Many aspects of the current international debate on free trade and globalisation were on view at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec over the weekend. Leaders of 34 states agreed to conclude by 2005 a Free Trade Area of the Americas. But in doing so they heard strong reservations from leaders of many of the poorer states that unless poverty and inequality are reduced and democracy and human rights strengthened free trade will be no guarantee of development. That message was dramatically echoed outside the conference halls by the thousands of protesters who denounced the free trade project as a monument to corporate profiteering rather than peoples' welfare.
Thus the debate is more complex than is allowed by simplistic stereotypes that counterpose those inside and outside the conference halls where such issues have been negotiated in the last couple of years. Quebec joins the catalogue of such locations, beginning with the violent protests in Seattle at the World Trade Organisation talks in December 1999, then running through various other meetings in London, Prague and Nice. Many of the non-governmental organisations supporting the protests also lobby governments intensely on issues of development, democracy, inequality and poverty. Many of them, too, are finding the repeatedly violent activities of a small minority of demonstrators counter-productive, however much they are provoked by over-reaction from security forces.
Such protests could not have erupted on such a scale without being rooted in genuinely concerned and often spontaneous social movements arising from the deleterious effects of unregulated free trade driven by commercial greed and opportunism. They bring together trade unionists, poor farmers, representatives of indigenous peoples, ecological protesters and many NGOs using contemporary communications networking more effectively than governments. Political leaders have to take increasing account of such movements at home and abroad, without conceding the trade or integration agendas to them. This will be a feature of the international system for the foreseeable future. No longer will it be possible to negotiate issues with such potential for good or ill behind closed doors. As seen in Quebec, there is an overlap of interest and positions between protesters and participants, and not only a security gulf between them. That should not be obscured by the militant activists.
The project to free American trade remains highly problematic after this meeting. The goal of uniting 800 million people producing one third of world output in one economic and political bloc is ambitious indeed. Leaders of Brazil, Mexico, Chile and Argentina are attracted by the prospect that United States markets would open up to their exports. But they underline the vulnerability of many of their industries and communities to competition from stronger US companies, and that of their societies where one third of the population live in poverty. The new Mexican president, Mr Vincente Fox, told the gathering that unless poverty and inequality are tackled democracy will not be strengthened. It was widely noted that for all his enthusiastic endorsement of free trade, President Bush has not been given congressional approval to negotiate it on the fast track.