Location of Doha

The Fourth Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization, also known as the WTO Fourth Ministerial Conference, was held at the Sheraton Doha Hotel and Resort, Doha, Qatar from November 9-13, 2001. At this conference, ministers from all WTO members launched the Doha Development Agenda.

At the conference, trade ministers agreed to undertake a new round of multilateral trade negotiations.^[1] The ministers passed two declarations. The first, the main declaration folded the on-going negotiations in agriculture and services into a broader agenda, which is commonly known as the Doha Development Round. In addition. the Doha agenda included the topic of industrial tariffs, topics of interest to developing countries, changes to WTO rules, and other provisions. The second declaration dealt with the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and allow government to be flexible of TRIPS to deal with health problems.^[2]

The meeting took place just two months after the World Trade Center attack. As a result, some government officials called for greater political cohesion and saw the trade negotiations as a means toward that end. Some officials thought that a new round of multilateral trade negotiations could help a world economy weakened by recession and terrorism-related uncertainty.^[3]

Ministerial Declaration[link]

The Doha Ministerial Declaration mandate for agriculture calls for comprehensive negotiations aimed at substantial improvements in market access; reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all forms of export subsidies; and substantial reductions in trade-distorting domestic support. These topics — domestic support, export subsidies, and market access — have become known as the three pillars of the agricultural negotiations. The Declaration also provides that special and differential treatment for developing countries would be an integral part of all elements of the negotiations. The Declaration took note of non-trade concerns reflected in negotiating proposals of various member countries and confirmed that they would be taken into account in the negotiations. March 31, 2003 was set as the deadline for reaching agreement on “modalities” (targets, formulas, timetables, etc.) for achieving the mandated objectives, but that deadline was missed. During the rest of 2003, negotiations on modalities continued in preparation for the fifth WTO Ministerial Conference held in Cancun, Mexico September 10-14, 2003.^[4]

Intellectual property declaration[link]

The Doha Declaration on Public Health sought to alleviate developing country dissatisfaction with aspects of the TRIPS regime. It delayed the implementation of patent system provisions for pharmaceutical products for least developed countries (LDCs) until 2016. The declaration committed member states to interpret and implement the agreement to support public health and to promote access to medicines for all. The Declaration recognized certain “flexibilities” in the TRIPS agreement to allow each member to grant compulsory licenses for pharmaceuticals and to determine what constitutes a national emergency, expressly including public health emergencies such as HIV/AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis or other epidemics.^[5]

China's accession to the WTO[link]

The conference also approved the accession of China to the WTO on November 10.^[6]

References[link]

See also[link]

• Doha Declaration

World Trade Organization (English) Organisation mondiale du commerce (French) Organización Mundial del Comercio (Spanish)
200px
WTO members   EU and WTO members   Observers
Formation	January 1, 1995
Headquarters	Centre William Rappard, Geneva, Switzerland
Membership	155[1] member states
Official languages	English, French, Spanish[2]
Director-General	Pascal Lamy
Budget	196 million Swiss francs (approx. 209 million USD) in 2011.[3]
Staff	629[4]
Website	wto.org

The World Trade Organization (WTO) is an organization that intends to supervise and liberalize international trade. The organization officially commenced on January 1, 1995 under the Marrakech Agreement, replacing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which commenced in 1948. The organization deals with regulation of trade between participating countries; it provides a framework for negotiating and formalizing trade agreements, and a dispute resolution process aimed at enforcing participants' adherence to WTO agreements which are signed by representatives of member governments^[5]:fol.9-10 and ratified by their parliaments.^[6] Most of the issues that the WTO focuses on derive from previous trade negotiations, especially from the Uruguay Round (1986–1994).

The organization is attempting to complete negotiations on the Doha Development Round, which was launched in 2001 with an explicit focus on addressing the needs of developing countries. According to a European Union statement, "The 2008 Ministerial meeting broke down over a disagreement between exporters of agricultural bulk commodities and countries with large numbers of subsistence farmers on the precise terms of a 'special safeguard measure' to protect farmers from surges in imports."^[7] The position of the European Commission is that "The successful conclusion of the Doha negotiations would confirm the central role of multilateral liberalisation and rule-making. It would confirm the WTO as a powerful shield against protectionist backsliding."^[8] An impasse remains. As of May 2012^[update], the future of the Doha Round remains uncertain.

History[link]

Harry White (l) and John Maynard Keynes at the Bretton Woods Conference — Both economists had been strong advocates of a liberal international trade environment, and recommended the establishment of three institutions: the IMF (fiscal and monetary issues), the World Bank (financial and structural issues), and the ITO (international economic cooperation).^[9]

The WTO's predecessor, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), was established after World War II in the wake of other new multilateral institutions dedicated to international economic cooperation — notably the Bretton Woods institutions known as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. A comparable international institution for trade, named the International Trade Organization was successfully negotiated. The ITO was to be a United Nations specialized agency and would address not only trade barriers but other issues indirectly related to trade, including employment, investment, restrictive business practices, and commodity agreements. But the ITO treaty was not approved by the U.S. and a few other signatories and never went into effect.^[10][11][12]

In the absence of an international organization for trade, the GATT would over the years "transform itself" into a de facto international organization.^[13]

GATT rounds of negotiations[link]

