>From: "aiaif" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>Published in 'Proletarian Era', (Vol. 33 No. 12, February 1,2000) the
>English organ of Socialist Unity Centre of India
>
>Events in Seattle And After
>
>The ministerial conference of WTO ended in a fiasco in Seattle. There was
>confusion both within and outside the venue of the conference. This
>conference was marked by violent demonstrations by an odd combination of
>protesters with widely varying motives. But the protesters were all united
>against the WTO.
>All ports in the USA were paralyzed by strikes called by the dockworkers in
>protest against the WTO. The protests spilled over to the other side of
>the Atlantic. A massive protest demonstration was organized in London
>against the privatization of railways leading to a big accident in London
>suburb because of slackening of safety norms with profit motive. The
>protesters converged in Seattle with a rare show of solidarity. They
>included those with genuine anti-imperialist leanings and they stood by the
>people of the less developed countries in their struggle against WTO and
>the powerful multinational corporations. There were groups among the
>protesters whose objective was to wrest concessions within the ambit of WTO
>and there were spokesmen from the protectionist ''trade'' unions of the USA
>like AFL (American Federation of Labour), COL (Congress of Labour) which
>wanted measures to protect the US industries from competition from the less
>developed countries.
>The leadership of these trade unions is controlled by the agents of the US
>ruling class having still a big support from the workers. This leadership
>is trying to divert the attention of the workers by making use of their
>genuine sense of job insecurity and redundancy from the real cause i.e. the
>US capitalist system. This leadership is showing to them that the cause of
>their redundancy lies in cheap labour, child labour and women labour of the
>countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This leadership is trying to
>create a division between the workers of the developed and of the
>developing capitalist countries.
>But despite this, one aspect was common among them all, and that is, an
>acute sense of job insecurity as a result of the implementation of the WTO
>measures. The attempts to create a rift between the workers of the
>developed and developing capitalist countries notwithstanding, the spirit
>of international solidarity was marked in the speeches of labour leaders of
>different countries. The Head of the US Longshoremen's Union said in his
>address : ''there will be no business as usual today. (We are)
>demonstrating to the corporate CEOs (Chief Executive Officers) that the
>global economy will not run without the consent of the workers
>everywhere... The interest of the working people transcends international
>boundaries.'' This spirit of international solidarity was repeated by a
>South African labour leader when he said : "Freedom is under a new threat
>today, the threat of corporate greed... a new form of terrorism led by the
>WTO, a new form of colonialism led by globalization...(They are) attempting
>to throw a new wedge between workers of the developed and workers of the
>developing countries." (Source : EPW, 17-24 Dec'99)
>Militant protest by working people
>More than 50,000 protesters marched, sang, shouted slogans and made
>speeches. The International was sung in three languages. The police of
>the Clinton administration pounced upon the protesters with ferocity. They
>used batons, bullets, grenades, tear gas shells, irritant chemical weapons
>and unconventional gases medically affecting the demonstrators. The
>arrested persons were beaten and tortured in jails by throwing all canons
>of human rights to the wind. Finally, emergency was clamped in Seattle.
>Cause of collapse of Seattle talks
>While this was the scene outside the venue of the conference, the picture
>inside was equally stormy. The Seattle Conference was convened to finalize
>the agenda for the next round of talk, euphemistically called the
>millennium round, to be held in Geneva. The 1 of 9Uruguay Round of talks,
>concluded in Marakash, had many unresolved issues, on which the Uruguay
>Round itself mandated further negotiation. These include critical issues
>like agriculture, financial services, maritime services and infotech
>services. Besides, some of the existing agreements need to be further
>reviewed in the light of the experience in implementing them during the
>last five years. The developed capitalist-imperialist countries have not
>opened up their markets to the extent they are required to though the less
>developed capitalist countries have opened up their markets to a large
>extent and fulfilled the commitment of WTO provisions to a large measure.
>Many developed capitalist-imperialist countries have failed to implement
>the Special and Differential (S&D) treatment clause as incorporated in the
>GATT agreement. The third world countries were opposing a new round of talk
>with new agenda, and insisting on discussions on the built-in agenda of the
>Uruguay Round as also on the issues like protectionist measures adopted by
>the developed capitalist countries and their failure to implement S&D
>treatment clause. These countries insisted that these questions should be
>addressed first before venturing into a new round of negotiations with
>newer agenda. The developed capitalist-imperialist countries, on the other
>hand, insisted that the talks should go beyond the immediate agenda and
>venture into new pastures with agenda like labour and environment
>standards, multilateral agreement on investment (MAI), e-commerce, etc.
