Diverse verklaringen (sociale bewegingen, NGOs, activisten, etc)
Hier zijn verklaringen van sociale bewegingen, NGOs, activisten, etc over de mislukte top en de Doha Ronde.
2. Public Citizen, USA
Aid 29 juli 2008 (UK)
5. Stop the New Round Coalition 30 juli 2008
6. Bharatiya Krishak Samaj
30 juli 2008 (India)
for Economic and Policy Research
The Oakland Institute 29 juli 2008
Statement on Outcome of WTO talks 31 juli 2008
– – – –
Attac welcomes the breakdown of WTO-talks
Press Release Attac Germany
Frankfurt am Main, 29th July 2008
The Alter-mondialist network Attac welcomes the breakdown of the WTO
negotiations in Geneva today ( Tuesday 29th July) : "The end of the talks
good news. After a seven years battle it is now clear that a free trade
policy that only favours the corporate interests of the north has no chance
any more", said Alexis Passadakis from the Attac-co-ordination group.
The aggressive approach, in particular of the European Union and the USA is
"German Economic Minister Michael Glos for instance was only interested in
the German car industry. Social disasters due to liberalisation policies in
the south, are simply collateral damage for Germany’s export leadership",
added Alexis Passadakis. In the USA it’s a similar story. The interests of a
few agro-industrial corporations carry more weight for the government than
millions of small farmers in the south.
The "Doha-round" negotiations of the WTO ended today in Geneva
results, due to a lack of consensus between USA, China and India over trade
in agriculture according to AP-news. It was already clear on Monday that the
proposal that WTO director General Pascal Lamy brought to the table at the
end of last week, could not provide the basis for consensus.
Attac warned, that EU and the USA may play the "blame-game" and
developing countries of causing the breakdown in the talks. "That would be
highly dishonest. The negotations broke down because the rich industrial
nations only made demands and ignored even the most elementary needs of the
developing countries such as minimum food security", explained Roland Süß
from the Attac-coordination group. Developing countries had brought a
detailed proposal to the table concerning special safeguard measures (SSM)
that was rejected by the USA and the EU. "The deeper reason for the
of the WTO is the obvious crisis of neoliberal globalisation, that only
benefits corporations while throwing people into poverty and destroying the
environment." said Roland Süß. In recent years more and more people in
countries have become increasingly critical towards "free trade".
"For social movements and critical NGO’s the failure of these talks is the
success of long years of intense campaigning. Now there is a window of
opportunity for a change in policy towards a more social and environmentally
friendly world economy", said Johannes Lauterbach from the nation-wide
Attac-working group on world trade and WTO. In particular the small farmers
movement of the South and trade unions – for example in South Africa and
Argentina made sure, through their work, that the USA and the EU didn´t make
a clean sweep with their free-trade dogma as they were able to do in the
"Now is the time to use the open situation. It is time for a
democratisation of trade politics, in which all groups within society must
have a voice", adds Johannes Lauterbach. It is also high time to bury the
bilateral free trade discussions. In particular the negotiations between the
EU and the African States dealing with extensive free trade agreements
(Economic Partnership Agreements / EPAs); and the new european trade
strategy "Global Europe", involving the Asian and Latin American
* Alexis Passadakis, Attac- co-ordination group , Tel. 0170 – 268 4445
* Johannes Lauterbach, WTO-WG Attac, Tel. 01577 – 183 2424
* Roland Süß, Attac- co-ordination group, Tel. 0175 – 272 58 93
– – – – – – – – – – –
2. RIP Doha Round – Another WTO Collapse in ‘Make or Break’ Talks Shows
New Direction Is Required;
Victory for Small Farmers, Workers, Civil Society and Developing Nations as WTO
Expansion Bid Is
Again Defeated in Geneva
Public Citizen, USA
July 29, 2008
Statement of Lori Wallach, Director of Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch
Thank God no deal was reached, because the proposal under consideration would
have exacerbated the
serious economic, food security and social problems now rocking numerous
The moldering corpse of the Doha WTO-expansion Round should have been buried
years ago. Hopefully
after this latest rejection of the Doha agenda, countries will move on to a new
agenda focused on fixing
the existing WTO rules.
Countries’ unwillingness to concede on particular themes is the proximate cause
for the collapse, but
government positions were based on strong public opposition in many poor and
rich nations alike to
expanding WTO scope and authority after more than a decade of experience of the
outcomes. By calling a ministerial summit to try to force agreement on a WTO
opposed by many countries, WTO Secretary General Pascal Lamy set up the
conditions for yet another
direct blow to the beleaguered global commerce agency’s shaky legitimacy.