The GATT was the only multilateral instrument governing international trade from 1946 until the WTO was established on January 1, 1995.^[14] Despite attempts in the mid 1950s and 1960s to create some form of institutional mechanism for international trade, the GATT continued to operate for almost half a century as a semi-institutionalized multilateral treaty regime on a provisional basis.^[15]

From Geneva to Tokyo[link]

Seven rounds of negotiations occurred under GATT. The first real GATT trade rounds concentrated on further reducing tariffs. Then, the Kennedy Round in the mid-sixties brought about a GATT anti-dumping Agreement and a section on development. The Tokyo Round during the seventies was the first major attempt to tackle trade barriers that do not take the form of tariffs, and to improve the system, adopting a series of agreements on non-tariff barriers, which in some cases interpreted existing GATT rules, and in others broke entirely new ground. Because these plurilateral agreements were not accepted by the full GATT membership, they were often informally called "codes". Several of these codes were amended in the Uruguay Round, and turned into multilateral commitments accepted by all WTO members. Only four remained plurilateral (those on government procurement, bovine meat, civil aircraft and dairy products), but in 1997 WTO members agreed to terminate the bovine meat and dairy agreements, leaving only two.^[14]

Uruguay Round[link]

During the Doha Round, the US government blamed Brazil and India for being inflexible, and the EU for impeding agricultural imports.^[16] The then-President of Brazil, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, responded to the criticisms by arguing that progress would only be achieved if the richest countries (especially the US and countries in the EU) make deeper cuts in their agricultural subsidies, and further open their markets for agricultural goods.^[17]

Well before GATT's 40th anniversary, its members concluded that the GATT system was straining to adapt to a new globalizing world economy.^[18][19] In response to the problems identified in the 1982 Ministerial Declaration (structural deficiencies, spill-over impacts of certain countries' policies on world trade GATT could not manage etc.), the eighth GATT round — known as the Uruguay Round — was launched in September 1986, in Punta del Este, Uruguay.^[18]

It was the biggest negotiating mandate on trade ever agreed: the talks were going to extend the trading system into several new areas, notably trade in services and intellectual property, and to reform trade in the sensitive sectors of agriculture and textiles; all the original GATT articles were up for review.^[19] The Final Act concluding the Uruguay Round and officially establishing the WTO regime was signed April 15, 1994, during the ministerial meeting at Marrakesh, Morocco, and hence is known as the Marrakesh Agreement.^[20]

The GATT still exists as the WTO's umbrella treaty for trade in goods, updated as a result of the Uruguay Round negotiations (a distinction is made between GATT 1994, the updated parts of GATT, and GATT 1947, the original agreement which is still the heart of GATT 1994).^[18] GATT 1994 is not however the only legally binding agreement included via the Final Act at Marrakesh; a long list of about 60 agreements, annexes, decisions and understandings was adopted. The agreements fall into a structure with six main parts:

• The Agreement Establishing the WTO
• Goods and investment — the Multilateral Agreements on Trade in Goods including the GATT 1994 and the Trade Related Investment Measures
• Services — the General Agreement on Trade in Services
• Intellectual property — the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)
• Dispute settlement (DSU)
• Reviews of governments' trade policies (TPRM)^[21]

Ministerial conferences[link]

The topmost decision-making body of the WTO is the Ministerial Conference, which usually meets every two years. It brings together all members of the WTO, all of which are countries or customs unions. The Ministerial Conference can take decisions on all matters under any of the multilateral trade agreements. The inaugural ministerial conference was held in Singapore in 1996. Disagreements between largely developed and developing economies emerged during this conference over four issues initiated by this conference, which led to them being collectively referred to as the "Singapore issues". The second ministerial conference was held in Geneva in Switzerland. The third conference in Seattle, Washington ended in failure, with massive demonstrations and police and National Guard crowd control efforts drawing worldwide attention. The fourth ministerial conference was held in Doha in the Persian Gulf nation of Qatar. The Doha Development Round was launched at the conference. The conference also approved the joining of China, which became the 143rd member to join. The fifth ministerial conference was held in Cancún, Mexico, aiming at forging agreement on the Doha round. An alliance of 22 southern states, the G20 developing nations (led by India, China,^[22] Brazil, ASEAN led by the Philippines), resisted demands from the North for agreements on the so-called "Singapore issues" and called for an end to agricultural subsidies within the EU and the US. The talks broke down without progress.

The sixth WTO ministerial conference was held in Hong Kong from 13–18 December 2005. It was considered vital if the four-year-old Doha Development Round negotiations were to move forward sufficiently to conclude the round in 2006. In this meeting, countries agreed to phase out all their agricultural export subsidies by the end of 2013, and terminate any cotton export subsidies by the end of 2006. Further concessions to developing countries included an agreement to introduce duty free, tariff free access for goods from the Least Developed Countries, following the Everything but Arms initiative of the European Union — but with up to 3% of tariff lines exempted. Other major issues were left for further negotiation to be completed by the end of 2010. The WTO General Council, on 26 May 2009, agreed to hold a seventh WTO ministerial conference session in Geneva from 30 November-3 December 2009. A statement by chairman Amb. Mario Matus acknowledged that the prime purpose was to remedy a breach of protocol requiring two-yearly "regular" meetings, which had lapsed with the Doha Round failure in 2005, and that the "scaled-down" meeting would not be a negotiating session, but "emphasis will be on transparency and open discussion rather than on small group processes and informal negotiating structures". The general theme for discussion was "The WTO, the Multilateral Trading System and the Current Global Economic Environment"^[23]

