From daga at HK.Super.NET Wed Apr 2 11:42:00 1997 From: daga at HK.Super.NET (daga) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 10:42:00 +0800 (HKT) Subject: [asia-apec 387] IPS: Asia-Pacific: Growth Won't Be Green Under APEC Free Trade Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970402103505.097f7198@is1.hk.super.net> /* Written 10:13 PM Mar 29, 1997 by newsdesk in igc:apec.general */ /* ---------- "IPS: ASIA-PACIFIC: Growth Won't Be" ---------- */ Copyright 1997 InterPress Service, all rights reserved. Worldwide distribution via the APC networks. *** 20-Mar-97 *** Title: ASIA-PACIFIC: Growth Won't Be Green Under APEC Free Trade By Johanna Son MANILA, Mar 20 (IPS) - Free trade in the Asia-Pacific is likely to cause even greater damage to the enviornment as the economic growth of region's economies accelerates. East Asia's economic power houses have enriched themselves at a heavy cost to nature, and it has long been evident that such growth is not sustainable. The Bangkok-based Focus On The Global South, in a report for the 'Rio Plus Five' conference on the environment that ended Wednesday in Brazil, said free trade conflicts with long-term environmental concerns. ''The rapid industrialisation of the Asia-Pacific region has produced an environmental situation that can only be described as bordering on crisis,'' said the report written by Walden Bello and Nicola Bullar of Focus. Yet the governments of 18 Asia-Pacific economies are pursuing efforts to institutionalise free trade within the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. Formed in 1989, APEC spans North and Latin America to South- east Asia and Pacific and aims to tear down all barriers to trade and investment by the year 2020. Its members are Australia, China, Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, Brunei, Mexico, Chile, the US, Canada, New Zealand, Hong Kong and Taiwan. APEC was meant to be a loose consultative forum aimed at discussing not only freeing up trade but pursuing technical and development cooperation. But pressures from the industrialised economies are pushing APEC to focus more on its free trade goal, despite doubts by developing member economies. In the process the environment is not getting enough attention, despite rhetoric among APEC members about integrating ''sustainable development'' concerns in their discussions, said the report called 'APEC And The Environment: A Report To The Rio +Five Conference'. Focus concludes that APEC is an unlikely vehicle for nature- friendly growth, or for reconciling its aims of freer trade and investment with environmental protection.. ''The body's (APEC) commitment to preserving the environment in the Asia-Pacific is largely rhetorical and has not been backed up by effective programmes,'' it said. Most of East Asia's tiger economies have paid a high price for their industrialisation in the last three decades, making their cities extreme health hazards. South Korea's industrialisation is largely responsible for filthy air in Seoul, which has one of the world's highest sulphur dioxide levels. Focus cited studies showing that cancer rates have doubled in Taiwan since 1960 and that children in Bangkok have among the highest levels of lead in blood due to air pollution. A large number of Asia's rivers are degraded or dead, even as its capitals race to build the highest skyscrapers and the biggest shopping malls. In China, up to 30 percent of the agricultural land are degraded, lost to erosion or converted into urban real estate since the 1950s. Deforestation remains a concern in many South-east Asian countries, and this year's 'State of the World's Forests' report says tropical Asia-Oceania still has the highest rates for forest loss at nearly one percent a year. And as Asia strives to catch with the industrialised economies of the world, it is also producing more greenhouse gases. The region's carbon dioxide emissions are expected to rise from the current 25 percent of global production to 36 percent by 2025. Some of these concerns--from the liveability of cities to the state of the marine environment--were discussed in meetings leading up the 1996 APEC summit in the Philippines and endorsed by President Fidel Ramos, who was APEC chair last year. At one point, Ramos said: ''We finally stand on the threshold of unprecedented growth and change. That threshold--unless we watch our step and look when we cross--could very well be the brink of environmental disaster.'' The Manila Summit was dominated by trade concerns, but on a rhetorical level at least expressed hopes that growth could be sustainable. However, these were only ''nice words'' and a subsequent blue print to spur APEC free trade revealed a gap between talk and action. Free trade remains the main driving force of APEC, but the organisation does not have a fixed forum for discussing the environmental impact of trade treaties. Focus traces Asia's environmental malady to its pursuit of the newly-industrialised country (NIC) development model, which was followed by the tiger economies and ''places no investment in pollution control and externalises environmental costs''. Finally, Focus argues that APEC's potential for looking beyond free trade and investment is limited by the strong influence wielded by economic powers like the United States--for which the top priority is opening up Asian markets. Says the report: ''The failure of the North to come up with even a fraction of the cash to bankroll Agenda 21, which it agreed to in Rio five years ago, should forewarn us about entertaining any illusions about an APEC environmental Marshall Plan for the Asia-Pacific''. (END/IPS/AP-TR/JS/KD/97) Origin: New Delhi/ASIA-PACIFIC/ ---- [c] 1997, InterPress Third World News Agency (IPS) All rights reserved May not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service outside of the APC networks, without specific permission from IPS. This limitation includes distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media and broadcast. For information about cross- posting, send a message to . For information about print or broadcast reproduction please contact the IPS coordinator at . From mario_m at HK.Super.NET Wed Apr 2 11:43:25 1997 From: mario_m at HK.Super.NET (mario mapanao) Date: Wed, 2 Apr 1997 10:43:25 +0800 (HKT) Subject: [asia-apec 388] Launching of NO to APEC campaign Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970402103630.1faf3ab2@is1.hk.super.net> CARRY FORWARD THE STRUGGLE AGAINST IMPERIALIST GLOBALIZATION! A statement of solidarity on the occasion of the launching of the B.C. NO TO APEC Campaign 20 March 1997 We, members of the Network Opposed to Anti-People Economic Control (NO TO APEC) in Montreal, Ottawa and Toronto, extend our warm and militant greetings as you launch today the NO TO APEC campaign in Vancouver, British Columbia. Across Canada today, militant anti-imperialist organiza- tions, groups and individuals are laying the ground for a massive protest movement against the APEC Leaders' Summit to be held in Vancouver, B.C. this coming November. In the coming months, NO TO APEC campaigns will be launched in other cities of the coun- try, to culminate in a main activity - People's Conference Against Imperialist Globalization: Continuing the Resistance - as well as coordinated events in November. The NO TO APEC campaign, in fact, is a national campaign spearheaded by organizations of Filipino workers, women and youth, Philippine solidarity and support formations composed of Filipinos, Canadians and people of other nationalities, joined by Canadian and other non-Filipino groups and organizations united on the issue of opposition to, not just the APEC, but more so, imperialist globalization. The Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is nothing but an expanded version of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). It is another ploy by the ringleaders of global monopo- ly capital to deepen and make permanent structural adjustment in Canada and other parts of the Asia-Pacific, just as it further distorts the already maldeveloped economies and tramples on the fundamental rights of the peoples of the oppressed countries like the Philippines. On the one hand, the phenomenon of regional trading blocs, like the APEC and the NAFTA, is reflective of the need of the global capitalist powers (the G-7 countries mainly) to consolidate themselves in the face of an ever-worsening crisis of their own making i.e., the crisis of overproduction. On the other hand, it underscores the intensifying struggle for the redivision of the world among these giants. The APEC in particu- lar, is US imperialism's bid to strengthen and further expand its sphere of influence against the Japanese and European economic offensives in the region. We are well aware of the impact of such schemes on the affected peoples. As the APEC hastens implementation of the GATT/WTO agenda of trade and investment liberalization, deregula- tion and privatization, jobs are lost, the incidence of poverty in both "developed" imperialist and maldeveloped, oppressed countries goes up, the environment is destroyed to make way for mega-projects which sap the countries of the much-needed resourc- es for its own peoples. In Canada under the NAFTA and structural adjustment, the real unemployment rate as of October 1996 was close to 17% (ECEJ, December 1996). This rate adds some "half a million discouraged workers who have dropped out of the labour force because they do not believe there are any jobs to be found, and another 642,000 who are only working part-time because they cannot find fulltime jobs, to the 1.52 million Canadians officially counted as looking for work. And yet the Chretien government shells out millions of dollars just for the APEC Leaders' Summit in Vancouver this November. The quality of jobs has also been going down in Canada. There are now more part-time low paying jobs, with more and more people employed in temporary jobs, including workers hired for short-term work through temp agencies and workers directly hired by firms for short-term contracts. Women, youth and people of colour comprise the greater number of workers in non-standard jobs which have average incomes of less than one-half of those of standard employment and few to no benefits. In the Philippines, the KMU (May First Movement) puts the real unemployment figure at around 38%. Under President General Ramos's Philippines 2000, there is the "no union, no strike" rule especially in the export processing zones and subsidiaries of US, Japanese and European multinational firms. There are the market- oriented hiring schemes like temporary hiring, job-sharing, labour contracting - all designed to reduce wages, remove job security and undermine unions. Farming and indigenous communities are constantly threatened by displacement as a result of develop- ment projects and the push to build export processing zones and tourism development projects. Beneath the high-tech development and so-called technologi- cal advances ostensibly brought about by "globalization," the question remains: all these for whom? It is therefore illusory to expect the APEC leaders to take the interests of the people seriously and, at their annual summits, to squarely address the root issues that make for poverty, unemployment, national dis- crimination and oppression, and environmental destruction. No amount of sidebar agreements, made within the framework of the ruling world order, can effect real change in favour of the working peoples. Institutions such as the WTO, and agreements such as the APEC and the NAFTA are hatched by the big imperialist bourgeoisie precisely to bail itself out of the contradictions of the world capitalist order. It is only the militant and determined unity of anti-imperi- alist forces the world over that can overturn this ruling system in decay. We have only to look at the struggles of the peoples in the oppressed countries and in the capitalist centres as well. We take inspiration from our own people's struggle for national freedom and democracy in the Philippines where, as the APEC leaders met in Manila last year, a total of 176 foreign and local delegates and 178 observers attended the People's Conference Against Imperialist Globalization sponsored by BAYAN (New Patri- otic Alliance). The delegates came from labour, women's groups, farmers' organizations, academics and other groups and individu- als from 30 countries in Asia, Africa, the Americas and Europe. Almost 400 hundred vehicles and about 5,000 men and women partic- ipated directly in the People's Caravan against APEC. Mass actions were held in 14 provinces across the Philippines. There were also anti-APEC/anti-globalization activities in other parts of the world. Other chapters of BAYAN International held their own protest actions. Let us therefore continue to wage this campaign against imperialist globalization and help forge the strongest possible unity of anti-imperialist and democratic forces on this side of the globe. CAST AWAY ILLUSIONS! JUNK APEC! CARRY FORWARD THE STRUGGLE AGAINST IMPERIALIST GLOBALIZATION! ---------------------------------------------------------------- THE NETWORK OPPOSED TO ANTI-PEOPLE ECONOMIC CONTROL (NO TO APEC) Montreal: Centre for Philippine Concerns (CPC) PINAY Montreal Coalition of Filipino Students (MCFS) Student Christian Movement - McGill University (SCM-McGill) Ottawa: Philippines-Ottawa