Volume 3, No. 1, January 2002

The ‘WTO Ministerial Declaration’, accepted by the delegates of 142 countries, is nothing but a charter of economic and political aggression by the developed countries on the underdeveloped countries of the world. For all their ‘bold’ posturing, Maran and the other ministers of the third world have themselves signed the death warrant of the countries they were supposed to represent. If the Uruguay Round took a big leap in the neo-colonial domination of the backward countries, the Doha Round will increase the stranglehold ten-fold.

The government and the Indian media have gone on an over-drive to try and show the Doha meet as a big victory. It has sought to present Maran as the gladiator, all dressed in ‘swadeshi’ armour, leading the third world into battle against the US/EU bullies. In fact this ‘gladiator’ was noting more than a mouse dressed in tiger’s clothing, and even its roar was fake. And to add to the disinformation, a number of so-called left economists have also added to the confusion by trying to portray the Doha Meet as a partial victory.

Maran, in fact, started with a roar, but ended with a whimper. Till a month before the meet, he thundered time and again, "India would remain steadfast in opposing the launch of a New Round till the Uruguay Round agenda is completed". Then, on the eve of the Ministerial Meet he claimed that it was a "necessary evil" to live with the WTO. After the conclusion of the Doha Meet, while claiming a victory, he warned that the country had just two years to introduce drastic reforms to bring it in line with the new WTO agenda. He now stated (Nov.17) that "if there is one lesson from Doha, it is that we should reform fast". But that is just what the US/EU have been insisting, through the WTO, and otherwise!! Then why all the earlier posturing? It was no ‘brave fight’, as the revisionists would have us believe, but mere hot air, designed to fool the people of the country, who are vehemently opposed to the WTO.

No doubt there was much arm-twisting, threats and dadagiri by Zoellick, Lamy and their henchmen from the US and EU; no doubt there were also direct calls from Blair to Vajpayee to fall in line ‘or else’ — all that notwithstanding, in the end there was total capitulation, which was sought to be covered up by brave talk and systematic disinformation. What was put forward in the new Declaration was so sweeping and all encompassing, so devastating for the future of backward economies, that even the compradors attending the Meet feared peoples’ reaction back home, and so put up some opposition. More than from India, this came from the LDCs (Least Developed countries), who have been always treated as outcasts.

In the wake of the severe recession the developed countries were determined to push through a New Round, in order to push the burden of the crisis on to the backs of the third world countries. Particularly the US and EU decided to act jointly, and put aside their own trade disputes that had scuttled the Seattle meeting, for the common good of the imperialists. Even the Sept. 11 events were sought to be used to their advantage.

Even as the bodies were being extracted from the WTC debris, US Trade Representative (USTR), Robert Zoellick, waxed eloquent on the "role that trade had in fighting terrorism". In a speech, this hatchet man in the Bush cabinet, argued that "trade legislation was needed to signal that the US would not retreat from its responsibility to defend free trade against the terrorists and critics of globalisation". Here, even the anti-globalisation activists are being lumped together with the ‘terrorists’. Allen Greenspan, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, was even cruder in linking the new trade round to Sept.11. He said, "as a consequence of the spontaneous and almost universal support that we received from around the world, an agreement on a new round of multilateral trade negotiations now seems feasible". In fact the sinister campaign to link a new trade round to the so-called war against terrorism was orchestrated jointly by the EU Trade Commissioner, Pascal Lamy, and the USTR, Zoellick, who argued that the best response to the ‘terrorist’ attacks would be to launch a new round.

So it is not surprising that the revised Draft Ministerial Declaration, released on Oct. 27, (i.e. not even a fortnight before the Doha Meet), which had been arbitrarily prepared by the chairman of the General Council of the WTO (referred to as the Harbinson-More coup — Mike More is secretary general of the WTO & Harbinson is the Chairman of the General Council) at US behest, was far more damaging to third world countries than the earlier draft. It negated most of the earlier objections from countries like India; it brushed aside all alternative viewpoints, and, in fact added a vast number of new points that had never been discussed earlier. To take just one example, under the newly proposed GATS (General Agreement on Trade and Services), private foreign health and education corporations will have the right to establish themselves in any WTO member country. They will also have the right to compete for public funds with institutions and hospitals and educational institutions. Standards of health and education will also be subject to WTO rules and conditions. Under the proposed new GATS any aspect of education would be potentially open to foreign competition, and this would include everything from curriculum development to owning and operating educational institutions and hiring teachers.

