Bilateral Free Trade And Investment Agreements
From Seattle to Doha, Cancun to Hong Kong, and all points in between, World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations have failed to deliver as much as many of the corporations and governments which dominate the world’s economy want. So the US and a number of other governments, urged on by their big business lobbies, have increasingly turned to bilateral free trade and investment agreements. These negotiations are much less visible and can easily slip beneath the radar of NGOs and popular movements that oppose the WTO. The business coalitions that are the biggest driving force behind bilateral free trade and investment negotiations are quite open about their self-interest, and eager to keep upping the stakes and locking governments into ever tougher standards to ensure expanded profit margins and monopoly control. Through bilateral agreements, they seek to stitch up from below what they have been unable to achieve – so far - at the WTO. Bilateral free trade agreements are seen by the agricultural biotechnology industry as an important conduit for spreading genetically modified organisms (GMOs) around the world. US agribusiness corporations are looking to bilateral and regional trade agreements “to expand foreign understanding and acceptance of US regulations and standards, particularly with respect to agricultural biotechnology.”2 Meanwhile, the US Administration sees these agreements as useful political instruments to further its broader geopolitical interests.
|Title:||Bilateral Free Trade And Investment Agreements|
|Authors:||Pesticide Action Network Asia Pacific|
genetically modified organism
|Publisher:||Pesticide Action Network Asia Pacific|
|Appears in Sub-Collections:||Free Trade Agreements (FTA)|
Files in This Item: