Naomi Klein on the Shock Doctrine

Naomi Klein's The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism is out in paperback this month. She spoke with Amy Goodman about our current economic "perfect storm" and the potential for pro-multinational economic restructuring on Democracy Now! yesterday. Here's a very brief excerpt from a discussion of how corporate-controlled policymaking is failing people and the planet on every front.

There really is a kind of a tsunami of shocks facing not just the economy but people's lives, people's real lives. They're all intersecting. They're making each other worse. And ...this is what I mean by "the shock doctrine." There is a clear political strategy, and has been for several decades, to exploit these moments when people are desperate for quick-fix solutions and more inclined to believe in a kind of a magical cure, to push through very, very unpopular policies that don't actually solve the crisis at hand, that don't actually help people, but are incredibly profitable for multinational corporations.

You can also read a transcript at Alternet, here.

Read more!

Free Trade Undermining Democracy in Costa Rica?

By Steve Suppan

October 12, 2007

http://www.tradeobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=100394

The last poll taken before the October 7 referendum on whether Costa Rica should join the Central American Free Trade Agreement estimated that 55 percent of Costa Ricans would vote “No.” The binding referendum is the first ever held anywhere on a free trade agreement in which the government must act on the basis of the voting result. The stakes of the vote couldn’t be higher for the future of the Costa Rican democracy and economy.

I had the honor of participating in an academic seminar and then a public forum on September 13 in San José, Costa Rica. Participants reviewed the results of their legal and economic research into the results of the first year of CAFTA-DR in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua, and the first months in the Dominican Republic (synthesis in Spanish: http://www.ciid-gt.org/informecafta.pdf). The results of were unremittingly grim, particularly in agriculture. Promised government investments in national agricultural production were not made. CAFTA DR’s tariff elimination allowed 30 percent and more increases in imports of basic grains in which the countries traditionally had been self-sufficient. Former farmers sought jobs in assembly plants paying from $.30 an hour in Nicaragua to $.80 an hour in Guatemala. Trade balance deficits boomed while promised foreign direct investment went bust. If CAFTA-DR is implemented in Costa Rica, it very likely faces the same economic outlook. It also likely faces further corruption of its democratic institutions and the degradation of public services well known in Latin America for their efficiency, fairness and near universal availability.

So, it’s not surprising that extraordinary measures were taken in the days before the election to gain its approval. In violation of a Costa Rican law prohibiting campaign activities 48 hours in advance of an election and on election day, Costa Rican television and newspapers repeatedly publicized statements from President George Bush and U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab suggesting that the U.S. would not extend preferential market access to any country that had rejected a free trade agreement. U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid stated in a September 28 letter to the Costa Rican Ambassador to the United States that continuation of the preferential access did not depend on the referendum’s results, but their statement was not broadcast. Employers told employees not to show up for work if the “No” vote prevailed. Though election rules require that ballots be signed in black ink, the government provided only red pens for some polling stations. Despite widespread reporting of voter intimidation, illegal government financing of the “Yes” campaign, and vote buying, the Supreme Electoral Court, the fourth constitutional branch of Costa Rican government, did nothing.

The strength of opposition to CAFTA-DR is remarkable, given the campaign of voter intimidation carried out by the U.S. and Costa Rican governments. A July 29 memo from the Vice President of Costa Rica and a member of the Costa Rican Congress to President Oscar Arías recommended a campaign to “stimulate fear.” The memo was leaked to a university newspaper on September 10. Though the voting results will not be certified by the Supreme Electoral Court until October 20, the means used to achieve the 51.5 percent vote in favor of CAFTA-DR have dealt a crushing blow to the rule of law in Costa Rica. The memo recommended focusing the campaign of fear on the so-called “simple people” in rural areas. But a majority of them defied threats to vote against joining CAFTA-DR. President Arías was reduced to distributing rent vouchers personally in the poorest neighborhoods of San José on election day to get out the “Yes” vote, further tarnishing his legacy as a Nobel Prize for Peace winner.

