VIII. Implications for Namibia
Favored tariff treatment under WTO covers over 90% of Africa's exports but unfortunately not fish, which is an important Namibian export product. Nevertheless, due to product diversification Namibia can exploit the new export opportunities. The agreement on textiles and clothing for example will lead to a progressive liberalisation of existing quotas. Market access opportunities are also available for exports of services and for consumption of service abroad (e.g. banking and financial services). Besides this, commitments on the supply of services in all potential markets have been made so that Namibia will benefit from the combination of technology and services offered.
Namibia is not forced to use international standards of non-tariff measures, Uke rules of origin, import licensing and sanitary measures, as long as its measures are transparent and predictable.
WI. Critical comments on the WTO agreement
The WTO believes in the "free market effect" where the "invisible hand" (Adam Smith) navigates offer and demand and creates a balance. Therefore free trade, free investment and an independent National Bank that guarantees a stable currency are necessary. But as the world economic crisis 1929 and the break down of the Far East market 1998 show free trade without regulations does not work. Developing countries and transition economies are not strong enough to stand the international competition and will lose economic independence if its exchange rates decline. Of course it is important for developing countries, like Namibia, to participate in interregional and international trade but due to their low productivity they need preferential access to international markets, which should not be granted to industrial countries exporting to them.
Positive voices like 'The Namibian Trade Digest" see a more secure and open market for African exports due to the WTO agreement, which includes the agricultural sector, as a single new tariff will replace protective measures. To my opinion it seems very naiv to believe in better export opportunities for primary products because of a single tariff: Most of the agricultural exports need subsidies in order to offer competitive prices on the world market. Moreover, international agricultural markets, like the EU, produce much more than they need and pay subsidies for lower production; they are not interested in African agricultural products. Therefore, African countries should concentrate on interregional trade under rules, which correspond to their requirements.
The African WTO members (excluding the least developed countries) agreed further on ceilings for tariffs on all agricultural products and certain industrial products. The problem is that countries will lose benefits of import duties on which they rely often heavily. Missing import duties can also lead to increasing exports in developed countries, which are able to offer their surplus of agricultural products to dumping prices and push the local goods away.
Fact is that the developing countries must make sure that they participate actively in the WTO in order to strengthen their influence and to defend their interests.
Global problems
Terrorism
Terrorist acts occur unpredictably, making it impossible to protect yourself absolutely. The first and best protection is to avoid travel to areas where there has been a persistent record of terrorist attacks or kidnappings.
Most terrorist attacks are the result of careful planning. Just as a car thief will first be attracted to an unlocked car with the key in the ignition, terrorists are looking for the most accessible targets. The chances that a tourist, traveling with an unpublished program or itinerary, would be the victim of terrorism are slight. In addition, many terrorist groups, seeking publicity for political causes within their own country or region, may not be looking for American targets.
Nevertheless, the following pointers may help you avoid becoming a target of opportunity. These precautions may provide some degree of protection, and can serve as practical and psychological deterrents to would-be terrorists.
Terrorism
Religious zeal of political goals drive terrorists. Recent terrorist attacks are illustrating the privatisation of violence and globalisation of insecurity more then ever before. International terrorism is becoming more and more a strategic threat. The new terrorist movements seem willing to use unlimited violence and cause massive casualties. The tragic events on September 11 should not be considered anymore as attacks, but as massacres, in lay parlance, and as a crime against humanity in international law. The signal horror of what happened that morning results from the occurrence of the large-scale and premeditated random killing op people over a short period of time, in a context which is revolting for its massiveness and the innocent people killed in it, whatever motives the killers may have been prompted by to commit the massacres.
Terrorist organisations typically maintained a presence worldwide in order to raise and transfer funds, to create false identities for operatives, to procure weaponry and material, to set up operational sanctuaries, and to support infiltration across the borders and overseas.
The term terrorism was never defined by law in any consensual manner until the European Union, under the Treaty of Amsterdam has offered an ideal setting for international law enforcement cooperation , but this experience cannot be extrapolated to other regions of the world.
The first attempt ot reach an international agreement on terrorism was made in 1937 within the League of Nations. However its dissolution on the eve of WWII aborted this initiative. One of the measures considered by the League of Nations was the creation of an International Crimininal Court4, responsible for trying international terrorists and sea pirates. The United Nations has never achieved a comprehensive treaty on terrorism for several reasons: its membership includes nations who actively sponsor terrorits; the members could not reach an agreement on how to distinguish between terrorism and wars of national liberation. Especially the African and Asian members feared that such a treaty would endanger the right to self-determination of populations. The emphasized explicitly the legitimacy of violence in the struggle for national liberation, and the use of tactics such as hostage taking5. The third problem has been the inability of the United Nations to enforce a treaty, which makes it a futile exercise.
