THE WORLD Trade Organization’s (WTO) General Council reached
an agreement on July 31 in Geneva on a number of controversial trade
issues. The corporate media were quick to hail the ‘July
Package of Framework Agreements’ as a breakthrough for
the World Trade Organization's Doha Round of negotiations that had
been stalled after the
failed ministerial meeting in Cancun, Mexico last year.
In Cancun, the poor countries were able to stand their ground knowing
that no deal was better than a bad deal. During the negotiations
in Geneva, they
agreed to a deal in order to avert more harm and to stall the
forceful moves of the EU and US to impose more disadvantageous deals
upon them.
NGOs monitoring the negotiations and some delegates of poor countries
criticized
the agreement for betraying the poor and stressed that the rich
countries were able to get what they wanted through bullying
and intimidation
of the delegations from the south.
Purportedly, the US and Europe promised to reduce their huge agricultural
export subsidies but in reality the text is very vague and does
not even impose a timeframe. The agreement actually only enhances
the dumping of farm products which has already caused significant
harm to poor farmers in Asia, Africa and Latin America.
The poor countries, on the other hand, made concessions
on trade in services, industrial tariff protection (or Non-Agricultural
Market Access) and other issues. More importantly, the deal puts
the so-called “development round” of trade negotiations
back on track and might pave the way for more unfavorable trade
agreements.
In the Philippines, activists already warned that the country's
food
sovereignty will be undermined further by the agreement. To
add insult to injury, the Philippines'
special treatment for rice, through quantitative restrictions
on imports, will expire on June 30, 2005. The lifting of these restrictions
will allow the unlimited entry of cheaper rice from WTO rice-exporting
countries, to the detriment of poor Filipino rice farmers.
