G8 rules the world: who rules the G8?

Corporate interests first
  
Mon 02 June 2003
FRANCE/Evian


As the world's richest and most powerful nations meet in France this week, the questions they should be asking are the ones which matter most: who rules our world? What forces are we going to allow to shape our future?


The experience of the war in Iraq suggests that international law and multinational agreements are declining as forces of order. Might now makes right, and any nation strong enough can invade another on the thinnest excuse of "preventive war," without fear of even having to evidence its case post-facto.

The US challenge to Europe's moratorium on GMO food further suggests that health and environmental concerns, and indeed the will of consumers, are now going to take a back seat to trade. Where corporate profits are threatened by rules governing our health and our planet's future, corporate profits are currently favoured to win.

A true axis of evil is on trial this week in Evian: the monopolisation of global decision-making by the forces of money and power.

The actions from G8 leaders will send a strong signal as to whether we are moving towards a more equitable world, or one which will see increasing instability and insecurity. We don't just mean, militarily, but also in terms of food, water, energy, and access to basic educational and health services.

As an example, President Bush has just announced that the US will provide US $5 billion for a five year plan to combat AIDS, but the latest bill passed by the US Senate suggesting that medicine to treat AIDS could be denied from African nations if they refuse genetically engineered (GE) food aid. This is an extreme example of the US readiness to use all possible means to defend corporate interests. Even if the US bill provision is not legally binding it demonstrates that the US is willing to defend the narrow interests of Monsanto and the GE industry at all cost, including threats to withhold lifesaving aid.

Who are these people?

The G8 (Group of 8) are eight of the leaders of the most economically and politically powerful countries: George Bush of the United States, Jean Chrétien of Canada, Tony Blair of Britain, Gerhard Schröder of Germany, Junichiro Koizumi of Japan, Silvio Berlusconi Italy, Jacques Chirac of France and Vladimir Putin of Russia. The European Union also participates in G8 meetings. Collectively, the G8 controls 65 percent of the world's wealth, but only 14 percent of the world's population.

The group has met annually since 1975, when the world's six largest economies gathered in France to discuss the economic crisis created by US abandonment of the gold standard.

Today the G8 is one of the most powerful bodies in the world. While the organisation claims to be an informal discussion forum, the G8 largely sets the agenda for all of the major international institutions including the World Trade Organization, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Nothing happens on the international stage without direction from the G8. From debt relief to nuclear proliferation, from global forestry policy to global action on climate change, the G8 is involved. However, it is not social and environmental well-being that motivates the G8. Time and time again, the G8 has clearly demonstrated that its primary commitment is to create a global environment in which corporations can easily pursue profits free from obstacles such as environmental regulations, labour standards and taxes.

The record of the G8

I ) On the environment

While the G8 claims that the environment and sustainable development are important issues, the organization consistently fails to put its money where its mouth is.

Consider the G8's position on climate change. The G8 recognizes that climate change is a global problem. The body has even recognized that renewable energy has important potential in addressing this global crisis and went so far as to appoint a Task Force to study renewable energy. However, when the Task Force recommended that the G8 take real action leading to a significant uptake of renewables in both the North and the South, the G8 shelved the report.

From illegal logging to protection of endangered species, the G8 often says it is concerned, but rarely acts on its concern by committing real resources and establishing real timelines to combat the problems. Where the interests of big corporations are at odds with the environment, the environment always loses out.

ii) On trade

The G8 advocates, "open trade and investment drive global growth and poverty reduction." Based on this belief, the G8 has expressed its determination: "we must renew our unwavering commitment to structural change--including greater competition and more adaptable labour markets" (Okinawa Summit Communiqué).

Over and over again, the G8 insists that the free market is the key to social and environmental well-being throughout the world. Whether it's energy security, poverty eradication, combating climate change or fighting HIV/AIDS, the G8 advocates that competitive markets and liberalized trade are pivotal to solving these crises. However, the promises of neoliberal globalisation have failed to pan out.

