NGO STATEMENT ON WTO CRISIS IN SEATTLE

[James Love <love@cptech.org>]

This is one of the NGO statements that was issued during last week's
WTO meetings.  I'll have some notes out soon regarding the
negotiations on the ecommerce and access to medicines issues.

  Jamie


----------------
NGO STATEMENT ON WTO CRISIS IN SEATTLE: 
A CALL FOR CHANGE

2 DECEMBER 1999

The WTO is in crisis.  The process of trade negotiations is
fundamentally
flawed and cannot be the basis for global policy making for the new
millennium.  Any outcome of such a process is illegitimate.  As the
events
of the last few days have illustrated, the WTO is:

· Undemocratic - both between people and their governments, and among
the
governments of the world.  For example, without consulting and over the
objections of civil society and EU member states, the European
Commission
announced its support for a Biotechnology Working Party, causing 15 EU
trade ministers to issue a joint statement of disagreement.

· Unjust - denying meaningful participation of developing countries,
ignoring their needs, and overriding their positions.  For example, the
chair of the Working Group on New Issues ignored the dissent of
developing
countries, and mischaracterized their criticism as support for the
inclusion of new issues. 

· Untransparent - as "green room" deals exclude developing countries,
and
as civil society continues to be ignored and denied information.  For
example, African nations, small island states, and least developed
countries were excluded when a small group of powerful countries
brokered a
deal addressing the lack of implementation of existing WTO commitments.

· Unbalanced - elevating short-term economic interests of a few over
broader concerns for equity and sustainability.  For example, the EU and
others continue to promote an investment agreement despite the deep
concerns of civil society as demonstrated by the defeat of the MAI.
Similarly, the USTR told NGOs working on forest issues that their
concerns
about the impacts of forest product liberalization would be disregarded. 

These examples illustrate a systemic flaw.  The ascendancy of a narrow
set
of business interests over all other interests of society must be
reversed.
 As the protesters world-wide have made clear, WTO negotiators must not
return to Geneva to continue business as usual behind closed doors.
Rather, we must all engage in a broader search for a democratic, humane,
and sustainable international system.  


Action Aid
Action Aid Brazil
Africa Trade Network
AIDC, South Africa
Asia Indigenous Women's Network
Center for International Environmental Law
Citizens Trade Campaign, USA
Common Front on the WTO, Canada
Consumer Project on Technology, USA
Council of Canadians
Consumer Unity and Trust Society, India
Consumers Association of Penang, Malaysia
Friends of the Earth International
Friends of the Earth - Japan
Friends of the Earth - US
Greenpeace Brazil
Independent Farmers Association, Japan
Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, USA
International Coalition for Development Action
International Forum on Globalization
International South Group Network
NCOS, Belgium
Network for Safe and Secure Food and Environment, Japan
Tebtebba Foundation, Philippines
Oxfam Fair Trade Belgium
Pesticide Action Network, Asia and Pacific
Polaris Institute, Canada
Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch, USA
Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, UK
Seikatsu-Club Consumers Cooperative Association, Japan
South Asia Watch on Trade Economy and Environment
Third World Network
Toto Consumers Cooperative, Japan
World Development Movement
-- 
James Love / Director, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org / love@cptech.org
P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036
voice 202.387.8030 / fax 202.234.5176