This Draft was a vicious attack on the sovereignty (or what is left of it) of the backward countries, it sought to ruthlessly smash what little safeguards still remain, and to aggressively pave the way for the full and total control of all the economic lifelines of the third world countries. Though this Draft was initially ‘opposed’ by Maran, the FICCI, etc., the final Declaration was meekly accepted, even though its essence was the same, with mere cosmetic changes.

The New Round

By deciding Qatar, an autocratic princely state, as the venue, the Ministers were able to keep out the sea of demonstrators that had haunted all their earlier meets. But, in spite of the fact that only a handful of ‘legitimate’ NGOs had been given the visa to enter Qatar, the panic stricken chief of the imperialist world, had 2,000 US marines sail around near the coast of Doha, to keep guard.

After much haggling, threats, arm-twisting and finally resorting to the notorious ‘green-room’ meetings of a select few, the ‘Doha Development Agenda’ (DDA) was finally passed. Though it is officially called a ‘Work Programme’ and not a ‘New Round’, in order to dupe world opinion, it is far more sweeping than even the Uruguay Round. The establishment of a ‘Trade Negotiations Committee’ and the declaration that the entire negotiations would be treated as a ‘single undertaking’ left little doubt that this amounted to a New Round. The DDA has a massive agenda, covering 12 distinct areas and 7 other work programmes. Included in it are all the subjects that India had vehemently opposed. These include all the four ‘Singapore issues’ (these 4 issues were first presented for study at the 1996 Singapore meet) to draw up a framework of future WTO treaties on global rules for foreign investment, competition policies, transparency in government procurement and trade facilitation. While the Uruguay Round introduced, for the first time into GATT, one non-trade issue —intellectual property rights — the present round has brought in three non-trade issues. The final Declaration has also introduced the much opposed (by India) issues of environment and labour standards. This goes even beyond the earlier (October 27) Draft, which contained the formulation that the ILO is the body for substantial discussion of labour issues; the final Declaration has deleted all references to the ILO, indicating the possibility of the WTO taking up the issue later.

Though environment and labour standards are necessary, to link them with international trade will only facilitate the developed countries to use this as a pretext for protectionist policies. Utilizing the lack of environmental and labour standards in third world countries, the US/EU have already been boycotting exports from India and other backward countries — like bidis, shrimps, etc. Now, with a passing of these clauses such protectionist measures will be widened and will gain official legitimacy.

Regarding ‘investment policies’ there is a specific proposal that foreign capital have the freedom to move across national borders without let or hindrance caused by nation-states. This will be introduced by a re-wording of the GATS to include "comprehensive multilateral discipline on investments". This will result in the removal of all controls on FIIs, FDIs, repatriation of profits; free entry of foreign capital into any and every sector, without any controls allowed by the local governments; and bringing in currency convertibility on capital account (which has wrought havoc on the currencies of those countries that have already introduced this).

A ‘competition policy’ would entail the removal of all preferences to local industry, small-scale sector, handicrafts, thereby treating the giant TNC and the small local business on an equal footing. This will act to only further kill local industry, unable to face ‘competition’ from the foreign giants.

So called ‘transparency in government procurement’ means that global capital will be able to tie the hands of governments regarding the public sector, social welfare, public services and controls on any and every economic activity of local governments.

And as far as ‘trade facilitation’ is concerned it means breaking down trade barriers even more thoroughly than what has been achieved by the Uruguay Round. It calls for further restrictions on customs tariffs, in the name of common norms.

