[asia-apec 1386] Fw: India, the WTO and capitalist globalization

[APEC Monitoring Group]

-----Original Message-----
From: jaggi singh <tyrone_conn at hotmail.com>


>[A slightly different version of this article was to appear in the
>Alternatives supplement of HOUR magazine, a weekly newspaper published in
>Montreal.]
>
>India, the WTO and capitalist globalization
>by Jaggi Singh <jaggi at tao.ca>
>
>BHOPAL, INDIA, January 13, 2000 – Mike Moore, the shell-shocked
>Director-General of the World Trade Organization (WTO), is visiting India
>this week to meet with "top officials and business leaders". It’s all part
>of a concerted attempt at damage control after the victory of diverse
>peoples’ movements at the Battle of Seattle. According to a WTO envoy in
>Geneva, "Moore clearly sees India as a key to kick-starting the negotiation
>process." [Reuters, January 7, 2000].
>
>[In an interview with India Today Magazine [January 24, 2000], Moore spoke
>of the "liberating force of globalisation" and declared it "a reality, not
a
>policy." In Moore’s words, "The era of "isms" is over." He didn’t mention
>"capitalISM."]
>
>The official Indian government delegation to the Seattle WTO Ministerial
>meetings took a hard-line stance, at least publicly, against linking trade
>to labour and environmental standards. It was a position supported by all
>the major parliamentary factions, including the so-called left parties.
>Indeed, the government’s view not only echoes that of other governments in
>the "Third World", but is critically supported by the majority of
>progressive opponents of globalization in India and the rest of South Asia.
>
>It’s not that activists here are "soft" or relativistic about labour
>standards, the environment or human rights; nor are they naïve about whom
>the Indian government really represents. Rather, they see Western
>governments’ apparent discovery of universal human values and standards as
a
>ploy to ensure a competitive advantage for their own multinational
>companies. This view is widespread in countries like India, with its own
>historical context of colonialism, and contemporary context of
>neo-colonialism (with which the "holy trinity" of the WTO, International
>Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank (WB) are considered synonymous).
>
>According to Sanjay Mangala Gopal, the co-coordinator of the National
>Alliance of People’s Movements (NAPM, representing some 125 grassroots
>organizations): "We will define our own way of development and we are
>capable of doing it. Who are you to teach us about child labour or anything
>else?"
>
>Gopal insists that voices from the South -- where the majority of the
>world’s marginalized peoples live and survive – should provide the
>leadership to the international resistance to globalization (by definition,
>this includes those pockets of the Third World in the North, such as many
>indigenous and minority communities in North America). The analysis
>emanating from diverse sources in the Third World – not just the communists
>– revolves around the "Three Aunties."
>
>They’re not talking about a kindly trio of female relatives who pamper
their
>nephews and nieces, but an analysis of the WTO and related institutions
that
>is "anti-imperialist", "anti-colonial" and "anti-capitalist," phrases which
>are seemingly alien to most mainstream anti-globalization movements in the
>North. As Gopal puts it, "If you want real change, you have to abolish the
>capitalistic mode of development."
>
>In the forceful words of R. Geetha, a union and women’s rights activist
>based in Madras, "Who are they [the West] to impose conditions on
>third-world countries? People are starving here! Why the hell should they
>tell us what kind of economy we should have?"
>
>Meanwhile, Medha Patkar, a leading organizer of the Narmada Bachao Andolan
>(NBA, a more-than-decade long mass movement against destructive development
>and displacement in the Narmada River Valley of India) is not shy in
saying:
>"The ultimate goal is to say no to the WTO. We’re against the whole
>capitalist system."
>
>As for the clear emphasis by major Western labour, environmental and
>consumer organizations that the WTO needs to be reformed -- the "fair
trade"
>crowd -- activists here respond with varying degrees of diplomacy. In the
>carefully chosen words of Patkar, "The context of developed and developing
>countries is different. Those who are for reforms [will] realize over a
>period of time that these institutions [WB, IMF and WTO] are beyond
reform."
>
>In Geetha’s view, "I think the organized American working class is worried
>about American capital going to the Third World to exploit conditions
>there." She adds, "That’s an indirect fight."
>
>Meanwhile, one small independent Bombay monthly (which describes itself as
>"a monthly that challenges the ideas of the ruling classes") writes that
>"[t]he big labour unions and environmental groups" were those "whose
demands
>almost mirrored that of the US government." [The Voice of People Awakening,
>December 1999.]
>
>Geetha insists on having a "direct fight" against globalization, while
Gopal
>feels that many opponents of globalization "are looking at this issue with
>one eye," by ignoring, or downplaying, the voices of the South.
>
>While there is a strong basis of analytical unity by India’s numerous
>activist groups and movements, their tactics in action are diverse,
>reflective of the complex  -- cliched but true -- diversity of the
>subcontinent itself. The actions range from Gandhian-style non-violence to
>more militant forms of direct action (including property destruction) to
>armed struggle in certain rural pockets of the country. To a large extent