In the United States, violation or selective enforcement of election laws and dysfunctional election technologies have become a too regular feature of our political life. But in Costa Rica, until CAFTA-DR became the principal issue of its presidential election and then the cause of this referendum, the Supreme Electoral Court was the guardian of democracy. The corruption of Costa Rican electoral institutions to advance the cause of “free” trade has removed a bulwark of democracy against an autocracy of trade rules. To the lack of positive economic performance from CAFTA-DR in its first year for all but its largest corporate beneficiaries, CAFTA-DR now dons a mantle of electoral and political illegitimacy.

Campaigners against CAFTA-DR are mulling over their political and legal options. An appeal to the Supreme Electoral Court to comply with election law may be filed, though with little hope of success. Appealing to the Organization of American States to investigate U.S. interference in a Costa Rican election likewise may be in vain. Opposition party leader Otton Solís will be proposing a legislative “mitigation agenda” to reduce some of the anticipated harm from CAFTA implementation. The possibility of a general strike, lasting weeks, to force the government to annul the illegitimate “Yes” vote and to remove officials who violated election laws, is not beyond the realm of possibility.

IATP promotes resilient family farms, rural communities and ecosystems around the world through research and education, science and technology, and advocacy. For more information, visit www.iatp.org.

Steve Suppan is a Senior Policy Analyst at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.

Other Resources

Letter to President Bush on CAFTA-DR and Costa Rica from Senators Dorgan, Brown and Sanders. October 5, 2007 -

http://www.tradeobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=100391

Letter to Costa Rica Ambassador on CAFTA-DR from Senator Harry Reid and Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. September 28, 2007 - http://www.tradeobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=100392

Statement by Deputy U.S. Trade Representative John Veroneau on Costa Rica and CAFTA-DR. October 1, 2007 -

http://www.tradeobservatory.org/library.cfm?refid=100393

Read more!

Costa Ricans Back CAFTA in Referendum But Opposition Refuses to Recognize Result

by Marianela Jimenez
Published on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 by The Associated Press
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/10/10/4453/

SAN JOSE, Costa Rica — Costa Ricans prepared on Monday to join a controversial free trade agreement with Central American neighbors, the Dominican Republic and the U.S. after a thin majority apparently backed the pact in a national referendum.

But even Sunday’s vote on the Central American Free Trade Agreement did not end a yearlong battle over the agreement.

Opponents said they will wait for a mandatory recount, set to begin Tuesday, before recognizing the referendum’s results. The ballot-by-ballot recount is required by Costa Rican law, and can last no longer than two weeks.

With 97 percent of precincts reporting Monday, 51.5 percent of Costa Ricans voted in favor of the trade deal, which is known as CAFTA.

Costa Rica was the lone holdout among the six Latin American nations that now constitute the trade bloc. The pact has already taken effect in the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and El Salvador.

The White House kept a close eye on Sunday’s election results, having fought a bruising political battle to get the deal ratified by the U.S. Congress in 2005, when it passed the House of Representatives by just two votes.

Washington last week urged Costa Ricans to recognize the treaty’s benefits and vowed not to renegotiate the terms of the deal if voters rejected it. U.S. officials also suggested they might not renew other trade preferences now afforded Costa Rican products, set to expire next September, if the pact is not approved.

Costa Rican President Oscar Arias called the trade deal crucial to industry in the Central American nation of 4.5 million people.

Opposition legislators on Monday vowed to use a pending vote on a package of laws required by CAFTA as leverage to win increases in education outlays and farm subsidies.

Bills that would open state telecommunications and insurance monopolies to competition are among the most controversial of the package of 13 laws.

Critics also object to requirements that Costa Rica open its agricultural and service sectors to competitors, fearing a flood of cheap U.S. farm imports.

Read more!

CAFTA Wins in Razor-Close Costa Rica Vote

CAFTA Wins in Razor-Close Costa Rica Vote

AlterNet. Posted October 8, 2007.

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/64680/?page=entire

That nearly half the public in Latin America's richest free-market democracy opposed CAFTA despite the intensive campaign in its favor should end the repeated claims that pushing more NAFTA-style free trade deals improves the U.S.'s image in the region.

