Brussels, 09/11/2001 (Agence Europe) - Alongside the delegates of the 142 WTO member countries, hundreds of non-governmental organisations have reached Doha (Qatar) where the Fourth Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) started on Friday. Mass demonstrations outside the WTO's highest decision-making body have been ruled out since only one representative per NGO (and highly vetted at that) has been allowed on the site - a total of 647 representatives. Hundreds of others converged on Beirut where the World NGO Forum has been running since the beginning of the week, the second counter-Summit of its type after the Punte del Este Summit last year. The anti-globalisation or "Another world is possible" demonstrators will be assembling in other parts of the world; in Asia, the Americas and Geneva in particular, where action days have been organised. Needless to say, the representatives of civil society do not all share the same viewpoint.
They represent a wide variety of interests - the environment, development, human rights, women, consumers, workers, free trade or simply trade, employers, peasants, farmers and agri-industry, textiles, pharmacy, high tech industries, etc. and almost as many different emphases have been incorporated into the NGO approach to the world trade negotiations that the WTO wants to launch next Tuesday. Everyone appears to have learnt the lessons of Seattle, however, the scene of an institutional fiasco that is in everyone's minds, along with the just as memorable excesses in the streets. So much so, in fact, that nobody (even spokespersons for the multinationals) talks about free trade without mentioning accompanying measures and new disciplines, whilst on the other side of the spectrum, apart from a hard core infamous for its violence, people very rarely call themselves anti-"globalisation" as such, conceding that globalisation is a fact of life.
In its monthly newsletter, Eurocommerce says that development has to be the key subject of any new trade round, hoping that liberalisation will go as far as possible. UNICE wants new negotiations that meet the challenges and concerns that globalisation gives rise to in a constructive, transparent and open manner, listing priorities for investment, facilitating trade, services, market access, intellectual property, etc. Belgian business leaders in UNICE are calling for the programme of negotiations to be "ambitious", with a focus on the needs of "the poorest developing countries" but certainly not "overloaded with unrealistic demands". "A "no-go" at Doha would be the worst option, they note, since they see the trade round as an "absolute necessity". As Eurocommerce put it, "Doha simply cannot fail", referring to the growing pressure on the world's economy and the international crisis after the 11 September. "There is more than enough genuine margin" for pursuing liberalisation and growth through international trade whilst taking greater account of the concerns of developing countries" argues Eurocommerce, noting that for every percentage that the economy is further opened up, every country increases its revenue per head of population by the same amount. Its own priorities are completing the acquis from the Uruguay Cycle by establishing a series of rules for providing minimum guarantees for investors, ensuring fair trade and eliminating the last non-tariff barriers. Industry representatives and representatives of high tech users in Europe (EICTA), Japan (JEITA) and America (AeA) are calling for "a collective political leadership" by the decision-makers to make Doha a success, helping to "promote economic growth and thereby allow sustainable development, poverty reduction and dealing with the social aspects of globalisation". For the European textile and clothing industry, the Doha meeting is "crucial", and "if one wants to contribute to development and give a new boost to world trade, everyone has to be prepared to play their part", particularly "the most advanced developing countries" which should "finally take part in the world trade system". The European Trade Union Confederation, however, sees the launch of a new trade round as "premature". They want a solution to Third World debt and the problem of transparency and control over financial transactions to be found before a new trade round is launched.
There are also groups who were called "anti-globalisation" groups for a long time, but are now speaking in more mature terms, no longer simply criticising the system. The definite mood for challenge that existed two years ago has been replaced by a desire to discuss and study what a "possible new world" might look like. The nearly 200 groups and NGO networks from 45 countries that are meeting in Beirut say that globalisation is an objective phenomenon that has to be understood, avoiding the stumbling block of confrontation. These groups include ATTAC, Third World groups, the Confédération paysanne and the Via Campesina coalition (whose envoy is Jose Bove, including in Doha), Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace (whose new Rainbow Warrior has headed for Doha), Public Citizen, led by the American Ralph Nader, etc.. For most, a radical reform of the WTO and a review of its body of rules (to have emerged from the 8 preceding rounds) must come before any further negotiations. "We are told that without a new Round the poorest will become even poorer. But there is no need of a new Round (…) to create conditions enabling the poorest to become less poor", stated Urfig (research, training and information unit on globalisation), highlighting the ethical demand of non-discrimination, solidarity, transparency and democratic control of institutions. A point of view broadly shared. According to Attac, the WTO is not the appropriate place to speak of agriculture, public health, education, culture or patenting life. "The WTO is currently the only international organisation to have binding powers, so much so that trade take primacy over the rest of the activities and rights", it denounces more generally. A reproach that finds an echo among many others, like Greenpeace, which wants "the WTO not to be the only organisation with teeth" and that it endorse the principles of sustainable development, and even that it accept the limits imposed by climate change. WWF also recalls that the WTO has responsibilities, calling on it to promote fair and sustainable trade, respectful of natural resources (reduction in subsidies that contribute to over-fishing, strengthening of multilateral agreements on the environment while continuing to combat "green protectionism", etc.). Solidar, which represents a dozen groups and trade unions, for its part calls for "an end to the acceleration of liberalisation", and considers that the institution may contribute to "creating a global society with binding rules, based on democracy, human rights, social justice and sustainable development". The CLONG network (Development Liaison Committee) speaks of "subjecting trade and the WTO to economic and social duties", placing emphasis on democratic functioning, a prohibition on patenting life, the respect of the notion of public service and food security for populations. Likewise for the members of the Via Campesina network, including the Coordination paysanne européenne (CPE). "The world is not merchandise", and, as for the WTO, it needs "subduing or abolishing": "the old unfair and oppressive trade system" must give way to "a new trade framework, socially fair and sustainable", protecting cultural, biological, social and economic diversity, gradually putting to work policies playing in favour of local trade, guaranteeing economic, social and cultural rights, while restoring the sovereignty to the people and democratic control at national and regional levels, they say in a joint statement co-signed by close to 400 other NGOs, including Attac, WTO Watch, Friends of the Earth (which recently listed the "ten reasons why the WTO is bad for the people and the planet), as well as GAIA. But not Greenpeace or Solidar. Whatever the movement they belong to, all these NGOs are in a state of alert and remain vigilant as to how the ministerial talks will proceed.