"We can form a single united body, while the enemy must split up into fractions. Hence there will be a whole pitted against separate parts of a whole, which means that we shall be many to the enemy's few", (Sun Tzu, 2007, p. 131).
Introduction
There is a saying that "a picture is worth a thousand words". A poignant photo that captures life at a critical moment in time is a powerful portrayal of reality or fiction. While the connotation of the phrase is one of truth, if words can lie, can't a picture? If one looks at the pictures of developing nations, what thoughts come to mind? Does one envision nations stronger and better or weaker and more fragmented due to free trade? Whatever mental picture comes to mind, if free trade agreements enforced by the World Trade Organization fundamentally favor and benefit developed nations instead of developing nations, then perhaps there is no authentic mutual benefit.
This article will explore who the World Trade Organization ultimately benefits. Is it a tool of the developed nations via its enforcement of free trade agreements that provide legal right to access markets of developing nations? Or is the World Trade Organization an international organization that assists developing nations by enforcing agreements they enter into that provide them access to markets in developed nations? If the World Trade Organization's enforcement of free trade agreements increases the wealth and profits of multinational companies in developed nations as well as the wealth and income of citizens in developing nations, then perhaps the World Trade Organization is a forum of parity.
Mutually-Binding Agreements: The World Trade Organization Dispute Resolution Process
Sovereign nations, who enter into trade agreements by choice, are expected to honor their commitments. The World Trade Organization is tasked with providing a forum and process for facilitating resolution of trade disputes between countries, however, unlike alternative dispute resolution techniques(1), the World Trade Organization also serves as a legal entity by interpreting trade agreements and enforcing adherence to such agreements. This tribune role the World Trade Organization plays regarding trade disputes mars the impartiality it is supposed to represent as it is a facilitator of conflict. Finally, decision panels deliberate in closed processes despite the fact the World Trade Organization is supposedly a public institution. If so, the processes it undertakes to reach decisions, not just those decisions, should be in the public domain.
The World Trade Organization through its facilitation of free trade between countries can also indirectly support or exacerbate income and wealth inequality particularly in developing nations but also in developed countries. The fact that countries enter into free trade agreements that do not have processes to increase income for laborers or create wealth for such individuals as part of their content, can benignly increase the wealth and income stratification in nations. As sovereign nations do not have to join the World Trade Organization, the argument they have no other choice but to join is untrue. Nonetheless, the substance of the free trade agreements, the way they are operationalized, and the effect they have on laborers will affect countries not party to such agreements. While those polities outside of the World Trade Organization are not party to its jurisdiction, by operating in the global economy, they can still be affected negatively by the influence it wields. The development brought about through free trade agreements should not ignore the needs of people who reside in countries party to such agreements or not. As Lerche et. al states, "...we suggest that development should be considered in normative and moral terms and not just as an economic or technical problem", (1995, p. 223).
For businesses who operate domestically or abroad, agreements of this type must be evaluated to determine whether they support entrepreneurial endeavors at home, in other countries, or not at all.
1. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes differ from legal processes that address and resolve disputes in that those in conflict retain the power of self-determination. ADR processes do not have any authority to impose or enforce decisions made by those in conflict except for arbitration.
Prince John Gaither-Eli (http://tinyurl.com/The-Sovereign) is a global investor, philanthropist, and entrepreneur. Seeking to engage and synergize the relationship between investing, philanthropy, and entrepreneurship, the "entrepreneurial philanthropist" or "philanthropic entrepreneur" works to eradicate chronic poverty, disease, and intractable leadership across the globe. With experience in a range of fields from conflict resolution, community & economic development, and geopolitical analysis, he desires to fulfill humanity's greatest occupation, a servant. His newest company, Sovereign Insurance & Asset Management, offers the basics of financial stability and protection by supporting his relationship with one of the leading fraternal benefit societies in the United States of America. In addition, Prince John Gaither-Eli is also currently enrolled in the Master's Degree in Entrepreneurship Program at Western Carolina University. Webmasters and other article publishers are hereby granted article reproduction permission as long as this article in its entirety, author's information, and any links remain intact. Copyright 2011 by Prince John Gaither-Eli.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Prince_John_Gaither-Eli
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar