in the end negotiations never got to deal
with its priority issues, i.e. agriculture, non-agricultural
market access, special and differential treatment, and - of
course - cotton. Speaking strictly in his permanent capacity, the
LDC Group's spokesperson Bangladeshi Trade Minister Amir
Chowdhury said that he thought the alliance could have had more
flexibility on the Singapore issues if more had been offered for
cotton. The paragraph on cotton in the second draft Ministerial
Declaration was seen as a slap in the face by many African and
other poor cotton-producing countries, whose hopes had been
raised by the general sympathy with which the initiative had been
received just a couple of days earlier at the Ministerial
plenary. ...
EC: Visibly trying to contain his disappointment and frustration,
European Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy made no qualms about his
view that "Cancun has failed". While it was not dead, the Doha
Round was definitely "in intensive care", he added. ...
US: The US reacted to the failure of talks with thinly veiled
frustration. US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick complained
that the US had come to Cancun ready to negotiate on a wide range
of issues including agriculture, only to have its ambitions
thwarted by developing countries who seemed more interested in
"tactical rhetoric" than concrete progress. Zoellick condemned
certain developing countries for inflexibility during
negotiations, noting that "frustration is not a policy." ...
Japan: Japan sought to deflect blame for the deadlock on the
Singapore issues, insisting that it had displayed the flexibility
necessary to move discussions forward. It did not, however,
retreat from its insistence on negotiations for the Singapore
issues, claiming that issues "are about making rules, and we all
need rules." On the similarly contentious issue of agriculture,
Japan maintained that it would continue conferring with the G-10
to block tariff rate quota expansion and tariff capping, noting
that it could not and would not agree to these proposals.
CARICOM: Billie Milla, coordinator of the Caribbean Community
(CARICOM), contradicted assessments by some of the major players
that progress had been made in agriculture, arguing instead that
very little movement had been achieved, which would not have made
a difference to the CARICOM. She stressed that all were going
home empty-handed and that no-one had gained anything. ,,,
Civil society reactions: In their immediate reactions, ActionAid,
Oxfam and Greenpeace accused the EC and US of sinking the talks.
The International Gender And Trade Network and the Africa Trade
Network celebrated the collapse of talks as representing "a major
political shift in the power dynamics of the WTO with developing
countries successfully resisting power in the face of extreme
pressure and bullying." WWF said that the failure represented a
chance for sustainability, and that governments should now focus
on slimming the WTO agenda and dealing with sustainable
development issues in forums outside the WTO. The European
business group UNICE and the European Services Forum on the other
hand expressed disappointment at the missed opportunity at
Cancun.
The Way Forward
At this stage it is not entirely clear on what basis talks will
continue in Geneva, particularly as there was no failure
management plan in place for the Conference. ...
The Africa Policy E-Journal is a free information service
provided by Africa Action, including both original
commentary and reposted documents. Africa Action provides this
information and analysis in order to promote U.S. and
international policies toward Africa that advance economic,
political and social justice and the full spectrum of
human rights.
|