On the contrary, we have seen the gap between the rich and the poor grow. Where energy and water have been privatised, these basic goods have become unreliable and inaccessible to low income people. Where caring for the environment has been left unregulated, pollution has increased and environmental disasters have grown. And where health or environment regulations, or consumer concerns, come into conflict with the concept of unrestricted "Free Trade," the G8 has nearly always sided with the multinational corporations that stand to profit, rather than the cautionary path that would defend our planet and our future. The US attempt to force unwanted GMOs on Europe is only the latest example of world leadership coming directly from the corporate board room, in this case Monsanto's.

To be sure, there already are some very important global rules which, if followed, could go a long way to ensuring that human and environmental well-being are put before corporate profit. Such global rules include environmental agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and human rights agreements such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

However, despite calls from citizens around the world, the G8 has failed to take any action that would make trade rules subservient to environmental and human rights agreements. On the contrary, the US is pushing the World Trade Organization to make exactly the opposite prioritisation in the case of GMOs. It's time for the G8 to listen to citizens instead of big corporations.


iii) On debt

At the 1999 Summit in Cologne, US $100 billion of debt cancellation was offered. However, as of last year, only US $2.6 billion has been cancelled. Given the devastating impacts of poverty world-wide, it's hard to see what the G8 is waiting for.

The G8 supports the World Bank's Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC). The HIPC has come under sharp criticism because it offers inadequate amounts of cancellation to only a handful of the countries requiring debt relief. The Jubilee movement in the South argues that full debt relief should be provided to all of those countries who need it. If such a debt cancellation policy was adopted, most impoverished countries would have all of their so-called debt forgiven.


Greenpeace has consistently called for a more equitable approach to development. The 'development' policies of the last 50 years have led to a growing gap between rich and poor, both between and within nations. A development policy which serves to enrich Northern corporations and a few elites in both North and South is not acceptable.

Will major world governments be intimidated by the strong-arm tactics of the US? This not only applies to questions of war and peace, but also attempts by the US to impose the will of their corporations on the rest of the world.

Which way will the G8 head? We, and the world, will be watching.Corporate interests first
  
Mon 02 June 2003
FRANCE/Evian


As the world's richest and most powerful nations meet in France this week, the questions they should be asking are the ones which matter most: who rules our world? What forces are we going to allow to shape our future?


The experience of the war in Iraq suggests that international law and multinational agreements are declining as forces of order. Might now makes right, and any nation strong enough can invade another on the thinnest excuse of "preventive war," without fear of even having to evidence its case post-facto.

The US challenge to Europe's moratorium on GMO food further suggests that health and environmental concerns, and indeed the will of consumers, are now going to take a back seat to trade. Where corporate profits are threatened by rules governing our health and our planet's future, corporate profits are currently favoured to win.

A true axis of evil is on trial this week in Evian: the monopolisation of global decision-making by the forces of money and power.

The actions from G8 leaders will send a strong signal as to whether we are moving towards a more equitable world, or one which will see increasing instability and insecurity. We don't just mean, militarily, but also in terms of food, water, energy, and access to basic educational and health services.

As an example, President Bush has just announced that the US will provide US $5 billion for a five year plan to combat AIDS, but the latest bill passed by the US Senate suggesting that medicine to treat AIDS could be denied from African nations if they refuse genetically engineered (GE) food aid. This is an extreme example of the US readiness to use all possible means to defend corporate interests. Even if the US bill provision is not legally binding it demonstrates that the US is willing to defend the narrow interests of Monsanto and the GE industry at all cost, including threats to withhold lifesaving aid.

Who are these people?

The G8 (Group of 8) are eight of the leaders of the most economically and politically powerful countries: George Bush of the United States, Jean Chrétien of Canada, Tony Blair of Britain, Gerhard Schröder of Germany, Junichiro Koizumi of Japan, Silvio Berlusconi Italy, Jacques Chirac of France and Vladimir Putin of Russia. The European Union also participates in G8 meetings. Collectively, the G8 controls 65 percent of the world's wealth, but only 14 percent of the world's population.

