Size matters. That is the lesson to be drawn from last week's failed attempt to launch a new world trade round. Finger pointing has intensified in the wake of the breakdown in negotiations, with the United States proving the scapegoat of choice for most non-Americans (and even some Americans). That may be satisfying for many, but there is more than enough blame to go around. If there is to be another world trade round — and there are very good reasons to have one — WTO members must learn from the debacle in Seattle.
For anyone trying to make sense of those events, the critical figures have nothing to do with the number of protesters. The latter wreaked havoc on Seattle and gave their hosts a black eye. Their wanton violence complicated security but, triumphant claims notwithstanding, they had little influence on the negotiations taking place behind closed doors at the convention center.
No, the critical numbers are four and 135. The first is the number of days that trade ministers had to reach agreement on a trade agenda. It was far too little time for such an ambitious undertaking, especially after negotiators had failed to craft an agenda during preliminary talks in Geneva. After all, six years of Uruguay Round negotiations did not yield a deal on agriculture and financial services, and there has been little sign of a concerted push for compromise in the years since then. In this hothouse environment, the decision of U.S. President Bill Clinton to make a personal — make that campaign — appearance in Seattle was also a mistake. Besides distracting U.S. negotiators, his comments about labor standards — a sop to traditional Democratic Party supporters — infuriated many delegates.