MILLIONS of earthquake survivors see a ray of hope in the International Donors’ Conference opening in Islamabad today. They need help from the world community to rebuild their shattered lives. Hopes have been pinned on leaders of rich nations to donate more generously for relief and rehabilitation. In the words of U.N. Secretary General Kori Annan, who saw for himself the widespread devastation caused by the 8`” October catastrophe, this human tragedy is incredible. Tens of thousands of persons, half of them children, perished. Over one hundred thousand were wounded. Some thirty thousand have been incapacitated for life. The Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) has estimated loss to livestock and agriculture to the tune of US$ 440 million. The world community’s response to appeals from the U.N. and the Government of Pakistan for immediate relief assistance was indeed very heartening. Leaders from far of countries visited the areas devastated by the catastrophe. Thousands of troops, engineers, doctors, and volunteers from different countries are tirelessly working in the region to mitigate human sufferings which have been compounded with the start of the very cold Himalayan winter.
According to Pakistan Government, so far various countries and international organizations have pledged to contribute US$ 2.46 billion against which remittances of only US$ 211.2 million have been received. Kofi Annan has made a passionate appeal to the world to show greater generosity to help millions who suffered and continue to suffer. The cold figures can not describe the colossal loss of human life and property. Deep wounds inflicted by the calamity on the soul of millions would not heal for many decades. It happened to a large population of NWFP and Azad Kashmir. Tomorrow people in another corner of the globe may be hit by a similar or greater tragedy. Human race in one and its fortunate portion must rush to help those humans whose lives are devastated by such natural forces. It is the moral duty of mankind to come to the rescue of its members regardless of differences of creed or colour. Human race is the victim and the magnitude of the loss warrants every one to come out for succour. An estimated U.S. 5.2 billion is required for reconstruction. A lot more will be needed to rebuild lives of the survivors. Economic activity needs to be regenerated. Schools and colleges have to be rebuilt. Hospitals need to be replaced. Infrastructure including roads and bridges is to be reconstructed or repaired. Pakistan is already groaning under the weight of foreign debts. We therefore need grants and not credits. The challenge posed by the monumental tragedy is beyond the resources of any Government. The world must join hands to give a new hope to the millions. The U.N. Secretary General has attempted to shake conscience of the global community. The world will hopefully respond.

Trade talks down to the wire

While attention is focused on this week’s meeting of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum in Pusan, South Korea, the main event is the World Trade Organization (WTO) meeting to be held next month in Hong Kong. That ministerial meeting is critical to the success of the current round of global trade negotiations. Unfortunately, the talks have stalemated, and the culprit appears to be the European Union — France in particular. A breakdown would be a dangerous setback to the prospects of many of the world’s poorest citizens. Resistance to agriculture market liberalization must be overcome. The Doha Round of trade negotiations, launched four years ago, was premised on the agreement that it would focus on opportunities for developing economies. That meant, for all practical purposes, increasing access to agriculture markets in the world’s richest countries. A recent World Bank study estimated that trade liberalization would add nearly $300 billion annually to the global economy by 2015, with two-thirds of those gains coming from reducing barriers to trade in agriculture.
Progress in this area has been slow; while industrialized nations have pushed relentlessly for increased access for their goods and services in developing country markets, they have been reluctant to extend similar opportunities to farm goods from the developing world, products that are often those countries’ most valuable exports. The reason, as Japanese well know, is that agricultural lobbies are often extremely powerful in national capitals. Politicians liberalize at their peril. As those old constraints quickly asserted themselves, the agreement to focus on agriculture quickly unraveled. A ministerial meeting at Cancun, Mexico, two years ago broke up amid acrimonious disputes over the idea of liberalizing developing country agricultural markets. There were hopes that the development of a broad framework agreement last year would help rejuvenate the negotiations; optimists spoke of an interim deal at the Hong Kong ministerial next month. Unfortunately, old political pressures appear to have reasserted themselves.
Trade negotiations earlier this month in Europe were supposed to put more meat on the bones of that framework, but they too broke up without progress. In fact, after the meetings, most negotiators conceded that there would be no deal in Hong Kong and that expectations should be scaled back considerably. The blame for the breakdown has been laid at the feet of the EU. Mr. Peter Mandelson, the EU trade commissioner, is in a tough position. He understands the need to push for agricultural reform, but he is only a commissioner, and is bound by the positions of EU member states. In this case, France adamantly opposes dismantling the protection afforded its farmers.
France is not the only developed country that cossets its farmers. Japanese protections are legendary, and the rationale Tokyo uses — food security and protecting the culture of farmers — echoes those deployed by Paris. The United States also extends considerable assistance to its farmers, but Washington has been forthcoming with offers to open its markets. Last month, U.S. negotiators proposed tariff cuts of 55 to 90 percent over five years and a 60 percent cut in some farm subsidy programs.

—Japan Times