BY NICK EVERETT
SYDNEY The coalition organising a mass unity rally protesting against the World Trade Organisation "mini-ministerial" meeting on November 14 decided not to have opposition to an impending war on Iraq as a main demand of the rally.
In contrast to the protests in Barcelona in March and the February anti-World Bank protests in Washington, where the coordinating groups mobilised people around the big social issues of the day war in Palestine, refugees and unjust trade agreements the September 13 meeting decided to narrow the focus of the protest to trade-related issues.
The meeting was attended by representatives from Aid Watch, the National Union of Students, Labor for Refugees, Free the Refugees Campaign, the No War on Iraq Coalition, the Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network (AFTINET), Action in Solidarity with Asia and the Pacific, the Search Foundation, a number of officials from the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, the NSW Teachers Federation, ATTAC Australia, the Sydney Social Forum, Jubilee-Drop the Debt, the Democrats and the NSW Labor Council.
A statement adopted by the meeting puts forward the demand "Fair trade, not free trade". It details a number of problems with the WTO agenda, including the impact on jobs, health, education, workers' rights, social services and the environment.
The statement also calls for more socially and ecologically responsible trade agreements, as well as respect for UN agreements.
In discussion, Iggy Kim from Action in Solidarity with Asia and the Pacific (ASAP) proposed an additional section opposing the war on Iraq. He proposed this on three grounds: (1) Like corporate globalisation, the US-led war on Iraq is an example of how rich countries bully and dominate poorer countries; (2) the war will take centre stage in November and become the overriding concern of many people the world over; and (3) the war will generate a ferocious security hype around the WTO meeting, and will require a direct response.
Kim said he was disappointed that the statement did not call for the cancellation of Third World debt or for the abolition of the World Trade Organisation.
There was very little discussion about including opposition to the war in the official statement. One argument that was put, by Danny Faddoul from the National Union of Students, was that the war will not be discussed in the WTO meeting and was, therefore, a separate issue.
Pat Ranald from AFTINET, while acknowledging that the coming war is of concern, argued that there are other groups organising against it and that the purpose of this coalition is to focus on the WTO.
From Green Left Weekly, September 18, 2002.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.