What do the Free Trade Agreements Mean for the People of Latin America?

If you would like to see the Latin American countries advance economically and socially, whether you are a proponent of capitalism or socialism, the trade agreement known as the Bolivarian Alternative of the Americas (ALBA) being discussed by the politicians in South America and the Caribbean gives us hope.

In this article I want to discuss some of the different agreements that already exist and if the involvement of the U.S. influences the decisions of those who govern. I am going to dedicate a separate article about ALBA and the different propositions being discussed to advance the education and health of our people.

There is a lot of confusion about the agreements and I want to briefly answer the questions most asked: What is their effect? What are the differences? Who benefits?

Andean Community of Nations (CAN)
This is one of the oldest agreements in South America that continues. But this trade agreement has its days numbered since two of its members, Colombia and Peru, signing the controversial Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United States. The countries that remain (Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela) have discussed the dissolution of CAN.

It was originally known as the Andean Pact formed in 1969. Chile was a founding member, but broke in 1976 during the dictatorship of Pinochet due its political-economic outlook were incompatible with the Pact. Members of CAN are able to travel within each other nations without visas and business between corporations are open and free of tariffs. That was before some of its members began to negotiate agreements with U.S. in the 1990s.

Even though the U.S. has been able to advance further with the nations of Central America in forming Central America Free Trade Agreement-Dominican Republic (CAFTA-DR) wich includes Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and the Dominican Republic, it hasn’t been able to do the same with the majority of the countries of the southern cone.

In response to the trade agreements the president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, said, “The Free Trade Agreement signed between Colombia and U.S. has taken from us the comerce for the Bolivian section. In CAN exists some nations that have been converted in instruments for disentegration.”

Plan Colombia: Against Narctrafficing or Our People
It is not surprising that Colombia is one of the first country to sign the FTA. This is different from the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas (FTAA) which no country in South America has agreed to the demands of the U.S. The smaller version known as the FTA was directed towards members of CAN. Recently Colombia and Peru signed the FTA, and Ecuador was on the verge of signing until it was stalled due to mass protests by trade union, student and indigenous organizations that paralyzed the Andean nation.

Colombia is one of the countries in Latin America governed by conservative politicans who are complacent to the demands of the U.S. It is one of three countries that receives the most amount of money from the U.S. surpassed by Israel (first) and Egypt (second). In 2000 President Bill Clinton of the Democratic Party signed Plan Colombia which projected $1.3 billion dollars over the next 10 years to combat narcotrafficking. This Plan is a continuation of a smaller plan signed in 1996.

For 2006, the Bush Administration proposes an increase in Plan Colombia and budgeting $742 million and 80% of it for Military/Police “aid”. The money is being used for the training of troops and paramilitaries. These paramilitaries are fighting in a civil war that has been raging Colombia for the last 40 years. Also, a year ago, Colombian paramilitaries were found in Venezuela planning the assassination of President Hugo Chavez.

In the end Plan Colombia has helped arm paramilitaries because the U.S. government would like to see the defeat of the Maoist rebel group known as FARC (Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces). At the same time the amount of drugs that enters the U.S. has only risen. A study by the Washington Offices of Latin America have figured that cocaine is sold 31% cheaper in U.S. streets since Plan Colombia was signed.

Another example in how the “war on drugs” led by the U.S. has only aided the rise of narcotrafficking is Afghanistan. Since the U.S. invasion of that country the cultivation of poppy (which produces heroine) has risen two-thirds. In 2004 the selling of poppy culminates 40 to 60 percent of its economy.

http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/wawjune2005.html#6

MERCOSUR
The MERCOSUR is a treaty formed in 1991 between the nations of Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Paraguay. It is similar to CAN in which its purpose to facilitate commerce between its members. Even though disagreements do errupt between its members that impeds advancement. In 2005 Venezuela was voted in as member of MERCOSUR. Its potential is limited to country members and agreements made with other countries.

The economic devastation trade agreements Third World nations have agreed to with the U.S. has only benefited the financially strongest nation, which is the U.S. There are example of what NAFTA has done to Mexico, and another agreement done with Jamaica has impacted the poor Caribbean nation. Many of the demanstrations that have errupted in Latin America against the FTAA, for example, are also nationalist protest. They demand that their natural wealth be used to benefit everyone in their nations which puts them in contention not just with U.S. and European corporations, but their own wealthy class.

The difference between these accords and ALBA, is that the purpose of ALBA is a treaty that unites the nations in Central and South America and the Caribbean. To use our natural resources for the advancement of our people. Also using the human resources available to advance the education and health of everyone. In the next article I will explain what has been accomplished, especially by Cuba and Venezuela, and future plans being made with Bolivia, Argentina and other nations.