Solidarity and Support Effort (POSSE) Ottawa-Carleton CUPE Council Toronto: Philippine Solidarity Group-Toronto (PSG-Toronto) Katipunan ng Manggagawang Kababaihan-Toronto (KMK-Toronto) Progressive Filipinos Overseas United for National Democracy (PROFOUND) From pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr Fri Apr 4 15:25:58 1997 From: pspd at soback.kornet.nm.kr (YoonKyong Lee) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 15:25:58 +0900 (KST) Subject: [asia-apec 389] Arrest of a Buddhist Monk Message-ID: HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE IN S. KOREA ARREST OF A BUDDHIST MONK Principle Facts of the Arrest and the Trial of the Venerable Jin Kwan (Legal name, Yong Mo Park) a Buddhist monk of South Korea Arrest: October 1, 1996 Trial: March 21, 1997 first trial. April 4, second trial Charges: "suspicion of espionage" "meeting and communicating with a North Korean" * * * * * * * * * * * Human Rights Issues: 1. Political imprisonment: this Buddhist monk met with a North Korean in Beijing and talked about the desires of long-term pro-Communist prisoners, and about possible cooperation among Buddhists in South and North Korea. For these acts he is being charged with crimes of espionage! He is being persecuted because of the South Korean government's policy of maintaining a monopoly on efforts toward unification. At the preliminary trial he testified that members of the National Security Agency beat him and held him sleepless during their interrogations. He has been held prisoner all these months even though he is a well known public figure, a member of the Buddhist Central Committee. There is strong reason to believe that the espionage charges are politically motivated. 2. The human rights of long-term pro-North Korean prisoners in S. Korea. Long-term pro-communist prisoners who have refused to change their ideology want to be returned to N. Korea but are being refused. * * * * * * * * * * * * Background of the case The charges all stem from Jin Kwan's relationship with Kang Byong Yun, a resident of Canada, whom he has known since 1991, when they met at the Pomminjok ('Whole Nation') Convention of that year. Kang has been engaged in Korean unification activities in Canada and the U.S., and has been pro-North Korea in his stance. The charges against Kang Byong Yun, Jin Kwan, and a few others were prepared by the National Security Agency of South Korea and turned over to the prosecutors in the case. Account given by Jin Kwan himself On September 11, 1995 Jin Kwan received an invitation from Kang Byong Yun to visit Canada. After meeting in Canada Jin Kwan accompanied Kang to Beijing on a vacation trip. Also, Jin Kwan believed he could meet Park Tae Ho of the N. Korean Buddhist Federation. However, in Beijing Kang took him to the N. Korean embassy, without giving advance notice of their destination. Jin Kwan did not enter the embassy, but later met with a North Korean at a different location and discussed with that person the possibility of the return to N. Korea of some long-term pro-North prisoners of S. Korea, and also suggested the possibility of S. Korea-N. Korea cooperation in celibrating the 1996 feast of Buddha's Birthday. He received no clear response to these suggestions. There was certainly no conversation which could be construed as "state secrets" or "national security". Strange aspects of the case Kang is a very outspoken person, not at all secretive about his visits to N. Korea. He does not hold an important position among pro-North Korean residents of Toronto. He is therefore not suited to play the role of an undercover agent for N. Korea. This weakens the basis for making this case one of espionage. Kang phoned Jin Kwan in September, 1996 and said he would be at Kimpo airport (the international airport of Seoul) on Sept. 14. Jin Kwan met him there. There was no other exchange except that Kang said he was going to N., Korea and would return on Sept. 24th. According to the National Security Agency, they arrested Kang on Sept 24th. There is some suspicion that he may have gone to the National Security Agency on his own. Reactions to Jin Kwan's arrest Five hundred Buddhist monks of S. Korea have signed a petition (Nov. 15, 1996) demanding his release. Amnesty International, Catholic Human Rights Committee of Korea, and oths arrest to S. Korean authorities, or have released public statements of protest. Results witnesses implies that he intends to build a case of espionage against Jin Kwan. * * * * * * * From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Wed Apr 9 08:36:30 1997 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Wed, 09 Apr 1997 11:36:30 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 390] Tour the Global Economy Bus tour Message-ID: GATT Watchdog PO Box 1905 Otautahi (Christchurch) 8015 Aotearoa (New Zealand) MEDIA RELEASE 9 April 1997 For Immediate Use "Tour The Global Economy Without Leaving Christchurch" Bus Tour Marks Trade Anniversary Christchurch opponents of free trade and the transnational corporate takeover of New Zealand are joining forces this Saturday (12th April) to commemorate the 3rd anniversary of the signing of the Final Act of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in an unusual way. Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) and GATT Watchdog have organised a guided bus tour with a difference. Entitled "Tour The Global Economy (Without Leaving Christchurch)", the tour will take passengers to the unsung sights of Christchurch - selected examples of who really does own this city and country. "This bus tour aims to show that the 'global economy' is very much on our doorstep - and points to the frightening extent to which Christchurch is literally in the grip of corporate control. April 12th is an appropriate day for such an event. The New Zealand government was one of more than 100 governments which signed the GATT, but the Uruguay Round was driven by the interests of transnational corporations," says GATT Watchdog spokesperson Aziz Choudry. "With the conclusion of the Uruguay Round of the GATT in Marrakesh in April 1994, transnational corporations secured a freedom charter enabling them to move goods and investments however and wherever they wish, free from public interference and accountability, binding future governments to maintain deregulated free-trade regimes, backed up by the newly-created World Trade Organisation which can impose sanctions or other punitive trade measures on countries which fail to comply with its rulings," says Mr Choudry. "People's eyes often tend to glaze over when the words GATT, free trade and transnational corporations are mentioned. At first glance, they all seem to refer