[Fwd: USA: Banana Republic] (fwd)

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.
  Send mail to mime@docserver.cac.washington.edu for more info.

--------------E709FCF0DE9DF87A8A8CEAE0



---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 1999 10:33:05 -0400
From: Barbara Larcom <larcom@bcpl.net>
Subject: [Fwd: USA: Banana Republic]

Sample #2 from Focus on the Corporation

--------------E709FCF0DE9DF87A8A8CEAE0

	Thu, 1 Apr 1999 16:11:42 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 16:10:46 -0500
Reply-To: rob@essential.org
Originator: corp-focus@essential.org
Sender: corp-focus@essential.org
From: Robert Weissman <rob@essential.org>
Subject: USA: Banana Republic
X-Comment:  Please see http://lists.essential.org for help 

"Banana Republic" used to refer to poor, developing countries that relied
on a single cash crop -- typically bananas -- and were ruled by corrupt
governments. Now the term seems singularly appropriate to the United
States, even though the U.S. relies neither on bananas nor any other
single cash crop.

Operating at the behest of banana magnate Carl Lindner -- the CEO
of Chiquita -- the United States for years has complained about the
European Union's policy of importing its bananas from former colonies in
the Eastern Caribbean (tiny countries like Dominica). 
	
To guarantee continued support for the Eastern Caribbean banana
producers, the European Union gives them preferential treatment through a
quota system. "Dollar bananas" from Central American countries --
controlled by U.S. marketing companies -- are cheaper than those from the
Eastern Caribbean, which has inferior land. 
	
The United States pursued its campaign against the EU system at
the World Trade Organization (WTO). The United States won the claim,
because in fact the EU policy does violate WTO norms: it is illegal under
WTO rules to place a quota on imports from one region.
	
Under the WTO rules, as manipulated by the United States, it is
largely irrelevant that the purpose of the EU's preference for the Eastern
Caribbean is for beneficent reasons -- to provide some minimal remedial
support for its extremely poor former colonies. It doesn't matter than
some 200,000 farmers plus many others stand to lose their livelihoods --
in countries where 30 to 50 percent unemployment is the norm -- if the EU
abandons its banana system. 
	
Under the WTO rules, it is irrelevant if the Eastern Caribbean
bananas are produced in a relatively more socially just way -- on many
small farms, mostly headed by women -- as opposed to the giant Chiquita
plantations in Central America, where unions are routinely smashed and
workers underpaid and exposed to serious pesticide and other chemical
hazards.
	
The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions explains:
"Central American bananas are produced on large 'industrial' scale
plantations employing large numbers of relatively poorly paid workers. Few
workers have been able to win recognition for their unions in the face of
the deep hostility of the companies, governments, the military and in some
countries para-military gangsters."
	
After a long series of back-and-forth negotiations and further
pro-U.S.  rulings from the WTO, the United States has now announced $520
million in sanctions against Europe in connection with the banana case.
Under WTO rules, the United States has the right to impose countervailing
sanctions against European imports in industries totally unrelated to the
dispute. The United States has chosen to impose 100 percent tariffs on a
range of European luxury imports -- ranging from Italian pecorino cheese
to Scottish cashmere sweaters -- hoping that these industries will become
internal lobbyists in the EU for a change in Europe's banana policy.
	
Of course, despite the degree of importance the U.S. government
places on its banana interests, the United States differs in one
remarkable way from the Banana Republics of old -- it does not produce any
bananas.
	
Why then, one may reasonably ask, is the United States launching
what is commonly labeled a "trade war" against Europe? The answer: Carl
Lindner, and his money. Chiquita CEO Carl Lindner has poured money into
the political system.
	
Lindner and wife Edyth donated more than half a million dollars in
1998 in political contributions. That's standard for the banana titan, who
contributes generously to both major parties.
	
Lindner's mega-contributions to former Senate Majority Leader,
former presidential candidate, current Viagra pitchman and aspiring First
Husband Bob Dole helped Dole see the importance of the banana issue to the
U.S.  economy. He pushed various legislative proposals designed to force
changes in the EU banana preference system, and deserves some credit for
the Clinton administration's decision to take up the case.
	
Greased by campaign money, the Clinton administration has chosen
to identify the national interest with Carl Lindner and Chiquita. The U.S. 
Trade Representative humorously asserts that "the U.S. economic stake in
this case is clear" -- even though virtually no U.S. jobs are at stake,
and even though it is widely understood that displacing the Eastern
Caribbean banana farmers will push many of them into the illegal drug
trade.
	
It is hard to imagine a more outlandish case to illustrate the
flaws in the WTO-governed global trading system or in U.S. campaign
finance rules.
	
Unfortunately, there are serious consequences to the U.S.
buffoonery, and it is innocent parties in the Eastern Caribbean who will
pay the price for the Clinton administration decision to convert the
United States into a Banana Republic.

Russell Mokhiber is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based Corporate Crime
Reporter. Robert Weissman is editor of the Washington, D.C.-based
Multinational Monitor.

(c) Russell Mokhiber and Robert Weissman

Focus on the Corporation is a weekly column written by Russell Mokhiber
and Robert Weissman. Please feel free to forward the column to friends or
repost the column on other lists. If you would like to post the column on
a web site or publish it in print format, we ask that you first contact us
(russell@essential.org or rob@essential.org).

Focus on the Corporation is distributed to individuals on the listserve
corp-focus@essential.org. To subscribe to corp-focus, send an e-mail
message to listproc@essential.org with the following all in one line:

subscribe corp-focus <your name> (no period).

Focus on the Corporation columns are posted on the Multinational Monitor
web site <www.essential.org/monitor>.

Postings on corp-focus are limited to the columns. If you would like to
comment on the columns, send a message to russell@essential.org or
rob@essential.org.




--------------E709FCF0DE9DF87A8A8CEAE0--