A tsunami of trade agreements: Reflections on 20 years of resistance
All the versions of this article: [English] [Español] [français]
In 2024, bilaterals.org celebrates its 20th anniversary. During this time, bilaterals.org has served as a collaborative and open online platform supporting struggles against free trade and investment agreements around the world, and campaigns against RCEP, TPP, the ISDS mechanism and many other processes.
To mark the occasion, we are publishing a series of five articles written by the movements and activists who have been at the heart of these campaigns all along. The articles aim to take stock of what has happened over the past 20 years and to look ahead to the resistance against free trade agreements in the years to come. They share experiences from Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America, connecting the dots between different struggles.
- A tsunami of trade agreements: Reflections on 20 years of resistance
A tsunami of trade agreements: Reflections on 20 years of resistance
by Diyana Yahaya, 11 november 2024
2004, the year bilaterals.org was founded, was a year when the world remained very much divided following the US invasion of Iraq. That way, Israel carried out various invasions of the Gaza Strip. That same year, an earthquake hit off the coast of Northern Sumatra, leading to one of the largest tsunamis recorded in history. This tsunami had hit coasts across the region, including the coast of the northern state of Penang, Malaysia.
Just a couple of months before the tsunami, the Malaysian government signed a Trade and Investment Agreement with the US, in what was likely supposed to be a first step towards a full-fledged Malaysia-US FTA. It was one of the many trade and investment agreements that were mushrooming in every corner of the world amidst the various deadlocks at the World Trade Organization (WTO) resulting from the oppositions from both social movements and global south countries.
This proliferation of free trade and investment agreements around the world, also came like a tsunami. It was massive, destructive, it shifted the mindset that there were many other agreements that were happening in secret and as capable of wrecking havoc, if not more, than the WTO.
The negotiations for the Malaysia-US FTA also faced numerous oppositions from various civil society and social movements in Malaysia demanding for the end of the negotiations. Negotiations officially stopped in 2008. However, behind the scene, another secret new negotiation was emerging around the same time, and just 2 years later, Malaysia officially joined the throngs of many other countries to take part in the negotiations of what was formerly known as the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) and now the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPPA).
Today, Malaysia is a country that believes itself to be trapped in its middle income status. And subsequently as a country, accepted the unproven dogma that foreign direct investment, providing market access and becoming more market friendly is its promised way out. As a result, successive governments have been eager to sign and negotiate free trade agreements without critically considering its impact on the country.
When I first learnt about the TPPA in 2013, the negotiations had been going on for years in secret . Very little was known about it. Most civil societies and social movements had never heard about it, whether in Malaysia or around the world. There was no draft text of the agreements available. Neither civil societies nor even members of the parliament had any access to the negotiations. All this, while the TPPA was being hailed everywhere as the “new generation” of trade agreements. Today, the CPTPPA is just one of the many so-called new generations of trade agreements. In fact, there are many more newer agreements being signed and negotiated, each becoming even broader, encroaching into newer issues and charting new areas to cause harm upon.
For several decades feminist movements and organisations have been raising feminist critique and analysis on the economic system as a whole, including trade and investment rules - which have often been designed and implemented blind towards gendered impact and consequences. In response, governments have introduced the human right and gender clauses and chapters in FTAs, touted as a way to “level the playing field” between women and men. However, these responses fail to address feminists’ actual criticisms, as ironically, the current free trade agreements ultimately empower wealthy multinational corporations and countries, not people.
Today’s world, similar to 20 years ago, continues to witness the devastating consequences of the Global North’s military interventions and support for oppressive regimes, as exemplified by the ongoing genocide and occupation of Palestine. Despite near-unanimous consensus among Global South states at the UN against the Palestinian genocide, in which 70% of those killed are women and children, the Global North has remained silent, failing to challenge Israel’s gross human rights violations.
Meanwhile the US, European and other global North countries actively promote free trade agreements that claim to uphold human rights, gender equality, labour protections, and environmental standards. However, their dismissal of these principles in the face of atrocities reveals the glaring double standards and empty rhetoric behind human rights clauses in trade agreements, often used to pressure developing countries into opening markets, removing tariffs, relinquishing regulatory power, and granting increased privileges to corporations.
So in many ways, the peoples’ struggles of the past 20, or even 30 years have evolved and changed, some struggles in today’s world have also remained the same.
What has remained the same is that with every emergence of new trade and investment agreements and the introduction of “new areas”, they have also been met with oppositions, from feminist movements to various social movements and civil societies. But with every new trade agreement that is put on halt through the oppositions and mobilisation of social movements and civil societies, another one emerges in its place. Furthermore, criticisms against the destructive and harmful impact of trade agreements are often met with false solutions proposed in subsequent agreements.
Despite the growing momentum of opposition against FTAs and the countless movements working towards alternatives, the trade justice movement and diverse social movements remain siloed by issues, approaches, and geographies. These divisions, perpetuated by governments and the technicality of trade agreements, hinder South-South collaboration and awareness of trade agreements’ far-reaching impacts. The Global North-South divide further exacerbates these challenges, as many civil society and social movements in the Global South lack the resources to work across different issues and regions while fighting against the direct negative effects of FTAs. Many civil societies and social movements in the Global North have not always carried the same criticism and opposition towards FTAs as those in the South. And the on-going genocide and colonization in Palestine has revealed some of the fissures further. Platforms like bilaterals.org therefore, remain crucial in bridging these gaps and fostering solidarity across diverse movements.
As trade justice activists, we must be at the forefront of collective organising and mobilising for a new trade system that addresses pressing global challenges such as the climate crisis, human rights, digital technologies, power asymmetries, and the erosion of democracy and multilateralism. This alternative trade system should be rooted in solidarity and the needs of people, communities, and countries, rather than free, open, and unregulated markets. Envisioning this alternative cannot be separated from our struggles to dismantle patriarchy, racism, fascism, fundamentalism, militarism, colonisation, and capitalism. It’s a daunting task, but as trade and human rights justice activists, we are left with no other choice but to embark on it.