to distant global issues with little relevance to ordinary people's lives. But free trade and the concentration of control over the world's economies and resources in the hands of a few corporations affects everyone". "GATT promotes a model of market driven development which has already led to a widening of the gap between rich and poor, the erosion of democracy, national, political and economic independence, and massive environmental damage. It essentially means Rogernomics on a global scale forever." "When the Uruguay Round concluded, the government had promised that 20,000 - 30,000 new jobs might be created over the next decade as a result of GATT, but between 1988 and 1993 over 40,000 jobs were lost in the manufacturing sector alone, many because of tariff reductions. A comprehensive April 1995 World Bank study of the Uruguay Round concluded that member governments had greatly exaggerated the extent of agricultural liberalisation which the deal would produce. The study lowered the estimated income gains for Australia and New Zealand from 0.6% of each country's GDP to under 0.1%. The report suggested that farm protection might even increase under the deal. But New Zealand is wide open to overseas investors seeking lower overheads, cheap natural resources and power, cheap non-union labour, and higher profits". "New Zealand has effectively become an investment playground for transnational corporations, 500 of which control some two-thirds of world trade. This bus tour will give local people a chance to see that many of the world's most powerful transnational corporations have offices, investments and interests right here in Christchurch. It is they, not ordinary people, who stand to benefit most from the commitments of successive governments to liberalise trade and investment." The bus tour leaves from Victoria Square at 1 pm on Saturday 12 April and will last approximately 4 hours. For further comment please contact: Aziz Choudry ph: 03 3662803 (w); 03 3484763 (h) or Murray Horton ph: 03 3663988 From gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz Thu Apr 24 12:48:52 1997 From: gattwd at corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 15:48:52 +1200 Subject: [asia-apec 391] Re: NZ government slammed over OECD investment treaty In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <6Z7N6D4w165w@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz> Path: corso!gattwd From: gattwd@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive Subject: NZ government slammed over OECD investment treaty Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Apr 97 15:35:51 +1200 Reply-To: gattwd@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz (Gatt Watchdog) Organization: PlaNet Gaia Otautahi GATT Watchdog PO Box 1905 Otautahi/Christchurch Aotearoa/New Zealand Email: gattwd@corso.ch.planet.gen.nz CAFCA PO Box 2258 Christchurch Email: cafca@chch.planet.org.nz MEDIA RELEASE 24/4/97 For Immediate Use Government secrecy over OECD international investment treaty slammed. Fair trade coalition GATT Watchdog and Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) are urging the government to withdraw from further highly secretive negotiations on a Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) which seeks to do away with barriers for foreign investors among the OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) nations. The groups challenge the government to enter into genuine public consultation on this issue immediately. The MAI represents a radical new economic treaty to set new limits on how governments can regulate investment and would override national legislation. CAFCA and GATT Watchdog have obtained a copy of the leaked draft agreement. In letters to the Prime Minister, International Trade Minister Lockwood Smith, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Don McKinnon, Deputy Prime Minister and Treasurer Winston Peters, and Finance Minister Bill Birch, GATT Watchdog questions the mandate of the government to enter into such negotiations without any public debate and challenges the secrecy surrounding the proposed agreement. It points out that the Clerk of the House of Representatives, David McGee described the way in which New Zealand has entered into international agreements such as the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) as "fundamentally undemocratic". An October 1996 Department of Justice briefing paper to the Minister of Justice raised similar concerns. "Most New Zealanders are oblivious of the fact that New Zealand officials at the OECD are participating in such a far-reaching agreement. The OECD has no mandate to be negotiating such a treaty in the first place. And what mandate do Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade or Treasury officials have to participate in this process in such a secretive manner?" says Aziz Choudry, GATT Watchdog spokesperson. "The European Union, having failed thus far to get such an investment treaty created within the World Trade Organisation (WTO), and the USA are the main proponents of the MAI. This is in essence a freedom charter for transnational corporations, giving them absolute rights without a shred of responsibility. It goes far beyond the investment liberalisation measures contained in the GATT Uruguay Round. It will strip away the powers of governments to regulate investment, and outlaw discrimination against foreign investors. It would facilitate even easier movement of assets from country to country, encouraging countries to compete in a race to the bottom in environmental, health and safety standards and labour costs to attract investors. It would allow any corporation with a grievance against regulatory mechanisms the right to sue local or national governments before an international tribunal with a binding outcome. And it would have many more implications, limiting other rights of national governments to ensure that investment serves local economic and social needs. If New Zealand signs this agreement it would remove any remaining protections over the economy in areas like fisheries and rural land ownership for example. And how does the government square its Treaty of Waitangi obligations with its negotiations on the MAI?" he said. "The OECD had hoped to get negotiations completed by May, but this deadline has now been moved back several months. It is high time that the Government fronted up to the peoples of New Zealand rather than presenting Parliament with a fait accompli in a few months time as it has done in the past in relation to other international treaties it has entered into. WTO Director General Renato Ruggiero has characterised the MAI negotiations as "writing the constitution of a