Fw: Dirty Tactics at WTO Conference in Qatar

["Nello Margiotta" <animarg at tin.it>]

 Subject: Developments with WTO in Doha
 
 Dirty Tactics Move Into Higher Gear At Fourth WTO Ministerial:
 Invasion of the Six Green Men
 
 
 Third World Network-Africa (Accra)
 
 PRESS RELEASE
 November 12, 2001
 Posted to the web November 12, 2001
 
 Tetteh Hormeku    Accra
 
 The undemocratic and manipulative methods which have characterised
 the operations of the WTO have moved into a higher gear barely six
 hours after the official opening of the Fourth Ministerial Conference
 of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in Doha, Qatar.
 
 Six individuals with undefined and seemingly open-ended powers have
 been appointed in an untransparent manner to work out the elements of
 a consensus document which will be finally adopted as the Ministerial
 Declaration. Operating without reference to any established and
 commonly agreed procedures, these six individuals, named as the
 "friends of the Chair" of the Conference, are expected to conduct
 consultations with delegates, and out of these consultations produce
 what they judge to be the points of consensus for adoption in the
 Ministerial Declaration.
 
 Many observers in Doha see this development as a worsening of the
 undemocratic, secretive and manipulative "green room" methods which
 excluded many African and other developing countries and led to the
 collapse of the third Ministerial Conference in Seattle two years
 ago. This time, the undemocratic methods and powers of the "green
 room" have been concentrated in the hands of six individual men.
 Speaking at a press briefing, Martin Khor of the Third World Network,
 noted that the "green room" has now become "green men".
 
 The six "Friends of the Chair", who were announced to wide-spread
 consternation of developing country delegates, are supposed to deal
 with six subject matters on which there are to be consultations. They
 include the Minister of Trade of Canada, who is to deal with
 Singapore issues of investment, competition and government
 procurement. Mexico will deal with the issues of TRIPS; Chile, the
 issues of Environment; Singapore, to handle Agriculture; Switzerland,
 to handle Implementation issues; and South Africa to deal with rules
 of the WTO. All these countries support the launch of negotiations on
 all or some of the controversial new issues.
 
 The criteria by which they were selected remains a secret to most
 delegates; so too the identification of the subject matters for
 consultation. They were announced in a way which left delegates no
 room for objection. Indeed the entire process surrounding the "six
 green men" has been described as a well-rehearsed coup d'etat carried
 out with the WTO secretariat in charge.
 
 The process began with the opening ceremony of the Fourth Ministerial
 Conference on Friday, 9 November. The WTO secretariat contrived to
 smuggle the disputed draft declaration prepared from Geneva into the
 simple opening ceremony. Most developing countries have already
 raised serious objections to the draft declaration.
 
 Thus after the Emir of Qatar and others had made their grand
 ceremonial speeches, and in the melee of the departure of his
 Eminence, Ambassador Stuart Harbinson, the Chairman of the General
 Council then presented his now infamous draft declaration. Since this
 was not a working but simply a ceremonial session, and in the melee
 of the making way for the Emir to take leave his guests, the
 delegates did not have the chance or see it fit to object, as they
 would have, to Ambassador Harbinson's presenting his disputed text as
 the working document.
 
 The full significance of this manoeuvre hit delegates on the morning
 of the following day, Saturday 10. At a meeting of the Heads of
 Delegations of all the member countries, the Qatari Minister of
 Trade, who by virtue of being the host of the Ministerial Conference
 is also the Chair of the Conference, announced to delegates that, as
 they (the delegates) had agreed at the opening ceremony, the text
 presented by Ambassador Harbinson is now the working document for the
 entire Conference. On the basis of this he then announced a work plan
 to carry discussion forward. This plan included the appointment of
 the six "green men". Then he announced a schedule of discussions on
 identified subjects starting immediately with agriculture. From the
 reports, what transpired after this was almost farcical.
 
 Apparently, after announcing his schedule, the Chairman was about to
 proceed immediately to discussion of the issue of agriculture when
 the WTO Director-General, sitting with him on the high table, drew
 his attention to the fact that some delegates wanted to raise issues
 with the procedure. Not knowing that the micro-phones were on, the
 Chairman was reported to have whispered something like: "but we are
 not supposed to give time for those kinds of discussions", to the
 hearing of all delegates. He relented, however, and developing
 countries, including India, Uganda and Zimbabwe, raised serious
 questions of procedure for redress. Without waiting for those
 questions to be addressed, he proceeded to invite other countries to
 speak on the topic of agriculture, but they declined.
 
