[asia-apec 257] APEC '93 WATCH "ECO" ISSUE 4 Part 1, Seattle, WA

[Northwest FOE Office]

NOTE: Sorry, APEC '93 Issue 4 bounced back from asia-apec because it was
just over 18k.  I've split it into Part 1 and Part 2.


Part 1 of 2

Seattle, WA                                   November 20, 1993
XXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX                APEC WATCH ECO

FINAL EDITION                                       No. 4
      
---------------------------------------------------------

ECO has been published by non-governmental groups at major
international conferences since the Stockholm Environmental
Conference in 1972.  This issue is produced cooperatively by
groups attending the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
Meeting in Seattle, Washington, USA, in November, 1993.
-------

NEWSFLASH:  APEC SECRETARIAT TO MEET NON-GOVERNMENTAL REPS

Non-governmental organizations concerned with labor, environment,
and human rights will meet today with the APEC Secretariat.  We
hope that this meeting will be a model for future annual
ministerial meetings.

CONTENTS:

WASTE TRADE     page 1
APEC EDITORIAL  page 2
INDONESIA       page 3
Taiga           page 4
Gremlin         page 5
Japan Reacts    page 5
Invitation      page 6

Greenpeace Reports. . .
WASTE TRADE TARGET: ASIA

Asia is currently being targeted by the world's waste traders as
an open market for unwanted wastes from industrialized countries.

Without strict national laws, decrees, and policies or a regional
agreement prohibiting all imports of hazardous wastes, Asia is in
danger of becoming a dumping ground for vast quantities and
several dangerous types of wastes.

For example, between January and June 1993, the United States
exported more than 19,000 tons of wastes and toxic products to
Asia, including plastic wastes, scrap metal waste, and spent
lead-acid automotive batteries.  These shipments included at
least 2,000 tons of banned or unregistered pesticides to Asia.

Toxic trades have offered Asian countries countless poisons;
among the commonly offered toxic wastes and products:  asbestos,
incinerator ash, tire wastes, industrial chemical wastes,
municipal wastes, slag from metallurgical processes, leaded
gasoline, banned an never-registered pesticides, useless
pharmaceutical, plastic wastes, polychorinated biphenyls, lead
acid battery wastes, sewage sludges and used paints to name but a
few.  All of these materials contain or can produce upon
incineration, extremely toxic and harmful substances such as
heavy metals, dioxin and furans.

Almost every country in Asia has been targeted as a waste
dumpsite for wastes from industrialized countries.  In the first
six months of 1993 along, Greenpeace has documented more than 440
waste export schemes from the United States to Asian countries. 
However, this number is clearly just the tip of the iceberg of
the number of schemes from all industrialized countries to the
region.

Additionally, the number of waste shipments to Asia as a whole,
as well as to certain countries, is increasing.  For example, for
the first six months of 1992 and 1993, the actual number of waste
shipments from the United States to Asian countries increased
from 422 to 440 shipments.

As Asian countries are alerted to the environmental, political,
and social menace posed by waste imports, Asian countries are
developing national legislation to halt the waste trade pirates. 
For example, in 1992, the Indonesian Government banned waste
plastic imports.  Greenpeace discovered that in 1992, 90% of all
hazardous waste export schemes from industrialized to developing
countries came under the guise of "recycling," recovery,"
"further use," or even as "humanitarian aid"  Thoughout Asia,
waste traders invariably present their proposals as "development
plans" that will bering jobs, roads, energy, hospitals, housing
and money.  The proposals never mention the "development plan's"
environmental and health implications.
------


EDITORIAL:

After the last trade minister has made the last trade, and the
last Head of State has motorcaded out to the airport, one thing
is clear.  APEC will never by the same.  Ambassador Bodde refers
to APEC as a baby.  Two new babies, Mexico and Papua New Guinea
have been added to the nursery.  But APEC needs to be potty-
trained.  A good does of citizen activism, environmental
journalism (the APEC WATCH ECO newsletter) and one-on-one
lobbying ha proven that democracy is a good thing and future APEC
meetings should accommodate it.
Saturday, while Heads of State congregate on Blake Island State
Park in the middle of Puget Sound, an estuary with sick fish and
closed shellfish beds, we urge President Clinton to take a
chapter from Section 101(c) of the Federal Clean Water Act. 
Passed in 1972, Congress mandated the President, working through
the Secretary of State to use all possible means to achieve zero
discharge of pollutants into waters of the countries, not just
our own.  A declaration that Pacific Rim trade will not be
conducted at the expense of the Pacific Ocean and its bays and
estuaries would be a powerful signal that the era of "Trade Uber
Alles" has come to an end.
Log, cigarette and waste exports are obvious examples of how
'trade balances' and 'economies' are built on the hidden impacts
to the Pacific Rim's citizens and environment.
Finally, above all else, APEC must not pursue a closure of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade round by next month in the
absence of an integration of environmental, human rights and
labor issues into the GATT.  We can not afford to let APEC stand
for "A PERMANENT ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS."
------

WASTE: A DEADLY BUSINESS
(The following article was written by WALHI, Friends of the Earth
Indonesia)

A government decree issued in Indonesia in 1992 banned plastic
waste imports.  Since then more than 5,000 tonnes of waste have
been illegally imported. 

Indonesia has not resolved its own domestic waste problem yet
waste imports from America, Europe, Japan and Australia are
arriving at Indonesian ports under the guise of western
countries' recycling programmes.  However, only 60% of the
imported waste can be recycled:  the remaining 40% is
unrecyclable and at least 10% is contaminated by toxic or
hazardous waste.
WALHI/FoE Indonesia, the Jakarta Social Institute and scavenger
groups are concerned by the impact of waste imports not only bon
the environment and public health, but also on the incomes of
2000,000 local scavengers, which have decreased by 50 to 75
percent since Indonesia began to import waste in 1988.  The irony
is that scavengers provide Indonesian cities with free recycling
services which keep the environment clean and save the cities
millions of dollars annually in waste disposal costs.

The recycling potential of the waste industry makes it an
extremely lucrative business.  Waste imports are paid substantial
sums to receive materials for recycling in Indonesia which are
considered waste by the exporting countries. US $40 and $60 per
tonne for toxic and hazardous imports are not uncommon sums,
whereas countries in Europe demand $160 to $100 pr tonne to
receive such waste.  From these figures it is easy to see where
the waste ends up.

Controversy surrounding the waste imports intensified after the
Government scheduled an auction to disperse the 5,000 tonnes of
waste imported illegally since the ban went into  effect. 
However, just one week before the event, President Suharto
ordered that the imported waste be destroyed.  Government
officials were not interested in pursing alternatives to the
President's directives,  and balked at WALHI's suggestion that
the wastes be returned to their countries of origin.

WALHI has not so far met with success with appeals to embassies
requesting that governments take full responsibility for the
waste imports originating int heir respective countries and cover
the costs of shipping the waste back.

Indonesian NGOs and scavenger communities continue their efforts
to re-export waste to its country of origin, and are
simultaneously working to put an end to the water trade to
Indonesia.  WALHI is launching a letter-writing campaign to
Indonesian President Suharto urging the government to enforce the
existing ban on plastic imports and to return the illegal
imports. This should send a clear message that developing
countries in the Southern hemisphere and eastern Europe are not
dumping grounds.
-----

End of Part 1, ISSUE #4.