single global economy..." Governments will be reduced to the status of mere filing clerks, ratifiers and rubber stamps in the service of transnational capital. We urgently need genuine public debate about the contents of the draft investment agreement, New Zealand's position in these negotiations, and the implications for New Zealand and New Zealanders of the MAI. Without this the government cannot claim to be democratic." "The question of foreign investment was a major election issue last year. And rightly so. The right of peoples to decide how, where and to what extent foreign investors may enter their economy is fundamental to any society which wants to chart its own course of development and hang on to its political and economic sovereignty. That right is now under renewed threat with this OECD proposed agreement" concludes Mr Choudry. (Copy of letter to MPs is attached) A copy of the draft MAI text can be viewed on the following website: http//www.citizen.org/gtw Copies are available from CAFCA, P O Box 2258, Christchurch cost $15 for copying and postage For further comment ph Aziz Choudry (GATT Watchdog) (03) 3662803 (w) 3484763 (h) or Murray Horton (CAFCA) (03) 3663988 (Letter to Ministers) 23 April 1997 Dear Dr Smith, We understand that Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and Treasury officials are currently involved in negotiating an OECD multilateral investment agreement. We are deeply concerned that the government is taking part in such negotiations when it has not consulted with the public about either the contents of the draft agreement on investment nor the implications of such an agreement being concluded on New Zealand and New Zealanders. Essentially we believe that the OECD proposal reads like a freedom charter for the transnational corporations which dominate the world economy. The removal of a nation's right to determine how, where and to what extent foreign investments may be made severely compromises economic and political sovereignty. The Clerk of the House of Representatives, Mr David McGee raised concerns last year about the "fundamentally undemocratic" way in which New Zealand has entered into international agreements such as the GATT. He points out that there "is little or no opportunity for public input while a treaty is under consideration" and that Parliamentary debate tends to be bypassed altogether in such cases. Similarly, an October 1996 briefing paper to the Minister of Justice by the Justice Department suggests: "where treaties are likely to change our domestic law, presenting the House with a concluded draft treaty for acceptance or rejection may not be sufficient. Where a treaty has the potential to affect the rights of New Zealand persons, parliamentary, and hence public, participation would be more effective if the House provided guidance during the formative drafting stages". We seriously question the mandate of the New Zealand government to enter into such negotiations, let alone bind itself to an agreement of this kind. We believe that it is outrageous for the New Zealand government to enter into such an agreement without there being public debate, and a public mandate to do so. We call on the government to withdraw from further negotiations until genuine public consultation on this matter has taken place. We would welcome your response as to the nature of New Zealand's position at the OECD negotiations on this agreement and an explanation as to the high level of secrecy which surrounds it. Yours sincerely, Aziz Choudry - GATT Watchdog ===================================================================== GATT Watchdog, Box 1905, Otautahi (Christchurch) 8015, Aotearoa (New Zealand). Ph 64 3 3662803 Fax 64 3 3484763 ===================================================================== From moonlight at igc.apc.org Thu Apr 24 21:56:30 1997 From: moonlight at igc.apc.org (moonlight@igc.apc.org) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 05:56:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [asia-apec 392] Letter to Clinton--May 2 Action alert Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970424055531.362f0bba@pop.igc.org> NATIONAL ACTION ALERT Please contact your Congressional representative and encourage him/her to sign on to the following letter (by April 28th) that is being circulated by Congressman Sam Farr from California. Also please sign and send a copy of the letter to President Clinton. The Honorable William J. Clinton President The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, D.C. 20500 Dear Mr. President: In light of your upcoming visit to Mexico, we wish to express our concern about the status of the peace talks in Mexico and cases of increasing violence in the Mexican state of Chiapas. After three years, the conflict in Chiapas remains unresolved. Dialogue between the government and the Zapatista National Liberation Army (EZLN) has been on hold. We are concerned that, as this deadlock continues, the people in Chiapas may lose faith in their ability to achieve change through nonviolent means. Since the impasse in talks began, rural violence and killings in Chiapas have increased. Human rights groups report that more than 100 people have been killed in recent months, primarily by paramilitary groups with links to the ruling party. Human rights organizations have been attacked or threatened while seeking to investigate human rights abuses, and they report that much of this violence happens either with the support or acquiescence of the police or the military. We understand that you seek to strengthen ties between the two countries. However, we believe that bilateral issues of primary concern to our country =96 such as economies, migration, and anti-narcotic efforts =96 need to be considered and discussed within a broader discussion of human rights, the conflict in Chiapas, and the role of the Mexican military in civilian affairs. If these are not dealt with constructively, these matters may become destabilizing factors in Mexico, with grave potential impact on bilateral relations. We urge you, in your meetings with President Ernesto Zedillo, to encourage him to ensure that the peace negotiations in Chiapas are successfully concluded. We believed that the achievement of a just peace in Chiapas is essential for future stability in Mexico and the long-term health and viability of U.S. - Mexican relations. Sincerely, From moonlight at igc.apc.org Thu Apr 24 21:56:21 1997 From: moonlight at igc.apc.org (moonlight@igc.apc.org) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 05:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [asia-apec 393] Sample Media letter--May 2 Action Alert Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970424055525.362f56bc@pop.igc.org> NATIONAL