Corporations Struggle to Answer
Global Protests

FEATURE - Corporations struggle to answer global protests
MALAYSIA: September 25, 2001

KUALA LUMPUR - Branded villains by
anti-globalization protesters, many of the world's
largest companies are casting around for a fitting
response.

But they are finding it tough.

At violent protests in Seattle in 1999 and in Genoa last
July, the behavior of multinationals was a rallying cry for a
body of causes, from the plight of world's poor to
destruction of the environment.

Many companies are worried the protests will get worse,
especially if the attacks on Washington and New York hurt
the global economy and pull the world into conflict, leading
to greater unemployment and other cutbacks.

"We have got to work out how to deal with them," said
Richard Sykes, group environmental advisor for Anglo-Dutch
oil firm Shell International BV. "And to me it's not obvious
how you do it."

But the array of causes emblazoned on the banners of
angry marchers - such as poor country debt, sweat-shop
labor, human rights and the perceived hand of business in
thwarting climate change action - has made it hard to forge
coherent replies.

Executives tackled the topic at a recent meeting of the
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
(WBCSD) in Malaysia, whose Prime Minister Mahathir
Mohamad has voiced sympathy for some issues raised by
protesters.

Participants came from the coalition of 150 global firms in
the council, a body styling itself as a leader in
"eco-efficiency, innovation and responsible
entrepreneurship".

DEMANDS NOT IRRATIONAL

"We think that the violence is totally crazy, however, we
think that the protests are not all irrational," said Al Fry, a
World Business Council program manager.

"Although there's a wide spectrum of protests, and
sometimes internal conflicts within these movements, there
are some serious and genuine concerns. Most of these
protesters are not crazy."

Shell is one of several high-profile multinationals that has
been singled out by demonstrators.

It came under criticism in 1995 for its part in Nigeria's oil
industry at a time when writer Ken Saro Wiwa and eight
fellow activists were hanged on disputed charges of murder.

Saro Wiwa's organization had campaigned against Shell,
arguing the oil industry had devastated his native Ogoniland
and left its people in poverty.

That same year Shell came under fire for trying to dump its
underutilized Brent Spar oil installation at sea, sparking
consumer backlashes in Europe before it backed down.

"We took a year out to understand society's changing
expectations and why we'd gone wrong," Shell's Sykes told
Reuters on the sidelines of the WBCSD meeting in Kuala
Lumpur.

Shell's apparent change of heart has seen it join fellow oil
major BP in backing the Kyoto protocol to limit the
emission of climate warming greenhouse gases.

EXXON BOYCOTT

Exxon Mobil Corp, meanwhile, which has rejected the
Kyoto approach on climate change, faces a boycott by an
alliance of environmental groups based mainly in Britain.

Campaigns targeting the environmental, social and human
rights records of companies have mushroomed since 1999
when thousands of protesters took to the streets in Seattle
outside a meeting of the World Trade Organization (WTO),
claiming free trade hurt workers and the environment.

Trade ministers who are to pick up the pieces two years
later at November's WTO ministerial meeting in Doha,
Qatar, may meet against a backdrop of what
anti-globalisation activists say will be a world day of action.

Anti-globalization demonstrators have also vowed to disrupt
a meeting of Commonwealth leaders next month in
Australia, which is scheduled to host up to 50 heads of
state.

At a WBCSD closed-door session in Kuala Lumpur dubbed
"Battles in Seattle to demos in Doha - What is the
business response to anti-globalization?" executives
engaged in some soul searching to find a response.

Fry, the WBCSD program manager, said slow progress on
debt forgiveness and WTO deals favoring rich or rapidly
developing countries were among issues that have enraged
protesters most.

Shaun Stewart, international and government affairs advisor
at mining giant Rio Tinto, said no company appeared to
have built a workable strategy response.

"There was no evidence of any company having done that,"
he said after chairing the session.

He warned that September 11's attacks on New York and
Washington, the week of the WBCSD's meeting in Kuala
Lumpur, could bring an economic downturn which in turn
could spur more anti-globalization sentiment in the longer
term.

"I would think we are going to probably see more rather
than less of it," he said.

Story by Patrick Chalmers

REUTERS NEWS SERVICE