“Negotiating
a free-trade agreement with the U.S. is not something
one has a right to – it's a privilege."
[1]
This quote from US Trade Representative Robert
Zoellick came to mind when the BBC reported former
head of Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, US army General
Karpinski on policy at the US concentration camp
in Guantanamo. Karpinski quoted former Guantanamo
commander Major General Miller saying , "At
Guantanamo Bay we learned that the prisoners have
to earn every single thing that they have."
She went on, "He said they are like dogs
and if you allow them to believe at any point
that they are more than a dog then you've lost
control of them." [2]
Lessons
from that kind of psychological and physical torture
are very evident in US government efforts to force
through coercive “free trade” deals
on weaker trading partners in Latin America. Disorientating
high-pressure timetables, meagre incentives and
seriously damaging penalities underlie the superficial,
businesslike bonhomie. Over these trade-in-your-sovereignty
negotiations hangs constantly the perennial imperial
Damocles' sword – “comply.... or else”.
In the background, national and international
media sound the endless confidence-eroding drip,
drip, “there's no alternative....what choice
do you have?....no alternative.....”.
The
idea that the poor majority in Latin America are
unaware of the crude aggression and blunt contempt
for their needs and interests on the part of the
United States or complacent at their own governments'
canine roll-over responses is false. Resistance
is widespread to US government attempts to extend
and consolidate imperial control of Latin America's
resources on behalf of giant multinational corporations.
One would never know that from the corporate-owned
mainstream media.
If
it's bad news for US allies, it's a non-event
– Colombia
Only
the most inescapable signs of that resistance in
Latin America make the corporate media. The list
of important events barely covered outside the countries
where they happened reveals how popular protest
is neglected. For example, the successful 37 day
strike by national oil company workers in Colombia
this year received virtually no coverage at all.
Organized
to resist continuing attempts to privatize the
State oil company to favor multinational giants
like BP-Amoco and Occidental Petroleum, initially
the strike was declared illegal. Over 200 workers
were fired. Seventeen strike leaders were arrested.
The government militarised petroleum installations
throughout the country. [3]
Similarly,
on May 18th around half a million public workers
held a national strike. A massive protest in Cartagena
was brutally repressed by the army. None of this
received coverage in the North American or European
media in any way comparable to the coverage given
to the 2002 Venezuelan opposition lock-out. Army
and paramilitary massacres in Colombia, such as
those this May in Guajira and in Arauca, that
would be headline international news if they happened
in Venezuela, are simply not reported.
Mexico
Likewise,
serious human rights abuses in Vicente Fox's Mexico
also go mostly unreported. An overwhelmingly peaceful
recent demonstration in Guadalajara outside the
meeting between European and Latin American leaders
was violently dispersed after provocations by a
small number of aggressive protestors well infiltrated
by government provocateurs. Hundreds of bystanders
and peaceful demonstrators were rounded up, severely
beaten and in many cases tortured during their subsequent
detention. [4]
In
Chiapas, indigenous leaders continue to be assassinated
and indigenous communities displaced and attacked.
On June 7th indigenous leader Vazquez Alvaro was
murdered by gunmen believed to be in the pay of
local landowners. While Mexico has denounced Cuba
for its human rights abuses, Amnesty International
had this to report about Mexico “In May
the UN Committee against Torture published its
report on a five-year investigation into torture
in Mexico. The report stated that incidents of
torture "are not exceptional situations or
occasional violations committed by a few police
officers but that, on the contrary, the police
commonly use torture and resort to it systematically
as another method of criminal investigation".
[5]
AI
also notes that a UN Special Rapporteur for the
area expressed concern that Plan Puebla Panama
threatens basic rights of indigenous communities
in southern Mexico. The report observes “In
June local human rights organizations opposed
the threatened eviction of up to 42 indigenous
settlements in the Montes Azules Biodiversity
Reserve in Chiapas, on the grounds that communities
had not been adequately consulted and the measures
were intended to encourage private investment,
not protect the environment.” Ecuador All
these abuses in Mexico tend to be played down
in the international media. Similarly, in Ecuador,
widespread popular protest against President Lucio
Gutierrez precarious government is also under-reported.
