|
||
|
Unrest in Colombia as thousands protest FTA, economic policies Dear friends and colleagues, We share with you a number of articles covering the breakout of protests in Colombia beginning earlier this year and exploding into large-scale unrest over the government’s political and economic decisions and policies, particularly Bogota’s decision to sign free trade agreements (FTAs) with the United States and the European Union. While the protests were declared more than a month ago and led initially by farmers in one part of the country, they have been joined in the thousands by other farmers elsewhere in Colombia as well as groups as diverse as oil industry workers, miners, truckers, health sector professionals and students. According to reports, 20,000 make up the number of students alone who have joined the movement of mobilisation – as well as roadblocks in some parts – to protest the policies and decisions. As the first report points out, one source of grievance, particularly for farmers and indigenous communities, relates to the FTAs with the US and EU which now “criminalise” the acts of saving, exchanging and selling farmed-saved seeds, whether these were the varieties bought from commercial entities or indigenous seeds that had not been formally registered. Anger and frustration have also grown around the FTAs as a result of the dislocation suffered by countless thousands of Colombian producers who have found they cannot compete with the surge of subsidised imports – particularly agricultural imports – from the US and EU that are undercutting local produce. [Item 1] The second report recounts how the early protests by farmers grew into the now-nationwide movement Mesa de Interlocucion Agropecuaria nacional (MIA) that is articulating and engaging with the government on the FTAs it had signed as well as on a number of other issues and concerns facing the people. “The national agricultural strike is the result of problems and demands that have built up over many years,” economist H้ctor Le๓n Moncayo, a university professor who is a co-founder of the Colombian Alliance against Free Trade (RECALCA), is quoted as saying. “The only solution now is to bring about a major transformation.” [Items 2] We have included also an earlier article reporting on the fears and concerns that had been expressed by Colombians several months ago in relation to effects the FTAs with the US and the EU would have on the domestic market in Colombia, especially in relation to corn, rice, wheat, barley, soybean, bean, oil seed, chicken, pork, beef, dried milk, and whey exports. Economist Juan Pablo Fernแndez warned further that small-scale producers of goods such as car parts, machinery and home appliances would also be affected. [Item 3] With best wishes, Third
World Network ------------------------------------------------------------- [Item 1] Colombia farmers' uprising puts the spotlight on seeds GRAIN | 04 September 2013 www.grain.org/e/4779 On 19 August, Colombian farmers' organisations initiated a massive nationwide strike. They blocked roads, dumped milk on cars and basically stopped producing food for the cities. The problem? Farmers are being driven out of existence by the government's policies. The state provides almost no support for the small-scale farming sector.1 Instead, it embraces a social and economic model that serves the interests of a wealthy elite minority. Recent free trade agreements (FTAs) signed with the US and the EU are undercutting Colombian producers, who can't compete with subsidised imports. The Colombian government has been actively promoting land grabbing by large corporations, many of them foreign (Monica Semillas from Brazil, Merhav from Israel, Cargill from the US), to promote export-oriented agribusiness at the expense of family farming oriented towards food sovereignty. But the farming sector needs real support, especially in the form of access to land and lower costs of production, protestors argue. Otherwise, Colombian potato and coffee farmers, dairy and meat producers, not to mention small fishers, will not be able to keep up. They are being evicted and exterminated. With their backs against the wall, a movement of mobilisation began in one part of the country in June and grew into a coordinated national action for August. The farmers' strike was soon supported by other sectors: oil industry workers, miners, truckers, health sector professionals and others. On 29 August, ten days into the strike, more than 20,000 students joined the movement and shut down the capital city, Bogotแ. The response of the government was chaotic and contradictory. Police forces violently repressed and injured a lot of protestors, not to mention journalists. More than 250 people were arrested, including high-level union leader Hubert Jes๚s Ballesteros Gomez, mostly on trumped up charges. A number of people on both sides lost their lives. At one moment the government recognised the farmers' grievances as valid and offered some concessions. In another it claimed that the movement was infiltrated by the FARC. President Santos even went on TV and claimed that "the agrarian strike does not exist". The following day, he was filmed from a helicopter, inspecting the skirmishes and tear gas which filled the streets of Bogotแ. The mobilisation has been extremely successful in opening up space for discussion, conscientisation, solidarity and resistance in Colombia. Students, for instance, were keen to support the farmers and back their demands. They rallied loudly against GMOs and for food sovereignty. But they also wanted to put forward their own demands for free public education, nudging the mobilisation beyond agrarian concerncs into a broader wave of social pressure to change current Colombian policies. Law 970 Seeds emerged as one highly visible issue. Under the FTA signed with Washington, as