Another important opportunity to do something good for the world, to improve the national image of the US, and thereby our national security, as well as our collective humanity has been squandered. Thanks to the administration of good ole georgie porgie.

Hope and Sadness as World Trade Talks Collapse
Jeffrey Allen
OneWorld US
Tue., Jul. 25, 2006

The Bush and Blair administrations, along with other global powers, have long touted trade as a central element in the fight against global poverty. Many international aid and development organizations agree, but disagree with the approach the world's wealthier nations have taken on the issue, arguing that the global trading system is set up largely to benefit the global "haves" at the expense of the "have nots."

As the primary forum where the rules of global trade are set, the World Trade Organization (WTO) can play a key role in either exacerbating or eliminating poverty. The latest negotiations centered largely around the subsidies wealthy countries offer their farmers, which allow them to undercut most farmers in poorer countries. This makes it virtually impossible for farmers in poorer countries to compete on international markets and often even on their home turf, thus decimating their hopes of earning a decent living through their crops.

Global aid groups have taken varying positions on Sunday's "collapse" of trade negotiations. Some had held out hopes that a poverty-reducing deal could be hammered out; others believed that wealthy countries would never agree to such a deal, and so the suspension of talks was the best possible outcome. Here are some of their reactions to the news.


From ActionAid:

"We must now look to the future for global trade--which remains a central element in the fight against poverty. There must now be root-and-branch reform of the WTO if it is to be a force for good in the world, rather than a forum for the rich to exploit the poor....

"ActionAid estimates that the EU and US still spend $100 billion per year on farm subsidies that undercut producers in poor countries. All rich countries promised was a re-packaging of existing domestic support rather than real cuts to the amount of money going to rich farmers and corporations....

"The WTO will still exist--it is only these particular negotiations that have been put on ice. But their suspension does offer an opportunity for root-and-branch reform that bans exclusive meetings and makes the organisation more inclusive and democratic."

[Read the whole Q & A: ''Where Next for World Trade?'']


From the International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI):

"The collapse of the WTO talks represents a huge setback for developing countries. The agricultural trade policies of the industrialized countries harm the economies of many developing nations, where millions of poor people are dependent on agriculture for food and income. But too much is at stake, especially for the world's small-scale farmers, to play the "blame game" and point fingers. Instead, we need to look forward and identify the opportunities that lay ahead....

"First, if free access of least-developed countries to wealthy-country markets is increased from 97 percent of imports to 100 percent, as proposed by the E.U., world income would increase by an additional $14 billion over the compromise scenario. Most important, about half of these additional gains would go to the poorest countries, increasing their income dramatically from $1 billion to $7 billion.

"Second, if the percentage of agricultural products defined as sensitive and special were reduced from 5 percent to 1 percent, as proposed by the U.S., world income would increase by an additional $7.3 billion over the compromise scenario. This would especially benefit developing countries where agriculture is an important source of employment and export earnings--most notably in middle-income countries.

"While the talks have collapsed for now, it is far from the end of the Doha Development round. The negotiations will continue, because ultimately reduction of agricultural protectionism and subsidies is in the interest of most countries, industrialized and developing alike."

[Read the whole statement from IFPRI.]


From the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development, CAFOD

"The Catholic aid agency is bitterly disappointed that talks have collapsed and said hopes for achieving a development outcome lie in tatters due to the failure of rich countries to put the longer term interests of developing countries and the global economy before the short-term and selfish interests of domestic lobby groups....

"The U.S. gave the rest of the world a choice between agreeing to unacceptable proposals or seeing the multilateral system collapse. This is no way to show global leadership or create an international trading system that meets the needs of all.

"The EU must also take responsibility for the talks reaching this sad point. They consistently put the needs of their own farmers and business above the needs of the poor....

"CAFOD partner Jack Jones Zulu from the Jesuit Centre for Theological Reflection (JCTR) in Zambia says: 'The collapse of the talks takes us backwards and will impact heavily on development in the South as we continue to trade under an oppressive system.'"

[Read the whole statement from CAFOD.]


From Oxfam America, the U.S. arm of the international aid group Oxfam:

"What distinguishes this failure, and makes it a tragedy according to the organization, is that these trade negotiations were launched for the express purpose of benefiting millions of poor people in developing countries around the world. The U.S. and other countries made this commitment at the launch of these negotiations in 2001 and although the trade deal was supposed to be finished by 2004, talks have continued on life support, deadline after missed deadline.

"'The once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to bring about an international trading system that is not rigged for the rich and hurting the poor has been put on ice,' said Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America. 'Five years of haggling and debating have ended in a sad display of political failure.'

"At the G8 meeting in St. Petersburg only a week ago, a spark of hope was lit when heads of state sent their trade ministers back to the table to negotiate, arming them with orders to be flexible. But today's impasse shows that it was not enough. The central hurdle was, and remains, the trade distorting agricultural subsidy programs maintained by rich countries like the U.S. and the agriculture tariffs maintained by the EU."

[Read the whole statement or visit Oxfam's ''Make Trade Fair'' site and see what you can do to help.]


From Christian Aid:
"Christian Aid said that the collapse of the trade talks removed the single most important weapon in the fight against global poverty....Poor countries desperately needed a fair trade deal so that they could grow out of poverty and not rely on hand outs. This tawdry squabbling at the rich world's high table has now put paid to that....

"How can this allegedly great trading organisation continue to function when it cannot perform the basics of what it was designed for? This is an extremely serious matter and I suspect we are back to the drawing board on trade--with all the damaging consequences that will have for poor countries."

[Read the whole statement from Christian Aid.]


From Friends of the Earth International:

"Campaigners from Friends of the Earth International today welcomed the collapse of the World Trade Organisation (WTO)’s trade negotiations. This means that there is now time to review and reconsider the multilateral trading system in its entirety.

"This will be welcome news to millions of people around the world who feared that a WTO deal would have further impoverished the world’s poorest people and caused irreparable damage to the environment. Developing countries, including India, also fear that a WTO deal would cause immense harm to millions of small and subsistence farmers....

"Ronnie Hall, Trade Campaigner at Friends of the Earth International added: 'The delay created by the failure of the Doha negotiations must be used to review past negotiations and analyse the flaws in the WTO system as a whole. It will allow us to reflect on how to develop multilateral governance systems that will genuinely promote fair and sustainable societies that benefit everyone.'"

[Read Friends of the Earth's complete statement here.]


From the Center for Global Development:

"The U.S. should not be on the defensive in these talks and it cannot take a leading role as long as it is. Washington should take the offensive and thereby shift the spotlight back to the EU's much higher agricultural support and to India’s failure to engage seriously. U.S. negotiators could still do this relatively easily...

"What happens next?

"If I'm right that fear of losses in this fall's mid-term elections is keeping the [Bush] administration from offering even minor concessions, then the trade talks are unlikely to get serious again until early 2007. But then France holds presidential elections in April and similar political constraints there could mean that serious negotiations are not revived until mid-2007....Sadly, unless something unexpected changes in the next few weeks, I think that the next chance for a pro-development multilateral trade deal won’t arise until after the U.S. presidential elections in 2008. I hope I'm wrong."

[Read the whole Q & A with Kimberly Elliott, author of ''Delivering on Doha: Farm Aid and the Poor.'']