GREEN PAPER 3: Freedoms
That Are Abolished
download this document (488k). ACERCA
Within the proposed FTAA's Declaration of Principles, a clear effort is made to pay lip service to the demands of civil society worldwide to have a voice not only in the negotiation process, but also in the direction of the global economy. In addition to ideals like prosperity and poverty reduction, the FTAA claims to promote transparency and democracy. However, not only have the negotiations been conducted in complete secrecy since 1994, the very structure of the FTAA obstructs democratic process throughout the Hemisphere. The FTAA's most prominent policy makers have made it clear that what is valued in the FTAA process is obedience, homogenization and assimilation NOT democracy and diversity.
Former USTR Charlene Barshefsky has said that the main obstacles to a Hemispheric Trade Agreement in the past were "conflicts of perceptions and ideas."29 The erosion of these ideological barriers over the past 50 years has not occurred because people are convinced of the merits of neoliberalism (the ideology of free trade). Rather, the people of the Western Hemisphere have been forced to enact free trade policies by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, and have faced U.S. militarism whenever they stood in opposition to neoliberal policies. This allows Barshefsky and the other Trade Ministers to proclaim, as Margaret Thatcher is often quoted, "There Is No Alternative."
Many alternatives do exist, but the FTAA is not interested in them. Many non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have tried to work within the FTAA's structure to achieve transparency and participation in the negotiations, but they've been slamming their heads against a wall of secrecy. None of the full texts of the FTAA negotiations have been made available to the public, so any talk of transparency on the part of the FTAA negotiators rings hollow. In relegating the role of civil society to simply "making recommendations" to the FTAA's unaccountable "Committee on Civil Society," trade negotiators have succeeded in the rhetoric of transparency but not the substance.
As the groups who have actually submitted proposals have seen, the Committee is a completely inadequate mechanism. To date there has been no indication that the Committee is anything more than a symbolic "mail carrier." NGOs can offer their suggestions and criticisms until they are blue in the face while the FTAA moves forward with its free-trade-at-all-costs agenda. Despite the obvious ineffectiveness of the Committee on Civil Society, the FTAA doesn't mind patting itself on the back for its generosity. Regarding the formation of the Committee, the FTAA's website announces, "The FTAA is the first major trade negotiation where such a group has been established at the outset of the negotiations, and this is therefore a unique feature of the process."30
Over 300 NGOs from around the Hemisphere aren't impressed. In November 2000, the Hemispheric Social Alliance sent a letter to the Trade Negotiations Chair, Dr. Adalberto Rodriguez Giavarini, expressing their frustrations at the Committee's ineffectiveness and the continued secrecy of the negotiations. He called for increased participation and for the FTAA to "liberate the text" of the negotiations: "It is impossible for us to engage in a serious dialogue on the FTAA when we do not know the actual content of the negotiations."31 In addition, groups like Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch launched a "Campaign of Inquiry," to petition the FTAA to release the text and educate the mostly unaware Congress on the FTAA and its lack of transparency.
Regardless of whether the text is released, it would only be available in the four official languages of the FTAA (Spanish, French, Portuguese, and English). The FTAA negotiators have, therefore, excluded many indigenous people throughout the Americas, who do not speak one of these languages, even though they will be the most affected by the FTAA. FTAA negotiators have no intention on establishing a dialogue with indigenous people throughout the hemisphere. Just as the Zapatistas, have stated that NAFTA is the death sentence for indigenous people in Mexico, the FTAA is likely to be a death sentence for native people throughout the Western Hemisphere.
Additionally, releasing the text does not change the fact that the FTAA is fundamentally undemocratic. Allowing corporations to annul food safety and labor laws, undermine human and indigenous rights, and destroy the environment are not part of any democratic processes. When the FTAA text is released, they will use it as a public relations campaign to try to convince the public that they are a transparent organization. We will not be fooled.
Since 1994, the only voice the FTAA has heard is the call of the dollar, not the cries of the people. It is the most anti-democratic endeavor yet to appear on the international trade scene. FTAA negotiators who refuse to release the text of their negotiations and who deliberately exclude the voices and concerns of indigenous communities and civil society have no place talking of democracy. Democracy is about people, not profits.