If all these four clauses are to be implemented, together with another 15 areas proposed, it will result in the total dismemberment of a country’s sovereignty, putting it completely at the mercy of foreign capital. The disastrous impact of the decade of ‘liberalisation’ is already to be seen; one can imagine the extent of devastation caused by such excessive dismantling of economic and political controls. Unfortunately, though the Indian government has been making a show of opposing these four ‘Singapore issues’, in actual fact it has already begun implementing them in various spheres of the economy. Raising the FII limits; introducing derivatives trading on the stock exchange; talk of scrapping the FIPB, BIFR, etc.; allowing FDI into defence, small-scale sector and other spheres; reducing customs duties drastically and removing QRs even before the WTO time-limit; vigorous privatization of PSUs; and in fact all the so-called second generation reforms — are already geared to take the country and its economy in the direction chalked out at Doha.

What is more, the new Round, which is to be launched in Jan. 2002, is scheduled to be completed before Jan.2005. So, while the Uruguay Round, with a much smaller agenda, took 7 years to finalise (from 1986 to 1994) the Doha Round is expected to be completed in just 3 years. Yet, Maran and others claim getting discussion on the 4 ‘Singapore issues’ postponed till the next ministerial meet (after two years), as a victory for India — the fact is that the entire ‘Agenda’ plans to be bamboozled through in just 3 years, making the two year ‘postponement’ of no great significance!!

India’s Demands Ignored

For months the Indian rulers have been saying that unless the ‘implementation issues’ from the Uruguay Round are first settled it will not agree to a new Round. The developed countries insisted that let the ‘implementation issues’ be part of the very Doha Round itself. India opposed this suggestion as it meant indefinite postponement of issues that the developed countries have not implemented, affecting trade with countries like India. India had presented a list of 102 ‘implementation issues’.

The Doha meet, besides the ‘Negotiating Agenda’ issued two other declarations — one, on some 40 implementation issues, and the second, a policy statement dealing with patents and public health. The latter two are more statements of intention and in no way impinge on the main ‘Negotiating Agenda’.

All the 40 implementation concerns of the backward countries, except for one on the imposition of anti-dumping duties by the rich countries, that were part of the final statement, were merely statements of good intention. All the important implementation issues, were made a part of the negotiations of the Doha Round. This is exactly what India has been opposing, yet it claimed that Doha was a victory! In addition, the US even stonewalled on a minor relaxation of textile quotas (India’s largest export item), which was slated for settlement at Doha.

Also, under TRIPS, India wanted an extension of the scope of protection provided by the Geographical Indication (GI) to cover Basmati, Darjeeling (for tea), Kolhapuri for chappals, and Alfonso for mangoes. This extension was also not given in the Declaration.

In the area of Dispute Settlement, India specifically wanted the exclusion of any NGO or referee to interfere in the dispute. This too was rejected.

In the area of agriculture and services the outcome of Doha was no better. In agriculture, the perspective of negotiations will continue to be biased towards the heavily subsidized goods of the developed countries. Even on the much-disputed question of export subsidies in agriculture, France was able to dilute the provisions for the phasing out of all export subsidies.

In services, many new aspects have brought in, already mentioned. There was no departure from the very narrow approach regarding the movement of labour. Moreover no cognizance has been taken about the fundamental importance of the delivery of basic services, particularly health and education, notwithstanding the much trumpeted separate statement on public health.

All in all, the imperialists were able to impose their will on the entire 142 countries gathered there. India’s role there (and after) resembled the monkey who lost his tail, and began propagating the advantages of tailless monkeys.

So-called victory on Public Health

The Indian rulers claim that this separate statement, on the right to bypass the patent regime during times when a ‘public health emergency’ is declared, as a big victory for India, is also a big lie. Firstly it was not India’s concept, but de facto what is already being implemented in Brazil, and to a lesser extent South Africa. Second, the practical advantages of this statement are minimal.

To take the first point. Starting in 1994, the Brazilian government urged local companies to start making drugs to treat AIDS. The government invoked "national emergency" provisions, in its patent laws to start manufacturing low cost anti-AIDS drugs. The US took Brazil to the WTO disputes panel, but later retracted in the face of adverse public opinion. It is now this that has been legitamised.

