EDITORIAL Interests of poor countries heard at WTO meeting
Still smarting from the humiliation
of having to curtail its meeting in Seattle two years ago, the World Trade
Organization adopted a more sympathetic attitude toward the concerns of its
poorer members at Qatar last month. The final document acknowledges the need
for special treatment of poor countries within the World Trade
Organizations rules dealing with freedom of trade and intellectual
property rights.
Public health needs are recognized as taking precedence over
protection of patents.
The Qatar meeting listed 12 major issues -- including food,
dumping of steel and textiles, opening markets and access to drugs -- on which
to pursue negotiations before the next WTO meeting two years from now. Given
the limited resources the poorest countries can allocate to highly technical
discussions, the work can be expected to take much longer, perhaps an entire
decade.
Among the most urgent issues for both the poorest countries and
such intermediate countries as Australia and New Zealand is food. Uppermost is
concern over the dumping by the United States and the European Community of
surplus food, especially corn, soybeans and wheat, on the world market at
prices below the cost of production. If the WTO were to compel countries to
open their markets to this food, subsistence farmers everywhere would be forced
out of business, leaving consumers to the mercies of the few megafirms that
control international food distribution.
CAFOD, the agency for overseas development of Englands
Catholic bishops, played an important role in briefing delegates on the issues,
explaining, for example, the extent of U.S. subsidies for agriculture, with
direct payments last year totaling $22.9 billion. That amount represents nearly
half of the net cash incomes of farmers in this country, with two thirds of it
going to the largest producers. A bill now before Congress would increase the
figure significantly.
Farmers everywhere are also threatened by the expansion of patent
rights. In a letter sent shortly before the Qatar meeting, Senate majority
leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.) urged the State Department to prevent the WTO from
making farmers pay royalties on patented animals and from having them pay
license fees on genetically modified seeds. He would also prohibit the
development and sale of sterile seeds, make patent owners or holders liable for
any impact on health or environment, as well as damage from lower prices, lost
markets or contamination. None of these issues is raised in the final
document.
The United States was on the defensive at Qatar on two levels,
because it protects its steel and textile industries against imports and
subsidizes its agriculture, and because it defends the interests of the
transnational corporations, most of which are based in this country. The major
transnational interest at stake was patent rights and copyrights. The drug
sector has the most heavily financed -- and consequently most influential
public relations operation in Washington, with more lobbyists than there are
members of Congress.
Of major concern for India, Brazil and many countries of Africa is
the cost of drugs to combat such scourges as AIDS, malaria and pneumonia. Their
delegates seized on the declarations of spokespersons for the U.S. government
who had stated publicly that they would, if necessary, override patent rights
to drugs needed to fight the threatened terrorist attacks with anthrax.
Delegates from the poorer countries would, they insisted, use the same right of
eminent domain to deal with their own epidemics.
The Qatar meeting ended without resolving any of the major issues
that divide the World Trade Organizations 142 members. The European Union
and the United States stand firm against the demands of poor countries that
export farm products that they end subsidies to agriculture. The United States
continues to keep out textiles from Bangladesh and other countries, imposing
punitive duties on imports that threaten domestic producers. All of the
countries involved remain at the start of protracted negotiations.
If trade rules are to be changed to benefit the worlds poor,
the pious hopes expressed in the final document will need to be converted into
action. Much will depend on the developing countries consolidating their
newfound strength, George Gelber of CAFOD said, and on the North
learning to listen more, and bully and preach a good deal less.
National Catholic Reporter, December 7,
2001
|