Blow to world economy as trade talks collapse

[demdave]

The fragile global economy received a damaging blow last night when trade talks in Cancun collapsed after a walkout by African countries protesting at the west's failure to open its markets to the poor.
In scenes reminiscent of the World Trade Organisation's disastrous Seattle meeting four years ago, a day of acrimonious wrangling ended as the chairman, the Mexican foreign secretary, Luis Ernesto Derbez, was unable to get talks restarted after African countries lost patience and left the negotiating table.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/wto/article/0,2763,1042274,00.html

[T_i_B]

1. Activists shouldn't rejoice at Cancun's faliure.

Patrick Nicholson of the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development on why this is bad news for poor countries.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3108690.stm

A deal at Cancun that reflected the concerns of developing countries could have lifted millions of people out of poverty. The World Bank estimated that 144 million people in the Third World would benefit from the new round of trade talks.

A fair deal for the poor would have had to involve the EU and US accepting some painful concessions. Their system of supporting their farmers with $300bn per year is a scandal.

And with the rich countries turning more and more to bilateral deals, developing countries will be in even weaker positions to get fair trade rules.

The WTO must not be allowed to fade into irrelevance.

[bpilgrim]

7. no agreement is BETTER than a BAD agreement

sounds like the ball is in the G8's court.

peace

[jos]

13. Yes

No agreement is bad for the multi-national corporations, good for the people, and good for democracy.

[AlabamaYankee]

2. A number of people celebrated

The article on Common Dreams this morning gave the impression that this was a good thing: "The sensation of failure with which the five-day gathering ended triggered a burst of elation among activists and the representatives of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), who gave shouts of joy and even jumped up and down and danced when they heard the news that no final statement had been agreed." (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0915-01.htm)


Just goes to show that Where you stand depends on where you sit.

[bvar22]

3. In its current incarnation, the death of WTO...

...and other alphabet corporate fronts is a good thing. May the greedy "Lets Privitize the World Bastards" rot in HELL.

If the deals that these organizations are offering to the 3rd World developing countries are soooooo good, why are these countries now telling them "Fuch you and your deals. We would rather starve than mortage our natural resources to the WTO."

Human Rights, Environmental Protections, Local Heritage & Cultural Protections, Workers Rights, and a level cost of living/minimum living wage program would need to be 1st level priorities before Globalization will benefit the People of the World.

If you believe that mega-Corporations should be in charge of the World, then turn your retirement over to Enron.

[aneerkoinos]

8. You fail to see

That unlike IMF/WB, WTO can be changed, and that's just what happened. The organization is not offering any deals, it's been US, EU and Japan dictating the deals in WTO for too long.

Bilateral system is very bad alternative, with WTO there is opportunity, it can be transformed into democratic organization that present equally the interests of all partners, and that's what the G23 is doing pretty succesfully. The fight over WTO is just beginning.

[madrchsod]

4. the guardian sat. had a

report saying that the third world is looking to china-india-brazil for help and no longer will seek help from the west. these three nations represent one half the worlds population.brazil is also setting the standard for basic respect for human rights and fair dealings in trade. the guardian also reported the us group wouldn`t come out of their rooms sat. to deal..the guardian art. likened that to the old soviet game that they played in the 80`s...
there is no future for the united states with the neo conservites in power. if you had a billion dollars to invest would you invest in america or china?

[demdave]

5. Setting the standard for basic respect for human rights ?

I would hold back on the rosy picture painting. http://hrw.org/reports/world/brazil-pubs.php

[lanlady]

6. as long as no one is looking to China--

--to set any human rights standards.

[whirlygigspin]

14. free kick for workers!

[Laughing Mirror]

9. the poor countries are right to walk out

how in the world can any of the rich countries, specifically the EU, expect poor countries to discuss investment and competition, when the poor countries have nothing to invest or compete with?

[PROGRESSIVE1]

10. If any agreement had been reached it would have.....

been at the cost of the poorer nations of the world!
Until the developed nations of the world (NOT just the U.S, but too Europe, Canada, and Japan) play by a set of fair rules I see no reason for the 3rd world countries to sign up to biased and unfair trade agreements! The wealthy countries will only rape these poor countries for their labor and resources!

The developed world MUST take responsibility!!!

[whirlygigspin]

11. Thank you Maude Barlow!

here's a link to her site: http://www.canadians.org/browse_categories.htm?COC_token=23@@8bb9fd69dbfe5fe5b570f76b340ab0e0&step=2&catid=196&iscat=1

[FlemingsGhost]

12. First, we must ask ourselves:

How did the global economy fall into such a fragile state in the first place?

Just what kind world economic/human resource policy can we expect from a organization who is essentially being bullied by the same folks who mercilessly looted and pillaged our own coffers.

The WTO must embrace far more accountability, or it deserves to die a miserable death.

[damnraddem]

15. The world economy suffers a blow?

No, Dubya's corporate friends suffered a blow.

The world economy is trying to recover from the blows Dubya has directed at it.