The WTO’s 14-year lifespan has sparked a dramatic wave of popular protest
across the world, and this
week’s talks were no different, with small farmers, fishers and workers
protesting in various national
capitals and teams of civil society activists traveling to Geneva to remind
their countries’ WTO delegates
of the political consequences at home of damaging compromises.
Now that WTO expansion has been again rejected at this “make or break” meeting,
elected officials and
those on the campaign trail in nations around the world – including U.S.
presidential candidates – will be
asked what they intend to do to replace the failed WTO model and its version of
with something that benefits the majority of people worldwide.
While the “blame-country-x game” is likely to reach a frenzy this week, seven
years of virtual deadlock
since the Doha Round WTO expansion talks started signals that most WTO
countries and their
populations are seeking a different direction than what was offered with the
Doha agenda. The WTO
Secretariat and the small bloc of mainly rich country governments who
stubbornly insist on continuing
with the Doha WTO expansion agenda after it has been repeatedly rejected are
the ones to blame for
the repeated summit collapses and deadlocks.
With the damaging socio-economic consequences of WTO implementation and an
process at the summit having once again translated into a rejection of WTO
expansion, the organization’s
already-shaky legitimacy is nearing rock bottom.
Acknowledging the broad opposition among WTO member countries to aspects of the
Doha Round agenda,
WTO officials had called last week’s invitation-only mini-ministerial with the
intention of allowing 35 of the
WTO’s 153-member nations to participate in a selective process known as the
“Green Room”. But even
this exclusive process was abandoned by the third day of talks in favor of
closed-door meetings among
representatives from seven large countries. This so-called “G-7” group
completely excluded African and
Caribbean countries, included only Japan and China from all of Asia and only
Brazil from all of Latin
America. And this was the so-called Doha “Development” Round! The remaining
trade ministers – mainly
from poor countries – were left “in the dark sitting in the dark”, as the
Indonesian trade minister
complained. Kenya’s Deputy Prime Minister and Commerce Minister Uhuru Kenyatta
spoke for the African
countries in expressing similar anger. The seven large nations announced a
tentative deal this weekend,
warning that it represented a non-negotiable balance of interests. They
declared to the press that a
ministerial declaration resolving various issues was at hand. However, when
this take-it-or-leave-it deal
was brought back to the exclusive 35-country grouping, inquires began about the
details. Over the past
two days it became clear that the proposed modalities agreement was
unacceptable to blocs of countries
and the 8-day summit ended where it began: with countries in deep disagreement
about the future
direction of global trade rules and negotiations.
Public Citizen is a national nonprofit advocacy organization based in
Washington, D.C. For more
information, please visit www.citizen.org
Contact: Bill Holland (773) 569-2814 – Ann Eveleth (202) 454-5108
– – – – – –
Persverklaring SOMO/WTO.ZIP, 29 juli 2008
Dat de besprekingen over internationale handel in de WTO zijn mislukt is
voor maatschappelijke organisaties die met ontwikkeling en milieu bezig
zijn, niet verwonderlijk.
"De EU en de VS bleven teveel markttoegang eisen op het gebied van
landbouw, industriële goederen en diensten, en deden slechts
schijnconcessies op het gebied van landbouw en diensten" concludeert Rob
Bleijerveld van WTO.ZIP Nieuwsbrief (1).
"Eindelijk kan worden nagedacht om het multilaterale handelssysteem op te
bouwen op basis van meer duurzame en ontwikkelingsvriendelijke regels die
nu echter niet op tafel lagen", zegt Myriam Vander Stichele, senior
researcher van SOMO (2).
De WTO volgt nog steeds een route van zuivere vrijhandel met toenemende
concurrentie en weigert handel in dienst te stellen van duurzame
ontwikkeling en verbetering van het milieu. Nadat ontwikkelingslanden veel
toezeggingen deden in de Uruguay Ronde (de onderhandelingsronde van
WTO-voorloper GATT) en werden geconfronteerd met de gevolgen daarvan,
besloten ze zich niet meer zo makkelijk onder -vaak zware- druk te laten
zetten van de geïndustrialiseerde landen. In landen als India en
China, maar ook elders in de wereld, zijn de kleine boeren een grote en
zeer kwetsbare groep die weinig profiteren van de economische ontwikkeling
in hun land en de concurrentie (nog) niet aan kunnen. Dit speelde een rol
bij het stilvallen van de onderhandelingen van de WTO. Het algemene
probleem was echter dat de VS en de EU slechts hun eigen belangen voorop
stelden terwijl het een ontwikkelingsronde had moeten zijn, zoals in 2001
in Doha is besloten.