well as that signed with Brussels, Bogotแ is required to provide legal monopoly rights over seeds sold by US and European corporations as an incentive for them to invest in Colombia. Farmers who are caught selling farm-saved seeds of such varieties, or simply indigenous seeds which have not been formally registered, could face fines or even jail time. As is the case in many other countries throughout the world, this criminalisation of farmers' and indigenous people's rights to save, exchange and sell seeds puts the country's biodiversity and cultural heritage at risk. While it's true that the Colombian government has been moving in this direction for many years, and agreeing to such policies as part of its membership in the Andean Community or the World Trade Organisation, many people point out that it is only since the signing of the US and EU FTAs that the government has begun seriously implementing them. In 2011, the Colombian government authorities stormed the warehouses and trucks of rice farmers in Campoalegre, in the province of Huila, and violently destroyed 70 tonnes of rice that it said were not processed as per the law. This militarised intervention to destroy farmers' seeds shocked many, and inspired one young Chilean activist, Victoria Solano, to make a film about it. The film is called "9.70" because that is the number of the law adopted in 2010 that articulates the state's right to destroy farmers' seeds if they don't comply. Today, thanks to the force, tenacity and justness of the farmers' protest, people from all walks of life are Colombia are discussing that film, as can be seen in the mass media, social networks and the streets, and asking why the government is pursuing such senseless policies. Support the movement There is no question that Colombian farmers can feed the country very well, in a way that provides jobs, dignity and a healthy environment. But the government is too firmly attached to an economic model that caters to crony interests and holds no place for small-scale family farming. We should all support the popular agrarian struggle in Colombia to turn that model around. It's not too late. As one small concrete action, the documentary film "9.70" -- which you can watch online in Spanish at http://youtu.be/kZWAqS-El_g -- is seeking funds to produce a version with English subtitles so that more people around the world can understand what the Colombians farmers are facing and support them to defeat such policies. The smallest contribution helps. Please go to http://idea.me/proyectos/9162/documental970 to participate. The deadline is 10 September! As another meaningful action, the Latin American Coordination of La Via Campesina are seeking international solidarity initiatives to support the strike. Please go to http://goo.gl/9u6RXJ to learn more. Again, time is of the essence! Beyond Colombia, the battle over similar seeds legislation is raging right now at very high political levels, and across the countryside, in Chile and Argentina as well. One concern is that some of the more aggressive elements adopted by the government of Colombia could infiltrate other Latin American countries as well. The need to scrap these laws is truly urgent indeed! -------------------------------- [Item 2] Nationwide Protests Rage against Colombia’s Economic Policies By Constanza Vieira and Helda Martํnez BOGOTA, Aug 30 2013 (IPS) - A strike declared nearly two weeks ago in Colombia by farmers and joined later by truck drivers, health workers, miners and students spread to include protests in the cities before mushrooming into a general strike Thursday, demanding changes in the government’s economic policies. The protests ballooned after clashes with the ESMAD anti-riot police left at least two rural protesters dead and over 250 under arrest. Also fuelling the unrest, say analysts, was the attempt by President Juan Manuel Santos to minimise the strikers’ actions. He said on Sunday Aug. 25 that “the so-called national agrarian strike does not exist.” The authorities, meanwhile, allege that the nationwide roadblocks and protests have been connected to the country’s left-wing guerrillas. The head of the Fensuagro agricultural trade union, H๚ber Ballesteros, was arrested Sunday, accused of financing the rebels. He is one of the 10 spokespersons selected by the Mesa de Interlocuci๓n Agropecuaria Nacional (MIA) to negotiate with the government. MIA, a national umbrella movement, emerged from over two months of protests by campesinos or small farmers in Catatumbo, an impoverished area in northeast Colombia, where they are calling for government measures that would make it possible for them to stop producing coca – their main livelihood in the isolated, roadless area — and switch to alternative crops. Since the campesinos began to protest in Catatumbo in June, the problems facing small farmers around the country have become more visible. The difficulties they face are especially exacerbated in the central provinces of Boyacแ and Cundinamarca and in Nari๑o in the southwest, where smallholder production of potatoes, onions, maize, fresh produce, fruit and dairy products is the main economic activity of much of the population. Since Monday Aug. 19, small farmers around the country have been on strike to protest that they cannot compete with low-price food products imported under free trade agreements with the United States (in effect since May 2012) and the European Union (in effect since Aug. 1). They are also complaining about rising fuel, transport and production costs. Another target of the farmers’ protests is “Resolution 970”, passage of which was required by the U.S.