Tags:
Journalism of Courage
SEATTLE, DECEMBER 1: Did the United States orchestrate – or at least turn a blind eye – to the massive protests against the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in Seattle to further its own agenda of imposing labour and environment standards on the Third World?
That was the suspicious buzz which swept through many developing country delegations and Third World groups as unexpectedly violent and prolonged demonstrations rocked the WTO meet on the opening day and derailed many carefully made plans of the wise people of international trade.
"Preposterous," snorted Susan Esserman, the Deputy US Trade Representative who traveled to India last month to talk to New Delhi about the common ground the two sides could agree on. "This is a free country just like yours. Didn’t you see there were so many interests demonstrating outside?"
And indeed there were. While some groups railed about labour conditions in the developing world, others ranted about the degradation of environment. Their ire was directed not so much against the Third World countries as rich US corporations that they say exploit the conditions to reap huge profits. One group of protestors smashed the windows of a garment chain outlet called The Gap, which they said used sweatshop labour. Another group sprayed graffiti on an outlet store of the Seattle-headquartered shoemaker Nike. The ubiquitous McDonalds and toy store FAO Scwartz were also under attack.
A group calling itself the Anarchists were angry about everything. People came in costumes that showed them as turtles, whales, pigs, fish, vegetables and butterflies. One protestor was dressed as a big red fist. Another chose a skeleton. One group protested China’s occupation of Tibet and another wanted freedom in Burma. There were also groups from Korea and Philippines, not to speak of the Green Peace troupe from Germany. Some Indian groups, which are also here, were not so visible. Not since the anti-war demonstrations of the 1960s had the American people seen anything like this. Network and Cable television went ballistic with streaming coverage when police began hurling pepper spray in the afternoon to clear the areas near the hotel. Local television had nonstop live coverage of the protests and the police action. As much as the protests were well-planned, law enforcement authorities were hopelessly underprepared.
But by nightfall however, police in riot gear had pushed the demonstrators to the outer fringes of the venues, sanitised the area, and ensured some order. Washington State itself declared an emergency, night curfew was imposed in the downtown area as, and the National Guard called in to support the police as President Bill Clinton arrived in the city. US officials defended the protests as a legitimate expression of public dissent. They said the agenda put forward by protestors was shared in large part by the Clinton administration.
However, Barshevsky contested the basic premise of the agitators that unfair labour practice in the developing world were robbing American jobs. She agreed with the largely developing country view – and India’s stand – that this was more a factor of technology rather than trade.
Not so, howled protestors outside as they trashed Nike and The Gap stores. "The only jobs that will be left in the US will be those high-tech Silicon Valley jobs or flippin’ hamburgers. Nothing in between," growled Jimmy Hoffa, America premier labour union leader. The protestors railed most against big US corporations. "The corporations are not sitting at the negotiating table," US Trade Rep Charlene Barshevsky replied.
"Isn’t it interesting to see such radical slogans being heard in the cradle of capitalism?," asked India’s Commerce Minister Murasoli Maran, echoing the developing countries’ doubts about the origins of the protest, especially the incessant rant about labour practice.
But Seattle’s radical chic said the main issue was not how developing countries practiced labour but how developed countries exploited it.
India has so far blocked any real discussion of the issue, arguing that allowing it to come on the WTO agenda could result in protectionism and saying it is best left to the International Labour Organisation. But the buzz is Washington will use its muscle to ram through language that will, for the first time in the history of trade talks, make labor conditions an explicit subject of negotiations. While authorities hope to hold protestors further back on Thursday – if today’s exertions has not worn them out – to allow President Clinton to address the gathering in the afternoon, the turbulent events have not only overshadowed the meet but also changed the tenor of negotiations.
India which came to the meet with a flexible and negotiable stand, has suddenly hardened its views. "We will never allow labour standard to come on agenda," thundered Maran at a briefing in words reminiscent to the now famous "not now, not later" stand India took on the signing of the CTBT.