Protestors organized large demonstrations in Quito
to mark the 34th general assembly of the Organization
of American States in early June. Around the same
time the major indigenous organizations declared
they would no longer recognize the legitimacy
of the Gutierrez government. [6]
In
the north of the country highways continue to
be cut by demonstrators protesting Ecuador's growing
involvement in the war in Colombia and against
the upcoming “free trade” talks with
US trade negotiators. Gutierrez is reported to
have closed down press and radio media critical
of his government. But the formula for the international
media seems to be “Cuban censorship, bad:
Ecuadoran censorship, so what?....” [7]
So you only discover these reports on the web.
The
Bolivian referendum
Just
as all these events have failed to attract the same
level of attention in the international media as
similar events in Venezuela, coverage is largely
absent of the referendum scheduled for July 18th
which will decide the future of Bolivia's huge gas
fields. Will they be ransacked by the Pacific LNG
consortium of BP- Amoco, British Gas and the Spanish
giant Repsol for sale in Mexico and the US? Or will
they be exploited so as to benefit Bolivia's impoverished
majority? The contrast between the virtually non-existent
coverage of the rights and wrongs of this referendum
and that given to Venezuela's referendum is sharp.
Bolivia
is one of the poorest countries in Latin America,
with a population of just 9 million. It's mineral
wealth has been looted for centuries by Europe
and North America. It also has some of the largest
natural gas reserves in the world, 52 trillion
cubic feet (TCF) of proven or probable reserves
and another 25 TCF of possible reserves. The importance
of the Bolivian government's energy strategy for
the country's future can hardly be overstated.
In terms of Bolivia's future geo-political options
and economic development its reserves of natural
gas are fundamental.
The
discredited government of Sanchez de Lozada facilitated
78 natural gas concessions for foreign companies
before popular outrage at the waste of national
resources forced Sanchez de Lozada out of office
and out of the country in October last year. The
replacement President Carlos Mesa is desperately
trying to defend his predecessor's largesse to
the multinational oil companies against growing
popular rejection. As part of the strategy to
respond to demands from the popular majority his
government has called a referendum on the sale
of Bolivia's gas. President Mesa's government
hopes the measure may provide some legitimacy
to the knock-down disposal of the country's resources
to foreign multinationals.
Some
history
Rights
to the country's fabulous gas reserves began to
be privatized under the government of Jaime Paz
from 1989 to 1993. From 1993 to 1997 Sanchez de
Lozada's government deepened the privatization process,
forcing State enterprises like the State energy
company YPFB into public-private partnerships with
foreign multinationals. Successive laws and administrative
regulations throught the 1990s ate away at Bolivia's
sovereignty over its natural resources.
Much
of this resulted from pressure to comply with
creditors' demands permitting Bolivia to enter
the first round of the Highly Indebted Poor Countries
(HIPC) initiative. Even after that “concession”
Bolivia's debt in 1999 still stood at over US$6bn
– nearly three times its Gross National
Product. In addition, the Sanchez de Lozada government
of that period signed agreements with World Bank
and US government bodies guaranteeing giveaway
investment terms in favor of foreign companies.
Bolivia's
low production costs – as low as a quarter
of those in Venezuela or Mexico – are a
powerful magnet for predatory multinational looters.
They make exploitation of the gas fields viable
in a pan-american market where huge US reserves
tend to keep prices low. Apart from the Pacific
LNG consortium, other companies anxious for a
cut of Bolivia's gas wealth include France's Total
and Brazil's Petrobras as well as Bechtel and
BHP of Australia who want to use the gas to generate
electricity for copper operations in Chile –
Bolivia's traditional enemy.
Geopolitics
– a route to the sea after 125 years
The
geopolitical angle for many people in Bolivia is
that Chile's need for cheap gas might be land-locked
Bolivia's opportunity for a route to the sea. (Chile
cut off Bolivia's access to the sea after war between
the two countries in 1879.) The Chilean army, the
US government and the multinational energy giants
have other ideas. Reports of large Chilean troop
deployments along the border – reports vary
from 22,000 to as many as 50,000 out of a total
armed forces of around 90,000 – and information
suggesting potential coup attempts all raise the
pressure on the Bolivian government to play along
with the status quo as much as possible. [8]
(It's worth noting that the Chilean armed forces
are guaranteed a percentage of all profits from
Chile's copper production. In the mid-1990s it received
as much as US$400million from this source.)
