[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Fw: Dirty Tactics at WTO Conference in Qatar
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.