Wto Does Not Do Its Job

The question of the effects of trade, and the role that international organizations play in it, such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) always bring about different opinions, from different kinds of people. Peter Singer’s book, One World brings a common opinion, one shared by many people. This essay will argue that the WTO does indeed aid in making the rich richer, while worsening the conditions of the poor, while maintaining itself as a democratic organization. This will be proven through the examination of basic international economics, the opinion of a well-known economist, and facts that speak for itself.

The first argument that Singer puts forwards is that of the lack of democracy of the WTO. Ever since the creation of the WTO the voting process has remained the same. Each country has one single vote, and in order for any new policies to go through, the voting needs to be unanimous (Singer 75). Singer states that each country has different views and opinions, as well as different population sizes. He compares the size of one of the largest countries in the world, India with over 1 billion people, with that of Iceland, with only 275,000 people. Imagining that these two countries were voting differently, it does not make sense to give India more voting power simply because of its population size. If the WTO were to change its voting process, and give each country votes according to the population within each country, that would mean that if the two most populated countries, China and India, were to decided to vote together, they would dominate any decisions made in this organization, given that combined they have 2,386,578,200 people, almost 40% of the worlds population (CIA Fact Book). This would not be a very democratic way of running an international body that affects 149 countries of the world. Thus, Singer’s charge that the WTO is not democratic is untrue. The countries that join the WTO need to know that their voices will be heard,