|
Comment on this article |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
Big Change in Rhetoric and Disunity of the Summit Points to Impact From Masses |
Current rating: 0 |
by Andrew Kennis
Email: AndrewInQuebecCity (nospam) yahoo.com (unverified!)
Phone: (212) 817-7882
Address: 34 East 29th Street, between Park and Madison Avenue |
13 May 2001
|
|
How the effects of the massive A20-22 demonstrations against the FTAA in Quebec City impacted the rhetorical illusion of unity amongst heads of state. |
Big Change in Rhetoric and Disunity of the Summit Points To Impact from Mass Demonstrations and Protests
Throughout the week leading up to and into the weekend during the Summit of the Americas, an alternative Summit took place as well. The People’s Summit featured social justice groups from an array of different issues and involved the participation of hundreds of groups and thousands of individuals. The Summit of the Americas, conversely, involved the participation of 34 heads of state from every country in the Western Hemisphere except Cuba. This Summit was where the Free Trade Area of the Americas trade agreement was negotiated.
A quick look at some of the rhetoric emanating from the official Summit reveals some interesting similarities to the protest speeches coming from the street. Take the Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, for example, whose opening speech during the Summit read as follows: \"From the outset, we have focussed on a global action plan of co-operation to reduce poverty, protect the environment, promote the adoption of labour standards and encourage corporate social responsibility . . . We are working together to reinforce democracy, to broaden access to education and health care, to promote the equality of men and women, cultural diversity and dialogue with indigenous peoples.\" The President from Brazil, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, went so far as to express a bit of solidarity with the protesters: \" . . . we should set as our task the elimination of the profound inequality of income and living conditions, both within and among countries . . . The thousands of demonstrators on Quebec streets expect this from us. Their protest is fuelled by the fear of an FTAA and a globalization without ‘a human face.’ This is our challenge.\"
Finally, the declaration that was released after the conclusion of the Summit, sounded more like a piece of social welfare legislation than a declaration of neo-liberal principles for international trade and investment. The declaration, however, was actually written before the Summit even began as was revealed when the Center for Media Alternatives in Quebec (CMAQ) obtained a copy of the declaration on April 18, which bore an April 22 release date. The declaration does not even mention anything about trade and investment until the fifteenth page of the forty-four page document, despite the fact that the Washington Post reported that \"Negotiations on a separate Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA)\" would be the highlight of the Summit, and would \"top the agenda at [the] hemispheric summit.\" (February 26) Instead, sections titled \"Fight Against Corruption,\" \"Empowering Local Governments,\" \"Making Democracy Work Better\" and \"Transparency and Good Governance\" round out some of the headings of the pre-manufactured declaration. In terms of transparency, despite promises for the draft text of the FTAA to be released following the Summit, the text remains secret and unreleased at the time of this writing.
While the Brazilian and Canadian heads of state came close to sounding like social activists, not all heads of state sang the same tune of rhetoric. For example, U.S. President George Bush was quoted as saying, \"I don’t want none of that labor stuff.\" That statement was just one of many Bush gaffs, who also referred to the French-speaking Chrétien as his \"amigo.\" A Washington Post news piece reported that \"with Chrétien at his side, [Bush said] he would not answer questions in English, French or ‘Mexican.’\" Finally, as the Post piece notes further, \"In a session with Mexican President Vicente Fox, Bush declared that ‘it’s very important for folks to understand that when there\'s more trade, there’s more commerce.’ Asked what Bush meant by that, aides replied that he was speaking Mexican.\" (April 22)
While it is true that the rhetoric of the heads of state sounded like it could come from the People’s Summit, such rhetoric can only be taken with a grain a salt as even the most controversial provisions of NAFTA are still on the bargaining table for inclusion in the FTAA as well (i..e. the infamous \"Chapter 11\" provisions in the North American Free Trade Agreement, which allow corporations to sue governments, are still up for debate and possible inclusion in the FTAA). Nevertheless, Warren Allmand, president of the Montreal-based organization Rights & Democracy, says that the protesters have made a real difference. Allmand points to the promise that FTAA officials have made to release what has been a secret in the past, the draft text of the FTAA, and also noted that the inclusion of civil society groups in the negotiating process represents a real change from the past.
The disunity of the Summit itself is another piece of evidence that points to the massive demonstrations as having had an impact on what transpired inside the closed-door meetings of the Summit. In the business press, the Financial Times had a piece written by Guy de Jonquieres and Edward Alden which bore the headline: \"Summit gives a rich study of contrasts not unity: Heads of the 34 countries may struggle to maintain the public veneer of solidarity.\" Jonquieres and Alden wrote that \"Efforts to project a spirit of unity were also damped by Mr Bush\'s inability to offer more than a promise to try to persuade a sceptical Congress to grant him late this year the renewed authority to conclude trade agreements. To many Latin American governments, that authority is an acid test of U.S. commitment to the FTAA.\" Yet again, resistance was felt from the Brazilian delegation, such as when Cardoso \"increased the pressure on Mr. Bush and his Canadian hosts by insisting that unless the region’s rich countries fully opened their markets to imports from poor ones, the FTAA ‘would be irrelevant or, worse, undesirable.’\" Finally, Jonquieres and Alden conclude that \"In the end, these differences were brushed aside as the leaders united behind a bland and pre-cooked summit communique.\"
In light of the drastic changes in the rhetorical approach of the Western heads of state and the \"struggle to maintain the public veneer of solidarity\" between countries like Brazil and the U.S., it is hard to deny that the protesters have not had an impact on what easily could have been a Summit without a shred of influence from the public.
|
See also:
http://twincities.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=1654&group=webcast
|
