[asia-apec 36] APEC Comes to Aotearoa, by Aziz Choudry

[daga]

APEC TRADE MINISTERS MEETING AT CHRISTCHURCH
APEC Comes To Aotearoa 
by: Aziz Choudry 

It was fitting that bleak midwinter rain greeted the APEC Trade Ministers
Meeting in Christchurch from July 12 t0 14. In true APEC - and New Zealand
free market - fashion, the build up to the meeting was big on semantics and
rhetoric. Those seeking something of substance could be forgiven for feeling
that official statements from the meeting washed over them like the rain
that fell on the two hundred or so protesters who marched to a spirited and
fiery rally opposing APEC at the start of the conference.

One journalist wrote: "For all the fine words in the chairman's statement,
the APEC meeting was not a milestone in the journey towards liberalisation,
but largely a stepping stone in the build-up of preparation to the leaders'
meeting in Manila in November and the World Trade Organisation Ministerial
Meeting in Singapore in December." ("APEC decided to push hard for free
trade," Dominion, 7/18/96)

Billed as probably the most significant economic event that New Zealand had
held, and chaired by Trade Negotiations Minister (and New Zealand ABAC
representative) Philip Burdon, the meeting marked yet another opportunity
for the government to sell its neoliberal model of economic development
internationally. It was another chance to plea for more foreign investment
after the hard sell at the 1995 ADB and Commonwealth Heads of Government
Meetings. Local opponents of unbridled free trade and investment, such as
GATT Watchdog, which organised a very successful international forum
"Trading with Our Lives: The Human Cost of Free Trade," a citizens meeting
and protest action just prior to the Ministers Meeting have long drawn the
parallels between the extremist domestic market reforms of the past 12 years
and regional and global pushes for free trade. 

These reforms - structural adjustment policies - have left 1 in 5 New
Zealanders living in poverty and given us the dubious distinction of
"enjoying" the fastest growing gap between rich and poor in any OECD country
over the past 15 years. We are left with one of the most open economies in
the world - a deregulated labour market, a slash-and-burn approach to social
spending, and a lemming-like rush to privatise and sell off state-owned
assets to transnational buyers, as the country has been transformed into a
bargain basement investment playground for transnational corporations.

So it was no surprise to read that the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and Trade's current view is that: "[t]hrough APEC we are able to
encourage regional colleagues to follow the type of reforms undertaken in
New Zealand." Such sentiments were echoed by Prime Minister Jim Bolger in
his opening address. "There is no downside to opening up world trade. All
you have to do is to overcome political barriers, in other words,
attitudinal barriers." The hype and talking up of the supposed benefits of
liberalisation have taken on an air of desperation in New Zealand, as many
other economies still resist pressures to axe subsidies, tariffs and other
forms of protection which New Zealand's government proudly boasts of having
removed.

Normally the Trade Ministers Meeting would have met just prior to the
November Leaders Summit. The date was advanced to canvass ways of adding
further impetus to liberalise global trade and investment leading up to the
WTO ministerial meeting in Singapore. WTO director-general Renato Ruggiero
was in town for "informal" talks with APEC delegates and a lunchtime address
on the opening day of the meeting. His message was much the same as on his
March visit to this country. Part of his role involves panic-mongering and
instilling a sense of urgency in the proceedings. The gospel according to
Ruggiero is that globalisation is "unstoppable," but cannot be taken for
granted. The fires of hell await any who oppose this process or support
trading blocs. "At the end of the process we should have one big free trade
area. I think this is what was in the mind and the vision of the builders of
the multilateral system, which was based on non-discrimination," he opined.
Ruggiero hopes for an activist APEC caucus within the WTO to propel it
forward and prepare it for the next round of negotiations, taking it beyond
a mere review of implementation of the Uruguay Round.

Whether, when, and how the semantics translate into action in Manila or
Singapore remains to be seen. So do Burdon's claims that at Christchurch, a
"very positive and ambitious achievement" was reached, with APEC members
agreeing to settle their differences and form a united APEC push for further
global trade liberalisation to the Singapore WTO meeting. Cracks appeared in
the facade of collective unity. The last public session was delayed for an
hour as Malaysian, Korean and Indonesian delegates objected to the speed of
proposals to open up markets and others put forward on trade and the
environment, and trade and labour issues. One US delegate dryly observed
that "APEC is all about conflict diminishment rather than conflict resolution."

It was also hard to escape the impression that the actual APEC meeting was
overshadowed by bilateral meetings. All the other members sought meetings
with the USA. Japanese and US delegates discussed the issue of access to the
Japanese market for semiconductors. Japan asserts that foreign companies
already have 30% of the market, while the USA seeks more access. The issue
was left until the end of July to be resolved. US and Indonesian delegates
met over Indonesian plans to build a "national" car, the "Timor." The name
has supposedly nothing to do with the territory invaded and occupied by
Indonesia for over 20 years, but an acronym for Teknologi Industri Mobil
Rakyat. The USA, Japan and others have been outraged at the plan to grant
special tax concessions from the government enabling Tommy Suharto (the
President's son) to produce a car for sale at half the price of similar
cars. This issue is earmarked for supposed resolution by November. Australia
and New Zealand signed a food inspection pact that would allow most food
passing between the two countries to be subject to only to the same checking
as applied to local food.