-Colombia FTA, which protects genetically modified seeds under intellectual property rights, making the replanting of them a crime. In addition, they are protesting large-scale mining projects that have been given the green light in agricultural regions, without consulting local communities as required by law. It all boils down to the lack of real policies for the countryside, says MIA, which presented a lists of demands before the farmers’ strike began. The list calls for solutions to the crisis affecting farmers; access to land titles proving ownership; recognition of protected campesino territories; participation in decisions involving mining industry activity; guarantees for exercising political rights; and social spending and investment in infrastructure like roads in rural areas. On Sunday Aug. 25, the protests spread to the cities, after farmers posted photos and videos on social networking sites of the ESMAD riot police’s brutal crackdown on campesino families, including children and the elderly. A mission of human rights defenders reported that the riot police had fired live ammunition into crowds of protesters, and that injured demonstrators had wounds indicating that they had been beaten and even stabbed or shot by ESMAD. The mission also documented reports of sexual abuse and rape threats against the wives and daughters of campesinos taking part in the protests. One woman who reported that the police threw a tear gas canister directly at her inside her home told the human rights defenders: “I was cooking for my kids when I saw an ESMAD agent in the window who, without saying anything, broke the glass and just threw [the canister] inside. I ran out to protect my kids.” In response to the images and reports of police brutality, people in the cities began to protest, with “cacerolazos” – where demonstrators bang on kitchen pots and pans – which are common in some Latin American countries but are unusual in Colombia. President Santos apologised and launched a dialogue, in an attempt to negotiate by region or by sector. But his strategy failed and the unrest continued to spread. Santos said on Wednesday Aug. 28 that his instructions to the security forces to clear the roadblocks, “as they have been doing,” were still standing. On Thursday, he unexpectedly cancelled his participation in Friday’s Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) summit in Suriname. Thousands of indigenous people in the southwestern province of Cauca reported Wednesday that they had begun rituals to join the protests. “The national agricultural strike is the result of problems and demands that have built up over many years,” economist H้ctor Le๓n Moncayo, a university professor who is a co-founder of the Colombian Alliance against Free Trade (RECALCA), told IPS. “The only solution now is to bring about a major transformation.” “A true agrarian reform process has never been carried out in Colombia. Every attempt has failed,” he said. The civil war, which has dragged on for nearly 50 years, “was a pretext for building up military power, and in parallel, paramilitary power,” he argued. “The far-right paramilitaries stepped up the violence against the campesino population, fuelling massive displacement,” he said. According to the figures of the Consultancy for Human Rights and Displacement (CODHES), a leading Colombian human rights group, 5.5 million people were displaced from their homes between 1985 and 2012. From behind the scenes, “the drug lords increased the concentration of land ownership, and today there are very few regions with a small-scale campesino economy. Clear examples are the latifundios (large landed estates) where sugarcane and African oil palm are grown,” Moncayo said. According to January statistics from the National Agrofuels Federation, 150,000 hectares of land are dedicated to sugarcane and oil palm, of the country’s total of five million hectares of farmland. The government of C้sar Gaviria (1990–1994) introduced free-market reforms to open up the economy. And more recently, free trade agreements have further undermined the competitiveness of small farmers. Moncayo said campesinos have lost the ability to make a living by selling their products, thanks also to dumping – the export of products by Colombia’s partners at prices below production costs. “It would be very hard to get the free trade agreements revoked, but it is possible – and urgently necessary – to design sustainable policies for rural development for campesinos,” he said. According to the United Nations Development Programme, 32 percent of Colombia’s population of 47 million lives in rural areas, and between nine and 11 million people depend on farming for a living. “We need to make the transition from traditional agriculture to agroecology, to revive the Colombian countryside,” Adriana Chaparro, a professor at Uniminuto, a private college that offers degrees in agroecology, told IPS. “Agroecology is a big challenge that would make it possible to obtain the best results from farming, without deterioration of the land,” she said. “It would also prevent what many are calling for: subsidies for agriculture, which would require increasingly large investments, which are difficult to finance. “These protests, which include fair demands, are also an opportunity to take a close, critical look at our agricultural practices, without falling into the government’s way of thinking,” Chaparro said. Agroecology student Tatiana Vargas said these practices “should become a way of life, which would help us go back to our essence.” ---------------------------------------------- [Item 3] COLOMBIA-U.S.: Trade Deal “Throws Country into Jaws of Multinationals,” Critics Say By Helda Martํnez BOGOTม, May 16 2012 (IPS) - The entry into force of Colombia’s free trade agreement with the United States was met by student protests and opposition from a segment of the business community, small farmers, and trade unionists. The trade deal, signed in 2006 after two years of negotiations, went into effect Tuesday after a lengthy process of modification of