<< Retour - Back
Call for the European Union to withdraw its proposal for a new and comprehensive round of trade negotiations in the World Trade Organisation
Source: Friends of the Earth www.foei.org
Despite continued and vocal opposition from governments and people around the world, the European Union (EU) continues to call for the establishment of a new and comprehensive round of trade negotiations at the next World Trade Organisation's (WTO) Ministerial in Qatar, in November 2001.
The EU's proposal remains virtually unchanged since the WTO's last Ministerial in Seattle, in December 2000, when it contributed to the collapse of negotiations due to unprecedented opposition from developing countries and civil society groups. The same tensions could cause the collapse of the Qatar Ministerial.
The EU intends to bring a broad range of 'new issues' - including investment, competition and government procurement - to the negotiating table. Many developing countries are opposed to this position, on the grounds that - far from being a 'development round', as suggested by Clare Short, the UK's Secretary of State for International Development - this agenda ignores their concerns and threatens to undermine their development needs (1).
During the Seattle Ministerial, nearly 1500 citizens' groups and social movements from 89 developed countries also opposed the EU's new round agenda on the basis that it would have severe social, economic and environmental impacts (2). These concerns remain but appear to have been ignored (3).
The undersigned support a multilateral trading system that is democratic, equitable, sustainable and in harmony with the requirements of local and regional economies. However, the WTO, with the active support of the EU and the WTO Secretariat - notably EU Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy and WTO Director General Mike Moore - are promoting a different agenda, that of corporate globalisation. Instead of recognising and addressing the social, economic and environmental problems associated with existing WTO agreements, they are pushing for further trade liberalisation in the areas of servcies, investment, competition and government procurement, largely at the behest of and in the interest of transnational corporations based primarily in the EU and the United States.
The EU should withdraw its proposal for a new and comprehensive round. A new round is not inevitable. Furthermore, mandated negotiations already underway (concerning intellectual property rights and the further liberalisation of trade in services and agriculture) are already sufficiently controversial, having the potential to have severe negative impacts on people, the environment and local economies in both the North and the South.
Instead, the European Union should take the lead in calling for fundamental change to the world's trading system, in line with its own sustainable development and human rights objectives. The EU should start by calling on WTO members to commission an independent review of and then rectify the deficiencies of the world trade system and the WTO itself. Such a review should address the WTO's impact on marginalised communities, development, democracy, environment, health, human rights, the rights of women and children and labour and consumers' rights. Such a review should be conducted with civil society's full participation.
Reveiw and rectification of the current trade system is essential if society is to change course and develop an alternative, humane and sustainable international system of trade and investment relations.
(1) India, Malaysia and Pakistan are the key countries leading developing country opposition to a new round.
(2) See 'Statement from Members of International Civil Society Opposing a Millennium Round or a New Round of Comprehensive Trade Negotiations' at http://www.foei.org/activist_guide/tradeweb/ngostat.htm
(3) 'See WTO - Shrink or Sink! The Turn Around Agenda' at http://www.tradewatch.org/gattwto/ShrinkSink/shrinksink.htm
Drafted 25 May 2001