Background - October 1, 2004
A powerful negotiating block called the Miami Group, led by the US, Argentina and Canada, feared that a strong protocol would disrupt their export markets. They tried to force an agreement where most GE organisms (including those destined for use as food for humans and livestock) would actually be excluded from the protocol.
Greenpeace corn action during the International Biosafety Protocol.
They also wanted any protocol to be subordinate to the rulings
of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). This move was vigorously
opposed, as a treaty specifically designed to protect biodiversity
could become meaningless if it were subordinate to the WTO.
Besides, in international law, treaties are equivalent in power to
each other unless stated otherwise. Why would the signatories to
the protocol deliberately weaken the treaty in this way?
In marked contrast to the position of the Miami Group, nearly
all the countries of the developing world have worked for a strong
protocol, based on the precautionary principle, where their right
to reject GE organism imports would be protected. Many developing
countries have tropical environments, which are rich in biological
diversity, and they are especially vulnerable to genetic pollution.
These countries were the leaders in the effort to secure a strong
protocol.
In-Depth:
Help us stop Bush &
Co force feeding the world GE food
How does the WTO affect you, and why should you care about
it?