Editor's Note: On Sunday, in the first ever public referendum on a trade agreement, Costa Ricans approved CAFTA by a 51-48 margin. Opposition organizers have asked for a recount. Below is a press release issued by Public Citizen.

The depth of public opposition to North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)-style pacts was demonstrated Sunday by Costa Rica's massive "no" vote to CAFTA despite a intensive campaign led by the country's president, months of deceptive radio and television advertising in favor of the pact, and a threatening statement issued Saturday by the White House, Public Citizen said today.

The strong vote against CAFTA likely will fuel growing opposition to another Bush proposal now before Congress to expand NAFTA to Peru. The Peru Free Trade Agreement (FTA) contains the same foreign investor privileges, service sector privatization, agriculture and other provisions that fueled Costa Rican public opposition.

"That nearly half the public in Latin America's richest free-market democracy opposed CAFTA despite the intensive campaign in favor of it should end the repeated claims that pushing more NAFTA-style free trade deals is critical to U.S. foreign policy interests in the region or helps the U.S. image," said Lori Wallach, director of Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch division. "This vote also debunks the claim that these pacts are motivated out of U.S. altruism to help poor people in trade partner countries, given that many of the people in question just announced that they themselves don't want this kind of trade policy. This policy, supported by the elite, will help foreign investors seize control of their natural resources, undermine access to essential services, displace peasant farmers and jack up medicines prices."

Preliminary results showed that those opposing CAFTA garnered just over 48 percent of the vote and those for it garnered under 52 percent. The anti-CAFTA vote received the majority in most rural regions, where fears about campesino displacement drove opposition to the pact. The pro-CAFTA vote won narrow majorities in most urban, populous regions, where Bush administration's threats made Thursday and Saturday were widely covered by the media despite a legally mandated black-out on advocacy for or against CAFTA in the press. As of Monday morning, the "no" campaign had not conceded and was awaiting a partial recount on Tuesday and an investigation into polling station irregularities.

Citizens of El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala and the Dominican Republic had no opportunity to voice their own views of CAFTA. Despite massive, long-running public demonstrations against CAFTA in those countries - which resulted in protestors being killed by the police in Guatemala and a legislature fleeing its own building to hold the vote in a downtown hotel in Honduras - legislatures in those countries ultimately ratified and implemented CAFTA by mid-2006.

In Costa Rica, the CAFTA debate coincided with that nation's presidential election. With fair trade presidential candidate Ottón Solís running against CAFTA-supporter and Nobel-Prize winner Oscar Árias on a campaign focusing on the widely unpopular NAFTA expansion, CAFTA never came to a vote in Costa Rica. Early in 2007, after Árias narrowly won, Costa Rica's legislature passed a measure establishing a national referendum on whether Costa Rica should enter CAFTA.

That Sunday's referendum resulted in narrow passage is not surprising given considerable intervention by the Bush administration and a massive, well-funded campaign for the pact led by Costa Rica's president and pushed heavily by the corporate sector and much of Costa Rica's media. The Bush administration repeatedly threatened to remove Costa Rica's existing Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) trade preferences if the public rejected CAFTA, even though the program was made permanent in 1990 and only an act of Congress could terminate it. (A tiny percentage of Costa Rica's U.S. exports enjoys duty-free benefits under a CBI add-on program that was approved in 2000. The tremendously popular program, which covers nearly two dozen countries and cannot be removed for rejection of an FTA, is set for renewal next year.)

"Right now, we see the same duplicity with the proposed NAFTA expansion to Peru, where proponents claim that implementing the Peru agreement is critical to building a positive U.S. image in the region," Wallach said. "Yet if these agreements are good foreign policy, why did the Bush administration also threaten to remove existing Andean trade preferences to force the deal over the opposition of the Peruvian public as well as its religious, indigenous and labor leaders?"