>Because, they wanted the programme of liberalization to be carried further
>and force open fresh areas of the market of the developing countries. The
>developed and the developing capitalist countries took an unbending stand
>on their respective position, and thus there was a stalemate in Seattle.
>Again, on the question of opening up of the agricultural sector, EU and
>Japan, having a highly protected agriculture which is given large export
>subsidies and extremely restricted import of agricultural goods, strongly
>resisted the pressure of the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, joined by
>some other less developed capitalist countries, in opening up their market.
> The EU and Japan raised the question of hidden subsidies to the extent of
>40% of the cost of agricultural products in the USA. This issue also
>caused an impasse in Seattle.
>Again Japan, joined by countries like India, South Korea, Taiwan and
>others, raised the question of imposition of anti-dumping laws by the USA
>and the EU. This question also could not be resolved in Seattle. All
>these irreconcilable contradiction between the developed and the developing
>capitalist countries, the EU and Japan versus the USA, Canada, Australia,
>New Zealand and Japan versus the USA and the EU, created a complete
>deadlock in Seattle, and thus the conference which started without a formal
>opening, ended without a formal declaration. The US Trade Secretary,
>Charlene Barshefsky, called a press conference to reveal the collapse of
>the talks.
>The collapse of the Seattle talks must be viewed in the background of the
>severe economic crisis confronting world capitalism today. After the fall
>of the socialist system the bourgeois ideologues cherished the fond hope
>that the crisis of capitalism can be contained by WTO arrangement. But the
>inexorable law of history asserts and reasserts itself. Every attempt to
>stave off the crisis leads to deeper crisis. WTO measures are nothing but
>an attempt to limit the internal conflict among the advanced capitalist
>countries to a manageable extent and to build up a single global capitalist
>market at the cost of the developing countries. But that this attempt is
>bound to fail in the background of the severe crisis of world capitalism
>was clearly analyzed at the Cuttack Plenum of our party in 1994 and it was
>conclusively stated: "...world capitalism-imperialism has plunged into an
>unprecedented economic crisis. It will be naive to hope that the present
>WTO arrangement will cure this cancerous disease." The breakdown of
>Seattle talks proves to the hilt the correctness of the analysis of our
>party at the Cuttack Plenum.
>Severe economic crisis of world capitalism
>Now let us have a glimpse into the nature of crisis of world capitalism.
>In the developed capitalist countries like the USA, EU and Japan, the
>aggressive use of hi-tech has rendered a huge workforce surplus. Moreover,
>because of the law of maximum profit operating in the capitalist economy,
>mass production is replaced by high valued production in lesser volumes
>catering to the needs of the corporate sectors. This also renders a huge
>workforce surplus.
>The introduction of hi-tech in production process means less manpower and
>production is based on capital intensive industries having dearer capital.
>Thus the more the introduction of hi-tech the more the capital cost. So
>the market for the finished product having high cost of production becomes
>more uncertain because of uncertainty in the rate of return. So the
>necessity of grabbing market anyhow becomes all the more intense.
>Moreover, surplus capital is not invested in productive purpose but it is
>diverted to speculation. Again, the MNCs of these countries are investing
>in third world countries to exploit cheap labour and cheap raw material
>there. Thus the workers of the metropolitan capitalist countries are
>finding jobs elusive. The US MNCs are doing business by basing their
>productive units in other countries. 36% of the employees of these MNCs
>belong to the developing capitalist countries. It is largely because of the
>activities of these MNCs that the environment of the third world countries
>is getting polluted. The Bhopal Gas tragedy is a glaring example of this.
>So these MNCs are not raising the question of labour and environment
>standard. It is the non-MNC monopolists who, being squeezed out by the
>MNCs, are actually raising the issues of the labour and environment
>standard. The contradiction between the MNCs and non-MNC monopolists have
>sharpened to a great extent. Again the advanced capitalist countries have
>become scared by the future potential of the developing capitalist
>countries which are trying to storm the citadel of their hitherto protected
>market.
