Ottawa meetings of the IMF/World Bank

From Soren Ambrose, 50 Years is Enough

November 20, 2001

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank held two
high-level meetings over the past weekend (Nov. 16-18) in Ottawa. These
were the remnants of the cancelled joint annual meetings of the
institution, and are the two sessions which, every 6 months, legitimize
the conduct of the institutions. One, the International Monetary and
Financial Committee -- the meeting which we protested in Washington on
April 16, 2000 (and have many times before and since) -- is the
highest-level regularly-scheduled meeting of global economic
decision-makers, and is the official policy-making body of the IMF. The
other, the Joint Development Committee (often referred to as a World
Bank body), has some overlapping membership, and is supposed to give
direction on issues pertaining to development in impoverished countries.

They met right after the meetings of the G-20, a rather pointless
assemblage of finance ministers and central bank governors from the G-7,
the EU, and 12 “emerging market” countries, which, all together,
constitute something like 87% of the world economy (or is it 95%?).
This meeting of the G-20, the third annual one, was scheduled for New
Delhi, but relocated either because the Indians didn’t want to deal with
security concerns, or finance ministers, unlike trade ministers, are
afraid of flying into a war zone.

In this report, some details on what happened in the unofficial events
outside the meetings, and some thoughts on what results of the meetings
might hold some interest.

UNOFFICIAL EVENTS

* On Thursday, Sept. 15, a press conference took place at the Parliament
building. Its focus was: why are people protesting the IMF and World
Bank? Speakers at the event included representatives of the Halifax
Initiative (a Canadian coalition of IMF/WB campaigners), Global
Democracy Ottawa (the coalition organizing to support the protests),
CAZO (a francophone Canadian anti-FTAA coalition), the 50 Years Is
Enough Network, and the Sustainable Energy & Economy Network. We
structured the press conference around the 4 demands endorsed by over
200 organizations internationally (cancel debt; end structural
adjustment; stop environmentally and socially devastating projects; open
the meetings), and released the “civil society rebuttal” formulated in
the last few weeks in response to the World Bank’s response to those
demands. There was good press turnout (much of it francophone), and a
reasonable number of articles the next day, from what we could tell.

* On Thursday evening there was a panel discussion at McGill University
in Montreal (about two hours from Ottawa) featuring Anna Kikwa of the
Tanzania Gender Networking Programme and Lidy Nacpil of Jubilee South
and the freedom from Debt Coalition (Philippines). About 100 people in
attendance.

* On Friday morning, there was another press conference featuring
campaigners who have tried to engage the World Bank in joint exercises
(such as the World Commission on Dams and the Structural Adjustment
Participatory Review Initiative). They denounced the Bank’s use of such
exercises for public relations, its refusal to take the process or
conclusions seriously, and its failure to keep promises made as part of
the agreement to talk to one another.

* During the day Friday there were marches by activists around Ottawa in
advance of the main day of protests. Windows were broken at two
McDonalds restaurants in downtown Ottawa, but at the end of the day the
police chief thanked the demonstrators for their good behavior.

* Friday evening there was a teach-in attracting about 500 people,
sponsored by the Council of Canadians, the Halifax Initiative, and the
International Forum on Globalization. Lots of enthusiasm. Southern
speakers included Lidy Nacpil, Alejandro Bendana of Jubilee South and
the Center for International Studies in Nicaragua, and Oronto Douglas of
Environmental Rights Action in Nigeria. Maude Barlow of the Council of
Canadians gave a report on the Doha meeting of the WTO, from which she
had just returned.

* Saturday morning started with a meeting between Canadian Finance
Minister Paul Martin (about whom our Canadian colleagues have legitimate
complaints, but whose relative intelligence, humanity, and
sophistication would disqualify him from a political appointment in the
U.S.) and the Southerners present (those mentioned above, plus Walden
Bello of Focus on the Global South [Philippines/Thailand]).

* As the main session of the G-20 got underway, demonstrators started
gathering at several different points in Ottawa. A few quick speeches
and protesters started toward the Supreme Court building. While the
Ottawa police chief’s words were very conciliatory, the behavior of
Ottawa police was inexplicably confrontational. They attempted to
divide the march starting from the University of Ottawa by marching into
the middle of it and creating a human barrier. It took well over 15
minutes for them to relent when the marchers in the first group refused
to procede without their comrades. In the march I was in, leaving from
LeBreton Flats, the police did the same thing, but relented after 10
minutes of the crowd shouting “Sol-sol-sol - Solidarite.” Earlier in
our march the police adopted a tactic I’ve not seen before: they stood
in the path of the march, riot shields up, motionless, in a staggered
formation. The protesters had to weave their way around the living
statues to continue. On either side were other police with German
shepherds yowling and snapping. These police dogs, whose use the media
criticized, later bit several protesters (and, it would appear, even a
police officer or two).