 The upshot was that the Chairman merely noted the points of procedure
 raised and proceeded to have the day's business as he had outlined it
 discussed. In short, he listened, but simply ignored what was said,
 and proceeded as if nothing contrary had been said against his
 announced agenda.
 
 The tactic of simply ignoring contrary views has now emerged as part
 of the arsenal of tricks being employed by the powerful members of
 the WTO to sideline the demands of the developing countries. Instead
 of not consulting as in the past, the trick now is to consult but
 ignore views contrary to the person doing the consultation. This was
 exactly the method adopted by the Director-General of the WTO,
 together with the Chairman of the General Council, Ambassador
 Harbinson, during the discussions in Geneva in the preparation of the
 draft declaration which has now been tabled as the working document
 of the conference.
 
 It will be recalled that at the end of September, Amb. Harbinson
 produced his first draft declaration. Developing countries bitterly
 denounced as imbalanced because it included only the issues raised by
 developed countries, while excluding the issues raised by the
 developing countries. The developing countries then re-stated their
 issues, together with specific sentences that should be included in a
 revised draft. Amb.
 
 Harbinson listened to all this, but produced a second draft which
 excluded even those issues for developing countries that were in the
 first draft; and did include any of their proposals for revising the
 first draft.
 
 This throws light on the role that six" green men" are will be
 playing during the on-going Ministerial Conference. As stated above,
 the six individuals will operate without any procedure as to who they
 should consult and how. Nor is there any procedure to check if the
 views of the people he is consulting are being reflected in whatever
 document he produces and therefore in the final document it is meant
 to feed into. And finally there is not mechanism by which delegates
 can add other subject matter to those identified by the green men.
 
 In short, the Friends of the Chairman have been set up to operate
 according to their own wisdom, as to what is basis of consensus, and
 using their own methods. There are two pointers to what is likely to
 the content of this wisdom of the individual green men? All the five
 individual friends of the Chair are from countries that support the
 launch of negotiations on one or other of the new issues. Secondly,
 at a briefing to US NGOs, the US trade delegation gave indication
 about its involvement with the design and implementation of the plan
 to appoint the six friends of the Chair as the working method for the
 Ministerial Conference.
 
 Thus, the "six green men" represents a collusion between the
 management of the WTO, the Ministerial Conference and the powerful
 countries to ensure that the outcome of the Ministerial reflect their
 will and interest. In the process they have shown that they are
 desperately prepared to ride rough-shod over the rules and proper
 procedure.
 
 Accounts from delegations so far about how the whole set-up seems to
 be working gives cause for worry. Some of the "friends of the chair"
 have virtually set up court waiting for the delegations to come and
 talk to them. Others have decided to conduct one-on-one discussions
 with selected country-delegates. In these one-on-one meetings, one
 delegate has no way of knowing what other country delegation may have
 said. Each country has to rely on the "honesty" of the particular
 "green man" to faithfully convey their own positions to the other
 delegates and vice-versa.
 
 Already there are accounts emerging to the effect that some delegates
 positions are being misrepresented to other delegations. This is
 especially dangerous in the cases where some developing countries
 have adopted common positions and platforms, as in the case of the
 Africa group. The one-on-one consultation as seems to be proceeding
 provides opportunity for fragmenting the front as different stories
 are told about this or that delegation presenting a different
 position from the previously stated or agreed common position.
 
 Ultimately, this is a set-up designed to frustrate developing
 countries and subjugate them. They have to jump through three
 handicaps in order to promote their interests in the on-going
 negotiations. First they arrived in Doha with an agenda for
 discussion which excluded their points of view. So rather than a
 balanced text in which every body's issues are taken as the point of
 negotiation, developing countries now have to fight for their issues
 to be included in the text in order to begin the battle of
 negotiations. Secondly, if they manage to achieve this, they then
 have to withstand pressures, blackmail, bribery and threats from the
 developed countries in order to stand by their positions on the
 issues being negotiated. On top of all this, thirdly, they now have
 to deal with a process which is calculated to make it impossible for
 them to include their issues in the negotiating agenda.
 
 This is the essence of the outrageous situation developing countries
 are confronted with at the fourth WTO ministerial conference. How
 they respond to this will determine not only their future, but indeed
 the future of the multi-lateral trading system as a whole.