Who rules the G8? Right, end of photo op, let's go boys...
Arm-twisting tactics
The WTO's more powerful members use a number of arm-twisting
tactics to put pressure on other countries and achieve their key
goals. Many developing countries cannot compete. The Seattle 3rd
Ministerial Conference actually broke down and ended in failure for
this reason: because of a lack of transparency, openness and
fairness in decision-making.
All or nothing
The decision-making process within the WTO is complex. One of
the rules is that all decisions must be agreed by "consensus" - all
members must agree.
What's more, all issues must be resolved at the end of a WTO
trade meeting - there must be agreement on all issues, or else
there is agreement on none and the meeting will end in failure.
It's all or nothing.
This puts a great deal of pressure on countries that may be
"holding out" on one issue, to give in - or face a political and/or
economic backlash from other members.
A system of trade-offs that trade away
the environment
This rule also creates a system of "trade-offs." In other words,
because all issues form part of one package, governments will often
trade off something they want on one issue, to give them a better
chance of winning something important on another issue.
This system is most advantageous to powerful countries that have
more to trade and more to gain. It also means that issues on the
WTO agenda, including environment and health-related issues, can be
traded away in this negotiating game.
Meetings behind closed doors
The WTO employs a series of tactics that keep it hidden from the
public. Most of its decision-making processes are completely closed
- only governments can participate and provide input. This
closed-door, invitation-only type meeting completely de-legitimises
the process and its outcome. It also ensures that the negotiations
are weighted in favour of more powerful countries.
Before each Ministerial meeting, there are often
"mini-ministerials" which are meetings of government Ministers held
to try to build consensus before the big meeting. The most
difficult issues are discussed, and countries start to work on
"deals." However, because these mini-ministerials are by invitation
only, only a handful of countries are even present. NGOs have
traditionally been locked out.
It is interesting to note that the US, European Union, Canada,
Australia and Japan are a few of the examples of countries that are
always present. The negotiating reality is that these countries are
the ones that can make or break deals, and whose input really
counts.
There has also been a history of documents being held back,
rather than quickly declassifying them and making them publicly
available.