The U.S. ambassador to Costa Rica, Mark Langdale, was slammed with a rare formal denunciation before Costa Rica's Supreme Electoral Tribunal in August after he waged a lengthy campaign to influence the vote on CAFTA. As part of that, Langdale employed misleading threats and suggested there would be economic reprisals if CAFTA were rejected. In response, Rep. Linda Sánchez (D-Calif.) who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Western Hemisphere Subcommittee, wrote a letter to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in late September demanding the cessation of Langdale's interventions. "Even the perception of such interference harms the U.S. image in a region already suspicious of our intentions," Sánchez wrote. "If we are to be seen as respecting democracy, sovereignty, and economic development, we must not interfere in any way with the historic popular referendum on CAFTA in Costa Rica, the region's oldest and strongest democracy."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in late September sent a letter to Costa Rica's ambassador to the United States correcting Langdale's false threats that Costa Rica would lose its CBI trade preferences if the public rejected CAFTA. "Participation in CBI is not conditioned on a country's decision to approve or reject a free trade agreement with the United States, and we do not support such a linkage," Pelosi and Reid wrote. Despite this, Bush's U.S. Trade Representative renewed the threats on Thursday, and the White House issued a statement repeating the threats on Saturday - just hours before the vote.

"Only two years after CAFTA squeezed through Congress on a one-vote margin, the narrowest margin ever for a trade deal, nearly half of Costa Rica's public took a strong stand, in the face of campaign trickery and lies, against the damaging agreement," said Todd Tucker, research director for Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch division and author of the CAFTA Damage Report. "No more countries should be subjected to the damaging policies imposed by overreaching 'trade' agreements."

Read more!

Costa Rica Referendum on CAFTA Outcome Questioned

From: "Jessica Walker Beaumont"

For immediate release Contacts: Tom Loudon, Alliance for Responsible Trade,
http://www.art-us.org/

October 8, 2007 011 (506) 864-3449 through 10/9 and (301) 204-9549

Tara Carr-Lemke, Stop CAFTA Coalition (202) 319-5542


Costa Rica Referendum on CAFTA Outcome Questioned

U.S. Intervention, Corruption, and an Internationally Financed Fear Campaign

Provoke Questions about Referendum Process

United States intervention, corruption, and the realities of an internationally financed campaign led to the passage of the U.S.-Dominican Republic-Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA) in yesterday’s popular referendum in Costa Rica. A delegation from the U.S.-based Alliance for Responsible Trade and the Stop CAFTA Coalition, who represent U.S. faith-based, solidarity, union, and student organizations and served as international observers, point to the process as an example of dirty campaigning designed to pressure countries to accept the existing trade model and the economic program it promotes.

“In Costa Rica, voting ‘No’ was about stopping CAFTA, but it was also about a twenty-year struggle to preserve publicly run electrical, phone and health care systems,” says Tom Loudon from the Alliance for Responsible Trade. “The Costa Rican and U.S. governments and the multinationals they represent simply had too much to lose to allow the ‘No’ campaign to win.”

Many characterized the “Yes” and “No” campaigns as a struggle between David and Goliath. Although the locally-funded grassroots door-to-door strategy facilitated unprecedented broad-based mobilization around the trade agreement, it was up against an internationally-backed fear campaign administered by the Costa Rican and U.S. governments, multinational companies, and multilateral institutions.

“It is clear that pro-‘free trade’ forces identified Costa Rica as a pivotal battleground for their model,” said Phil Jocelyn from the New York People’s Referendum of Free Trade. “The amount of funds that the ‘Yes’ side had at its disposal was practically limitless, and as a result, Costa Ricans were submitted to a nine-month long advertisement for CAFTA.”

In spite of the funds available to them, CAFTA advocates witnessed a swelling movement, which they feared would triumph at the polls­a fear which led to manipulation and corruption. Vice President Kevin Casas resigned last month over a leaked memorandum mapping out their strategy for an iron-fist approach to ensuring CAFTA’s passage. Just two days before the referendum, another scandal broke uncovering illegal campaign financing to President Arias from powerful Carlos Slim, the Mexican telephone baron, and Central American families with interests in the Costa Rican telecommunications market.

