The Indian Social Forum invites you to:

Plenary Event: WTO: END OF THE ROAD?

Date: Sunday, 12^th November 2006

Time: 12:30 pm to 03:30 pm

Venue: P - 1, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi

Organised by: World Social Forum India

Speakers: SP Shukla (chair), Prof. Abhijit Sen, Dr. Jacques Berthelot,

Dr. Devender Sharma, Lebohang Pheko and Dr. Jaya Mehta

Background note by the Indian Peoples Campaign Against the WTO

(IPCAWTO)

When the Uruguay Round of trade talks (1986-1994) was launched, the
strategic objectives of its main proponent, the United States of America
were:

* Curtailing national regulatory systems and bringing the whole gamut
of transactions in “services” within the ambit of a GATT-like discipline

* Legislating a new global regime on intellectual property to serve
the interests and enhance the monopolistic hold of the corporate sector

* Redesigning the GATT regime on agriculture to further the interests
of big agri-businesses by containing the challenge of competition posed by
the EU in the world markets; by making inroads into the rich potential of
the closed markets of Japan and South Korea; and by prising open the markets of the populous third world countries.

With the emergence of World Trade Organisation in 1995, the Agreement on
TRIPS, GATS and AoA were put in place. TRIPs more or less achieved what the US had set as its objective. GATS provided a new legal framework for the
so-called trade in services, and also a permanent forum for negotiations to
expand and deepen the new disciplines. By the end of 2005, in regard to GATS too, the US’ strategic objective is well on the road to achievement.

As regards AoA, however, the US objective has only been partially achieved.
The derailment of the negotiations at Cancun in 2003 was occasioned
ostensibly by the opposition of a large number of developing countries to
the so-called Singapore issues (rules on competition policy, investment,
trade facilitation and government procurement). But the confrontation had
started with the banding together of major developing countries on the issue
of agriculture. The ’suspension’ of the Doha Round of negotiations in July
2006 is again on account of agriculture, though this time differences
between the EU and US caused the impasse.

Agriculture, therefore, continues to be the weakest link in the chain. Or
reversing the metaphor, agriculture symbolizes the major roadblock stalling
the triumphal march of WTO. Equally it is agriculture, which is rekindling
the solidarity of the South in the negotiations, despite the obvious
diverging tendencies among the developing countries on this issue.

In a sense, it is agriculture that will largely determine the fate not only
of the Doha Round but also of WTO.

If the GATS is about capturing new expansion opportunities for the operation
of global capital through emasculation of the nation-state, particularly in
the South; if the Agreement on TRIPS is all about strengthening monopolistic grip of the corporate capital on technology and knowledge and enhancing its rentier income; the AoA has been conceived by the agribusiness, a powerful
arm of global capital, as a strategic tool to decimate the last bastion of
petty production on the globe. The challenge goes far beyond the role of the
nation-state and the ’project of development’: It threatens the very
survival of millions of peasant families. The paradigm of AoA, which is
predicated upon temperate zone, large scale, mechanized, trade-oriented and
agri-business driven agriculture has little to offer to the small and
marginal peasant dominated, largely rain-fed and subsistence type of
agriculture prevailing in the third world which has traditionally functioned
as a sponge absorbing the additions to labour force. Indeed the ’solution’
the AoA offers implicitly or explicitly is the corporatisation of third
world agriculture which, combined with the de-industrialisation being
unleashed through other areas of negotiation, spells out virtual extinction
of peasantry.

An agrarian crisis is already gripping the third world. If the trade majors
coerce the resumption of the suspended negotiations through some cosmetic
moves in agriculture to take on board Brazil and India, the crisis will only
deepen, the political and social consequences of which are incalculable. The
’success’ of a resumed Doha Round will generate a powerful resistance by the
third world peasantry sooner rather than later, which will put a big
question mark on the future of WTO.

Even those governments of developing countries that would seek comfort in
some inadequate and ineffective caveats like special products and special
safeguard mechanisms will eventually find the ground swell of peasant
discontent unmanageable.

In the developing situation, what should be the strategy of the South?
Should it not, (taking advantage of the interregnum provided by
“suspension”) “up the ante” in the negotiations across the board, and,
particularly in the area of agriculture? What should be the specific moves
it should make as a precondition to the resumed negotiations? And, even more
important, what political counter-initiative it should take to backstop the
negotiating stances?

The IPCAWTO had in its meeting on 27 July 06 put forward a concrete agenda in this regard:

"IPCAWTO ... demands that Government of India (GoI) use the opportunity
provided by the present collapse of the negotiations to harden its stand:

IPCAWTO further demands that simultaneously the GoI initiate a move for an
inter-developing country Agreement on Trade and Cooperation in Agriculture
based on a paradigm entirely different from the paradigm of the present AoA
which is biased in favour of temperate zone, mechanised, large-scale,
agri-business-driven, trade-oriented and peasant-insensitive agriculture.
The new paradigm will eschew all these negative characteristics: it will be
peasant-centric; it will be founded on concepts of food sovereignty and
livelihood security; it will be based on the solidarity of the peasantry of
the third world and their mutual cooperation based on their diverse needs
and capabilities."

What stance GoI will adopt is to be seen: But going from the past
experience, there is not much scope for optimism. What is imperative is that
issues raised here are thoroughly discussed by the peoples’ movements,
particularly peasant movements. And action is initiated to mobilize the
global peasantry to repel and defeat the impending challenge to its very
survival. That will signal the ’End of the Road’ for WTO.

Benny Kuruvilla

Focus on the Global South - India

A-201, Kailash Apartments

Juhu Church Road

Juhu, Mumbai - 400049

India

Tel:91.22.55821141/55821151

Tel Fax: 91.22.26254347


Email: bennyk focusweb.org
Website: http://www.focusweb.org