The Council of Europe issued the 1977 Strasbourg Convention on the suppression of terrorism. More recently, he G-7, as a periodical conference of the Heads of State and Government of the eight most industrialised countries in the world, has become more and more involved in anti-terrorism. The strength of their effort lies in the fact that they do not solely count on international treaties to resolve the problem, but pay attention to alternatives, such as the security standards set by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. The European Union has recently created a framework decision on preventing and combatting terrorism in 2004
The US has clearly expressed its wish to make the fight against terrorism the new priority, but most of the Europeans do not accept the idea of a war on terrorism. Behind these differences in opinion, there are divergent policies with regard to defence spending. 11 September not only led the US to declare itself at war, it also led to a sizeable increase in US military spending and brought about the biggest governmental reorganisation in fifty years by creating a new Department of Homeland Security. Planned increases of projection capability are only of slight benefit to civil defence and means are specifically earmarked to combat terrorism. Also a lot of progress has been made in the fields of police, justice and finance.
Decisions taken both in the US and Europe for protecting their societies from new attacks have been hotly debated on both sides of the Atlantic. One of main elements in the democracy/terrorism debate is military tribunals, such as those that have been put in place in the US. These appear reprehensible to Europeans for two reasons: they are a departure from the rules of democratic societies, and they prevent the cooperation that is essential for fighting terrorism. Exceptional jurisdictions are by definition a brake on international cooperation 6.
Drugs
1st policeman: We work as task force leaders in the 28th militia precinct of the Central District Administration of the Interior Ministry. We have a small beat, but many problems. There are more than 22,000 people living in our precinct and the problem of drugs is one of the most critical, because it brings all the other crimes along with it. The struggle against racketeering isn’t carried out on the precinct level. Most often our foe turns out to be the hooligan of song and story—thefts, burglaries, robberies. Many commit crimes not because they’re running with one mafia band or another, but simply because they’re forced into crime out of need, above all for money and drugs. They need money for drugs, and drug addicts often don’t work: their health doesn’t permit it.
"Pchela": What’s the social profile of a drug addict?
2nd policeman: Everything is determined by problems in the society. If drugs are sold almost legally in educational institutions and it’s considered cool to walk into a decent place with a joint, then you find every sort among the drug addicts—gilded youth and hooligans.
1st: The Authority for Combating Illegal Drug Trade is especially engaged in the struggle against the spread of drugs. I somehow don’t remember our ever having charged someone we nabbed with a joint or with a sack of "stubble" [chopped poppy heads used as a narcotic]. Most often we bring in drug addicts for general sorts of crimes: they commit thefts, robberies, beat up drunks, old people. If we speak in terms of social categories, then most often, of course, this isn’t the gilded youth, because we have hardly any colleges in the district. There are several spots where grass is sold. Most often we’re fighting with the lowest category, the dropouts. As a rule, these are guys who don’t work and can’t think about anything except drugs, guys who are completely fried. It’s pointless to look for a book in the apartments of these perpetrators. You stop by in the course of half a year and you see how things disappear. Then it turns out that the room has been sold, too, after which its occupant is put in jail. In a general cross-section of society there aren’t many drug addicts. It isn’t an overwhelming mass phenomenon, the percentages aren’t great.
In our precinct, for instance, there’s this group, twenty to twenty-five people, that creates the climate: they commit thefts, they stash and sell drugs. In Russia we have humane legislation: the perpetrator gets caught, the investigator says to him "Bad boy!" According to law he signs a document stating he will not leave the city, and you struggle with him for a year. Once a month we bury somebody. It’s an awful sight: a sixteen-year-old died here on Pravda Street—he’s lying there, green froth coming out of his mouth. Not much fun, especially if you know that there’s another guy like him in the next precinct over, and in the neighboring district there are two more like him.
2nd: They die for different reasons: it may be that the diagnosis isn’t drug addiction, but trophic ulcers or an overdose.
I don’t believe in the drug addict who doesn’t commit crimes—if of course he isn’t a high society drug addict, someone involved in film or music. In order to obtain drugs you need money in constantly increasing amounts. The addict loses control and his health is ruined and he isn’t able to work anymore: he loses his moral underpinnings. It’s hard to explain to him that it’s wrong to snatch an old woman’s purse and hit her over the head with a pipe in the process. He’ll say: "Yes, it’s bad, but I had to shoot up." I’m not against anyone doing their own thing. But of course if someone is going to deal drugs, then he’ll have to deal with us. We aren’t all-powerful, but sometimes we can make things seriously unpleasant for someone.
What’s being done in schools and universities in terms of campaigning against narcotics—when it’s done at all—is mainly poorly done, on the level of head teacher Maria, who doesn’t know what drugs are. You have to fight so that "Come on, Vasya, let’s go to the nightclub, we’ll each fix ourselves a joint and have a toke with our crowd" isn’t the way young people think. Propagandizing a healthy lifestyle is a national problem.
1st: Society changed a few years ago. Its social structure changed, economic relationships changed, people’s morals changed. Now people are obsessed by one idea, one thought: to get more and more pleasure. In principle it’s not the existence of nightclub culture that’s the problem—it’s a problem of society as a whole. Like the ancient Romans, who forgot that they should enlighten people, give them laws. They began to demand bread and circuses. Cheap, free bread and more and more nerve-tingling circuses. The same with our society. And it’s supported by our entire popular culture. And as long as that exists, drugs in massive quantities will exist.