World Trade Talks Fail! What does this mean for Wildlife?

Today the Independent newspaper reports that the World Trade Talks in Geneva have collapsed.

Obviously this is a very serious problem for the world economy and especially the poorest parts of the world, but is this also a major problem for the worlds wildlife specifically the endangered species?

The article  that appears on the Independent website:

Trade talks fail over US farm feud

By John Lichfield
Wednesday, 30 July 2008 By John Lichfield
Wednesday, 30 July 2008

Nine days – and seven years – of painful negotiations to boost the world economy by bulldozing obstacles to free trade have collapsed in Geneva.

Hopes of a confidence-building breakthrough on trade in food, industrial goods and financial services between rich, poor and developing nations foundered on a dispute between China, India and the US. Although there was some talk of fresh negotiations in September, the so-called "Doha" round of trade talks, launched in 2001, appeared to be dead in the water.

"Christian Aid said no deal was better than a bad deal for poor countries such as Sudan"  AFP/Getty Images

The talks broke down after the US failed to resolve a dispute with China and India over a proposed system to defend poor farmers in developing nations from a surge of food exports from richer countries. The issue – regarded as minor when the talks began – came to crystallise growing suspicions between rich and poor, the developed and the developing, about the balance of risks and benefits in the package.

The failure was greeted with relief by some – and with intense alarm by others. With the world economy wounded by high oil prices and the banking crisis, there were fears that the collapse of the talks could undermine business confidence and tip the world towards recession. "It was hanging on a thread," said the Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim. The thread didn't hold."

Peter Power, spokesman for the EU trade commissioner Peter Mandelson, said the failure was a "massive blow to confidence in the global economy". In a blog written before the final collapse, Mr Mandelson spoke of his "disbelief" that such important negotiations could be torpedoed by what he saw as a relatively technical dispute.

Similar views were expressed in the US and Europe. "I think it's a strong negative and it really follows on the heels of a retreat from globalisation and trade that were really the building blocks for the prosperity of the last several decades," said Michael Darda, chief economist at MKM Partners in the US.

Third World aid pressure groups said the collapse signaled a willingness by poorer countries to stand up to the West. "No deal is better than a bad deal," said Matthew Coghlan, of Christian Aid. By John Lichfield
Wednesday, 30 July 2008 By John Lichfield
Wednesday, 30 July 2008

So the question this article brings to my mind is; if we don't do enough to help the poorest people in the world to live, survive and prosper, then how can we be expected to gain their support in helping to protect the most vulnerable and endangered species which live in the same locations these people do?

We must enable and empower these poor populations and then we can enlist them to protect and support the animals which need our help. The people need our help as well as the animals. We have to have a complete package of help. Otherwise we wont achieve any real objectives in the long run.

Although the article in the Independent doesn't mention the wildlife issues, they are related problems and it would be wise to acknowledge the fact. Everybody needs hope. People and Animals.

Vince De Luca.



 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
  • No comments exist for this post.
Leave a comment

Submitted comments are subject to moderation before being displayed.

 Name

 Email (will not be published)

Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.