answers: no, no, the coalition
Opposition to the WTO decision from the pop-left is not fundamentally on grounds of sovereignty, though some use that rhetorical device when it suits them, but on grounds of competitiveness. Obviously for those on the right, sovereignty has more importance.
Competitiveness need not refer to capital; it can refer to workers. It goes to the ability to produce at decent wages and working conditions for export, and all the factors that enter into it. To describe this as neo-mercantilist is not historical, since the actual historical precedents are different. I have heard it described as 'labor mercantilism.' There's nothing wrong with it.
The anti-global forces I support are not pimping for U.S. capital. They seek to defend workers' living standards and the environment from the unregulated market. You have to look pretty hard to find capital interests among the anti-globalizers on the left. On the right, it's not much different, with the exception of the Millikin/textile forces.
I am predicting they will oppose the WTO decision, though I can't say for certain. I'm of two minds about it, as I indicated in my previous post. Getting rid of export preferences in the tax system would be good for the economy in general; thus it would be worth trading that concession for something of value. A potential win-win situation.
"They" means labor, environmental, consumer, and development- oriented groups. The Good Guys.
mbs