Doha Round[link]

The WTO launched the current round of negotiations, the Doha Development Round, at the fourth ministerial conference in Doha, Qatar in November 2001. This was to be an ambitious effort to make globalization more inclusive and help the world's poor, particularly by slashing barriers and subsidies in farming.^[24] The initial agenda comprised both further trade liberalization and new rule-making, underpinned by commitments to strengthen substantial assistance to developing countries.^[8]

The negotiations have been highly contentious. Disagreements still continue over several key areas including agriculture subsidies, which emerged as critical in July 2006.^[25] As of April 2012^[update], agreement has not been reached, despite intense negotiations at several ministerial conferences and at other sessions.

Functions[link]

Among the various functions of the WTO, these are regarded by analysts as the most important:

• It oversees the implementation, administration and operation of the covered agreements.^[27][28]
• It provides a forum for negotiations and for settling disputes.^[29][30]

Additionally, it is the WTO's duty to review and propagate the national trade policies, and to ensure the coherence and transparency of trade policies through surveillance in global economic policy-making.^[28][30] Another priority of the WTO is the assistance of developing, least-developed and low-income countries in transition to adjust to WTO rules and disciplines through technical cooperation and training.^[31]

The WTO is also a center of economic research and analysis: regular assessments of the global trade picture in its annual publications and research reports on specific topics are produced by the organization.^[32] Finally, the WTO cooperates closely with the two other components of the Bretton Woods system, the IMF and the World Bank.^[29]

Principles of the trading system[link]

The WTO establishes a framework for trade policies; it does not define or specify outcomes. That is, it is concerned with setting the rules of the trade policy games.^[33] Five principles are of particular importance in understanding both the pre-1994 GATT and the WTO:

1. Non-discrimination. It has two major components: the most favoured nation (MFN) rule, and the national treatment policy. Both are embedded in the main WTO rules on goods, services, and intellectual property, but their precise scope and nature differ across these areas. The MFN rule requires that a WTO member must apply the same conditions on all trade with other WTO members, i.e. a WTO member has to grant the most favorable conditions under which it allows trade in a certain product type to all other WTO members.^[33] "Grant someone a special favour and you have to do the same for all other WTO members."^[34] National treatment means that imported goods should be treated no less favorably than domestically produced goods (at least after the foreign goods have entered the market) and was introduced to tackle non-tariff barriers to trade (e.g. technical standards, security standards et al. discriminating against imported goods).^[33]
2. Reciprocity. It reflects both a desire to limit the scope of free-riding that may arise because of the MFN rule, and a desire to obtain better access to foreign markets. A related point is that for a nation to negotiate, it is necessary that the gain from doing so be greater than the gain available from unilateral liberalization; reciprocal concessions intend to ensure that such gains will materialise.^[35]
3. Binding and enforceable commitments. The tariff commitments made by WTO members in a multilateral trade negotiation and on accession are enumerated in a schedule (list) of concessions. These schedules establish "ceiling bindings": a country can change its bindings, but only after negotiating with its trading partners, which could mean compensating them for loss of trade. If satisfaction is not obtained, the complaining country may invoke the WTO dispute settlement procedures.^[34][35]
4. Transparency. The WTO members are required to publish their trade regulations, to maintain institutions allowing for the review of administrative decisions affecting trade, to respond to requests for information by other members, and to notify changes in trade policies to the WTO. These internal transparency requirements are supplemented and facilitated by periodic country-specific reports (trade policy reviews) through the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM).^[36] The WTO system tries also to improve predictability and stability, discouraging the use of quotas and other measures used to set limits on quantities of imports.^[34]
5. Safety valves. In specific circumstances, governments are able to restrict trade. There are three types of provision in this direction:

• articles allowing for the use of trade measures to attain non-economic objectives;
• articles aimed at ensuring "fair competition"; and
• provisions permitting intervention in trade for economic reasons.^[36]

Exceptions to the MFN principle also allow for preferential treatment of developing countries, regional free trade areas and customs unions.^[5]:fol.93

Organizational structure[link]

The General Council has the following subsidiary bodies which oversee committees in different areas:

Council for Trade in Goods

There are 11 committees under the jurisdiction of the Goods Council each with a specific task. All members of the WTO participate in the committees. The Textiles Monitoring Body is separate from the other committees but still under the jurisdiction of Goods Council. The body has its own chairman and only 10 members. The body also has several groups relating to textiles.^[37]

Council for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights

Information on intellectual property in the WTO, news and official records of the activities of the TRIPS Council, and details of the WTO's work with other international organizations in the field.^[38]

Council for Trade in Services

The Council for Trade in Services operates under the guidance of the General Council and is responsible for overseeing the functioning of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). It is open to all WTO members, and can create subsidiary bodies as required.^[39]

Trade Negotiations Committee

The Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) is the committee that deals with the current trade talks round. The chair is WTO's director-general. As of April 2012^[update] the committee was tasked with the Doha Development Round.^[40]

The Service Council has three subsidiary bodies: financial services, domestic regulations, GATS rules and specific commitments.^[37] The General council has several different committees, working groups, and working parties.^[41] There are committees on the following: Trade and Environment; Trade and Development (Subcommittee on Least-Developed Countries); Regional Trade Agreements; Balance of Payments Restrictions; and Budget, Finance and Administration. There are working parties on the following: Accession. There are working groups on the following: Trade, debt and finance; and Trade and technology transfer.

