DOHA,
Qatar-The tense negotiations at the Doha conference
are as much about equity and fairness in world
trade as about the values that the global
family of nations places above all others.
The results at Doha will tell us if America
still has the capacity to lead the world in
the direction of the values for which it has
fought for so long. Or Doha might tell us
that the world's trading and financial systems
will become more broad based and less responsive
to American influence.
Nongovernmental
organizations are the watchdogs of values. Although
somewhat muzzled in Doha, they are using whatever means
available to highlight the immorality of today's world
trading system, which tolerates that half of its people
should live in poverty ranging from destitution to
barely affording two meals a day.
Beyond the horse-trading in meeting rooms is the
reality of a world wracked by economic and social
inequalities so great that people, both poor and
rich, turn to fanatical belief in a higher divine
authority. They prefer to believe ignorant preachers
rather than those who rule their nations and the
world. The United States has long fought for a
set of values and institutions based on respect
for human rights, freedom of expression, freedom
of religion, rule of law, non-discrimination among
people, democracy, open markets and unfettered
international trade. It has also been the undisputed
leader of world trade liberalization since the
Kennedy Round of the 1960s. But fanatical terrorists
and those who hate what its stands for now challenge
America's leadership. That leadership is also questioned
by numerous diplomats and intellectuals who say
the US has used a combination of persuasion and
arm-twisting to install world trading and financial
systems that work more to its benefit than that
of other nations. One result is that the United
States enters the Doha conference as a fragile
economic giant being sucked into a quicksand of
doubts about the resilience of its values in times
of crisis. Those doubts, along with numerous disputes,
may become important obstacles to launching a new
round of world trade liberalization.
After the end of the Cold War, the steadfast US
resolve in support of its open values started to
bring significant results around the world, especially
in economic affairs and world trade. Almost all
the world's nations, including China, not only
accepted the need for market-oriented policies
but also began very painful changes on the ground
to implement them. But some US values seems to
be unable to bear the strain of the brutal wounds
upon its heartland caused by fanatical terrorists
on September 11. US borders are closing to both
people and goods for security reasons. Security
personnel on fishing expeditions, without the usual
safeguards, are scrutinizing people, financial
transactions, telephone calls, Internet and email
activity, and domestic and international travel.
Agents of the government are doing all of this
under a veil of secrecy, citing national security.
Meanwhile, some US intellectuals are calling for
a reassessment of torture as an appropriate means
of getting information. At the least, they suggest
that detainees be sent to other members of the
US coalition against terror, which use torture.
European countries with values systems closest
to the US are also groaning under the strain. France,
Britain and Germany are reducing normal freedoms
for security reasons and parliamentarians are enacting
laws to give police and intelligence agencies much
greater authority over citizens. Those laws are
usually for temporary periods of up to three years
but they have been quick in the coming.
Leaders get results because others believe that
they are recommending pathways resilient enough
to overcome crises. In the eyes of many, American
values seem not to be resilient even inside the
US during the first major domestic security crisis
the US has had to face since World War II.
It is this quicksand of gathering doubts about
America's capacity to be a leader that US negotiators
face at Doha. The conference's agenda is tough
enough already. The proverb going back to the days
of GATT (the WTO's predecessor) is that a new round
cannot be launched without prior agreement between
the US and European Union. That still appears to
be true.
Regrettably, the US and EU are not on each others
radar screen concerning their differences on subsidies
to agriculture and aviation, competitive practices
and dispensations for developing countries. Those
critical gaps are compounded by the numerous complaints
of developing countries against both giant trading
powers.
Given this backdrop, vigorous leadership is required
to achieve even a fudged agreement that puts the
grand title of a New Round on what might be just
the ordinary diplomatic ploy of agreeing to continue
talking.
|