Zelfs een geslaagde afloop van de Doha Ronde zal niet leiden tot
verbetering van vele, belangrijke multilaterale handelsproblemen, zoals te
lage prijzen voor kleine boeren, fluctuerende voedselprijzen en
voedselonzekerheid, de belemmeringen voor landen om handelsmaatregelen te
nemen om klimaatverandering tegen te gaan, geen of slechte
basisvoorzieningen en openbare dienstverlening voor de armen. Zolang het
doel en de besluitvormingsmechanismen van de WTO niet veranderen, zitten
de WTO-onderhandelingen op een verkeerd spoor, een spoor dat nu ook dood
lijkt te lopen.
Maar is het erg? Volgens de Financial Times zeggen de meeste analyses dat
de impact van de Doha Ronde op de wereldeconomie rond de 0.1% ligt. Het is
nu duidelijk tijd om stappen in een betere richting te zetten die de
barrières in het huidige handelssysteem voor eerlijke en duurzame handel
wegnemen, en om andere internationale afspraken te maken.
(1) Nieuwsbrief over de WTO, sinds mei 2000 (www.stelling.nl/trouble en
(2) Stichting Onderzoek Multinationale Ondernemingen, Amsterdam
stance of the EU and US resulted in collapse of the WTO trade talks,
Action Aid 29 juli 2008 (UK)
for the collapse in crucial trade talks in Geneva lies with the EU
and US not the developing countries looking to safeguard the
interests of their
growing industries and poor farmers, ActionAid
Alam Khan, head of ActionAid’s Trade Policy said the failure of the
a result of corporate greed in America and Europe as well
as the manner in which the
talks were held.
responsibility of failure squarely lies with the US, EU who could not
beyond the interests of their huge trans-national businesses
that want to grab more
and more market opportunities in poor
countries,” he said.
the US and the EU to blame China and India for the collapse is just
US and EU pretension to offer 70% and 80% cuts made a mockery of poor
farmers. The US suggestion that it would limit its subsidies to
$14.5bn, while it currently
provides $ 7-8bn annually, meant there
was no real cut on the table.”
Lamy also bears responsibility for conducting the talks in a way that
far from democratic.”
trade campaigner Angela Wauye from Kenya said the US failure to agree
deal over the contentious issue of cotton had also contributed to
the break down in
subsidies are a litmus test of the development dimension of WTO
than 10 million farmers have lost livelihoods because
the American government pays
between US$2-4bn subsidies to around
20,000 US farmers.” Ms Wauye added.
today also said developing countries were right not to give into
handed negotiating tactics by the US and the EU as crucial
trade talks collapsed.
that “no deal is batter than a bad deal,” ActionAid Head of Trade
Aftab Alam Khan said the deal offered to developing countries
would have put
millions of poor people at further risk.
is just another example of the intransigence and insensitivity of
countries, who aren’t interested in the survival of small
farmers, workers and jobs
in developing countries.”
industrial deal on the table was so bad it would have resulted in
countries being US $ 63bn worse off.
agreement would have resulted in thousands of job losses in industry.
say China, India and Brazil would have lost over 100,000
jobs in the car industry
alone.” He added that the Doha round of
talks, which began as a development round in
2001, had disintegrated
into a battle over trade.
also accused rich countries of using heavy handed negotiating tactics
to try and
force developing countries into a deal which would have
only benefited the former.
countries have to be appreciated for not succumbing to huge pressure
from rich countries and Pascal
further information contact: Aftab Alam Khan + 41 797121584 and
– – – – – – – –
5. Stop the New Round Coalition calls the
collapse of Doha trade talks a welcome respite for poor countries
Stop the New Round Coalition 30 juli 2008 (Filippijnen)
collapse of the Doha Trade talks in Geneva yesterday over
on agriculture subsidies is a welcome respite for poor
countries like the
the end, the ambition that has been driving these talks since the
round was launched in 2001, became too much and the aggressive
push by the
rich countries led by the US and the EU for more trade
liberalization at a
time of global crises of food and fuel too
blatant for developing countries
talks have collapsed because developing countries gave more
to protecting and supporting its agriculture and
industries rather than
being hi-jacked into a bad deal that would
limit their development options.
