November 16, 2001
The World Trade Organization conference that concluded on Wednesday was a double triumph of symbolism. By avoiding a repeat of the Seattle debacle of two years ago, the meeting proved that an ambitious attempt to advance international integration can succeed even in this era of globo-protest. And by launching a new round of trade talks that will focus on the needs of developing countries, the summit showed that the international system need not be the slave of corporate interests. With luck, this double victory could transform globalization's prospects. Protest leaders may be persuaded to work within the system. And the new emphasis on the link between trade and development may imbue globalization with the moral purpose that it needs to overcome its many enemies.
The summit only laid out an agenda for trade talks, though, and the fact that even this was difficult suggests the scale of the challenge ahead. This is all the more true since the toughest issues were resolved less by substantive compromise than by linguistic finesse. During the last night of haggling, the French objected to mention in the final declaration of "phasing out" subsidies for farm exports. They were eventually placated when a wordsmith inserted a preceding phrase saying "without prejudging the outcome of the negotiations."
To move from fudge to real bargaining, the WTO's member states are going to need pressure from nongovernmental activists. In their successful fight for debt relief, NGOs proved that they could form international coalitions, which move official policy, particularly on the moral question of world poverty. Advancing the new trade round is just as morally compelling. Its completion would clarify poor countries' rights to circumvent drug patents when battling public health crises. It would give them aid to help set up customs procedures and other trade-supporting institutions. And it would open markets for farm goods and low-tech manufacturers, which together constitute poor countries' best chance of exporting their way out of misery.
Along with NGO pressure, the trade talks will need American leadership. Since World War II, U.S. commitment to open trade has driven successive rounds of tariff cuts, boosting the international prosperity that underpins U.S. national security. In the past half-decade, when sole-superpower status led some to take national security for granted, the consensus in favor of trade evaporated, and ambitious multilateral negotiation became impossible. But since Sept. 11 Americans have seen that national security is not ensured, and that abject poverty in developing countries does threaten their interests. That realization must now be translated into a new pro-trade politics.
The site of this translation must be Congress, which has yet to grant the Bush administration trade promotion authority. The House Republicans have written a bill, which attempts to win Democratic support with concessions on labor and the environment, but Democrats are hard to get on this issue. The leadership on both sides needs to meet and hammer out a compromise, and President George W. Bush needs to invest some of his ample political capital in getting them to do so. After this week's meeting, it will be tempting to say trade is now off the agenda. But trade negotiations are just beginning. The administration needs trade promotion authority so that it can drive them forward, and so that this chance to link globalization with development is not allowed to slip away.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C § 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
