Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

ForeignPolicy

The Colombia trap

By Todd Tucker, Eyes on Trade. Posted March 17, 2008.


A trade deal with Colombia won't be beaten by moral outrage alone.
Advertisement

There have been a lot of surprising developments in recent days on the Colombia FTA, most recently with Dem leadership seeming to be suggesting that there could be a vote on the Colombia FTA if there is more trade adjustment assistance. (As we've argued before, it's hard to get all worked up for TAA, because it is highly inadequate to the scope of the problem, but that's for another time.) It's unclear whether this means leadership will allow a vote and support the deal, or allow a vote but whip against it. It's also unclear whether if Bush goes around leadership (as he's threatened to do) they would cancel Fast Track's application to the deal.

Without commenting directly on these latest developments, here are the things I've been thinking over the last few weeks on this matter. American politics are classist enough that one can't assume that mere moral outrage will carry the day on labor's agenda. It would simply never happen in this day and age that civil rights or abortion rights would be negotiated away in exchange for legislative favors. There's simply not a strategic argument that could be made that would erase the moral outrage that our society rightfully feels whenever racist or sexist undertones surface in public. (Think Geraldine Ferraro.)

There's simply no equivalent to these kind of widespread norms when it comes to class politics. It is profoundly insulting to working people that a trade deal with Colombia -- where workers are systematically targeted for assassination -- is even being considered. To not oppose this deal is simply to be a classist. Unfortunately, no politician in America today loses an election or is asked for an apology because they make classist remarks or advocate classist positions.

In 2008, backwards-thinking individuals don't justify opposition to civil rights legislation on the basis that people shouldn't have protected civil rights. But anti-labor legislation is openly supported, and labor has to come up with supplementary arguments as to why it should not be passed. This was why we argued so strongly last year that Bush's Peru NAFTA expansion had to be opposed on the basis that it was bad policy, and would be for ANY country. To not have made this argument last year equals unilateral disarmament. Trying to rally opposition to the Colombia FTA now means that you're assuming that our elected officials would not be so classist as to allow it to come up for a vote. This is a HUUUGE gamble, as the heart attacks some of us have experienced over the last few weeks show.

There is another way that an argument could be made against the Colombia FTA, but I don't think that it's really breaking through in the media coverage. That's through the application of readiness criteria. Under a new president, one hopes that trade deals wouldn't even be considered if a country had major social problems (say Colombia, Burma, Sudan, etc.). Much more like the European Union, accession to a common market wouldn't even be contemplated unless the country were broadly similar to the U.S.

But there's two challenges to this. First, it's simply not yet a part of political culture in the U.S. to think broadly about the level of social development of a trading partner country when contemplating market access. This must change. Secondly, such readiness criteria should also play a role when extending measures short of an FTA, such as trade preference programs. Colombia FTA critics are finding it difficult to justify FTA opposition solely on class- or readiness-type arguments if they didn't oppose preference benefits for Colombia as well. Admittedly, in the short term, having preferences for Colombia takes away the argument that one can make in certain quarters about ensuring market access "for a key U.S. ally." This notion of who is our ally in the region needs to be disputed, but, much like the class politics issues, they are more of a medium- to long-term political culture shift that is needed, and it ain't gonna happen overnight.

All that said, at this point, I would still be pretty surprised if the Colombia FTA came up for a vote this year. But the ground is shifting rapidly, and we like you are trying to stay on top of it.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: colombia, trade, colombia fta, classism

Todd Tucker is research director with Public Citizen's Global Trade Watch.



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Just one question...
Posted by: Spot on Mar 17, 2008 8:30 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Would this deal remove tariffs on imported cocaine?

I can see the administration wanting to move quickly to shore up the morale/long-term fortunes of an ally that might soon find itself odd man out in regional politics (two neighboring countries had troops stationed on their borders as little as 2 weeks ago).

Any other theories on why this would be pushed onto the floor?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You guys are so worng
Posted by: frankiscool on Mar 20, 2008 5:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Colombia definitely needs this trade agreement not only to show its support to colombia in appreciation for it being one of its most important ally's but to in a way give gratitude to president uribe in his efforts to stop all sorts of violence.

Colombia has come a long way from six years ago and to not see that is a big mistake. Colombia has shown significant progress and what i see when i read this story and some comments is a biased stereotypical nonsense.

Dont be fooled

Colombia needs to be respected. Thanks

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Columbia the Beautiful??
Posted by: crazy carlos on Mar 20, 2008 10:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just exactly , what in the hell are you talking about?? Columbia is considered a step and fetchit for the U.S. through most of America del Sul. Didi you watch where the support came from for Chavez--Brasil (spelling is correct!) and Argentina, the two largest and wealthest in SA. Our CIA has been their major customer for their Coke and some oil for quite a while. The President is an out and out thief, running around after some questionable folks (FRAC) who are still better than Uriba. We had best not try fuckin around south of the border or we will lose S.A. in a heartbeat. Ya, they love us too!! crazy carlos

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]