Decision-making[link]

The WTO describes itself as "a rules-based, member-driven organization — all decisions are made by the member governments, and the rules are the outcome of negotiations among members".^[42] The WTO Agreement foresees votes where consensus cannot be reached, but the practice of consensus dominates the process of decision-making.^[43]

Richard Harold Steinberg (2002) argues that although the WTO's consensus governance model provides law-based initial bargaining, trading rounds close through power-based bargaining favouring Europe and the U.S., and may not lead to Pareto improvement.^[44]

Dispute settlement[link]

In 1994, the WTO members agreed on the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes (DSU) annexed to the "Final Act" signed in Marrakesh in 1994.^[45] Dispute settlement is regarded by the WTO as the central pillar of the multilateral trading system, and as a "unique contribution to the stability of the global economy".^[46] WTO members have agreed that, if they believe fellow-members are violating trade rules, they will use the multilateral system of settling disputes instead of taking action unilaterally.^[47]

The operation of the WTO dispute settlement process involves the DSB panels, the Appellate Body, the WTO Secretariat, arbitrators, independent experts and several specialized institutions.^[48] Bodies involved in the dispute settlement process, World Trade Organization.

Accession and membership[link]

The process of becoming a WTO member is unique to each applicant country, and the terms of accession are dependent upon the country's stage of economic development and current trade regime.^[49] The process takes about five years, on average, but it can last more if the country is less than fully committed to the process or if political issues interfere. The shortest accession negotiation was that of the Kyrgyz Republic, while the longest was that of the People's Republic of China (P. Farah, Five Years of China's WTO Membership, 263–304). Russia, having first applied to join GATT in 1993, was approved for membership in December 2011.^[50] An offer of accession is only given once consensus is reached among interested parties.^[51]

Accession process[link]

WTO accession progress. (As of May 2012^[update], including imminent membership of the Russian Federation.):

  Members (including dual-representation with the European Union)

  Draft Working Party Report or Factual Summary adopted

  Goods and/or Services offers submitted

  Memorandum on Foreign Trade Regime (FTR) submitted

  Observer, negotiations to start later or no Memorandum on FTR submitted

  Frozen procedures or no negotiations in the last 3 years

  No official interaction with the WTO

A country wishing to accede to the WTO submits an application to the General Council, and has to describe all aspects of its trade and economic policies that have a bearing on WTO agreements.^[52] The application is submitted to the WTO in a memorandum which is examined by a working party open to all interested WTO Members.^[51]

After all necessary background information has been acquired, the working party focuses on issues of discrepancy between the WTO rules and the applicant's international and domestic trade policies and laws. The working party determines the terms and conditions of entry into the WTO for the applicant nation, and may consider transitional periods to allow countries some leeway in complying with the WTO rules.^[49]

The final phase of accession involves bilateral negotiations between the applicant nation and other working party members regarding the concessions and commitments on tariff levels and market access for goods and services. The new member's commitments are to apply equally to all WTO members under normal non-discrimination rules, even though they are negotiated bilaterally.^[52]

When the bilateral talks conclude, the working party sends to the general council or ministerial conference an accession package, which includes a summary of all the working party meetings, the Protocol of Accession (a draft membership treaty), and lists ("schedules") of the member-to-be's commitments. Once the general council or ministerial conference approves of the terms of accession, the applicant's parliament must ratify the Protocol of Accession before it can become a member.^[53]

Members and observers[link]

The WTO has 155 members (to become 156 on the pending accession of Russia) and 29 observer governments (including the Russian Federation).^[54] In addition to states, the European Union is a member. WTO members do not have to be full sovereign nation-members. Instead, they must be a customs territory with full autonomy in the conduct of their external commercial relations. Thus Hong Kong (as "Hong Kong, China" since 1997) became a GATT contracting party, and the Republic of China (Taiwan) acceded to the WTO in 2002 as "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu" (Chinese Taipei) despite its disputed status.^[55] The WTO Secretariat omits the official titles (such as Counselor, First Secretary, Second Secretary and Third Secretary) of the members of Chinese Taipei's Permanent Mission to the WTO, except for the titles of the Permanent Representative and the Deputy Permanent Representative.^[56]

Iran is the biggest economy outside the WTO.^[57] With the exception of the Holy See, observers must start accession negotiations within five years of becoming observers. A number of international intergovernmental organizations have also been granted observer status to WTO bodies.^[58] 14 states and two territories so far have no official interaction with the WTO.

Agreements[link]

The WTO oversees about 60 different agreements which have the status of international legal texts. Member countries must sign and ratify all WTO agreements on accession.^[59] A discussion of some of the most important agreements follows. The Agreement on Agriculture came into effect with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995. The AoA has three central concepts, or "pillars": domestic support, market access and export subsidies. The General Agreement on Trade in Services was created to extend the multilateral trading system to service sector, in the same way as the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) provided such a system for merchandise trade. The agreement entered into force in January 1995. The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights sets down minimum standards for many forms of intellectual property (IP) regulation. It was negotiated at the end of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1994.

The Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures—also known as the SPS Agreement—was negotiated during the Uruguay Round of GATT, and entered into force with the establishment of the WTO at the beginning of 1995. Under the SPS agreement, the WTO sets constraints on members' policies relating to food safety (bacterial contaminants, pesticides, inspection and labelling) as well as animal and plant health (imported pests and diseases). The Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade is an international treaty of the World Trade Organization. It was negotiated during the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and entered into force with the establishment of the WTO at the end of 1994. The object ensures that technical negotiations and standards, as well as testing and certification procedures, do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade".^[60] The Agreement on Customs Valuation, formally known as the Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of GATT, prescribes methods of customs valuation that Members are to follow. Chiefly, it adopts the "transaction value" approach.

Directors-General[link]

The Directors-General of the WTO have been:^[61]

• Pascal Lamy, 2005–
• Supachai Panitchpakdi, 2002–2005
• Mike Moore, 1999–2002
• Renato Ruggiero, 1995–1999
• Peter Sutherland, 1995

The Directors-General of the precursor organization, GATT, were:

• Peter Sutherland, 1993–1995
• Arthur Dunkel, 1980–1993
• Olivier Long, 1968–1980
• Eric Wyndham White, 1948–1968

See also[link]

Notes[link]

External links[link]

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: World Trade Organization

Wikimedia Commons has media related to: World Trade Organization

Official pages

• Official WTO homepage
  • WTO 10th AnniversaryPDF (1.40 MB) — Highlights of the first decade, Annual Report 2005 pages 116–166
  • Glossary of terms—a guide to 'WTO-speak'
• International Trade Centre — joint UN/WTO agency

Government pages on the WTO

• European Union position on the WTO

Media pages on the WTO

• World Trade Organization
• BBC News — Profile: WTO
• Guardian Unlimited — Special Report: The World Trade Organisation ongoing coverage

Non-governmental organization pages on the WTO

• Gatt.org — Parody of official WTO page by The Yes Men
• Public Citizen
• Transnational Institute: Beyond the WTO

Alexander Claud Cockburn ( /ˈkoʊbərn/ KOH-bərn; born 6 June 1941) is an American political journalist. Cockburn was brought up in Ireland but has lived and worked in the United States since 1972. Together with Jeffrey St. Clair, he edits the political newsletter CounterPunch. Cockburn also writes the "Beat the Devil" column for The Nation and a weekly syndicated column for the Los Angeles Times as well as for The First Post, which is syndicated by Creators Syndicate.

Life and career[link]

Born in Scotland, Cockburn grew up in Youghal, County Cork, Ireland. He is the eldest son of the sometime communist author and journalist, Claud Cockburn, by his third wife, Patricia Byron, née Arbuthnot (who also wrote an autobiography, Figure of Eight). He has one daughter, Daisy Cockburn, whose mother is the writer Emma Tennant (his wife 1968-73), and two younger brothers, Andrew Cockburn and Patrick Cockburn, who are also journalists. His half-sister, the barrister and mystery writer Sarah Caudwell, died in 2000. In addition, journalists Laura Flanders and Stephanie Flanders are his half-nieces, daughters of his half-sister Claudia Davis/Cockburn and her husband Michael Flanders. Actress Olivia Wilde is his niece, daughter of his brother Andrew Cockburn. After studying at Glenalmond College, an independent boys' boarding school in Perthshire, Scotland, and at Keble College, Oxford, Cockburn worked in London as a reporter and commentator.

Since moving to the United States, Cockburn has written for many publications, including The New York Review of Books, Esquire, and Harper's. From 1973 to 1983 he was a writer with The Village Voice, originating its longstanding "Press Clips" column, but he was suspended, the Voice stated, "for accepting a $10,000 grant from an Arab studies organization in 1982."^[1][2] His defenders charge that his criticism of Israeli government policies was behind the firing. Cockburn has said he left the Voice following the offer of a regular column in The Nation called "Beat the Devil" (after the title of a novel by his father). Since leaving the Voice he has also written columns for the Wall Street Journal, New York Press and the New Statesman. Cockburn has also been a regular contributor to the Anderson Valley Advertiser. Cockburn currently resides in Petrolia, California.

Cockburn originally chose Irish citizenship (over UK citizenship), but in 2009 he became a citizen of the United States.^[3] On March 16, 2009 Cockburn officially became a new columnist for the paleoconservative Chronicles magazine.^[4]

Themes and opinions[link]

There have been a number of consistent themes in Cockburn's political writing, among them:

• Outspoken criticism of US foreign policy, from its policies in Central America in the 1980s, including the Iran-Contra scandal, to the First Gulf War in 1991, the Kosovo War in 1999, and the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and 2003 invasion of Iraq.
• Criticism of the government of Israel based on its treatment of the Palestinians.
• Calls for political reform in the United States, mostly focused on criticizing the Democratic Party for failing to provide a progressive alternative to the Republican Party, as well as strong support for Ralph Nader's presidential candidacies in the 2000 and 2004 elections.
• Contempt for the mainstream establishment, in particular for public figures who, in his view, gain mainstream respectability by criticizing those to their left; targets have included The New York Times, President Barack Obama, Senator Bernie Sanders, the late academic Irving Howe and some of his colleagues at The Nation, including Marc Cooper, David Corn^[5] and Eric Alterman. Cockburn has also been highly critical (see below) of his former friend and colleague, Christopher Hitchens.^[6]
• Criticism of 9/11 conspiracy theories^[7][8]
• Regarding prior knowledge of Pearl Harbor, Cockburn thinks "there is strong evidence that FDR did have knowledge that a Japanese naval force in the north Pacific was going to launch an attack on Pearl Harbor. It's quite possible Roosevelt thought it would be a relatively mild assault and thought it would be the final green light to get the US into the war."^[7]

