Murder, Inc. (by Elizabeth Palmberg)
The Bush administration wants Congress to sign off on an administration-negotiated trade agreement with Colombia, alleging that to do otherwise is, as one analyst put it, to "turn our back on our friends." But with friends like this, Colombia really doesn't need enemies. Consider:
Friends don't let friends murder labor unionists. More thantwo hundred people were killed in Colombia from 2004-2006 alone just for joining or working for trade unions, and the government hasn't put a stop to the problem. The Bush-negotiated trade agreement offers some labor protections in theory – but enforcement is left entirely up to the very Colombian government that has failed to deal with the labor unionist murders.
Also not so friendly: displacing large numbers of farmers in a country already wracked with a civil war and narco-trafficking. By exposing small farmers to competition with the machine-, fuel-, and subsidy-intensive farms of the U.S., NAFTA took away the livelihood of more than a million Mexican small farmers. Those folks had some chance of finding factory work in Mexican cities or undocumented service-sector jobs in the U.S.; in Colombia, economic need will force many into the right-wing paramilitaries or left-wing FARC, both of whom violate human rights and profit from the drug trade.
But wait, there's more! In addition to hurting farmers and fuelling drug trafficking and the civil war, the trade agreement would also hurt the environment, encourage bio-piracy, help displace indigenous people and Afro-Colombians, and hinder access to lifesaving medicines.
P.S. Oh, and there's also this:
Noting that Colombian goods already flow freely to the U.S. under the Andean trade promotion agreement, [U.S. officials] say any economic impact is likely to be in the U.S.'s favor, since American goods would enter Colombia freely under an FTA.
Elizabeth Palmberg is an assistant editor for Sojourners.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Comments
One of the reasons I like John McCain is that he's likely to stand up to farming interests in this country. But I agree that free trade should actually be free, though I don't think this deal is the de facto Holocaust Palmberg makes it out to be.
Posted by: kevin s. | February 18, 2008 12:57 PM
I am grateful for Elizabeth's post, but we need to remember that this stuff was really bad under Clinton's presidency as well. He was more than happy to provide military aid to Colombia while it was supporting paramilitary groups within its borders who were terrorizing and killing many people.
This was frustrating to the point where many liberals such as myself voted for Nader in 2000. We can't let ourselves fall into the trap of thinking that a Hillary or Obama presidency would change the general state of relations between the U.S. and Colombia.
Posted by: I and I | February 18, 2008 3:15 PM
I agree with kevin s. in that free trade should be free; end farm subsidies here.
That being said, it's unclear to what extent the Colombian government is complicit in the murders being described. Is the US government responsible for all the murders we have here? If not, then punishing the government for its own rogue citizens is unfair and counterproductive.
Posted by: Ngchen | February 18, 2008 3:31 PM
I agree wholeheartedly with I and I that bad trade agreements are a bipartisan problem - Bill Clinton advocated for NAFTA, and both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama voted for the recent U.S.-Peru trade agreement.
Re: Colombian government responsibility for trade unionist murders, it should be noted that, according to the AFL-CIO, "Of the 236 trade unionists murdered [in Colombia] from 2004-2006, there has been only one conviction." This abysmal record suggests that the Colombian government is not really trying to stop the murders (although I would certainly attribute primary responsibility to the people who actually did the murdering).
Posted by: Elizabeth Palmberg | February 18, 2008 5:38 PM
This abysmal record suggests that the Colombian government is not really trying to stop the murders.
Columbian government officials may be afraid of making any real effort to stop the murders or to prosecute and convict suspects. They probably have to face possible retribution if they do.
D
Posted by: Don | February 19, 2008 11:15 AM
The murders of Colombian trade unionists are, sadly, largely aided & abetted by the Colombian government through its paramilitary henchmen. Note that the U.S. Pentagon, under Kennedy's administration in the 1960s & again as recently as 1990, has long instructed Colombia to combat left-wing insurgents by encouraging the organization of right-wing paramilitary groups. These groups were organized & funded on a large scale starting in the 1980s, & their human rights record is horrifying. They have always worked hand in hand with Colombia's army, often doing its dirty work. The largest groups are supposedly demobilized now, but new groups are forming, gaining strength, & committing murders. The current Colombian president, Alvaro Uribe, is trying to manage an immense "parapolitics" scandal that has erupted due to revelations of his own & his political buddies' close, warm ties with paramilitary bosses.
Elizabeth, bless you for pointing out that Colombia has these ongoing problems of violence BUT even if that violence stopped altogether tomorrow, ratifying an "FTA" would be unleashing yet another form of violence against the workers & subsistence farmers of that country.
Posted by: RuthG | February 20, 2008 4:44 PM
Though it doesn't get as much press, Protestant and Evangelical churches and church-leaders are also major victims in the Colombian conflict. Check out their own documentation project: Prophetic Call http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKuIyVil_BE
Posted by: Michael Joseph | February 21, 2008 3:55 PM
So Elizabeth what is YOUR solution? It is easy to imply that Bush doesn't care and he should have done more but really Elizabeth that is easy. What is required is a well thought out doable plan which I doubt that you have or you would have impressed us with it. When Bush goes to the table he doesn't have all the cards and is able to tell the nation of Columbia what they are going to do. When America did that we called it imperialism, when America doesn't do it, they accuse it of being self engrossed. It is so "common" to be a basher instead of a real reformer because that takes ideas.
Posted by: Media Guy | February 21, 2008 5:27 PM
You are being unfair to Elizabeth. Of course, implicit in her article is the idea that Bush should put human rights into consideration for any trade agreement with Colombia. And as she and I both acknowledged, this isn't a "partisan" issue and so it does not receive much attention, and she as a Christian social justice advocate is trying to bring attention to it. It is not her role to provide a 10-point policy plan, but it is by all means the role of the current and the future Presidents to attempt an honest and workable solution to this problem. That is what Elizabeth is rightly calling for.
Posted by: I and I | February 22, 2008 10:13 AM
Post a Comment
Are you aware of our Rules of Conduct?