talks have collapsed because the peoples’ resistance to the Doha
and to unfair and unjust trade made their collective voices
the wake of the collapse, we expect the machinery of the "free
trade" dogma to spin the news in order to shift the blame to
We will hear lamentations about the lost
opportunity for poor people with
the failure to secure a deal.
say, developing countries should take the credit for the collapse of
extremely bad deal that would have been detrimental to their own
is the time to seriously think outside the WTO-box and move towards
an alternative global trading system that puts poor peoples’
interests at the
Joseph Purugganan- firstname.lastname@example.org/09173874531
– – – – –
6.Collapse of Geneva Mini-Ministerial proves that
It is time to wind up WTO says
Bharatiya Krishak Samaj
Bharatiya Krishak Samaj
30 juli 2008 (India)
negotiations in Geneva which lasted over a week, finally
on July 29. This was expected and not a surprise. The Bharatiya
Krishak Samaj on July 19 had predicted *(July 19 Press Release also
below)* this outcome and had then urged the Indian commerce
Nath to boycott the mini-ministerial.
World Trade Organisation (WTO) is practically hopeless and helpless
after successive failures of a series of attempts to revive the
trade negotiations. The time has already demonstrated
multi-lateral trade system is absolutely incapable of
objectives of the Doha Development Round. Therefore,
the Bharatiya Krishak
Samaj has urged that WTO should be wind up
not much progress in multilateral trade negotiations was made on
the drafts issued in May this year, the WTO again on July
10 issued two
revised drafts – one on agriculture by Crawford
Falconer and other on NAMA
by Don Stephenson. There is practically
not much difference in spirit of the
drafts issued in July and those
released in May.
revised WTO text on agriculture completely ignored the food security
livelihood concerns of the farmers in the developing countries.
proposed a weak defence against the possible influx of cheap
imports by suggesting a complicated system for
implementation of Special
Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) by the
developing countries. In contrast the
Special Safeguard (SSG)
implemented by the developed countries is simple and
revised draft, though has the provision for self-designation
Special Products by developing countries, the provision suggested is
not enough to protect food security and livelihood concerns
the issue of an effective SSM came up for discussions in the
mini-ministerial, the developed countries led by US vehemently
developed countries intention was clear in the
mini-ministerial – they
wanted to protect their agriculture though
heavy subsidies and high tariff
barriers and at the same time were
determined to have access for their
products in the developing
attitude of the developed countries is not new. They have been
this number of times before. The agreement on Doha
Development Round cannot
be reached until and unless the developed
world drastically change their
attitude. Therefore we Indian farmers
believe that WTO has become
and needs to be wind up," said the president of Bharatiya
Krishak Samaj, Dr Krishan Bir Chaudhary.
recent collapse of the mini-ministerial in Geneva has vindicated the
stand of Bharatiya Krishak Samaj.
Bharatiya Krishak Samaj could also like to compliment China for
up on thye side of the developing countries farmers and
refusing to accept a
deal brokered in favour of the multinational
food companies of the developed
world. The BKS would like to
compliment the Indian commerce minister, Kamal
Nath on taking a firm
stand on the issue despite reported pressures from the
minister, Manmohan Singh to seek for a compromise.
the likely outcome, we had earlier urged Kamal Nath not to attend
the mini-ministerial. We had urged India to boycott the
said Dr Krishan Bir Chaudhary.
collapse of the Geneva mini-ministerial is also good for the infant
industries in the developing countries. The NAMA draft proposals had
death knell for the small and medium sized industries and
in the developing countries.
KRISHAN BIR CHAUDHARY, President Bharatiya
(Bharat Krishak Samaj is een grote boerenorganisatie
in India (regio Akola)
– – – – –
7.WTO Talks Collapse Amidst Developing
Countries’ Reluctance to Sacrifice Food Security
Minute Attempt to Push Through a WTO Expansion "Deal"
Center for Economic and Policy
Research 29 juli 2008
D.C. – Despite trade ministers’ hopes for a last-minute deal, World
Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations collapsed yet again today, and observers
at the talks in Geneva say that the failure is not surprising, given
the reluctance of India and other developing nations to sacrifice
measures in the wake of the recent global spike in food prices.