ACTION ALERT SAMPLE LETTER TO MEDIA Please send letters, faxes, or emails to the following people to call for them to broaden their coverage of US-Mexico relations and Clinton's state visit to Mexico to include investigations and reports on the uses of US military aid to Mexico and possible U.S. involvement in the low-intensity war against the indigenous communities of Chiapas. New York Times Executive Editor Joseph Lelyveld (212)556-1234 (212)556-7389fx 229 West 43rd St. NY NY 10036 Washington Post Exec. Editor Leonard Downie 1150 15th Street NW NY NY 20071 (202)334-6000ph (202)334-5547 fx ABC President of News Roone Arledge 77 West 66th Street New York, NY 10023 (212)456-7777 fx (212)887-6850fx CBS President of News Eric Ober 51 West, 52nd Street New York, NY 10019 (212)975-4321ph (212)975-4226fx NBC President of News Andrew Lack 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10112 (212)664-4444ph Dear National Media representative: With President Clinton's upcoming state visit to Mexico, there is an opportunity to provide the general public comprehensive analysis of US-Mexico relations. Currently the media coverage and press releases issued by both countries' administrations have focused on efforts to strengthen the economic, political and military ties between the two countries, and questions related to NAFTA, expanding bilateral cooperation to combat drug trafficking, bank and stock market reform and immigration. However these issues and US-Mexico policy need to be evaluated and reported within the context of Mexico's historic violation of human and indigenous rights, the failure of the Mexican government to respect and fulfill the dialogue for peace in Chiapas, and the growing denunciations regarding Mexico's military presence in civilian institutions and communities. The United States is Mexico's largest arms supplier, and therefore it is clear that the Zedillo government can not carry out any military plans without its access to the US aid. Despite this obvious necessity for government accountability, there is a serious lack of public debate and monitoring regarding U.S. military aid to Mexico. Although a growing number of local and alternative media outlets are reporting on the possible use of U.S. aid to fight indigenous communities rather than the drug war, national media coverage has focused principally on the impact of perceived failures and problems within Mexico on US economic policy, including immigration, NAFTA and the war on drugs. Despite the fact that events in Mexico have profound implications for the U.S., and therefore should be presented in the domestic rather than international news, the growing threat of civil war in southern Mexico receives far less coverage than developments in Europe and the Middle East. Instead broader coverage of Mexico and the low-intensity war in Chiapas is left to the Spanish-language media, a policy which leaves a large segment of the U.S., primarily white, society with an incomplete and biased view of the importance of events in Mexico. This lack of public debate bordering on a political and media cover-up as well as the free flow of aid have encouraged the Mexican government to believe that it can use its armed forces with impunity against the civil society and indigenous communities. Thus the US, through its provision of military aid, becomes an accomplice to any Mexican government action against the indigenous communities or the civil society. This is particularly critical as the possibility of open combat in southeastern Mexico grows more ominous. President Zedillo's rejection of the agreements on indigenous rights and culture, which his negotiators signed with the Zapatista rebels last February in Chiapas, has dealt a severe blow to the peace process. Over 80% of the Zapatista communities are surrounded or occupied by Mexican military camps, and nearly all of them have helicopter landing strips. President Zedillo appears to be preparing to go to war, and we are deeply concerned that U.S. financial and military interests may be supporting his actions. For these reasons we ask that during and after President's state visit to Mexico, you exercise your responsibility as a free press to provide the American public with comprehensive investigative reports on US Mexico relations and possible US involvement in the low-intensity war in Chiapas. The American people need to have access to and understand the extent of US involvement in Mexico and its implications for our future. This is particularly important as any plan by the Mexican government to conduct a surgical strike or wage a direct offensive against the Zapatistas using US military equipment and technology will only trigger a larger conflict throughout Mexico, create widespread destabilizing economic and social unrest and exacerbate migration pressures on the US-Mexico border. The American public must hold its public officials accountable for the US-Mexico policies and the national media has the responsibility to promote and assist that public debate. To do otherwise is to be complicit in the violence and bloodshed that is growing in Chiapas. We look forward to your response to these urgent concerns. Sincerely, From moonlight at igc.apc.org Thu Apr 24 14:50:02 1997 From: moonlight at igc.apc.org (moonlight@igc.apc.org) Date: Wed, 23 Apr 1997 22:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [asia-apec 394] Jornada opinion column Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970423224909.2fa764a8@pop.igc.org> La Jornada Tuesday April 22, 1997 Marco Rascon Translated to English by attorney Robin Yeamans, San Jose, CA Waiting for Clinton To Elena and Eduardo Gale In the American discussion about Mexico, Clinton represents an alternative to those who propose in the United States to provoke a crisis in our country: the bailout with conditions is more effective to impose their interests. Clinton comes sure because he is considered "a friend" that, at least, on two occasions has saved us as compared to the accusations of the Congress (loans of 50 billion dollars and certification). The deferred visit of the one who bailed us out will be the opportunity so that Zedillo, Gurria, senators and deputies of the PRI and of the PAN thank him for his support and receive the "indignation" and posturing from Mexico faced with the topic of drug trafficking, migration and trade. This will throw a smokescreen over the real content of the visit after the happening of the decertification and certification; the American accusations of connections between government officials and drug traffic and the entry into force of the anti-immigrant laws. In the meeting of May 5, 6 and 