>As opposition to the WTO continues to grow around the world, the
>Geneva-based organization can expect to see its effectiveness further
>damaged.
And it won't surprise me if Washington is one of the forces aiming to do damage. Joseph Kahn writes in the NYT:
>Even after the success here, doubts remained about the effectiveness
>of the World Trade Organization. It operates by consensus, meaning
>individual members can hold the group hostage. The negotiating
>program had to be watered down so much to obtain agreement that one
>Japanese trade official called the delicately constructed
>declaration "a perfect balance of unhappiness."
Translated, this means that the U.S. doesn't like it that each country has one vote, meaning that Africa together has greater weight than the G-7 countries. No doubt they'd prefer something more like the WB/IMF, where votes are weighted by income, and only the U.S. has veto power.
Chuck again:
>Hah! That's pretty funny. The World Bank could start a second career in
>stand-up comedy once we disband it.
>
>Ignorant hordes indeed.
Actually, these things are straight news summaries, with the WB adding little on its own. That phrase is in the original Financial Post edit <http://www.nationalpost.com/search/story.html?f=/stories/20011115/787321.html&qs=doha>: "While no one will ever agree with all the give and take of a major negotiation, it is important to dwell on the many accomplishments of Doha. The first is that a world-wide agreement has been reached -- years of riots by ignorant hordes of anti-globalization protesters notwithstanding."
Doug