President Bush’s lame duck status, negotiators had been called to Geneva
to try to push through a last-minute deal before Bush left office. Because
negotiators need about six months after a deal on the major issues to
complete the details of the agreement, this possibility has now evaporated.
what’s been on the table, no deal is better than a bad deal. A Doha conclusion
would have had major negative impacts for workers and farmers in developing
countries. The tariff cuts demanded of developing countries would have
caused massive job loss, and countries would have lost the ability
farmers from dumping, further impoverishing millions on the verge of survival,"
said Deborah James, Director of International Programs for the Center
for Economic and Policy Research, who has been observing the talks
is unclear why negotiations were proceeding, given the fact that the
does not have a mandate to conclude negotiations, as made clear by
a letter from Senators Feingold and Byrd sent to President Bush last week.
In addition, cuts in subsidies agreed to by the U.S. are also incompatible
with the new U.S. Farm Bill passed by Congress, and over-riding a
veto by President Bush.
developing nations not invited to participate in the exclusive
meetings in Geneva this past week are likely to continue strong opposition
to a deal in the midst of a global economic downturn and increasing
concerns over food security.
a time when many countries are seeking to reduce dependence on
in the U.S. and Europe, and as fears of a global recession loom, many
nations are questioning the development gains to be achieved from
The projected gains from the Doha Round offer developing countries
very little in potential gains. According to World Bank modeling, developing
country benefits would be just 16 percent of total world gains, or
0.16 per cent of GDP. This works out to less than a penny per day
in the developing world. Poverty reduction – which in itself would
limited – would reach only 2.5 million people. These projections
include many of the costs of implementing the Doha Round, which
to be as much as four times the projected gains.
Doha Round could also increase world prices for food. Since most developing
countries are net food importers, the recent increase in food prices
has led some developing country governments to reconsider food security
mechanisms such as tariffs and domestic subsidies, which the WTO seeks
to reduce. A number of countries have also imposed restrictions on exports,
in response to the food crisis.
just hasn’t been much to gain for developing countries in this round –
or for that matter, the majority of people even in the rich
CEPR Co-Director and economist, Mark Weisbrot. "The attempts by
countries to reduce policy space for developing countries in manufacturing
are widely seen as ‘kicking away the ladder’ that rich countries
like the United States used when they were developing countries.
whole process of subordinating national policy to special commercial interests
– whether in agriculture, telecommunications, pharmaceuticals (one of
the most powerful interests and gainers in the WTO), or the
– has gone way too far. Growth and development in most countries has been
hurt, and they are pushing back. In the United States, too, rising inequality
and now an economic downturn have provoked a backlash."
the negotiations, some developing nations promoted trade policies and
objectives at odds with the Doha Round’s objectives of opening developing
country markets, including commitments to food sovereignty and defending
policy space for alternative forms of economic development.
a written statement, Bolivian president Evo Morales said that, "The
have turned into a fight by developed countries to open markets in
developing countries to favor their big companies."
Kevin P. Gallagher and Timothy A. Wise, "Back to the Drawing
Board: No Basis
for Concluding the Doha Round of Negotiations." Research and Information
System for Developing Countries Issue Brief. No. 36, April 2008.
Sandra Polaski, "Winners and Losers: Impact of the Doha Round
Countries." Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, March 2006.
Dan Beeton, 202-239-1460
Center for Economic and Policy Research is an independent,
think tank that was established to promote democratic
debate on the most
important economic and social issues that affect
people’s lives. CEPR’s
Advisory Board of Economists includes Nobel
Laureate economists Robert Solow
and Joseph Stiglitz; Richard
Freeman, Professor of Economics at Harvard
University; and Eileen
Appelbaum, Professor and Director of the Center for
Women and Work
at Rutgers University
– – – – – – –
of WTO Doha Negotiations: A Blow to the U.S. – EU Hegemony
Collapse Paves a New Way Forward for Developing Countries
The Oakland Institute 29 juli 2008
CA: The collapse of the Doha Round of global trade talks in Geneva
today marks a victory for small farmers and workers in developing
countries whose governments stood up to the pressure and arm
twisting tactics of the U.S. and the EU over the last week.
India and China are being singled out for the collapse of talks,
they were not alone in standing firm. The Special Products (SP)/Special
Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) issues in agriculture which took
center stage, were concerns of about 100 developing countries represented
by various groups (G33, Africa, ACP, LDCs, SVEs). More important,
the negotiations failed because the U.S. and the EU want to
continue their domination of international trade of agricultural commodities.
Their responsibility is evident in their extreme market access
demands, combined with a lack of commitment to real development
objectives in the so called "Development" round.
rich nations, along with the International Financial Institutions such
as the WTO, World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, presented
the rapid conclusion of the Doha negotiations as a solution to
the current food price crisis. However, it is widely recognized that
opening of markets, removal of tariffs, and withdrawal of state intervention
in agriculture, has turned developing countries from net food
exporters to net food importers and burdened them with huge import
bills. This process which leaves the poor dependent on uncertain
and volatile global markets for their food supply, has wiped
out millions of livelihoods and placed nearly half the humanity at
the brink of hunger and starvation.
collapse of talks will surely be lamented upon as a missed opportunity
for the developing world, as it has been in the past. The truth
is that the so called "Development " Round marketed as a
of hunger and poverty, would have further perpetuated an unfair and
inequitable international trade system in the name of creating multilateral
collapse, however, presents new opportunities for the way forward. It
has resuscitated democracy where pressure from civil society organizations,
social movements, trade unions, and farmers organizations
could challenge and withstand "poorwashing" PR efforts, corporate
interests, and even political pressure on heads of governments
from President Bush and Prime Minister Brown.
has opened the door for developing countries to regain ownership of
their food and agricultural policies which should meet the needs of
their people and not the dictates of the IFIs. And
finally, it shows that policy makers can prioritize human rights such
as food, health, water, and education over trade agreements.
Oakland Institute <http://www.oaklandinstitute.org>
is a progressive policy think tank working to increase
public participation and to promote fair debate on
social, economic, and environmental policy issues.
Statement on Outcome of WTO talks
31 juli 2008
applauded the 2001 Doha WTO meeting promise to make the next round of
trade negotiations a “development round” that would ensure a more
fair and balanced trade regime for the poor and developing countries.
We strongly support an equitable system of multilateral trade rules,
particularly at this time of financial, food, energy and
environmental crises. But the failed policies of the WTO, World Bank
and IMF have led to these current crises, more poverty, and obscene
and growing gaps between the rich and the poor.
therefore join with many developing countries and civil society
activists in celebrating the defeat of the latest WTO package, which
was in reality a further gift to global corporate power, and would
have led to more poverty, more job losses in developing countries,
and accelerated environmental destruction.
important from PSI’s perspective, the corporate push for new GATS
commitments would mean even more privatization and deregulation in
essential public services such as water, health care and education.
PSI joined with EI and other civil society activists in drafting a
strong statement calling on the WTO negotiators to reject the
proposed GATS deal
The NAMA proposals, as the ITUC pointed out, would have led to major
job losses in the industrial sector of developing countries, and
denied them the same tools that rich countries like the US and the UK
used to achieve their wealth and power. In addition, the loss of
tariff revenues would have a devastating impact on access to quality
public services in the poorest developing countries.
agriculture, the final deal denied developing countries the policy
space to protect their small farmers in cases of major import surges
from rich countries. And they didn’t even get around to talking
about fairer rules for cotton farmers in Africa, driven off their
land by outrageous subsidies by wealthy countries such as the US.
should have been a round to draft fairer trade rules for developing
countries instead turned into an attempt by wealthy countries such as
the US and the EU to force developing countries to make unacceptable
concessions in industrial tariffs and services in order to get
minimal gains in agriculture.
recent process was profoundly undemocratic, with a small group of
countries in the inner sanctum and the others excluded and
marginalized, and with no time for meaningful analysis of complex
proposals with far-reaching impact on citizens’ lives. PSI
commends the developing countries that stood up to this strategy,
particularly Bolivia, Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. Attached is a
link to a powerful statement by Bolivian President Evo Morales on the
latest WTO round.
we salute the many trade unionists, farmers’ representatives, and
civil society activists who worked tirelessly in Geneva and national
capitals around the world to derail this unfair deal. PSI is a
member of the Our World is Not For Sale global network that played a
key role in this effort.
must now shift our focus to ensure that global corporate interests do
not achieve through bilateral and regional trade deals the gains they
were denied at the WTO, especially in the services area. We have
already seen this with the EPA’s forced by the EU on the poorest
countries in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific.
challenge now for PSI and all of us who want a more fair and balanced
global trading system, that works in the interest of small farmers,
workers, and the environment, that puts gender equality and human
rights ahead of corporate globalization, is to work together to build
that alternative vision.
must as well elect progressive political leaders who share those
goals. The world needs more cooperation, but the derailing of the
latest WTO deal is good news for those of us, including PSI, who
believe that progress in fighting global poverty and injustice and
meeting the minimal Millennium Development Goals will only come about
if we put quality public services and respect for the rights of all
workers to decent work at the heart of our policies. The WTO deal
failed to pass this most important test.
– – – – – –