Feb 13, 1991

GATT ROUND SAID TO THREATEN CULTURAL IDENTITY.

GENEVA, 11 FEBRUARY (TWN) – The current Uruguay Round GATT talks could have some far-reaching implications for cultural identity and needs to be looked into from a human rights dimension, the World Conference on Religion and Peace, an NGO with consultative status, told the UN Human Rights Commission Monday.

David Arnott, speaking for the WCRP during the Commission's debate on realisation of economic, social and cultural rights and right to development, supported the idea of a general cultural exception clause in the agreements yet to be concluded and said the issue should be looked into by the negotiating countries from the human rights dimensions and with a broad definition of culture.

Earlier, U.S. delegate Morris Abram declared that the right to development was "no more than an empty vessel into which hopes and expectations could be poured". A great deal of time, money and resources had been expended trying to explain and "realise" the right to development and the idea was "dangerous" since it implied fundamental freedoms could not be fully realised until all peoples enjoyed the right to development.

China’s Zhang Yishan however stressed that the right to development was not only the right of individuals but both a rights of nations and of individuals. There was no point in talking about the right to development of individuals when their countries were subjected to foreign domination. The economic environment, unjust and irrational to the Third World, had led to the growing gap between the North and the South and any change would require the establishment of a new international political relationship coupled with improvement of the existing international economic order.

Among other speakers, Rahardjo Jantomo of Indonesia said the successful application of the right to development was imperative in gaining respect for all other human rights. There should be equal weight given to economic, social and cultural rights and to civil and political rights.

Stephane Hessel of France however said that it was "a historical error" to separate development and human rights and development could not be based solely upon economic criteria.

Alioune Sene of Seneghal said it was difficult to talk of development without history in respect of the authenticity of each culture. No talk of a new order could be complete without a full discussion of various human rights, the debt crisis, ecology and genetic manipulation among other matters.

Ecuador's Eduardo Santos called for a dialogue in the conflict in the Near East. The disproportionate allocation of expenses for arms had hampered development of many countries. In the Third World external debt had badly affected economic, political and social development. International solidarity was needed for promotion of a just and equitable society, particularly in those regions where development was stagnating.

Inderjit Singh Chadha of India said the right to development had its legal basis in the UN Charter and was of paramount importance to the Third World. In speaking of development, there should not only be discussion of the satisfaction of material needs but also creation of conditions necessary for improvement in quality of life of human beings. A belief in multilateralism and interdependence was under increasing stress and the full realisation of economic, social and cultural rights was affected by currents in the global economic situation. The remedy lay in cooperation by all States in creation of an economic and political environment conductive to realisation of the right to development.

Underscoring the cultural dimensions, the WCRP observer, said "In a world ruled by the market economy and an ideology of development defined by the industrialised countries, the richness and variety of cultural and social life is being reduced to the one dimensional track of ‘economic behaviour’ and it is hardly surprising therefore that in human rights discourse, not least in this room, social and cultural rights have been almost entirely swallowed up by the economic".

While not ignoring some useful ongoing work in the Global Consultations on Development and in UNESCO, there was urgent need to tackle these problems within a broader human rights context. Cultural disintegration could occur when societies were subject to the forces of "modernisation" and it was necessary to give cultural rights "a stronger place than they at present occupy".

Arnott said culture should be understood in a broad sense, namely the means by which individuals and groups interpreted the world and themselves, "the values, attitudes, beliefs and customs of a society". Reports of the UNESCO and the South Commission had brought out the harm which cultures, especially of the South, could suffer by their exposure to vigorously transmitted images and values originating in the industrialised world.

There were many means by which cultures could be damaged, including insensitively planned development programmes, over-rapid integration into money economy, tourism, population transfers for strategic or economic motives. The threat to culture was of course not only transboundary but also frequently states and domestic activities, which violated cultural rights of peoples.

"But perhaps the most powerful and widespread factor is the transnational media", and the extent to which these would be able to operate without control by national governments was one of the issues currently being discussed in the GATT talks, particularly in Audio-visual services, he noted.

Supporting the idea of a general cultural right exception clause (in the Uruguay Round agreements) Arnott said if countries opposing such a cultural exception had their way "there would be little that contracting governments could do to stem the flow of images into their countries without risking international trade retaliation".

Negotiations were still in progress and countries arguing for a general cultural right exception might do well "to look at the human rights dimensions, particularly if they are able to work with a broad definition of culture".

In other interventions, Alejandro Teitelbaum for the American Association of Jurists noted that the GDP in Africa and Latin America had fallen while transfer of net resources to the North was up. The Gulf War would also lead to severely increased interest rates and credit squeezes and the burden would be borne by the debtor countries. The actions of the IMF rarely worked and often produced adverse effects. The debt problem needed solutions, not management.

Many transnational economic operations, Teitelbaum underlined, were financial crimes involving illegal and irregular acts, as had been the case in Chile and Argentina (during military rule). "International economic development should be regulated and abuse of economic power must be made an international crime", he added.