The
situation is aggravated by the decision by Argentina's
President Kirchner to restrict sales of gas from
Argentina to Chile as a result of the energy crisis
confronting his government. That energy crisis
itself is viewed by many as bogus, resulting more
from attempts by the energy multinationals to
fix prices than from genuine shortages. A powerful
statement of that view is given by the Bolivian
Coordinating Group for Defence of Gas and Life
in an open letter to the people of Argentina,
“There's much talk these days of an Energy
Integration Plan for the Southern Cone. We are
ready to contribute to it but to an integration
between peoples in accord with the need of the
peoples not with the businesses of amoral multinationals.”
[9]
The
questions
The
Bolivian July 18th referendum asks voters if they
are in agreement with five apparently non-controversial
measures. These are:
- the
revocation of the current Hydrocarbons Law
- the
recovery of all well-head property rights over
hydrocarbons by the Bolivian State
- the
re-establishment of YPFB as a State entity controlling
the production of hydrocarbons
- the
use of Bolivia's gas to recover “useful
and sovereign” access to the Pacific
- the
domestic industrialization of Bolivia's gas
for internal development with up to 50% charges
to private companies for rights to exploit the
gas
[10]
The
Central Obrero de Bolivia (COB) the country's
main workers union has rejected the questions
arguing that they represent an attempt to facilitate
the passage of a new Hydrocarbons Law to replace
the discredited existing Hydrocarbons Law. Opponents
argue that whatever the result in the first two
questions, the multinationals will still retain
the rights granted by Sanchez de Lozada for 78
concessions lasting up to 36 years representing
the country's most important gas reserves. The
referendum touches nothing retrospectively, only
new concessions will be covered by any change
in the law.
On
question three even a “yes” would
only permit the Bolivian government more say in
the three privatized entities that resulted from
the privatization of the State petroleum company
YPFB. Final decisions would still rest with the
majority shareholders – the multinationals.
Question four is so vaguely worded that the government
could use a “yes” vote to accept merely
a commitment to negotiate on the part of the Chilean
government while Bolivia's gas was still sold
cheap for shipment to Mexico and the US.
Question
five conceals the fact that without full control
of the gas reserves and a State company capable
of exploiting those reserves it makes no sense
to talk about industrialization of the gas for
the benefit of the people of Bolivia. The question
that is missing is: “Should Bolivia's gas
reserves be nationalized under a State energy
company?” That position is supported by
around 80% of Bolivia's population according to
various groups opposing the government. [11]
Bolivian
resistance – a civics lesson for Roger Noriega
On
June 21st the COB launched a campaign to collect
a million signatures calling for nationalization
of the country's gas reserves. The US government
may need to send its regional representative on
a basic civics class in Bolivia. Apparently after
having been asleep during recent events in Bolivia,
Roger Noriega woke up on March 2nd this year to
tell the US Senate, "A principal objective
of our democracy program in Bolivia is to draw the
long-marginalized indigenous population into political
life." [12]
Arguably
as crucial for the future of Latin America as
the presidential referendum in Venezuela, very
little of the national debate in Bolivia reaches
the international media. The imperial “free
trade” consensus has never had much time
for genuine debate based on accurate and timely
information. But the referendums in Bolivia and
Venezuela are likely to deliver unmistakeable
signals that the empire's subject peoples have
had enough – whether the corporate media
report it fairly or not.
NOTES
1.
Speech to the International Institute for Economics
in Washington. May 8th 2003
2.
“General Karpinski : Iraq Abuse 'Ordered From
the Top'” BBC , Tuesday 15 June 2004 posted
in Truth Out.
3.
See the International
Federation of Chemical, Energy, Mine and General
Workers' Unions .
4.
“Due Process in Guadalajara Repression of
Globalization Activists” by Patrick Leet,
ZNet, June 17, 2004
5.
Amnesty
International report on Mexico 2004.
6.
“Ecuador – Las naciones indígenas
desconocen al Gobierno de Lucio Gutiérrez”,
06/06/2004, www.fundacionpacificar.org.
7.
See Indigenous
uprising paralyses Ecuador.
8.
“Coup d'État Plot, Exposed, Shakes
Bolivia” By Luis Gómez, NarcoNews,
April 22nd 2004.
9.
“Carta abierta al Pueblo Argentino De la Coordinadora
de Defensa del Gas y de la Vida de Bolivia”,
22-06-2004 , www.rebelion.org
10.
See the Bolivian
government referendum website.
11.