7, the public agenda of concerns, which Chancellor Gurria will express, will not be the central one; the central one will be that which is prepared by Luis Tellez and Thomas McLarty, a Clinton advisor who is found in Mexico. On that agenda, covered by a curtain of declarations by Foreign Relations, will be addressed strategic topics of interest to America, more than Mexican concerns; it is a visit to garner "support" and to revindicate the policy of the bailout that Clinton has defended in the United States and to demonstrate that that country has a increased influence in Mexican matters. Clinton already considers Mexico part of his internal policy and comes to consolidate that vision. Drug traffic will not be the topic of interest, since the United States controls the flows within its own country; what is strategic in the binational relationship is the form of the control and its connection to what is political, economic and military. In the case of the conditioned certification, what is fundamental are the conditions in order for Clinton to demonstrate to Congress that the US earns more by the route of certification than by decertification, since decertification is converted into a mere act of hegemonistic insanity of Congress, since it does not oblige anyone to do anything. On the contrary, certification means imposing conditions in exchange for washing consciences. We will see Gurria tear his clothes in self-abasement (rasgarse las vestiduras) against the decertification but accepting, as a national victory, the certification and the conditions that it carries with it: armed DEA agents in Mexican territory, delivery of the control of information on flights with drug, and the integration of Mexico into an armed multinational force. Other points of interest for the author of the bailout (the good, in contrast to the bad Congress) are the revitalization of the McLane-Ocampo agreements in relationship to the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, converted again into a strategic zone of great interest to the US both as to what is economic as well as what is military. But a special topic will be the bailout of Mexico toward its/his democracy plan. Earlier arrived resources originating from the National Fund for Democracy (NED, initials in English) directed, by agreement of the American Congress, to encourage democracy and intended for various NGO's that are moved within projects regarding free elections. Other recent resources seek to establish an active critical front against Cuba from Mexico, making the deliberate Clintonian transition for Mexico the base of a proamerican transition for Cuba. Clinton comes to collect the result of all these efforts that would seek to legitimate a new majority in a Congress which is not PRI, but equally defending of US interests and of the policy of integration. Already Ambassador James Jones has declared that a victory of the opposition (of the PAN, of course) would not be a problem for US-Mexico relationships, something which would mean for Clinton more recognition after the economic rescue: that of the democracy in our soil, thus defeating supporters in the United States of the creation of a crisis for change in Mexico. Mr. Clinton comes to vindicate himself as mediator of the internal crisis; in the crisis through which navigates Zedillo between the pressure of his party and that of his rescuer. In this tenor, Jones prepares the agenda of interviews between Clinton and the Mexican political parties, each one of which will have a different meaning. They will be days of coups and surprises, certainly. From moonlight at igc.apc.org Thu Apr 24 21:56:16 1997 From: moonlight at igc.apc.org (moonlight@igc.apc.org) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 05:56:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [asia-apec 395] May 2 Action Alert Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970424055517.362f8cd6@pop.igc.org> NATIONAL ACTION ALERT- No More Manifest Destiny for Mexico Friday May 2nd On May 5th, the anniversary of Mexico's victory that ended France's reign of the country, President Clinton will arrive for his first state visit in Mexico. His two day trip has been billed as an effort to expand bilateral economic ties under NAFTA as well as strengthen collaboration against drug trafficking and immigration. But these appear to be the 21st century versions of the age-old process of the economic and military domination of Mexico by foreign interests and the ruling Mexican elite. It is against this new Manifest Destiny plan, which has been couched in terms of NAFTA and the war on drugs, that the Zapatistas rose up and have resisted since January 1994. They declared NAFTA a death sentence for the indigenous communities of Mexico, and as a result they have been the target of a low-intensity war, waged by the Mexican government and supplied and advised by the U.S, under the guise of combating drug trafficking. Now this low-intensity war threatens to become a full-scale civil war in southern Mexico. In northern Chiapas during the past two months more than 20 men, women and children from four villages have been killed, and dozens more have been injured, imprisoned, tortured or disappeared. Thousands have been dislocated during armed confrontations between Zapatista communities, paramilitary groups, police and the military. The victims include two girls 13 and 15 years old, both of whom were kidnapped for 10 days, tortured and raped before being killed. In addition the state attorney general allegedly was present and issued the orders for the helicopter gunfire attack against unarmed Zapatista community members. A caravan by 20,000 people and various high-level delegations including the Mexican Catholic Conference, COCOPA, CONAI, and human rights observers have sounded alarms about the tinder-box nature of Chiapas, as the army encroaches upon, occupies and blockades more and more communities. This blockade is so tight that Zapatista leadership was unable to meet recently with the delegation of bishops from the National Mexican Catholic Conference because of the risk to the Zapatista commandantes. As a result, the Zapatistas have issued several interviews and communiques warning that they will resist, not retreat, if provoked by the Mexican military. Out of profound concern about the implications of Clinton's plans, the Ad-hoc Committee for Peace with Dignity in Chiapas met with various White House, State Department and Congressional officials on March 18th and 27th. They denounced U.S. economic and military policies that are promoting the war in Chiapas, and requested a full public investigation, disclosure and debate of the amounts, types, costs and uses of US military aid to Mexico. They specifically called for the suspension of the aid, particularly the provision of the remaining 53 Huey helicopters to Mexico and the $34 million proposed for Mexican aid in the 1998 budget until there is significant progress in the peace process in Chiapas. They also pushed for the inclusion of indigenous and human rights and the peace process in Chiapas as parameters for the discussions between the two presidents regarding US-Mexico relations. To date there has been no response from officials regarding the Committee's requests. Instead the use of U.S. military aid to militarize indigenous communities and repress the democratic movements of the Mexican civil society, rather than combat drugs, is still virtually invisible, especially in the mainstream national media. Despite Mexico's critical importance to the US as a neighboring country and a principal trading partner, the growing threat of civil war in southern Mexico and its profound implications for the US receives far less coverage in the English language mass media than developments in Europe and the Middle East. Broader coverage of Mexico and the low-intensity war in Chiapas is left to the Spanish-language media, a policy which leaves a large segment of the U.S., primarily white, society with an incomplete and biased view of the importance of events in Mexico. To denounce this apparent cover-up and collusion by political leaders of both countries as well as the national media, the National Commission for Democracy in Mexico calls for a day of action on May 2nd. On the eve of the celebrations of Mexico's independence from France as well as the arrival of Clinton and the rest of the Manifest Destiny entourage, we ask all people of conscience to join us in: 1) conducting protests at the Mexican consulates to denounce the two governments' collaboration in the death and devastation of indigenous communities in Chiapas and throughout Mexico 2) faxing, phoning or emailing President Clinton to demand a response to and action on the Ad-hoc Committee's requests for a full investigation and suspension of US military aid to Mexico and the inclusion of progress in the peace process in Chiapas as a parameter for bilateral agreements. 3) sending faxes, email and letters to CBS, ABC, NBC, the New York Times, and Washington Post to call for them to broaden their coverage of US-Mexico relations and Clinton's state visit to Mexico to include investigations and reports on the uses of US military aid to Mexico and possible U.S. involvement in the low-intensity war against the indigenous communities of Chiapas. 4) contacting your Congressional representative and encouraging him or her to sign onto the letter to President Clinton that is being circulated by Congressman Sam Farr of California Given the ongoing support received from the US, the Mexican government believes that it can use its armed forces with impunity against the civil society and indigenous communities, especially the Zapatistas. If the questions of human and indigenous rights and the peace process in Chiapas are not addressed, Clinton's visit basically will serve to sanction Zedillo's policies which have promoted political repression and the militarization of Mexico, and are leading the country towards a genocidal war. The United States' relations with Mexico can not become another Vietnam. We must demand that US-Mexico policies be based on respect for the sovereignty and rights of the Mexican people in their struggle for a transition to democracy. For more information, contact; NCDM, 2001 Montana St, #B El Paso, Texas 79903 Phone/fax: 915-532-8382 Email: moonlight@igc.apc.org From moonlight at igc.apc.org Fri Apr 25 22:03:14 1997 From: moonlight at igc.apc.org (moonlight@igc.apc.org) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 06:03:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [asia-apec 396] Zapatista Women Artesian Exhibit Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970425060045.3e17b668@pop.igc.org> PRESS RELEASE FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Carol Hayman 477-3099 Eduardo Vera 454-8097 WEAVING THE STRUGGLE OF THE ZAPATISTA WOMEN EXHIBIT AND SALE OF TEXTILES HILL COUNTRY WEAVERS 1701 South Congress Avenue, Austin Friday, April 25, 7-9 pm slide presentation and sale Saturday, April 26, 10 am-6 pm sale of textiles All proceeds will be return to the community of weavers. Comite de Solidaridad con Chiapas y Mexico PO Box 906 Austin, TX 78767 (512) 454-8097 E-mail evera@igc.apc.org Eight people from Austin and five more from Los Angeles, California, Recine, Wisconsin, Cleveland, Ohio, Tucson, Arizona, and Minnessota plus support from El Paso, Texas, Sacramento, California and Oregon brought together a delegation of 13 people and more than $5,000 dollars to support the Zapatista women in Chiapas and their attempts to create weavers' cooperatives as a form of resistance against the low intensity war they face everyday. The Mexican Federal Army continues to terrorize the Indigenous people of Chiapas limiting their movement for planting, harvesting and moving their goods to the market. Indigenous women face harrassment and rape by the soldiers of the Federal Army. As a response, women are organizing weavers' cooperatives as an economic defense of their communities and they have asked our help in creating and finding markets for their textile goods. The delegation brought back textiles in support of the weavers cooperatives. Austin is privileged to viewing these exquisite works of human labor and struggle. Check other sites for women in Chiapas and other information: http://www.igc.org/ncdm/index.html http://www.igc.org/ncdm/sisters.htm http://www.igc.org/ncdm/women.html http://spin.com.mx/~floresu/FZLN/ http://www.peak.org/~joshua/fzln/ http://www.ezln.org/ In Austin to help continue the support of the Women's Weaving Cooperative contact Carol Hayman at 477-3099, e-mail chayman@austin.cc.tx.us. For more information on the next Delegation to Chiapas, Somos Indios CD, and local Zapatista work, contact the Committee in Solidarity with Chiapas and Mexico at (512) 454-8097 or 'evera@igc.apc.org.' The Comite de Solidaridad con Chiapas y Mexico meets Saturdays, 4: PM at Resistencia Bookstore, 2210 B South 1st St. For weekly news on Chiapas, Mexico and Border Issues tune to Radio Tierra y Libertad, a weekly program produced by the Comite, and aired on KOOP Radio, 91.7 FM Sundays at 4 PM. Wednesdays, Pesadilla, Musica y Cultura, 11 am to 1 pm on KOOP Radio, 91.7 FM ======================================= Comite de Solidaridad con Chiapas y Mexico PO Box 906 Austin, Texas, 78767 (512) 454-8097 Email: evera@igc.apc.org ========================================