Hordes of vigilantes & popular elements defeat Mai, for now
| Abstract | This is a follow up to my article on the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) in the May issue . That went to press a few weeks before the April 27 target date for signing of the MAI by the OECD countries. At the time, it was fairly clear that agreement would not be reached, and it was not—an important event, worth considering carefully. In part the failure resulted from internal disputes—for example, European objections to the U.S. federal system and the extraterritorial reach of U.S. laws, concerns about maintaining some degree of cultural autonomy, and so on. But a much more significant problem was looming. It was becoming increasingly difficult to ensure that the rules of global order would continue to be “written by the lawyers and businessmen who plan to benefit” and “by governments taking advice and guidance from these lawyers and businessmen,” while “invariably, the thing missing is the public voice”—the Chicago Tribune’ s accurate description of the negotiations for the MAI, as well as ongoing efforts to “craft rules” for “global activity” in other domains without public interference. It was, in short, becoming more difficult to restrict awareness and engagement to sectors identified by the Clinton administration, with unusual and unintended clarity, as its “domestic constituencies”: the U.S. Council for International Business, which “advances the global interests of American business both at home and abroad,” and concentrations of private power generally—but crucially not Congress (which had not been informed, in violation of Constitutional requirements) and the general public, its voice stilled by a “veil of secrecy” that was maintained with impressive discipline during three years of intensive negotiations. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,701 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Only published papers are available at libraries |
Similar books and articlesPerry Dane (2000). Pluralities of Justice, Modalities of Peace: The Role of Law(s) in a Palestinian-Israeli Accommodation. Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 32:273-285.
Otfried Höffe (1999). Nachruf. Hans Michael Baumgartner (5. April 1933-11. Mai 1999). Zeitschrift für Philosophische Forschung 53 (2):I - II.
Carl Pacini, Judyth A. Swingen & Hudson Rogers (2002). The Role of the OECD and EU Conventions in Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials. Journal of Business Ethics 37 (4):385 - 405.
Dorothée Baumann (2006). Global Rules and Private Actors. Business Ethics Quarterly 16 (4):505-532.
Meri Koivusalo (2010). Common Health Policy Interests and the Shaping of Global Pharmaceutical Policies. Ethics and International Affairs 24 (4):395-414.
Mai-Markand (1952). Mai-Ism. S.N.].
Harald Höffding (1913). Sören Kierkegaard: 5 Mai 1813 — 5 Mai 1913 (Discours Prononcé le 5 Mai 1913 à l'Université de Copenhague). Revue de Métaphysique Et de Morale 21 (6):719 - 732.
David Wood (2000). The International Campaign Against the Multilateral Agreement on Investment: A Test Case for the Future of Globalisation? Ethics, Place and Environment 3 (1):25 – 45.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads5 ( #160,428 of 549,119 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,119 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