Cockburn has criticized the German government for passing restrictive laws against the Church of Scientology, invoking several comparisons with Nazi Germany. Although he stated that Scientology deserved scrutiny, he also maintained that the demonization of any particular unpopular group — even one officials consider a cult — presented a far more imminent danger than the activities of Scientologists, or the organization they belong to.^[9]

Cockburn denounced the economic and political sanctions imposed on the Iraqi government by the United Nations, but Cockburn was more aggressive than most in his criticisms of American and British actions during the 12 years between the formal resolution of the Persian Gulf War and the 2003 invasion. In a column published in 2000, Cockburn averred that the economic embargo imposed upon Iraq was "demonically designed to prompt gnawing, endless suffering throughout Iraq's social economy". In the same column, Cockburn concluded that every major Republican or Democratic nominee running in the 2000 presidential election was supportive of Iraq sanctions, and was therefore complicit in mass murder.^[10]

Cockburn also joined the widespread criticism of the subsequent occupation of Iraq by American, British and other national military forces (the self-described "Coalition of the Willing"). In the wake of the capture of Saddam Hussein, Cockburn penned a column entitled "How to kill Saddam," in which he argued that the ensuing trial of Hussein would be a mock tribunal, conducted by a "kangaroo court," and that Hussein's conviction and ultimate execution were foregone conclusions.^[11]

In contrast, Cockburn's position on global warming is consistent with views usually held by the right. He believes the phenomenon has not been proven to be caused by humans,^[12] citing the statements of Martin Hertzberg that rising CO₂ levels are a symptom, not a cause, of global warming, which Hertzberg asserts is the result of natural, predictable changes in the Earth's elliptic orbit.^[13] In fact, Hertzberg is a semi-retired explosives expert who does not claim to be a climatologist.^[14] Cockburn is also critical of the "greenhouse" explanation for warming by positing that it is incongruous with the laws of physics, specifically the second law of thermodynamics.^[15] He cites the research of Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf Tscheuschner's Falsification of the Atmospheric CO₂ Greenhouse Effects Within the Frame of Physics.^[16]

Cockburn also has been critical of the originator of the Green Revolution concept. In an article in the Nation on Al Gore's 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, Cockburn made the following statement on Norman Borlaug's 1971 Nobel Prize: "Line up some of the more notorious Nobel Peace Prize recipients, such as Kissinger, and if you had to identify the biggest killer of all it was probably Norman Borlaug, one of the architects of the Green Revolution, which unleashed displacement, malnutrition and death across the Third World." Cockburn has criticized Borlaug previously on this issue.^[17]

At times acerbic, Cockburn can also be gently and humorously ironic, once declaring Gerald Ford America's greatest president for doing the least damage (his administration was the shortest in the 20th century) and praising the Lewinsky scandal's entertainment value.^[18] In the same vein, he has also expressed his admiration for the beauty of both Tipper Gore and Laura Bush. His nudge-nudge, wink-wink brand of humor is demonstrated in his response to a question asking for a comparison between George W. Bush and Napoleon. He replied that he wasn't sure about Bush as Napoleon, "though surely Josephine's heart beats beneath Laura's delicious bosom."^[19]

Criticism[link]

Cockburn and anti-Semitism[link]

Cockburn has written a great deal on the use of anti-Semitism accusations in modern politics, particularly by the state of Israel and its supporters, and has co-edited a book on the subject, The Politics of Anti-Semitism.^[20] Cockburn himself has also been accused of anti-Semitism, which he denies and considers an example of the use of that accusation to intimidate criticism of Israel and avert attention from Israel's policies.

One of those making anti-Semitism charges against Cockburn is Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz. In November 2005, Dershowitz wrote to the National Catholic Reporter that Cockburn's Counterpunch web site was anti-Semitic.^[21] This was in response to a review of Norman Finkelstein's book Beyond Chutzpah by Counterpunch contributor Neve Gordon. Cockburn had previously accused Dershowitz, in 2003, of plagiarism,^[22] and, in October 2005, of supporting torture.^[23] Cockburn and Dershowitz have each denied the other's charges. Dershowitz has also claimed that Cockburn has been one of three writers (along with Norman Finkelstein and Noam Chomsky) who are engaged in an attempt to discredit him, which Cockburn has also denied.^[24][25]

A 2002 Cockburn article on anti-Semitic remarks by Reverend Billy Graham^[26] reprinted elsewhere,^[27] discussed the furor over recently released tape recorded conversations between Graham and President Richard Nixon. Cockburn contrasted that response to the response to revelations in 1989 that Graham had advocated destroying Vietnam's irrigation infrastructure, which by Nixon's estimate would kill a million civilians, if the Paris peace talks failed. The latter revelations, in Cockburn's view, received little press coverage, while the anti-Semitic remarks caused a media firestorm.^[28][29][30] Cockburn wrote that Graham's anti-Semitic comments were

consonant with the standard conversational bill of fare at 75 percent of the country clubs in America, not to mention many a Baptist soiree? But they (Nixon, Graham, and White House Chief of Staff H. R. Haldeman) didn't say they wanted to kill a million Jews. That's what Graham said about the Vietnamese and no one raised a bleat.