The group has met annually since 1975, when the world's six largest economies gathered in France to discuss the economic crisis created by US abandonment of the gold standard.

Today the G8 is one of the most powerful bodies in the world. While the organisation claims to be an informal discussion forum, the G8 largely sets the agenda for all of the major international institutions including the World Trade Organization, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Nothing happens on the international stage without direction from the G8. From debt relief to nuclear proliferation, from global forestry policy to global action on climate change, the G8 is involved. However, it is not social and environmental well-being that motivates the G8. Time and time again, the G8 has clearly demonstrated that its primary commitment is to create a global environment in which corporations can easily pursue profits free from obstacles such as environmental regulations, labour standards and taxes.

The record of the G8

I ) On the environment

While the G8 claims that the environment and sustainable development are important issues, the organization consistently fails to put its money where its mouth is.

Consider the G8's position on climate change. The G8 recognizes that climate change is a global problem. The body has even recognized that renewable energy has important potential in addressing this global crisis and went so far as to appoint a Task Force to study renewable energy. However, when the Task Force recommended that the G8 take real action leading to a significant uptake of renewables in both the North and the South, the G8 shelved the report.

From illegal logging to protection of endangered species, the G8 often says it is concerned, but rarely acts on its concern by committing real resources and establishing real timelines to combat the problems. Where the interests of big corporations are at odds with the environment, the environment always loses out.

ii) On trade

The G8 advocates, "open trade and investment drive global growth and poverty reduction." Based on this belief, the G8 has expressed its determination: "we must renew our unwavering commitment to structural change--including greater competition and more adaptable labour markets" (Okinawa Summit Communiqué).

Over and over again, the G8 insists that the free market is the key to social and environmental well-being throughout the world. Whether it's energy security, poverty eradication, combating climate change or fighting HIV/AIDS, the G8 advocates that competitive markets and liberalized trade are pivotal to solving these crises. However, the promises of neoliberal globalisation have failed to pan out.

On the contrary, we have seen the gap between the rich and the poor grow. Where energy and water have been privatised, these basic goods have become unreliable and inaccessible to low income people. Where caring for the environment has been left unregulated, pollution has increased and environmental disasters have grown. And where health or environment regulations, or consumer concerns, come into conflict with the concept of unrestricted "Free Trade," the G8 has nearly always sided with the multinational corporations that stand to profit, rather than the cautionary path that would defend our planet and our future. The US attempt to force unwanted GMOs on Europe is only the latest example of world leadership coming directly from the corporate board room, in this case Monsanto's.

To be sure, there already are some very important global rules which, if followed, could go a long way to ensuring that human and environmental well-being are put before corporate profit. Such global rules include environmental agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants and human rights agreements such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

However, despite calls from citizens around the world, the G8 has failed to take any action that would make trade rules subservient to environmental and human rights agreements. On the contrary, the US is pushing the World Trade Organization to make exactly the opposite prioritisation in the case of GMOs. It's time for the G8 to listen to citizens instead of big corporations.


iii) On debt

At the 1999 Summit in Cologne, US $100 billion of debt cancellation was offered. However, as of last year, only US $2.6 billion has been cancelled. Given the devastating impacts of poverty world-wide, it's hard to see what the G8 is waiting for.

The G8 supports the World Bank's Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC). The HIPC has come under sharp criticism because it offers inadequate amounts of cancellation to only a handful of the countries requiring debt relief. The Jubilee movement in the South argues that full debt relief should be provided to all of those countries who need it. If such a debt cancellation policy was adopted, most impoverished countries would have all of their so-called debt forgiven.


Greenpeace has consistently called for a more equitable approach to development. The 'development' policies of the last 50 years have led to a growing gap between rich and poor, both between and within nations. A development policy which serves to enrich Northern corporations and a few elites in both North and South is not acceptable.

Will major world governments be intimidated by the strong-arm tactics of the US? This not only applies to questions of war and peace, but also attempts by the US to impose the will of their corporations on the rest of the world.

Which way will the G8 head? We, and the world, will be watching.