O'Sullivan: Trading off democracy

By FRAN O'SULLIVAN

United States President George Bush is showcasing democracy as the necessary condition for any nation that wants to sign up to the world's biggest free trade zone.

But his Hemisphere of Liberty - the lofty phrase politicians at the Summit of the Americas are using to describe the proposed Arctic-to-Andes trading bloc - has been coated with a vastly different hue by thousands of demonstrators opposing the summit in Quebec.

"You bastards. Is this democracy?" cried one black-clad activist as police water cannons forced him back from scaling the 3m-high metal fence that has turned old Quebec city into a fortress.

York University Professor Rob MacDonald said: "It's all very well to use trade as a weapon to get South American rogue states to adopt democracy, but communities are losing their voices to the corporations."

These types of swirling emotions and anomalies have taken the gloss off Mr Bush's debut on the world stage.

His first step into the free trade debate takes him along the path his father, George Bush sen, first trod when laying down the plan to bring Mexico into Nafta during his term as President.

But Dubya's attempt to put free trade back at the centre of US foreign policy has been largely overshadowed in Quebec.

The US President, like 33 other leaders, has spent the summit bunkered down behind a metal fortress to keep out protesters opposed to the ambitious plan.

Like Seattle, Prague and Melbourne before it, this economic jamboree has taken second place to television coverage of protesters being beaten back from the fence sealing off the convention centre and hotels where leaders have met.

At one stage, journalists were banned from re-entering the summit's big media centre after they were declared "contaminated" by getting too close to the teargas clouds that police repeatedly sprayed over demonstrators.

The Western Hemisphere pact, or Free Trade Area of the Americas, will involve all nations within the continent, except Cuba, to form the world's largest free trade zone in 2005.

Comprising 800 million people with a combined output of $US11 trillion ($26.64 trillion), this ought to be regarded as a juicy prize for poorer countries. But the protesters see it differently.

Two camps of demonstrators are represented in Quebec.

One is the anarchists who have led the violent demonstrations featured in television shots.

But this group is small compared with the bulk of mainly peaceful protesters led by unions and students concerned that the competition unleashed by globalisation will result in a "race for the bottom" and job losses.

In the past, the developing world's fears focused around loss of control and sovereignty.

But in the coffee bars where students gather before donning face-masks to tackle the protest zone, concerns are voiced that the free trade bloc will lead to basic goods such as education being sold out to international corporates.

Changing these perceptions is not a simple exercise for the politicians.

Activists such as Toronto's Naomi Klein, whose No Logo has made her into a poster girl for the demonstrators, refused invitations from Canadian ministers to come into the tent and influence the debate from within.

But the anti-globalists' protests have forced the leaders to look at ways of dealing with the losers from free trade. Political solutions are being added to the economic agenda.

The final communique has been all but written and only democratic nations will be able to enjoy the benefits of a pan-American free trade agreement.

"From this day forward," said Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien, "benefits will flow only to those who abide by our democratic clause."

Some countries say that enforcing such a condition in the event of a military coup might be difficult, and possibly open to challenge under international law.

But both Mr Bush and his Trade Representative, Robert Zoellick, want some big political wins, although the President still has to win his own domestic war on the trade front.

Fast-track power to enable the White House to negotiate trade agreements that would not be altered by subsequent haggling and tradeoffs in Congress has been stalled since 1994.

Former US President Bill Clinton could not build a congressional constituency to fast-track authority of his own, which ended New Zealand's hopes of achieving a free trade agreement with the US during his two terms.

While Mr Bush stresses that he wants "trade, trade and more trade," he faces some tough realities.

The US has been unable to achieve Mr Zoellick's ambitious goal of accelerating the Americas' free trade timetable at this summit.

It is not just protesters who are cynical about the President's fervour in dealing to the powerful US agricultural lobby, which shelters behind blatant pork-barrelling and subsidies.

Trade observers have pointed to the "America first" stance that Mr Bush has adopted on the Kyoto Protocol.

Linking trade to democracy forced Peru and Paraguay to reject coup attempts and helped Mexico to move away from one-party rule.

But putting the democracy clause into the trade bloc pact poses a challenge for South American leaders once they get back to base.

Colombian President Andres Pastrana said the region faced enormous difficulties and democracy was tenuous: "When hunger, misery and unemployment strike it is very easy to fall for irresponsible populism."

Brazil's Fernando Henrique Cardoso said the US must prove that it was ready to open up its markets to convince Brazilians that a Free Trade Area of the Americas was good.

Professor MacDonald, of York University, had a different concern. "We all know globalisation increases wealth. But while a rising tide raises all yachts, I am concerned some of them have short anchors."

Overcoming such sentiment as Mr Bush gets momentum back into the free trade agenda will be a key test of his presidency.

* Disclosure: Apec CEO Summit Inc provided part-funding towards Fran O'Sullivan's assignment.