>During the long period after the Second World War there has been a marked
>change in the pattern of merchandise exports of the developing capitalist
>countries. Traditional exports of these countries were agricultural
>products, minerals and raw materials for industries. But during the last 30
>years there has been a marked change towards manufactured goods that
>increased the percentage of their total export from 4 percent to 24 percent
>from 1963 to 1997. The developed capitalist countries being scared by the
>potential of competition from countries like China, Hongkong, Taiwan and
>newly industrialized economies of South East Asia, are resorting to more
>and more protectionism in various forms to guard their domestic markets.
>The gospel of free trade on the basis of multilateralism trumpeted so much
>in GATT 1994 ended in such a paradox. It is not without reason that Mr
>Sutherland, the former Secretary General of GATT, said after the formation
>of the WTO that it was not the end but the beginning of trade war in the
>world capitalist market.
>Thus today we find division between the US and EU and Japan almost on all
>issues barring their unity in protecting their domestic markets from the
>competition from developing countries. These developed capitalist countries
>are united in forcing open the market of the less developed countries. The
>USA and the EU are slapping anti-dumping duty on textiles, leather and
>steel from India. Thus iniquitous market access benefits flowed from
>Uruguay Round. The developing countries including India reduced tariff
>unilaterally and even way below promised ceiling as per the terms of the
>Uruguay Round, but the developed capitalist countries failed to respond
>similarly in commercial areas such as textiles and leather where
>liberalization has been tardy and restricted to products where developing
>countries' competitive advantage is minimal.
>New round of talks aimed at opening up more areas of trade to expand market
>All sorts of economic prescriptions in the post-Second World War period
>like Keynesian Welfarism, Thatcherism or Reaganomics have failed to
>extricate capitalism from its inherent crisis. The developed capitalist
>countries wanted to open up the market of the third world countries not
>only with the traditional merchandise but in newer and newer areas like
>services, patents, trade related investment measures etc. With this view
>Uruguay Round of trade negotiations opened in 1986. This Uruguay Round of
>talks was marked by acrimonious debates and tussles ,mainly between the
>imperialist countries for long eight years. Ultimately at the stage of
>breakdown of the talks the imperialist countries combined together to shift
>the burden of their crises to the third world countries, and thus the
>Uruguay Round was somehow salvaged from collapse. The developed capitalist
>countries expected an expansion of world trade after the formation of the
>WTO, the succeeding organization of the GATT. But this expectation was soon
>belied. This is the main reason for opening a new round of talks with newer
>agenda with a view to opening up more areas of trade. But all the
>imperialist countries are scared by demands surely to be raised forcefully
>by the less developed countries on the question of revocation of
>anti-dumping laws, dismantling of regional economic blocs provided in
>Article 24 of GATT and serious implementation of Special and Differential
>(S&D) treatment clause as provided in the GATT. To counter these offensives
>of the less developed capitalist countries and to have access to newer
>areas in compensation of the opening up of agriculture sector for EU and
>Japan more than hundred newer agenda were added for inclusion in the next
>round of talks. The imperialist countries contemplated old GATT way of
>doing business i.e. imposition of their decision in the name of consensus
>by steamrollering the views of the developing capitalist countries with a
>wide and damaging agenda. But this did not happen as unity between the
>imperialist countries could not be arrived at on the question of
>agriculture and bio-engineered food products. Because of this disunity
>among the imperialist countries on the one hand and the strong united
>resistance of the less developed capitalist countries on the question of
>inclusion of agenda like labour and environment standards the Seattle
>Conference collapsed.
>Compulsion of Bill Clinton
>The advocacy of Mr Bill Clinton, the US President, for improving the
>quality of lives of the people of third world countries is indeed an irony
>of history. Mr Clinton is now shedding crocodile tears for child labour in
>the third world countries for gaining mileage in the US trade. But it is
>now known to the entire people of the world that hundreds of thousands of
>children died in Iraq owing to the inhuman economic sanction imposed on
>Iraq at the behest of the US imperialists. Thousands of children were
>recently orphaned by the US-led NATO bombing on Yugoslavia. The root cause
>of hunger, poverty and destitution is the ruthless economic exploitation by
>capitalism-imperialism headed by the USA. But today to blunt the
>competitive edge of the less developed capitalist countries Mr Clinton was
>seen as the champion for raising the quality of lives of third world
>countries. Recent demonstration in Washington by 20,000 immigrant workers
>who are discriminated against exposes the real face of the US
>administration and its attitude to the workers of the third world
>countries. But Mr Clinton has other compulsions for domestic politics. The
>US multinationals put pressure on the US administration to compel WTO
>members to open up markets. The recent demonstrations and hostile
>opposition to the Seattle talks from trade unions and environmentalists are
>from the fear that the MNCs would opt for low wage rate areas for
>installation of productive units, spelling doom to the local industries and
>loss of employment. The MNCs got secret support from Mr Clinton and his
>party because of dependence of their candidate for the post of President on
>them. The balancing trick between keeping the MNCs in good humour, to
>handle the contradiction between MNCs & non-MNC monopolists and at the same
>time meeting the electoral compulsion to rope in trade unions' support
>simply delayed the talks by a few months. It does never mean that they are
>retracing from new protectionist measures that they are contemplating
>against developing capitalist countries.
