About Us | Publications | Mailing List | Initiatives | Donations

Tim Watts

"Mobilised, Globalised"

The Age

April 22, 2000

They work behind the scenes, hunched in front of computers, sending e-mail after e-mail to their collaborators across the globe. They are experts in international affairs, but are never seen mixing with diplomats and world leaders at economic summits. Few people know their names, but these activists are reshaping the rules governing the global economy. People such as Carol Welch, Mike Prokosch and Anna Reynolds are among a new breed of greenie, trade union organiser and community activist. Using the Internet as a weapon, they are lobbying for global change, challenging the bureaucrats and corporate groups that until now have made the rules regulating the world economy.

The three are part of an alliance of more than 450 groups that organised protests in Washington and disrupted meetings of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank last weekend. The same alliance was responsible for demonstrations outside World Trade Organisation meetings in Seattle in November.

The alliance has made for some strange bedfellows: church groups, trade unions, environmental organisations and farmers' cooperatives. But it has proven to be highly effective. And despite the diversity of its interests, it is proving to be a unified coalition.

Mike Prokosch, campaign coordinator with United for a Fair Economy, a US lobby group, says a consensus-building meeting in Boston on March 16 was a key step in formalising the relationship between members of the alliance.

"In Boston, we had the genuine interplay of national and regional interests. There were groups from Europe, North America, Latin America and Asia. We had groups from poor countries arguing that we should campaign for the withdrawal of the United States from the WTO. Others disagreed vehemently, saying effectively that there needs to be a system of rules.

"In the end, I believe we saw the beginning of the evolution of an alternative, bottom-up, NGO-led vision of the global economy. People from different countries were forging agreements, reconciling diverse interests, and creating our version of the global trading system."

The agreement established at the Boston meeting has been published on the Internet (www.citizen.org/pctrade/gattwto/shrinksink.htm) and has signatures from groups in 11 countries, including Australia. It sets out a plan to curb the rule-making authority of appointed bodies such as the WTO, IMF and World Bank and extend the role of more democratic institutions like the United Nations.

"We are not anti-globalisation," says Carol Welch, an international policy analyst with Friends of the Earth. "What we are opposed to is unregulated, unfettered globalisation, because it is eroding the power of the poor. It serves the needs of corporations and doesn't help people in poverty or prevent the destruction of the environment."

In fact, the activist alliance is itself a creature of globalisation. It believes its power stems from use of Internet technology and manipulation of media communications.

"The collapse of the WTO talks in Seattle was the result of a carefully planned, well-organised, global mobilisation effort," says Maude Barlow, head of the Council of Canadians, an Ottawa-based lobby group. "It was portrayed by the media as a spontaneous, chaotic protest when, in fact, it was a carefully planned, well-organised series of events that included people from countries all over the world.

"In the months before the Seattle meeting, there was a realisation that workers in labor unions, groups with environmental concerns, and people worried about poverty in poor countries had common ground in opposing the WTO's plans."

Mike Prokosch says the Washington protests drew hordes of young people from all over North America who only knew about the IMF meetings because of notices distributed on the Internet. "There is a whole generation of people who just swim in this technology. It is a huge mobilising force for people of a certain of age," he said

Activists believe the speed of Internet communication gives them an advantage over slower-moving bureaucracies in institutions such as the WTO, IMF and World Bank.

Maude Barlow says the collapse of the Multi-Lateral Agreement on Investment (a proposed treaty reducing regulation of international capital flows) in 1998 is a pertinent example. "Originally, we were leaked a copy of a draft of the MAI in a brown paper bag. Within hours we had circulated it to other groups in other countries using e-mail and started an international lobbying effort to fight it.

"The French Government was the first to pull out of the MAI, and the minister responsible said the reason was that civil society had done such a strong job convincing them of its flaws."

EVA THORNE, visiting assistant professor in the political science department at Boston University, has documented how activist pressure has changed the environmental policies of the World Bank. "Information is their political currency," she says. "They don't have power as it is traditionally understood. But they can create symbolic politics and gain a lot of leverage by creatively packaging information.

"The Internet allows you to do the work of three people at once," says Anna Reynolds, national liaison officer at the Australian Conservation Foundation. Reynolds was in Seattle for the WTO protests and says she came away having built relationships with activists from different countries. "I now have access to information on governments from people right there, on the ground. It takes just a a few minutes to find out what is happening. In the past, I might have had to put on a researcher for a few days just to get up to date."

It is becoming clear that global institutions are going to be forced to alter their approaches and acknowledge activist groups. United States trade representative Charlene Barshevsky has argued that the activist network must be included in trade negotiations. "It is important that civil society be heard. But more than heard, they must be integrated into the WTO."

To date, the activists' role in rule-making for the global economy has been confined to criticism. The question now facing leaders of the activist network is how they can begin to play a greater agenda-setting role.

Maude Barlow argues that activists need to consider "developing some institutional capacities for global movement building in the longer term". She believes formal mechanisms for engaging with rule-makers are necessary.

However, many activists fear that closer ties to governments will result in their groups being marginalised by politicians. Damian Sullivan, an international trade campaigner with Friends of the Earth in Melbourne, says links with the WTO would be unacceptable. "That can be seen as a panacea - seeking to look like they are doing something, but in reality pushing ahead with similar agendas."

THE DECENTRALISED nature of the activist groups means many members are uncomfortable with institutional-style decision-making. Nick Buxton, a website manager for lobby group Jubilee 2000 in London, says the rapid information flow made possible by the Internet benefits activists in distant locations. "e-mail lists and websites mean the news and campaign strategy are communicated to a large number of people quickly and cheaply. This means the expertise and level of knowledge is extremely high throughout the network."

Carol Welch, of Friends of the Earth, argues that the next step is for activists to unify their lobbying efforts. "Groups can remain autonomous. The key is to have many groups focused on common goals; that is enough to influence government," she says.

Regardless of how activist groups decide to operate, it is clear the Internet has sparked a new "counterculture" movement not seen since the '70s. Fears that Internet technology would isolate people and weaken community ties remain. But there are signs that the opposite effect may be emerging. Maude Barlow says the boost to civil society from the spread of the Internet cannot be underestimated. "It improves the coordination of campaigns dramatically. Face-to-face meetings are still crucial. But the Internet has helped ordinary people from different groups and countries appreciate how much they have in common."