[asia-apec 1834] Fast Track Passage Won't Defeat the Seattle Coalition

[Anuradha Mittal]

Today Fast Track passed by one vote (215 to 214). Thank you to all who 
participated in this fight. We were up against the most powerful 
corporate interests in the world. Once again, this vote confirms that 
Congress can be bought off by the highest bidder. However, our struggle 
continues as we build a peoples movement for a fair and just world.

Here's an excellent overview by Sarah Anderson and John Cavanagh of our 
movement's gains.  You can also view the final vote count at:
http://clerkweb.house.gov/cgi-bin/vote.exe?year=2001&rollnumber=481.
Thank you once again to all who joined this fight!!


FAST TRACK PASSAGE WON'T DEFEAT THE "SEATTLE COALITION"

by Sarah Anderson and John Cavanagh, Institute for Policy Studies

Today the U.S. House of Representatives barely approved fast track trade 
authority by a vote of 215 to 214, ending a long battle that pitted the 
Fortune 500 against a broad alliance of labor, environmental, religious, 
feminist, human rights, consumer, family farm and other activists. 

These diverse forces defeated fast track twice during the Clinton
Administration and managed to delay a vote numerous times this year
because of lack of support.  Now that fast track has been approved,
pro-free trade analysts would no doubt like to begin ringing the death
knell of the opposition forces.  To the contrary, there are several
reasons why this vote is only a small setback in the fight against
corporate globalization.  

1.  FREE TRADERS UNDERMINED THEIR LEGITIMACY WITH CHEAP SELL TACTICS

The K Street lobbyists, Capitol Hill horse traders, and White House
spin-meisters had to really hustle to pull this one out.  We will never
know how many millions of dollars in campaign contributions or pork
deals were needed to eke out a win.  When money wouldn't work, the
Administration diverted Colin Powell from the war effort to try to
persuade members of Congress with the ludicrous argument that fast track 
was needed to fight terrorism.  (Now that Bush has  fast track, can we 
expect Osama bin Laden to emerge from his cave waving a white flag?)  
All this last-minute manipulation makes it impossible for free traders 
to claim that fast track passed on merit. 

2.  JUST AS NAFTA PORK CREATED AN ANTI-FREE TRADE GROUNDSWELL, SO TOO
WILL THIS VOTE DOOM FUTURE DEALS

In 1993, NAFTA backers faced defeat in the House of Representatives even 
a week before the vote.  Then, Clinton started buying support with
promises of military contracts, research centers, and protections for
various commodities.  Although it succeeded in pushing the deal through, 
the strategy proved short-sighted.  The tainted nature of that vote, 
along with NAFTA's dismal record, paved the way for the defeat of fast 
track in 1997 and 1998 and for the recent wave of mass demonstrations 
against globalization that first erupted in Seattle in 1999.  This time 
around, we're likely to see similar fallout.  Even free traders such as 
Norman Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute warned in the days 
leading up to the vote that the last-minute arm-twisting could create 
such harsh feelings that Congress might reject future trade deals.  

3.  PLANNED TRADE DEALS FACE MANY OTHER OBSTACLES

What the House passed today was merely a procedural matter.  Free
traders still face high hurdles to obtain actual new deals.  The two
most significant on the horizon are:

FREE TRADE AREA OF THE AMERICAS:  The idea to expand NAFTA to 31 other
nations has few champions in the hemisphere.  The populist government of 
Venezuela refused to agree to the timetable for negotiations worked out 
in April in Quebec City, Canada.  The Brazilian government fears that it 
will lose its clout in South America by entering a hemispheric deal 
where it would be overshadowed by the United States.  For Mexico, the 
FTAA would mean losing the privileged access to the U.S. market it now 
enjoys under NAFTA.  Argentina is in economic meltdown and facing a
growing backlash against free market polices.  Small economies of the
Caribbean fear that the loss of tariff revenues would cripple their
public sectors.  Meanwhile, a Hemispheric Social Alliance has formed
that joins 50 million trade unionists and citizens networks across the
Americas in opposition to the FTAA.

WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION:  The Doha ministerial in early November
managed to produce an agreement to launch a new round of negotiations,
but the meeting hardly left the impression of rousing consensus.  France 
(one of the biggest global agricultural exporters) and India (the 
world's biggest democracy) were both threatening to pull out at the 11th 
hour.  Negotiators had to work past the deadline and through the night 
just to save face with an agreement that was so vague that countries on 
opposing sides of key issues could all claim victory.  These divisions 
are likely to flare up once again once the real deal-making begins-and 
next time negotiators may not be thousands of miles away from the 
nearest protestor.  

4.  THIS IS ONE SETBACK AMONG MANY VICTORIES

The growing movement to oppose corporate globalization is unprecedented
in the breadth of its composition and its demands and in its many
cross-border linkages.  While U.S. activists have suffered a blow on
fast track, there have been-and will continue to be-victories on many
other fronts:  

WTO:  At the recent WTO meeting, governments agreed to give poor
countries better access to discounts on drugs for AIDS and other major
killers.  Previously, U.S. AIDS activists had pressured pharmaceutical
firms and the U.S. government to back off challenges to South Africa's
and Brazil's programs to offer affordable AIDS treatment.  The U.S.
government had alleged that these programs violated WTO rules on
intellectual property rights.

INTERNATIONAL BANKRUPTCY MECHANISM:  Last week the IMF made the surprise 
announcement that it now supports an idea promoted for years by 
progressives to create an international bankruptcy mechanism for
developing countries facing debt crises.  While the details remain to be 
seen, the idea is to establish a procedure based on Chapter 11 of U.S. 
bankruptcy law that would protect governments from being sued by
creditors during negotiations over debt restructuring.  Progressives
have long argued that such a mechanism was needed to ensure that private 
investors are not bailed out while the poor bear the burden of economic 
crises.
  
MAI:  in 1998, international activists, particularly in Canada and
France, spearheaded the defeat of the Multilateral Agreement on
Investment.  Negotiated in the rich country club, the Organization of
Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris, the MAI would have
severely restricted the authority of governments to control the activity 
of foreign investors.  

DEBT:  since the late 1990s, several rich country governments have
responded to pressure from religious and other activists by canceling
debts owed to them by poor countries.  (The IMF and World Bank also
responded with a debt relief program, but this is only a partial victory 
since the institutions are demanding that debt relief be conditioned on 
onerous conditions and many impoverished countries, such as Haiti, are 
left out.)

CORPORATE CAMPAIGNS:  a number of groups have been successful in
pressuring specific companies to modify their behavior (e.g.  Rainforest 
Action Network's concessions from Home Depot to support sustainable 
forestry, certain companies pulling out of Burma over egregious human 
rights abuses).  In addition, students have organized on dozens of 
campuses to pressure their administrations to adopt a code of conduct 
against purchasing college gear that has been made in sweatshops.

WORLD BANK/IMF:  since the late 1990s, there have been victories in
individual countries against policies promoted by the World Bank and
IMF.  Workers, peasants and others have been successful in fighting
water privatization in Bolivia, gasoline price hikes in Nigeria, labor
law reforms in Korea, and telecommunications privatization in Costa
Rica.  In the United States, Congress passed legislation in 2000
requiring U.S. representatives to the World Bank and IMF to oppose
projects that include "user fees" on access to primary health care and
education.  These fees have been associated with lower school enrollment 
and reduced access to health care.  

GLOBAL FINANCIAL CASINO:  promoters of a tax on speculative capital
flows (known as a "Tobin Tax") have succeeded in obtaining support from
some European nations and Canada.  In September 2001, the European
Commission agreed to study the feasibility of such a tax. 

Contacts:  	
John Cavanagh, IPS Director, 202 234-9382x224, jcavanagh at igc.org
Sarah Anderson, IPS Fellow, 202 234-9382x227, saraha at igc.org

The Institute for Policy Studies is a multi-issue research and education 
center founded in Washington, DC in 1963.  See:  www.ips-dc.org for more 
information on globalization and other topics.
-- 

For more information, to order Food First Books,or to join our member-supported organization, go to:
http://www.foodfirst.org.  
Or send your tax-deductible check to:
Food First, 398 60th St. Oakland, CA 94618

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: asia-apec at jca.ax.apc.org

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxil2.aVxCnz
Or send an email to: fianusa-news-unsubscribe at igc.topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================