No Fun in the Sun

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Daily MoJo Archive
A L S O   T O D A Y :

Touring the ‘Fronts’
A quick, disturbing spin through the new ‘fronts’ in President Bush’s world of war.


This is Going To Hurt
In his speech on Sunday, the president tried to put the best gloss on the situation in Iraq. But it was bad news all around.

A R C H I V E :

9/08/03
Wounded Inaction
Arnold’s Language Barrier

9/05/03
Crunch Time For Abbas
Any More Bright Ideas?
Timing Is Everything

9/04/03
Kerry Kicks Off
Help!
Jakarta Justice


9/03/03
Just Hot Air
Israel’s Arabs
A Lost War

9/02/03
A Failing Grade
Will the WTO Step Up?

8/29/03
Clean Air Axed
Talking Nuclear



A prediction: The 146 trade ministers jetting into Mexico this week for the World Trade Organization’s latest mega-meeting will have the least fun anyone’s ever had in Cancun. Not for them the gentle, curving beaches, the swaying palms, or happy hour at Senor Frog’s. The ministers are in for days of hardball negotiation capped, most likely, by disappointment, impasse and recrimination. Pass the tequila.

The meeting, among other things, is supposed to nail down the details of how rich countries will open their markets to developing ones. Countries like the United States, Japan, and the E.U. nations, for all their gung-ho talk about free trade, heavily subsidize home-based agriculture and manufacturing, pricing developing countries out of the world market.

The Cancun meeting is part of the current round of WTO trade talks, launched in the Qatari capital, Doha, in November, 2001. The “Doha Round” was supposed to do away with these imbalances, but wealthy countries haven’t shown much willingness to follow up. The Financial Standard has this on the growing disillusionment of developing countries.

“‘As things stand, the report card (on the Doha Round) is disappointing,’ Guchinga Ndirangu, a trade policy expert at Heinrich Boll Foundation, said recently. ‘The rhetoric at Doha meeting where rich countries committed to initiate reforms which would place the interests of the poor at the heart of development agenda has not been matched with tangible action.'”

At the core of the Doha Round is the issue of farm subsidies. Seventy percent of the world’s poor are dependent on agriculture, and lowering barriers to farm goods from developing countries would improve the conditions for many millions of people. Adriano Campolina Soares writing for the BBC points out that instead of reducing subsidies, the U.S. and the E.U. have banded together and done exactly the opposite:

“Rich countries promised to cut the $330bn in subsidies they lavish on their farmers.

These subsidies destroy local markets and put farmers out of business in developing countries; they are flooded with cheap imports such as wheat, maize, milk and sugar, and they drive down world prices for exporters.

But instead of slashing subsidies, the U.S. ramped up its support by $175bn over 10 years and the E.U. has fudged reform of the Common Agricultural Policy, putting off any real cuts until 2013.”

Not unreasonably, developing countries have low expectations going into the Cancun talks. David Jessop writing for the The Jamaica Observer argues that, outside of the U.S. and the E.U., “confidence is limited about the likelihood of a positive outcome in Mexico.” Developing countries and emerging economies, he writes, will have to band up against the northern states. Translation: it’s going to get ugly:

“Nations outside of the wealthy OECD group have recognised the need to flex their muscles if they are not to be disadvantaged. The result is that WTO ministerial meetings have become a form of war without bloodshed.

In this process, the developing world has come to realise the importance of creating solidarity and a largely south-oriented consensus. Seattle and Doha showed the importance of emerging economies acting with less powerful developing nations to counterbalance an often aggressive EU and US view of trade liberalisation and a singular political view of the world.

The result is that almost all developing nations have become more assertive in trade negotiations and are no longer prepared to enable a consensus that is not in their interests.”

But as Reuters points out, Mexico, the host of this week’s WTO meeting, is a stark reminder that poorer countries usually get shafted in trade negotiations. And should the Doha agenda fail, these developing countries will inevitably fare the worst:

“If the Doha Round fails […] the WTO could become an irrelevant talking shop, and trade deals would be increasingly struck between pairs or groups of governments.

Countries in sub-Saharan Africa or the likes of Pakistan or Bangladesh would be the big losers if that were to happen: They would either have to accept tough conditions for improved market access or find themselves driven to the margins of the world economy, with the attendant risks of political radicalization.”

Although the outcome of the WTO’s Cancun meeting still remains to be seen, The Observer’s Nick Mathiason reports that “hopes for any significant breakthrough […] have been dealt a severe blow” as plans have been set for an unscheduled ministerial trade meeting (to revisit the issues that should have been settled in Cancun) early next year. The news of the unscheduled meeting will likely outrage protestors, writes Mathiason, who may see it as a sign that agricultural issues will be glossed over. The result? Another Seattle. (In which case, will journalists come up with a phrase to rival “The Battle in Seattle”? “The Spanking in Cancun”?)

“This new meeting has been discussed as fears grow among trade negotiators that agreement will not be reached on vital issues such as agricultural tariff reduction by Europe and America.

The news will provoke fury from the thousands of protesters gathering in the Mexican beach resort of Cancun this weekend and could spark a repeat of the riots that brought similar talks in the American city of Seattle to a chaotic close.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate