The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) now being
negotiated by 34 countries of North, Central, South America, and the
Caribbean, and heavily promoted by the US and Canada, promises to impose
upon the entire Western Hemisphere (excluding Cuba) a trade agreement
that goes much further than NAFTA in enforcing corporate control over
every aspect of life vital to our survival, up to, and including, the
food we eat, the water we drink, and the air we breathe. The FTAA
promises to disrupt, damage, and make illegal much of the ability of
every nation, indigenous culture, and of every civil society to provide
for themselves in ways that thousands of years of tradition, practice,
and knowledge, have proven to be most effective and essential to their
survival.
The smaller, poorer countries of Central and South
America, and the Caribbean promise to be most vulnerable to this unfair
trade agreement. Many traditional and localized agrarian based societies
and economies are already being severely disrupted by corporate powers
poised and eager to legally plunder the abundantly rich and diverse
resource base of all of the Western Hemisphere. These countries will be
forced to relinquish public control over their land and water, food and
medicine, in order to pay off national debts incurred through
participation in the exploitive lending policies and structural
adjustment programs of the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund. Through these programs such countries will be forced into
importing more food, such as genetically engineered corn, soybean, and
canola from corporate farms in Canada and the US, and to turn more of
their own variety-diverse traditional farming systems into
Western-style, cash crop monocultures for export.
Since Mexico signed on to the North American Free
Trade Agreement the poor of Mexico have paid dearly. The imposition of
genetically engineered crops on the farmers of Mexico promises to
further disrupt the agriculture, threaten the health, and create more
hunger and suffering for the people of Mexico.
We never asked for genetically engineered food. We
got it anyway. Now when we ask that it simply be labeled for the good of
our health, we are told it is none of our business. We never asked for a
trade agreement that threatens endangered ecologies and species,
sustainable agricultural diversity, and exploits the poor. When we ask
for details of a trade agreement that directly affects 800 million
people, we are told it is none of our business.
The "Miami Group" - the U.S., Canada, Argentina and
Chile (&Uruguay?) - are intent on forcing all countries of the
Americas to accept biotechnology and genetically modified foods (GMOs),
thereby promoting the interests of biotech companies such as Cargill,
Monsanto and Archer Daniels Midland over the survival needs of small
farmers, peasants and communities throughout Latin America
The mandate of the Negotiating Group on Agriculture
is to eliminate agricultural export subsidies affecting trade in the
hemisphere, based on the WTO's Agreement on Agriculture (AOA);
"discipline" other trade-distorting agricultural practices; and ensure
that "sanitary and phytosanitary measures" are not used as a disguised
restriction to trade, using the WTO agreement as a model.
The FTAA's AOA agriculture provisions set rules on
the trade in food and restrict domestic agriculture policy, down to the
level of support for farmers, the ability to maintain emergency food
stocks, set food safety rules and ensure food supply.
The WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Standards (SPS) sets constraints of government policies
relating to food safety and animal and plant health, from pesticides and
biological contaminants to food inspection, product labelling and
genetically engineered foods. As with TBTs [Technical Barriers to Trade]
, the WTO SPS Agreement goes further than NAFTA. The NAFTA provisions
do not in themselves impose any specific standards; they set out a
general approach to ensure that SPS measures are used for genuine
scientific reasons, not as disguised barriers to trade. Member countries
are still allowed to take SPS measures to protect human, animal or
plant life and health at the level they consider "appropriate." While
NAFTA "encourages" the parties to harmonize their measures based on
relevant international standards, the WTO seeks to remove decisions
regarding health, food and safety from national governments and delegate
them to international standard-setting bodies such as the Codex
Alimentarius, an elite club of scientists located in Geneva, largely
controlled by the big food and agribusiness corporations. The WTO SPS
Agreement has been used to defeat the use of the "precautionary
principle," which it held not to be a justifiable basis upon which to
establish regulatory controls. (The precautionary principle allows
regulatory action when there is risk of harm, even if there remains
scientific uncertainty about the extent and nature of the potential
impacts of a product or practice.) By choosing the WTO SPS Agreement
over the NAFTA SPS provisions, the drafters of the FTAA are moving to
totally remove the right of individual governments of the Americas to
set standards in the crucial areas of health, food safety and the
environment.
DFAIT [Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade,
Canada] strongly endorses the WTO Agreement on the Application of
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) in the FTAA. Like TBTs, these
rules are seen by many as a way to reduce or eliminate government
regulations that protect human and animal health in favour of private
interests.
By choosing the WTO agreements on standards (SPS and
TBT), the FTAA negotiators plan to give new powers through this pact to
downgrade Canada's food safety laws.
The WTO AOA assault on non-tariff measures, such as
environmental standards and supply management programs, has been used to
downgrade safeguards to public health and protection for farmers. For
example, through the WTO, the U.S. has successfully challenged Japan's
health-related pesticide residue testing requirements for agricultural
imports.
The WTO SPS agreement has had a terrible impact on
the right of the world's citizens to safe food. Canada and the United
States successfully used the SPS agreement to strike down a European ban
on North American beef containing harmful, possibly cancer-causing
hormones. The EU, deeply sensitive to lingering concerns about mad-cow
disease, implemented a ban on the non-therapeutic use of hormones in its
food industry, citing many studies linking them to illness. The WTO
panel demanded "scientific certainty" that these hormones cause cancer
or other adverse health affects, thus eviscerating the precautionary
principle as a basis for food safety regulations.
If the U.S. position wins out, FTAA will promote the
interests of biotech and agribusiness giants like Archer Daniels
Midland (ADM), Cargill and Monsanto over the interests of the public.
Planning is happening for activities on April 17th
(which will probably take place in Montreal) and for the Summit of the
Americas (in Quebec City). Some activities will be a public
statement/press conference denouncing the force-feeding of GMOs and an
unfair intellectual property regime on the Americas, and a solidarity
statement with the farmers and peasants who are most affected by these
processes. We would like to get this signed by as many farmer's unions,
peasant movements, anti-biotech activists, and other concerned people as
possible. What we organize is totally dependent on the input and energy
of those who want to get involved. Everyone is welcome... |