Posted on 09/12/2002 9:26:18 AM PDT by madeinchina
The good news from the United Nations Sustainable Development summit is that the radical environmentalists did not hijack the proceedings. Thousands of Green activists from non-government organizations (NGOs), mainly from the "rich" Northern tier states (North America-Europe-Northeast Asia), descended on Johannesburg, South Africa.
They were intent on convincing the world's poor that it was better to live in a hovel than in the decadent suburbs of Europe or America. They held rallies, presented papers and talked endlessly to the media. It was their grandstanding that gave casual observers the false impression that the Greens were a power. Yet, the conference remained true to its primary objective: how to raise the standard of living of those whose lands have not been as fully developed at those of the wealthy industrialized nations.
The developmental goals set by the U.N. were relatively modest, even though they are of vital importance to billions of people. Reduce by half the proportion of people living on less than a dollar a day; reduce by half those who suffer from hunger; reduce by two thirds the mortality rate among children under five and by three quarters the maternal mortality ratio; reduce by half those who lack access to safe drinking water; and achieve significant improvement in lives of at least 100 million slum dwellers, all by 2020.
But even these goals apparently set the developing world on a tragic course according to the Greens. Richard Navarro, chairman of Friends of the Earth International which sent 100 people to the summit, complained that the gathering was "hijacked by free market ideology, by a backward-looking, insular and ignorant U.S." Paula Snyder, an American traveling under the sponsorship of the Earth Island Institute, admitted that residents of the world's poorer nations "want what we have -- but they don't realize how ugly it is." Katie Silberman, of the Oakland-based Center for Environmental Health, even suggested that "the developing world has a lot of lessons for us as Americans in terms of limiting our consumption and reducing our waste."
What the Greens don't realize is that all of recorded history has been the struggle of people to better themselves, their children and their communities. The real decisions at the summit were made by delegates from member governments who know well the necessity of progress. They do not have the luxury of idle chatter like the spoiled brats in the NGOs.
The U.S. branch of Friend of the Earth complained, "There is still no text that will ensure that multilateral environmental agreements are not made subservient to WTO [World Trade Organization] trade rules." FoE-US claimed to have signed up 200 NGOs in support of a Green exception. However, the only major political support FoE could cite came from the European Union, which likes the FoE's opposition to genetic-enhanced foods -- but only because they pose a competitive threat to European farmers.
Third World states know that lax environmental standards give them a competitive advantage in attracting capital investment for new industrial plants that will provide jobs. At the Doha WTO conference, governments mandated the WTO unilaterally clarify the relationship between trade rules and measures that enforce environmental rules. The negotiations will be conducted by trade ministers, not environmentalists. Thus, the WTO will continue to overrule Northern environmental rules that harm Third World exports. The result will be that factories subject to draconian local laws in the North will be encouraged to relocate to the South, just as the overseas trade ministers desire. If this creates even thicker brown clouds over Asia, so be it -- the clouds will have a silver lining.
Energy policy was another critical issue in Johannesburg. U.N. working papers prepared before the summit emphasized that everything depends on generating more energy to meet human needs. The higher living standards of the planet's most affluent billion people are maintained because they use 25 times as much energy as the billion people who live in the world's worst poverty. "Nearly one-third of the world has no access to electricity, and another third has only poor access," noted the framework paper on energy prepared at the direction of the U.N. Secretary-General. It concluded, "Lack of access to diverse and affordable energy services means that the basic needs of many people are not being met." This seems like common sense, but sparked protests from the Greens.
The final U.N. declaration allows countries to use not only solar and wind power as substitutes for petroleum products, but also nuclear plants and large-scale hydroelectric dams. Environmentalists contend that nuclear power is unsafe and that large-scale dam construction is ecologically unsound.
As insane as is the Green message, its defeat at Johannesburg was not an unalloyed triumph for the United States. The summit still concluded that the #1 barrier to Third World development was the unequal division of the world's wealth. Thus, the solution must be a redistribution of that wealth from the industrial North to the rising South. The U.N. has declared that in "a world of unprecedented prosperity and technological advancement, such constraints emanate largely from the lack of resolve to share with and care for the have nots. The struggle against poverty is the shared responsibility of all. Renewed commitment to global solidarity is central to the success of the efforts to lift the plight of the poor."
"Market access remains a major issue and a crucial part of the expectation from the Doha round" says the U.N. as the first and most effective measure to right this global imbalance. The battle will now shift back to the WTO, where the Doha talks have been proclaimed a "development round" dedicated to restructuring global commerce to benefit the Third World.
Indian trade minister Murasoli Maran will chair a meeting of 14 developing countries from Asia, Africa and Central America, along with WTO Director General Supachai Panitpachkdi of Thailand, on September 21. The session is expected to focus on "special and differential treatment" issues which would open markets in the North while still allowing states in the South to keep their markets closed to aid local industrial and agricultural development. Such a non-reciprocal trade system would attract more investment southward, including the relocation of industrial plant and equipment.
With the Greens now pushed into the background, the real -- and interminable -- struggle for the world's wealth can be more clearly seen. American policy makers need to refocus their attention on how to share in the further development of planet, while at the same time maintaining the strength and prosperity of their own country in a turbulent world.
The true agenda for the international trade crowd.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.