The discussion of Cancun is interesting but I would like to propose a 
change in emphasis.  Generally speaking the Cancun meeting came to a 
halt because the developed capitalist countries were not willing to 
engage agriculture as they had previously promised.  Rather, they 
demanded that third world countries first accept negotiations on new 
agreements dealing with services, competition policy, government 
procurement and the like.  The third world refused this demand, 
maintaining their position that nothing new would be discussed until 
agriculture was settled.

This means that those of us living in the developed capitalist world 
were spared the negative consequences form new agreements that would 
greatly reduce the quality of our own lives, thanks to the third world 
position on agriculture.  There was a lot of attention in the U.S. 
press on third world demands on agriculture but very little about these 
other agreements except to say that everything was for the benefit of 
the third world and weren�t they silly to undermine the talks. 

Activists in the developed capitalist countries, or at least the U.S., 
did not succeed in making what was at stake in these other agreements 
very clear, and in the celebration over the (temporary) collapse of 
these talks have done little to call attention to them.  

So, the question I would like to pose concerns how best to deal with 
this situation.  Should our conversations about the WTO remain focused 
on agriculture and the need to demand an end to subsidies for agri-
business so as to help the third world?  Or should we also be finding a 
way to reignite attention on and concern about these other agreements?  
And if so how should we do it?  Obviously the U.S. is going to push 
them in the FTAA and other venues, and I hear very few progressives 
discussing this and strategizing over what we should do about it.

So, how can we build opposition to government procurement and somehow 
tie that work into revitalizing a sense of the importance of public 
services.  Are there ongoing struggles that can be tapped?  What about 
the service agreement?  How do we make connections between these 
agreements and the Bush attempt to commodify and marketize our lives?

It is probably worth noting that these other agreements would also 
greatly hurt third world working people so this struggle against them 
is not just a developed capitalist struggle.

Marty Hart-Landsberg 

Reply via email to