Colombia’s domestic laws to bring them into compliance with the agreement. In response to the protests Tuesday, the authorities closed down public universities, as well as bus stations in Bogotแ. The day was also marked by a bomb attack against the armoured car of Fernando Londo๑o, a former interior and justice minister of the government of มlvaro Uribe (2002-2010), which killed two of his bodyguards and injured him as well as some 30 passers-by. Another car-bomb had earlier been deactivated. But the Colombian government celebrated the start of the free trade agreement (FTA) signed by then presidents Uribe and George W. Bush (2001-2009). President Juan Manuel Santos said the accord signed with the United States, which is already Colombia’s main export market, would boost this country’s economic growth by nearly one percent a year and create 500,000 jobs. The FTA, which will be implemented in stages, will gradually eliminate tariffs on virtually all products traded between the two countries. It also contains provisions that regulate investment, agriculture, industry, services, telecommunications, intellectual property, public procurement, and environmental, labour, sanitary and cultural questions. But activists, students, farmers and other critics of the FTA say Colombia yielded in a number of areas, in exchange for nothing. To back up their arguments, they point out that President Barack Obama said the trade deal would help “achieve my goal of doubling U.S. exports.” “But (Obama) says little to nothing about increasing imports,” Enrique Daza, the head of the Colombian Action Network Against Free Trade, told IPS. Last year, Colombia’s exports to the United States amounted to 21.7 billion dollars, or 38 percent of this country’s total sales abroad, while imports from the U.S. stood at 13.6 billion dollars – 25 percent of Colombia’s total imports. The FTA will have a “scandalous effect on agriculture in Colombia, especially, immediately hurting the production of cereals, because huge shipments will enter our country (from the United States) tariff-free and at subsidised prices,” Daza said. He added that the problem is aggravated by the fact that “the government does not fully control the entry of imports because it does not have a unified customs information system. “This means that the authorised quantity could come in through each port, multiplying the amount of tariff-free goods entering the country,” Daza said. A 2009 report, “Impact of the U.S.-Colombia FTA on the Small Farm Economy in Colombia”, financed by Oxfam, says: “In short, Colombia guaranteed unconditional access to its domestic market for principal U.S. export products such as rice, corn (maize), wheat, barley, soybeans, beans, oil seeds, chicken, pork, high quality beef, dried milk, and whey, among others.” “However, in contrast, the United States conditioned the entry of an important Colombian product, sugar, to a duty free quota, and did not guarantee the elimination of non-tariff barriers,” say the authors, Luis Jorge Garay, Fernando Barberi and Ivแn Cardona. Under the FTA, 79,000 tonnes of tariff-free rice and 27,000 tonnes of chicken will enter Colombia from the United States in the first year alone, to the detriment of local farmers. “Colombia’s consumer goods industry, which for years has suffered problems from the opening up of the economy, will continue to be hurt,” said Daza. “As a result, the big local industries will prefer to sell out to multinational chains, as occurred in the case of the Bavaria brewery,” which was the second-largest in South America and was acquired in 2005 by UK-based beer maker SABMiller. Economist Juan Pablo Fernแndez, an adviser to the left-wing Independent Democratic Pole party, told IPS that small-scale producers of goods such as car parts, machinery and home appliances “will become mere importers, in the best of cases.” Activists estimate that 350,000 small-scale beef and dairy farmers will be hurt by competition from beef imported from the United States. Meanwhile, cut flowers from Colombia, which cover nearly 80 percent of demand in the U.S., will be directly affected by the strengthening of the peso against the dollar which, according to Daza, “is essential to the FTA, which states that intervention in the domestic foreign exchange market is considered anti-competitive.” To all this is added the crisis facing the coffee industry. “We don’t have enough beans, so coffee is imported from Guatemala and Vietnam, to meet domestic demand,” he added. With respect to which sectors will be affected by the FTA, Daza said “it is easier to list the ones that won’t be hurt, such as some importers and those who will profit from the economic activities of the state, like businesspeople who are already benefiting from trade globalisation policies.” And Colombia is in an even more disadvantageous position because in eight years of negotiations it did not upgrade railways, rivers or ports in preparation for the changes to be brought by the FTA. In other words, said Daza, “the negotiators of the agreement threw the country into the jaws of the multinationals.” The treaty will also lead to an increase in poor-quality jobs in the informal sector, which is “the way to boost profit margins, like what has occurred in the flower business, palm oil plantations and small-scale mining,” he added. The Oxfam report, meanwhile, states that the negotiation of the FTA did not even take into consideration issues that were described at the start as essential, such as Colombia’s decades-long civil war, “the importance of the welfare of the rural population to the economic, social and political stability of Colombia,” and “the need to create profitable alternatives to illicit crops.” The negotiation, the authors say, “was governed exclusively by commercial interests.” * With reporting by Constanza Vieira (END)
|
||