>USA pursuing bilateral talks to destroy unity of less developed countries
>The USA is now pursuing a surreptitious path of entering into bilateral
>talks with individual developing capitalist countries or smaller groups on
>the bait of some concessions on market access so as to obtain substantial
>following to push through its agenda. The strategy is clearly to divide the
>developing capitalist countries which are in overwhelming numbers and
>destroy their unity.
>As a major power of South Asia, India has already been targeted. Already
>some agreement on market access has been arrived at on 10 January last
>between India and the USA. Because of this opening up of market India might
>get some advantage in textiles and leather exports but the small and medium
>industries in this country will surely face closure and the consumer goods
>would be costlier.
>Mr Lawrence H Southern, the US Treasury Secretary, has arrived in New Delhi
>on 18 January last to open further talks. The US objective is to isolate
>India from G-15 countries as well as from China which is going to be a
>member of the WTO after the bilateral agreement between the US and China.
>The US fears formidable opposition if China, India and other G-15 countries
>combine against her. So while throwing gentle admonition on China on the
>question of human rights, the USA is lauding India as the greatest
>democracy.
>While imperialist motive behind raising labour standard is condemnable, so
>also is exploitation of cheap labour
>The developed capitalist countries are expressing concern over labour and
>environment standard with the imperialist motive of cutting the competitive
>edge of the less developed countries. This is clear and hence this must be
>condemned. But equally condemnable is the attempt of the capitalist class
>of these countries to exploit the workers by denying them their legitimate
>claims. So the claim of Mr. Rahul Bajaj, the spokesman of the CII, that
>cheap lanour is our advantage deserves equal condemnation.
>Trickery of Indian ruling class
>The role of the Indian ruling class at the Seattle talks is worth noting.
>India resisted the developed capitalist countries by uniting the less
>developed capitalist countries on the question of labour and environment
>standard. But at the same time it did not allow the relation with the US to
>be disturbed. India played between the contradictions of the advanced
>capitalist countries. It sided with the USA on the question of opening up
>agricultural sector in EU and Japan and again on the question of
>anti-dumping law it sided with Japan.
>India played a tricky role in Seattle. India demonstrated that its support
>to the moves of the developed capitalist countries must not be taken for
>granted. Its motive is to extract concessions for the Indian capitalist
>class by using its bargaining leverage.
>Conclusion
>In fine, it is to be recalled that our party guided by the thoughts of
>Comrade Shibdas Ghosh, the great Marxist thinker, analyzed the recent
>changes in the world situation and came to the conclusion at the Cuttack
>Plenum in 1994 that "among all the major contradictions �
>imperialist-imperialist contradiction and that between labour and capital
>have intensified greatly" and " after the collapse of the socialist camp,
>and the introduction of the so-called new liberalized and open market
>economy all over the capitalist-imperialist world, the significant
>contradiction between the developing countries and the major imperialist
>countries is becoming sharper and sharper with the passage of time." Events
>in Seattle fully vindicate this analysis of our party.
>Capitalism-imperialism is tottering on its last leg and continuing its
>existence on borrowed time. It is time to strike a deadly blow to this
>exploitative system and that can be done only by intensification of class
>and mass struggles by the working class against the ruling class of their
>respective countries.
>
>The article may be forwarded and posted on other mailing list or be printed
>without permission from the Editor, Proletarian Era, as long as the
>wording/attribution is not altered in anyway and with the acknowledgement
>to " Proletarian Era'
>The Editor,
>Proletarian Era
>e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
__________________________________
KOMINFORM
P.O. Box 66
00841 Helsinki - Finland
+358-40-7177941, fax +358-9-7591081
e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.kominf.pp.fi
___________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe/unsubscribe messages
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________