His critics quoted the final passage, reproduced below, to accuse Cockburn of spreading anti-Semitic conspiracy theories:^[31][32]

Certainly, there are a number of stories sloshing around the news now that have raised discussions of Israel and of the posture of American Jews to an acrid level. The purveyor of anthrax may have been a former government scientist, Jewish, with a record of baiting a colleague of Arab origins, and with the intent to blame the anthrax on Muslim terrorists. Rocketing around the web and spilling into the press are many stories about Israeli spies in America at the time of 9/11. On various accounts, they were trailing Mohamed Atta and his associates, knew what was going to happen but did nothing about it, or were simply spying on US facilities.

One of the Cockburn critics was Franklin Foer of The New Republic, who first noted Cockburn's response:

To be fair, Cockburn doesn't exactly endorse these theories. Rather, by noting that all of these Jewish conspiracy stories are "sloshing around the news," Cockburn seems merely to be pointing out that, hey, anti-Semitic ideas are still out there today — so why the shock that Graham endorsed them 30 years ago? Indeed, when I reached Cockburn to ask him about these conspiracies, he insisted he was just reporting what was already in circulation.

Part of Cockburn's response to the Graham article controversy is his ironically entitled essay My Life as an "Anti-Semite", from the The Politics of Anti-Semitism. Cockburn writes:

Over the past 20 years I've learned there's a quick way of figuring out just how badly Israel is behaving. You see a brisk uptick in the number of articles here accusing the left of anti-Semitism. ... Back in the 1970s when muteness on the topic of how Israel was treating Palestinians was near-total in the United States, I'd get the anti-Semite slur hurled at me once in a while for writing about such no-no stuff as Begin's fascist roots in Betar, or the torture of Palestinians by Israel's security forces. I minded then, as I mind now, but overuse has drained the term of much clout.^[33]

In May 2012 Cockburn said of Marine Le Pen, leader of the French Front Nastional, that she is a "nationalist politician, quite reasonably exploiting the intense social discontent in France amid the imposition of the bankers' austerity programs". He disputed the impact of Le Pen's attacks on Muslims and immigrants and rejected claims of her antisemitism.^[34]

Cockburn and Christopher Hitchens[link]

Christopher Hitchens is often mentioned in connection with Cockburn as ideological differences on various issues caused bitter moments between the two men. Beyond issues such as the wars in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq, they strongly differed over ethical disputes involving writers such as Sidney Blumenthal and Edward Said. In a Counterpunch article in August 2005, Cockburn attacked Hitchens as: "A guy who called Sid Blumenthal one of his best friends and then tried to have him thrown into prison for perjury; a guy who waited til his friend Edward Said was on his death bed before attacking him in the Atlantic Monthly; a guy who knows perfectly well the role Israel plays in US policy but who does not scruple to flail Cindy Sheehan as a LaRouchie and anti-Semite because, maybe, she dared mention the word Israel."^[35] Hitchens responded by standing by his criticism of Sheehan and then defending his deposition to House prosecutors regarding Blumenthal during the Clinton impeachment and his critical review of Said’s book, Orientalism (Hitchens stating that the review was determined by the 25th anniversary of the book’s original publication and not the state of Said’s health).^[36]

In a 2009 interview with C-SPAN's Brian Lamb, Hitchens intimated that his friendship with Cockburn was still intact, despite the critical gulf between them, discussed above, which was primarily exposed in the press in 2005 and before. Lamb directly asked what Hitchens' relationship with Cockburn was at that time [April, 2009], to which Hitchens mentioned that he recently had attended a Cockburn family wedding in which Alexander officiated, and that he and Cockburn used to see each other frequently, but, due to each of them now living on opposite coasts, they see each other much less. In this same interview Lamb and Hitchens further discussed Cockburn's scathing remarks about Hitchens criticisms of Said and Sheehan, mentioned above. From his 2009 perspective, Hitchens clearly felt the intervening years had justified his criticisms of Sheehan, and expressed that "it's beneath Alexander to be defending someone as cheap and demagogic as her." In the case of Hitchens' criticisms of Edward Said on his death bed, Hitchens replied, "It's actually rather silly of Alexander to say that, I think, because if you look at his [Cockburn's] journalism, he would rightly be proud of saying that he's often written counter-obituaries of people who have been overpraised and has chosen precisely the moment when there's a lot of sentimental garbage being published to say, 'come on, this guy wasn't so great!' So, it's silly of him – he gives a hostage to fortune in saying that."^[37] Following Hitchens' death in 2011, Cockburn wrote a highly critical obituary of him for Counterpunch.^[38]

Bibliography[link]