“We are not accepting the results of the referendum because of the way in which the Costa Rican and U.S. governments behaved during the final three days of the referendum,” said Jorge Arguedas Mora, President of ANTTEC union electrical and telephone workers and coordinator of the No CAFTA campaign. “Both violated laws regulating the referendum, the constitution, and even existing international agreements,” he said. “The media colluded in the government manipulation and unfortunately the Supreme Electoral Tribunal looked the other way,” Jorge clarified. The Tribunal, which oversees elections, permitted pro-CAFTA messages to be broadcast and failed to act when allegations that the government was delivering housing vouchers to influence votes in marginalized communities in the three days leading up to the referendum surfaced­ campaign activities that are illegal. CAFTA opponents pledged to investigate allegations of fraud in the voting centers.



The U.S., on behalf of the multinational companies in whose interests it acts, played an aggressive role to secure a favorable vote. “Observing the campaign waged in the Costa Rican media over the last few days, I am outraged by the U.S. role in presenting misinformation as fact and pressuring Costa Rica with threats,” said Emily Gaggia from CISPES. As recently as just three days prior to the referendum, U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab made a declaration stating that Costa Rica risked losing trade preferences with the U.S. if it did not vote for CAFTA­ a power given only to Congress. The Bush Administration, represented by U.S. Ambassador Mark Langdale, backed up those threats in-country and went as far as visiting export-dependent companies with the same message.

In spite of the manipulation and fear campaigns, Costa Ricans came out to the polls with faith in the process. The energy of the people moved me to tears as I entered my first center as an international observer,” said Jessica Walker Beaumont of the Alliance for Responsible Trade. “Not only were people empowered by the opportunity to have a voice in the process, but it was also clear that for Costa Ricans, CAFTA and global trade have become household issues.”

The Costa Rican movement against CAFTA joins the struggles of its neighbors and of the trade justice movement in the U.S. and challenges people’s movements around the world to continue building on its lessons. “We have only been here for a short time, but we’ve received an intensive course in Costa Rican history, politics, and grassroots mobilization,” said Tara Carr-Lemke, of the Stop CAFTA Coalition. “It is clear that we in the U.S. have much to learn.”

“There is consensus that we will not allow the implementation agenda and will continue to fight against the deliverance of our fundamental institutions to multinational corporations,” said Jorge of ANNTEC. “Tomorrow begins the fight against the 13 laws that will facilitate the implementation of the agreement.”

“We have learned that there are two United States, just like in many countries there are various ways of thought and not all support the executive decisions,” Says Mr. Arguedas. “This knowledge will strengthen us across borders as we continue this struggle in different countries,” he shared.

Read more!

costa ricans take to the street to protest against cafta

Friends of the Earth International (Original Article)

On September 30 members of Friends of the Earth Costa Rica joined between 100,000 and 150,000 people on the streets of San José in a peaceful march that stretched for over a kilometer. The aim: to encourage people to vote against CAFTA (the Central American Free Trade Agreement with the US) in the referendum on October 7.

Similar uprisings were seen earlier this year in February and last year in October. In a small victory for anti-CAFTA demonstrators, Costa Rica's Supreme Elections Tribunal (TSE) decided to call a referendum on CAFTA instead of putting it to vote at the National Assembly, where pro-CAFTA forces have a majority. This referendum will be the first time any population has voted on a free trade agreement. Costa Rica is the only signatory who has not yet ratified the agreement.

The goal of CAFTA is the creation of a free trade zone. If passed, tariffs on about 80% of US exports to the participating countries will be eliminated immediately and the rest will be phased out over the subsequent decade. There are worries that CAFTA will force local businesses to close. It´s predicted that poverty will increase as Central American countries prematurely open markets to US agricultural goods which are subsidized, making local farmers unable to compete with imports. These countries simply do not have the resources to support even short-term unemployment.

CAFTA also faces opposition due to provisions outlining "test data exclusivity" for pharmaceuticals. Test data exclusivity could enable multinational pharmaceutical companies for a limited time to hold an effective market monopoly on various medicines, including those used to treat AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. Critics say that this provision would prevent many poor people from receiving life-saving medications.

In 1948 Costa Rica became the first country in the world to constitutionally abolish its army and instead dedicated the military budget to security, education and culture. The CAFTA agreement includes importing war weapons and arms, tax-free in Costa Rica.

¨Next Sunday we will reject the CAFTA and continue building the country that we want¨ asserted Isaac Rojas, Friends of the Earth, Costa Rica.

Read more!