Tariffs are dominating news, but of course there are several other important aspects of trade-related aggression. As has been increasingly seen in recent decades, particularly in the course of moving from GATT regime of international trade towards WTO, trade became increasingly linked to many other important aspects including intellectual property rights and patent laws relating to medicines and seeds, to agriculture and investment and procurement policies so that in the name of implementation of trade rules, the sovereign rights of many countries to protect their farmers, consumers and even patients needing medicines could be trampled upon, all in the interests of increasing profit and control of powerful rich countries and their multinational companies.
The same trend can be seen now as many developing countries having been first encouraged to become more involved in international trade and more dependent on exports are being threatened with sudden hike in tariffs. In a situation in which they are highly vulnerable, to reach a compromise on tariffs they may be asked to agree to some other policy changes that are harmful for them. In particular they may be asked to make increasing concessions to some multinational companies and this may include agreeing to import their hazardous products and technologies. This can be harmful in many contexts but this is likely to be most harmful in the context of food and agriculture.
Over the years farmers, consumers, health activists and others in developing countries, supported by several scientists, have created important resistance campaigns to oppose imposition of harmful products and technologies of multinational companies and their supporting governments and allies including GM foods, chemical herbicides, pesticides and related products and technologies. Now in the wake of the tariff wars, there can be more arm twisting in more vulnerable situations to push open or even break open the doors for hazardous products and technologies.
The USA and some other countries have foolishly linked their farm sector to the spread of GM crops as well as related agrichemicals but with growing scientific evidence of their hazards and high risks, their efforts to seeking dominance on the basis of highly dubious technologies appear to be doomed. Similar is the situation of several giant corporations with very close links to the authorities. Hence these countries and corporations are trying their best to spread their hazardous technologies to as many countries as possible so that sources of making available assured non-GM food can be reduced as much as possible, while at the same time the GM technology controlled by these countries and corporations is able to dominate the farm sector at world level, despite all its hazards.
Unfortunately China too is unlikely to resist this trend as after reasonable resistance for some time, in more recent times several Chinese companies including state companies have also become involved in the spread of GM technology.
However, with increasing unity several developing countries can still protect their people and farms from the onslaught of GM crops and related products and technologies. They can also get the support of several farmer, consumer, environment and health groups in western countries who have been drawing attention to the high risks of GM crops for a long time.
Similarly, there should be increasing unity and determination for opposing the imposition of other hazardous products and technologies. The principle that no one can be forced to import products and technologies that have become controversial for their links to environmental hazards and health risks should be widely accepted.
Trade since ancient times has received its basic justification for getting products considered beneficial and desirable by people that are not available adequately at the local level. This understanding changed during colonial times as international trade was instead used to impose the products of the colonial powers on other countries even though these were not beneficial for these countries and in fact in most cases were clearly harmful in terms of their disruptive impacts. While tariffs were used to promote this objective, tariffs were not the only weapon used by the colonial powers which used many other means to destroy the production and competitive capacity of the colonized countries and their people. This was of course opposed by local people, and sooner or later this resistance asserted itself in the form of liberation movements, while the colonial countries tried desperately to keep the situation under control by utilizing the services of those local elites who had agreed to collaborate with the colonial powers in return for some gains.
It is important that trade should return to its original objective of allowing various countries and people to benefit on the basis of meeting genuine needs of other countries and obtaining those of their own real needs from other countries as are best met from other countries.
---
The writer is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Protecting Earth for Children, Planet in Peril, Man over Machine, and A Day in 2071
Comments