>the tactics are complementary, but it would be too idealistic to assert
>they’re not also at times at odds with each other. However, there is often
a
>strong sense of solidarity expressed between movements. It’s what Patkar
>describes as "different strategies, but same goals" which is to be
preferred
>to "same strategies, but different goals" (after all, right-wing fanatics
>also employ non-violence, property destruction or armed struggle as
>tactics).
>
>One group directly connected to the international anti-globalization
>movement is the KRRS, the Karnataka State Farmer’s Movement, representing
>thousands of peasant farmers in the southern state of Karnataka. In recent
>years, the KRRS has physically dismantled -- with iron bars -- a Cargill
>seed unit, trashed another office of the same multinational agribusiness,
>burned Monsanto’s field trials of biotech cotton, and trashed a Kentucky
>Fried Chicken outlet in Bangalore. [Their actions put in some perspective
>the recent debate about so-called "violence against property" in Seattle.]
>
>The KRRS has also been a major component of the People’s Global Action
>against "Free" Trade (PGA) movement, which unites peoples’ movements on
five
>continents (including the Zapatistas of southern Mexico and the Landless
>Peasants’ Movement (MST) of Brazil). The PGA’s "hallmarks" are a clear
>rejection of the WTO and similar institutions and agreements, a
>confrontational attitude, a call to non-violent disobedience, and
>decentralization and autonomy as organizing principles. The PGA also added
a
>fifth hallmark at their recent meeting in Bangalore which "rejects all
forms
>and systems of domination and discrimination including, but not limited to,
>patriarchy, racism and religious fundamentalism of all creeds."
>
>According to the recent PGA bulletin, "The "denunciation of "free" trade
>without an analysis of patriarchy, racism and processes of homogenization
is
>a basic element of the discourse of the right, and perfectly compatible
with
>simplistic explanations of complex realities, and with the personification
>of the effects of capitalism (such as conspiracy theories, anti-Semitism,
>etc.) that inevitably lead to fascism, witch-hunting and oppressive
>chauvinist traditionalism." In the Indian context, the new hallmark serves
>to distinguish progressive internationalist opponents of globalization,
like
>the KRRS, NAPM and NBA, from the Hindu Right who also employ much of the
>same rhetoric of the anti-globalization movement.
>
>And so, on November 30, while a state of emergency was declared in Seattle,
>and various militarized police forces proceeded to brutalize thousands of
>anti-WTO demonstrators, the KRRS organized it’s own demonstration in
>Bangalore. Several thousand farmers, along with their allies, issued a
"Quit
>India" notice to multinational food and biotech conglomerate, Monsanto.
>
>In the spirited words of one speaker at the rally: "We don't want to grow
>and feed poisonous food by using the genetically modified seeds of
Monsanto.
>It is our responsibility to protect our natural resources. I would like to
>tell the police to be prepared! We will attack Monsanto unless it quits
>India."
>
>The KRRS action on N30 is just one example of the spate of recent
>anti-globalization oriented protests on the subcontinent (although
>mobilizations against the WB and IMF started in earnest in the mid-1980s).
>For example, also on N30, activists of the NBA organized a 1000-strong
>non-violent procession in the Narmada Valley "protesting against the
>anti-human agreements and institutions that are pushing India and the rest
>of the world into the destructive process of capitalist globalisation."
>
>One week earlier, 300 adivasis (indigenous peoples) from the state of
Madhya
>Pradesh stormed the World Bank offices in Delhi. They proceeded to block
the
>building and cover it with posters, graffiti, cow shit and mud (yet again,
>more violence to property!). The protesters left a letter, which reads in
>part, "We fought against the British and we will fight against the new form
>of colonialism that you represent with all our might."
>
>Other adivasi activists are also currently engaged in a six-month long
>procession ("padyatra") from one end of Madhya Pradesh to the other in
order
>to highlight the ever-hastening process of land displacement in the name of
>globalization.
>
>Meanwhile, just two days ago, the non-violent protesters of the NBA
>converged on the Maheshwar dam (one part of the Narmada dam system) and
>proceeded to illegally occupy the dam site. About 4000 took over the site,
>while 1500 were eventually arrested by the police who responded by
attacking
>some demonstrators.
>
>The protests show no sign of ending, with the NAPM promising to disrupt
Bill
>Clinton’s anticipated visit to India in March. Their chosen slogans
include,
>"Go bank foreign exploiter Clinton!" The NAPM will stress "opposition to
>exploiting US rulers but friendship with all those Americans who support
>us."
>
>These examples don’t even account for other ongoing movements of indigenous
>persons, fisherfolk, farmers, labour activists, low caste and Dalit (former
>"untouchables") organizations, youth and individuals in all parts of India.
>More information on those resistance struggles, and India’s rush towards
>adopting free-market globalization, will be appearing in these pages in the
>upcoming months.
>
>[Jaggi Singh is a writer, independent journalist and political activist
>based in Montreal. He is currently writing and traveling in India. For more
>information, or a longer, in-depth version of this article, contact him by
>e-mail <jaggi at tao.ca> or by phone at 514-526-8946.]
>
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>