* As the various marches converged at the Supreme Court, the crowd
appeared to me to number about 4000. It was spirited and very diverse.
The rally, with music and speakers, was good, particularly since it had
warmed up about 10 degrees from the morning rallies. As the rally broke
up, most of the demonstrators headed to the barricades set up a couple
blocks away outside the site of the conference. Some demonstrators
tried to overturn barricades, and police responded with tear gas and
water hoses (not pleasant in 7-degree-centigrade/40-degree-farenheit
weather). All in all about a dozen people were arrested on Saturday.

* Overall, the protests were positive in spirit, and demonstrated
strength and unity in the movement for global justice. Activists made
clear that this movement will not be silent because of the September
11th events, especially when the economic system hasn’t changed, and
when the politically and economically powerful are trying to exploit the
public’s response to Sept. 11 to further secure their neo-liberal
agenda. The results of both Doha and Ottawa are a mixed bag in that
regard: we seem to have prevented the big victories that the more
ravenous neolibs thought attainable, but there was no clear repudiation
of their efforts. And the WTO is able to claim some redemption, even if
the practical meaning of Doha is not yet totally clear.

THE OFFICIAL MEETINGS

* The big news continues to be made by the anglophone countries, with
Paul Martin of Canada (okay, partly anglophone) sounding the call for
more substantial debt cancellation (a repeat of what he said last year).
Gordon Brown of the U.K. spoke favorably of debt “standstills” --
moratoria on debt payments when countries hit the skids, until
rescheduling is arranged -- and asserted that there is increasing
support for coming up with some sort of bankruptcy status for severely
indebted countries -- i.e., a system of arbitration to impose a final
reckoning on creditors and restore the country to square one. This
would be a significant step, but the idea was expressed in generalities
and not picked up by others. Brown also said that the overall amount
committed to assistance should be doubled -- meaning about $50 billion.
Lots of heads nodded, but, as WB President Wolfensohn pointed out, no
one brought their checkbooks. Seems unlikely.

* Wolfensohn spoke extensively about the need to accommodate the private
sector in all facets of development, which is consistent with the Bank’s
emerging private sector development (PSD) strategy -- one of the most
insidious developments to come out of the WB in recent years. At the
same time, there was also talk of making sure that the private sector
participates in (takes a hit) bailouts of countries like Argentina,
South Korea, etc. The criticism levelled at the IMF that it acts as a
guarantor for private investors is becoming unbearable, it seems.

* US Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill continued to advanced the proposal
made by Pres. Bush several months ago that the World Bank shift half of
its lending to grants. This has proven to be very controversial. Some
Europeans claim it is a way of defunding the Bank (which appears
overblown, tho it wouldn’t bother some of us very much). Others say it
means the Bank would be engaging in a type of development it has no
expertise in. Some of our Southern colleagues warn it could mean that
grants, presumably with SAP conditions, would be much more attractive to
Southern governments and thereby trap them in more stringent traps. But
there is an undeniable appeal to the idea of reducing the debt that
continues to accrue as the WB goes on its destructive way. At any rate,
the debate is a good one to see: it helps foster new ideas and keeps the
G-7 from undue collusion as they squabble: Claire Short, UK Development
Minister, called the proposal “crazy.”

* UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan attended the meetings, ostensibly to
support new proposals for “financing for development” -- the topic of
the next big UN summit. To little avail however. Indeed, the ministers
assembled merely asserted the need for the UN summit (in Monterey,
Mexico in 2002) to be sure that all the aid it talks about adheres to
“sound economic policies” (i.e., structural adjustment).

* Finally, Anne Krueger, the new #2 at the IMF, said that the money
spent on security at these meetings and on getting demonstrators to them
should be spent on something productive, like development assistance.
(Don’t tempt us to find better uses of funds at the IMF, Anne …) And
Wolfensohn said that he doesn’t see much point in protests; instead we
should be discussing and debating. In fact, Global Exchange, together
with 50 Years Is Enough, did suggest that the debates originally planned
for September take place in Ottawa. Carolyn Reynolds, WB External
Relations Officer, said that that was impossible: the Bank wouldn’t have
enough people there. Perhaps Mr. Wolfensohn would like to have a word
with her?

===========================================================
50 Years Is Enough Network http://www.50years.org
To unsubscribe, email [email protected] with
unsubscribe
in the body of the message. Questions? email [email protected].

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Neil Watkins
World Bank Bonds Boycott
Center for Economic Justice
1830 Connecticut Ave., NW, 4th floor,
Washington, DC 20009
Tel: (202) 299-0020 / Fax: (202) 299-0021
Web: www.worldbankboycott.org

To receive occasional updates on the World Bank Bonds boycott, join our
listserve:
Send blank e-mail to .

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Universal Inkjet Refill Kit $29.95
Refill any ink cartridge for less!
Includes black and color ink.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/bAmslD/MkNDAA/ySSFAA/xYTolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/