Copyright 1999 Journal of Commerce, Inc.
Journal of
Commerce
December 9, 1999, Thursday
SECTION: EDITORIAL/OPINION; Pg. 9
LENGTH: 892 words
HEADLINE:
World trade in the choppy wake of Seattle
BYLINE: BY R.
SEAN RANDOLPH
BODY:
The protests at last week's
World Trade Organization summit in Seattle vividly demonstrate how poorly
international trade is understood, and the scale of the effort needed to rebuild
the national consensus for open markets.
Inside the WTO
the challenge is no less daunting, as the call for openness, the size and
diversity of its membership, and the complexity of the issues
it is being asked to address are aggravating an already difficult negotiating
environment.
On the surface, the benefits of trade should speak for
themselves. Since the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was created 50
years ago, the volume of world trade has increased eighteenfold - three times
faster than world output. In the same period trade's share of the world's
economy has grown from 7 percent to 17 percent. In other words, GATT and its
successor, the WTO, have very successfully promoted trade
expansion. The economic benefits of trade are also clear. Tens of millions of
people in developing countries have been raised from poverty by economies built
on exports. Its recent problems aside, Asia's phenomenal economic success can be
traced to its ability to sell in an open world economy. The ability of many
Latin American economies to overcome poverty and recession is linked to their
increasing orientation to global markets.
As trade has expanded and the
developing world has grown in affluence, new markets have been created for U.S.
exports, creating millions of jobs at home. Nearly 12 million U.S. jobs are
directly or indirectly linked to exports. Most pay well above average.
Why, then, did dockworkers, whose jobs depend on trade and a growing
world economy, shut down West Coast ports? What brought steelworkers to the
streets of Seattle along with French farmers, environmentalists and human-rights
and other activists? And what is it about the WTO that raised such an emotional
response?
To a degree we witnessed old-fashioned protectionism, draped
in the more fashionable and politically acceptable clothing of environmental
protection and labor rights. The street show in Seattle, a virtual carnival of
protest, also brought out activists with only the loosest connections to trade.
More profoundly, however, what happened in Seattle also reflects a
growing insecurity about globalization and the loss of control felt by ordinary
people.
With technology moving faster than our social institutions can
keep pace, corporate consolidation and restructuring on a massive scale, and
national and global market forces penetrating communities in every nation, our
prosperity is tempered by disorientation and social unease.
While the
great majority of people benefit from the new economy, many are left behind. In
real ways the WTO, a small but important U.N. agency, has become a symbol of
rising globalization that few understand and most feel powerless to control.
Fear and ignorance are the greatest enemies of the WTO and trade.
Demonized as the cause of worldwide ills ranging from child labor to
deforestation, the WTO has become the vessel of our fears.
In truth,
trade is not the cause of the world's ills, but it is a big part of their
solution. History shows that the strongest force for human, labor and social
rights, democracy, environmental protection and other social goods, is economic
prosperity and a growing middle class. Once basic human needs are met, people
demand more respect and accountability from their governments.
For tens
of millions worldwide, trade holds the promise of a better future. Collapsing
world trade is the best way to dash these hopes.
After the WTO meeting
in Seattle, opponents exulted at having ""stopped globalization.'' Nothing could
be further from the truth. Driven by technology and the information revolution,
globalization is a fact of life. Stopping the clock by erecting walls imperils
U.S. leadership and opportunity, and will not succeed.
At the same time,
Seattle showed that labor and environmental concerns are a fact of life for the
WTO, and will not go away. The WTO must find a way to engage legitimate leaders
in the labor and environmental communities, severed from protectionist agendas.
It can also ease concerns about globalization by increasing its own
transparency.
This won't be easy. The task is more difficult because of
the increasing complexity of global negotiations. Politically, the United States
needs to win on agriculture, but Europe won't relent unless it gains in other
areas such as investment.
Investment, however, raises labor and
environmental issues, a severe problem for most developing nations. Along with
non-governmental organizations, they are demanding more openness. But as the
WTO's membership grows and these issues are added to the agenda, consensus will
be elusive.
The near-term upshot may be a less ambitious WTO agenda that
focuses on incremental improvements in market access for industries such as
information technology, rather than a new global trade round. A limited or
damaged WTO, however, is in nobody's interest.
Trade means opportunity
for our partners, while as the world's largest exporter and its most productive
and innovative economy, we stand to gain heavily. Realize it or not, we are all
stakeholders, and proponents of trade must redouble their efforts to bring that
message home.
LOAD-DATE: December 9, 1999
