Desperate News from the Failure Of World Trade Talks
It is desperate news that the world trade talks have floundered on the US refusal to agree to reduce trade barriers. Despite all the hopes that at last the World Trade Organisation was beginning to recognise the impact on the developing world of trade injustices, the Bush administration destroyed any hope of an effective deal by insisting on maintaining its protectionist policies.
There is a savage irony in all this. Here we have the Bush regime, the greatest advocate of free market, neo-liberal economics, demanding that its transnational companies be protected from competition from the developing world but at the same time calling upon developing countries to open up their economies to rabid exploitation and product dumping by the US.
The present WTO talks round is the best object lesson one could have in how the WTO and Gatt system was designed to promote the neo liberal agenda of forcing trade deals on the developing world to make it easier for US transnationals to dominate the economies of developing countries. When the developing world and its allies demand a mild redressing of this balance, the US refuses to play ball. Whilst in the eyes of the supporters of the "Washington Consensus" the unhindered operation of the free market is good enough for the developing world it is not acceptable if US profits are at risk and the protectionism is called for. These recent talks expose this hypocracy. Noam Chomsky's book "Profit over People-Neoliberalism and Global Order" provides a hard hitting expose of the role of the WTO and other global institutions in the promotion of free market philosophy.
There is a savage irony in all this. Here we have the Bush regime, the greatest advocate of free market, neo-liberal economics, demanding that its transnational companies be protected from competition from the developing world but at the same time calling upon developing countries to open up their economies to rabid exploitation and product dumping by the US.
The present WTO talks round is the best object lesson one could have in how the WTO and Gatt system was designed to promote the neo liberal agenda of forcing trade deals on the developing world to make it easier for US transnationals to dominate the economies of developing countries. When the developing world and its allies demand a mild redressing of this balance, the US refuses to play ball. Whilst in the eyes of the supporters of the "Washington Consensus" the unhindered operation of the free market is good enough for the developing world it is not acceptable if US profits are at risk and the protectionism is called for. These recent talks expose this hypocracy. Noam Chomsky's book "Profit over People-Neoliberalism and Global Order" provides a hard hitting expose of the role of the WTO and other global institutions in the promotion of free market philosophy.
5 Comments:
There should be and common european agenda for the socialist parties, on how to act within the WTO and in the national debates. I have been waiting a long time for someone within Labour to to rasie (or at least see) these issues!
These sensible comments have attracted some criticism at bloggers4labour. It might be worth stressing the positive policies which you have on world trade.
Some such policies are set out on the Labour Representation Committee website (www.l-r-c.org.uk).
The LRC has said that a real Labour Government would;
• Raise overseas aid expenditure to 1% of GDP, and end the linking of UK aid to policies of economic liberalisation and privatisation.
• Campaign to fund UN and World Bank aid and development schemes by a Tobin tax on speculative movements of capital.
• Demand the exclusion of water, electricity, healthcare and education from the WTO agreement on GATS, and from EU bilateral and regional trade agreements.
• Lead in establishing an international tax regime for corporation tax.
I take it that you'll be promoting these positive and progressive demands in your leadership campaign, and challenging others to produce their own positive proposals, rather than sniping from the sidelines?
Hi John,
I am a supporter, but I think we need more open debate on this blog. Given the negative comments on other websites, why aren't we dealing with them on this site?
Emma G
Just to clarify - the campaign strongly welcomes debate and encourages comment from all sides.
Let the debate begin!
Owen Jones
Webmaster
Soon we might be left with just 3 states on this globe. Bush's USA, Olmert's Israel and God forbid, UK? Fellow citizens Rise against this agenda
Post a Comment
<< Home