• Incompatibles (1967) (co-edited with Robin Blackburn)
• Student Power (1969) (co-edited with Robin Blackburn)
• Idle Passion: Chess and the Dance of Death (1975)
• Smoke: Another Jimmy Carter Adventure (1978) (with James Ridgeway)
• Political Ecology (1979) (co-edited with James Ridgeway)
• Corruptions of Empire (1988) ISBN 0-86091-940-4
• The Fate of the Forest: Developers, Destroyers and Defenders of the Amazon (1989) (with Susanna Hecht) ISBN 0-06-097322-6
• The Golden Age Is in Us: Journeys and Encounters (1995) ISBN 0-86091-664-2
• Washington Babylon (1995) (with Ken Silverstein) ISBN 1-85984-092-2
• Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press (1998) (with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-85984-258-5
• 5 Days That Shook The World: The Battle for Seattle and Beyond (2000) (co-edited with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-85984-779-X
• Al Gore: A User's Manual (2000) (with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-85984-803-6
• CounterPunch: The Journalism That Rediscovers America (2002) (co-edited with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-85984-455-3
• The Politics of Anti-Semitism (2003) (co-edited with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-902593-77-4
• Serpents in the Garden (2004) (co-edited with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-902593-94-4
• Imperial Crusades (2004) (co-edited with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-84467-506-8
• Dime's Worth of Difference (2004) (co-edited with Jeffrey St. Clair) ISBN 1-904859-03-8
• End Times: Death of the Fourth Estate (2006) (with Jeffrey St. Clair)

Compact Disc[link]

• Beating the Devil: The Incendiary Rants of Alexander Cockburn

References[link]

External links[link]

Wikiquote has a collection of quotations related to: Alexander Cockburn

• CounterPunch website
• Column archive at Creators Syndicate
• Column archive at The Nation
• Column archive (1974-1982) at The New York Review of Books
• Podcasts of Cockburn's recent articles
• Appearances on C-SPAN
  • In Depth interview with Cockburn, April 1, 2007
• Alexander Cockburn at the Internet Movie Database
• Works by or about Alexander Cockburn in libraries (WorldCat catalog)
• Alexander Cockburn at the Notable Names Database

Mary Aloe is an American film and television producer, focusing on action and drama. Her best known movies include Battle in Seattle, When a Man Falls in the Forest, While She Was Out, Numb, Tortured, and The Princess and the Marine.

Education and early career[link]

Aloe was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania as the youngest of three girls. She moved to Los Angeles to attend the University of Southern California, where she participated with other students on a music magazine titled “Rock”, distributed in 35 countries. Her interest in journalism led her to work as an entertainment reporter for Us Weekly and Entertainment Weekly Radio.

Aloe moved to New York and transitioned into producing talk shows, such as CBS’s Geraldo. She later moved back to the west coast where she produced a newsmagazine show at Paramount television called Hard Copy. She continued to freelance for ABC News 20/20 and went on to produce other newsmagazine, reality TV shows and specials such as The Susan Powter Show (Multimedia Inc), Caught in the Act (NBC/Dick Clark Productions) and Case Closed (USA Network).

Aloe's first executive producer credit was for the Columbia TriStar television movie The Princess and the Marine. She followed up with another TV executive producer credit on Downtown: A Street Tale. This led to producing feature length films such as When a Man Falls in the Forest, Numb, Battle in Seattle, Tortured, and While She Was Out. Aloe also participates with Regent Releasing in managing a $50 million P&A fund.^[1]

Personal life[link]

Aloe participates in charities that support children, women, and animals. She is an active supporting member of The Pasadena Humane Society, Pit Bull Rescue, and Women In Film.

Filmography (producer)[link]

Films[link]

Upcoming:

• The Ascent (2010)
• Hollywood & Wine (2010)
• Mary, Mother of Christ (2012) (with Lionsgate)
• What You Wish For (2011)
• Pistoleros (2012)
• Art of the Heist (2011)
• Keeper of the Pinstripes (2012)
• Book of Life (2011)
• Stanley Ann Dunham: A Most Generous Spirit (documentary) (2012)

Released:

• Battle in Seattle (2007)
• Numb (2007)
• When a Man Falls in the Forest (2007)
• While She Was Out (2008)
• Tortured (2008)
• Downtown: A Street Tale (2004)
• Cabin Fever 2: Spring Fever (2009)

TV movie and TV Shows[link]

Television[link]

• Geraldo (1987) TV series (producer)
• Hard Copy (1989) TV series (producer)
• Caught in the Act (1993) TV (producer)
• The Susan Powter Show (1993/II) TV (executive producer)
• The Princess and the Marine (2001) TV Movie (exec. producer)
• Downtown: A Street Tale (2004) TV Movie (Executive producer)

References[link]

External links[link]

• Mary Aloe at the Internet Movie Database
• Variety article announcing six picture deal for Mary Aloe [1]
• Variety article announcing alliance with Mary Aloe for $50 million P&A fund management [2]
• Mary Aloe official website [3]
• Studio announcement for producer Mary Aloe's Battle In Seattle [4]
• Luke Ford interviews Mary Aloe on Battle In Seattle [5]
• Pittsburgh Business Times article on Aloe's production plans for Pittsburgh [6]
• Regent announcement for $50 million P&A with Mary Aloe [7]
• Article on Mary Aloe and distribution alliance with Regent [8]
• Multiple Pittsburgh Business Times articles on Aloe's productions and company Proud Mary Entertainment [9]
• Seattle Times article on Mary Aloe and Battle In Seattle [10]
• The Guardian UK article on The Princess and the Marine and producer Mary Aloe [11]
• Oregon AFL-CIO article on Mary Aloe and Battle In Seattle [12]