At the APEC meeting itself, US trade representative Charlene Barshefsky
claimed that "widespread consensus among members" was reached that
information technology products was an area which deserved APEC action, and
that there would be active discussion on it prior to Singapore. It was
claimed that this consensus could enable work towards a global decrease in
tariffs on IT equipment and software. The USA tabled a plan to push for zero
tariffs, covering mainframes down to cellular phones. Barshefsky claimed
"extraordinary progress" on this "tariff-cutting exercise on the information
superhighway."

Ironically, a few days after both Barshefsky and Burdon had firmly called
for further commitments to trade liberalisation the USA announced a round of
dairy export subsidies into Asia! New Zealand officials see this move as
unfair and at odds with the American commitment to trade liberalisation and
the spirit of the Uruguay Round. On July 18, US Agriculture Secretary Dan
Glickman demanded "the elimination, not just the reduction, of all trade
distorting subsidies in agriculture" in the next round of global trade talks
scheduled to start in 1999. Once again, US actions showed a huge gap between
the free trade rhetoric which it so zealously expounds, and reality. The
move put Burdon's comments during the meeting about New Zealand's
disadvantages in the area of its natural benefit, agriculture, with dairy
and red meat products still facing huge tariffs in some nations, into sharp
relief. A major step towards progress in agriculture had been claimed in
Christchurch in approving a "substantive and balanced" work programme to
prepare for new negotiations, overcoming objections from Korea, which wanted
no further work to be done on this till after its 1997 presidential elections.

Commitment was made to further work on the Uruguay Round "built-in" agenda.
Beyond this, areas like improving access for industrial products and
discussion within the WTO on "transparency, openness and due process in
government procurement" were also signalled for attention. All 18 APEC
members had presented individual draft action plans on trade and investment
liberalisation in Cebu in May. At Christchurch, Philippines' Trade Secretary
Rizalino Navarro stated that he was pleasantly surprised by this, but that
some were "a little uneven." He did not single out any country but added
that some had been very forthright, while others lacked details and timeframe.

These plans, to be implemented in January 1997, have not been released
publicly. Washington, however, is known to have been reluctant to move far
and fast on free trade in election year when claims that free trade hurts US
jobs and interests are being raised in Congress. Since May, eight members
have produced revised plans. Most are believed to include commitments to
free up trade which outstrip WTO requirements. It will be another four
months before we learn what is in the action plans. APEC members agreed to
consult each other to improve the draft plans which they have tabled
privately. These will be discussed at another officials meeting in August.

The Chairman's statement emphasised "transparency, comparability and
dynamism" in revised plans. "We consider that it is now especially important
that regional and multilateral approaches to trade and investment
liberalisation support and reinforce each other," it said. Disappointment
was expressed that only one of the four areas in which the Uruguay Round
negotiations on services were extended - Movement of Natural Persons - had
been completed. The statement urged for progress in the areas of financial
services, and the need to maintain momentum in the work programme on the WTO
commitment on Trade and Environment. It also called on the WTO to define its
objectives more clearly, and to act with greater urgency.

Rizalino's aggressive boxing analogy to describe the path to further trade
liberalisation was in keeping with the flow of verbiage emanating from the
meeting. The first punch would happen in Manila, the second in Singapore,
and "hopefully, the knockout will happen to the opponents after that." The
Christchurch meeting broadly reaffirmed the APEC 2010/2020 timetable but did
not call for acceleration of these deadlines, nor did it seek to push the
WTO to adopt this timeframe. APEC support for China's entry to the WTO was
signalled, though US criticism over China's denial of market access to US
goods and other protectionist measures had characterised the lead-up to the
meeting. Barshefsky called for greater commitment in opening up China's
economy, while for her part Chinese foreign trade minister Madame Wu Yi said
that China had participated in the Uruguay Round negotiations and was
willing to implement the agreements as a developing country.

The lack of substance which characterised the 18-point statement from the
chair predictably flowed over into the free traders' attacks on critics of
APEC. For once, invectives from Philip Burdon were not so evident as he
enjoyed what was supposed to be the crowning point in his political career
and tried awkwardly to transform the meeting into an event of far greater
significance than its contents justified. Former Prime Minister and Labour
Labour Minister Mike Moore railed maniacally at the "grumpy, geriatric
communists," the "mutant strain of the left" who marched to oppose APEC.
"[T]he delegation should be made welcome, not abused by primitives who, if
they had their way, would throw New Zealand and our region into chaos and
depression," he said. Many New Zealanders know of Moore's shaky grip on
reality from his bizarre behaviour on election night in 1993, making victory
speeches even as Labour were defeated at the polls. And many are unimpressed
with the repetitious market mantras and lyrical waxings from politicians,
business representatives and much of the media which have long since
displaced any semblance of open debate about the desirability of trade and
investment liberalisation and market-driven models of development.

But it is clear that the government did not limit itself to mere abuse of
dissenting voices. A week after the APEC meeting, a story of a sinister
bungled break-in at the house of GATT Watchdog spokesperson Aziz Choudry on
13 July by two state intelligence agents, and subsequent police raids on his
house, and that of a speaker at the Trading With Our Lives forum, Dr. David
Small, supposedly for bomb-making equipment grabbed national media attention
- and continues to do so 10 days later as more and more evidence mounts to
support initial suspicions. The market myths that enshroud APEC are very
fragile. Obviously, abuse and ridicule are not the only weapons employed by
the New Zealand government to try to suppress debate and demonise and
discredit those who threaten to expose the APEC agenda. Dissent is met with
anti-democratic, covert state repression. Such is the "stability" demanded
by the free traders.

* More information may be obtained from GATT Watchdog at telefax number
(643) 3484763 or e-mail <gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz>.