Second, even this ‘victory’ is nominal and illusory. Firstly, in backward countries there is a perpetual ‘public health emergency’, yet rarely has one ever been proclaimed. For all the propaganda around AIDS, TB, malaria, Diarrhea, etc are the regular killers. For example, less than two-fifths of Indians and Bangladeshis have firm access to modern medicine. So, in other words, it means that TRIPS must be implemented for the regular daily killers, and only in an exceptional condition (an emergency) could it be bypassed. In addition the statement is itself vague, its legal value is uncertain, and it simultaneously reiterates the member’s commitment to the TRIPS agreement. In addition, the ‘concession’ excludes imports/exports from compulsory licensing. That means that most underdeveloped countries, lacking an indigenous manufacturing base, cannot procure essential drugs cheaply. Nor can competitive Indian manufacturers export them.

So, notwithstanding all the media propaganda on this issue, the actual benefits from this statement will be minimal, while the TRIPS regime will continue to get implemented, giving windfall profits to the giant pharmaceutical companies.

Undemocratic Methods

Much has been said about the democratic rights at the WTO (unlike the IMF), where each country has a single vote. In spite of the extensive discussions that took place before Doha, the views of the backward countries saw no place in both the Drafts prepared. The first one at least presented the alternative viewpoint in brackets, the revised Draft, which was finally presented at Doha did away with even that. The presentation was highly arbitrary and a group of 30 countries recorded their objection to the process.

Once again, on the final day, when no agreement could be reached, the notorious greenroom method was once again resorted to. The ministers of 20 countries were called to the Presidential suite at 6.pm. The meeting went on till 3.00am. Those not invited had to wait outside, and no one else was allowed to enter. It was only after this that the final Declaration was adopted. Even on the content, pressure was applied, with the US suddenly proposing changes on the anti-dumping duties. In fact, throughout the meeting, on the side-lines, the US and EU representatives went around threatening, bullying and coercing delegates to accept the New Round.

Though differences did once again arise between the US and EU on agricultural subsidies, this time they managed a compromise on the issue, in order to jointly launch their attack on the countries of the third world.

Withdraw from WTO: Fight for Self-Reliance and National Sovereignty

The threat to India’s sovereignty comes not from Pakistan or any other neighbour, but from the imperialists. It is the implementation of the WTO regime, the IMF structural adjustments, and the numerous bilateral deals with the US and other imperialists that is the single most important factor for the sell-out of the country’s interests to foreign powers.

On the question of world trade, we find that India, with a population of one billion, accounts for a mere 0.6% of the total, while the 55,000 TNCs account for as much as 70%. With such gigantic imbalance, can there possibly be equality between the contending players. Besides, the much-propagated falsehood that the WTO will promote trade and prosperity throughout the world is now well exposed. World trade growth in the second half of the 1990s, after the signing of the Uruguay Round, is less than in the first half of the decade. Besides, the terms of trade have gone heavily against the backward countries, whose exports are mainly of primary commodities. Except for oil, unit export value has declined continuously since 1995. For agricultural exports, which have been the hardest hit, unit value of exports have fallen by nearly 20%, in just the 5-year period. Also the percentage of world trade from the underdeveloped countries has remained static at around 29%. The increase has primarily been in the sphere of oil, the benefits accruing to a few countries and the TNCs that process it.

With such inequalities in the world trading system, it is quite obvious that those who dominate it, and have the muscle power, will dictate terms to the others. China’s entry into the WTO will make little difference to the status of the oppressed countries, as the new capitalist rulers there are more concerned in dining with the devil, than in asserting the rights of the oppressed countries. Nothing can be achieved by staying within the WTO, except more slavery and servility to the imperialists. Countries like India, should not only withdraw from it and refuse to accept its conditions, but should also scrap all bilateral agreements with the imperialists that rob the country of its wealth and natural resources.

Greater dependence on imports/exports cannot act as the motor for growth in the poor countries, more particularly in times of recession. With declining terms of trade, with continuous devaluation of the rupee, with a shrinking home market, the country cannot but go further and further into the dumps. It is only through self-reliance, creation of an expanding home-market and the assertion of the country’s sovereignty that India can come out of poverty, and build the dynamics for a growth process. This can only be achieved through stopping the gigantic loot by the imperialists and raising the purchasing power of the masses, through transforming the backward semi-feudal agrarian relations and industrializing the vast hinterland.

<Top>