Now that medicines are off the table...

Excuse my cynicism, but is the recent agreement on drugs for AIDS-ravaged poor countries a quick PR excercise to cover for business-as-usual? Now that the organization has been seen to show "concern" for poor countries, will it return to the corporate agenda? How else to explain the quick adoption of one of the main US pet causes - getting the WTO to rule on the EU's restrictions on GMO foods?

Last week, the WTO reached an agreement to provide desperately needed medicines to poor countries struggling with epidemics of AIDS, tuberculosis and other diseases. This agreement came about because the United States agreed to drug plan proposals it had previously rejected. It also agreed to take up one of the Bush administration's pet causes: investigating the European Union's restrictions on Genetically Modified Foods.

The agreement on medicines gave the WTO something to brag about. Apologists at the WTO and in the rah-rah financial press crowed about how the system really was concerned about those less fortunate than multinational pharmaceutical companies.

Many countries and organizations were quick to point out that the deal was not as good as it sounded. While the WTO was trumpeting its victory for disease-stricken countries, the US was seeking to encure that pharmaceutical profits would be protected, and very few cheap drugs would reach the countries that need them but can least afford them.

Once it became clear how many conditions the United States had insisted upon before signing the agreement, many countries grew concerned that the deal would discourage the production and distribution of cheap generic drugs.
"Flawed WTO drugs deal will do little to secure future access to medicines in developing countries"

Medecins sans Frontieres was quick to point out that the United States was using another trade negotiating apparatus, the Free Trade Area of the Americas, to lessen the impact of the agreement.

It seems the US was giving (very publicly) with one hand, and taking away (very quietly) with another. Why do this? I suspect it was to start the negotiations with a positive accomplishment (no matter how little effect it will have) in order to counter critics later, when the WTO seeks to expand into areas it really should leave to the citizens and elected governments of the world.

The WTO power grab has already begun. The very next day, before the ink was dry on the medicines agreement, the WTO announced that it would look into the European Union restrictions on GMO foods - turning an issue of public and environmental health into a trade issue.

"WTO to probe Europe's GMO policy"

Find out more about the Precautionary Principle, which the US is opposed to in the EU's GMO policy