What kind of ally will we lose if we don't sign the FTA with Colombia?
About a week and a half ago I was in San Antonio to speak at a forum on trade organized by 32 community organizations who see the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (FTA) as a "trojan horse" for both Colombians and U.S. citizens. As it turns out Colombian Vice President Francisco Santos was also in San Antonio (at a forum organized by the Colombian government) to bolster his argument that the U.S. would lose an ally in Latin America if the FTA does not get ratified. To learn more about his arguments you can read this article from the San Antonio Express News Paper:
http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/nation/stories/MYSA092807.15A.ColombianVP.32875b9.html
What the article fails to delve into is the type of ally that the U.S. would be losing. Does the U.S. really want to ratify a trade agreement with a government in which at least 12 Congressional legislators are under investigation for their ties to paramilitary groups which are responsible for some of the worst human rights violations in the western hemisphere? Is it ok to trade with a country that is well known for being the worst place on earth to be a union leader--the country in which most union leaders are killed every year? And is it enough that less union leaders are being killed in Colombia this year? Should the trade agreement be ratified with this country based on the fact that less people are being killed? Isn't one life lost enough to at least make us question ratifying this treaty?
Do we really want to maintain ties to a government that is infiltrated by paramilitary groups which the U.S. government categorizes as terrorists?
Clearly, the one size fits all approach of this trade agreements is not applicable and especially not in such a violent and corrupt context.
2 comments:
"Does the U.S. really want to ratify a trade agreement with a government in which at least 12 Congressional legislators are under investigation for their ties to paramilitary groups which are responsible for some of the worst human rights violations in the western hemisphere?"
I guess you aren't aware the US trades with lots of human rights violaters across the world, as does pretty much every other country. Welcome to reality. Do you put gas in your car? Do you fly on airplanes as part of your little anti-America/Colombia traveling circus? Are all your possessions 100% guaranteed only made by benevolent little elves? If not, then I guess you're part of the problem, and a gigantic hypocrite.
At least Colombia, under Uribe, is investigating the people in question. Chavez would promote them.
"Is it ok to trade with a country that is well known for being the worst place on earth to be a union leader--the country in which most union leaders are killed every year?"
Again, we trade with lots of problematic countries like China, Saudi Arabia, and, of course, Venezuela. Your unionist representative at the forum, Gerardo Cajamarca, when he isn't busy denouncing Uribe, travels around pimping for Venezuelan dictator, FARC ally, and thug, Hugo Chavez. If he represents the average unionist in Colombia, then the paramilitaries have a point when they call them guerillas in disguise. But I bet you're a fan of Chavez, too. Aren't you? That's really what this is all about; your socialist delusions are being trampled upon by the global economy.
"And is it enough that less union leaders are being killed in Colombia this year?"
Is it enough that unionist killings have been declining pretty much every year Uribe has been in office? It's called "progress" and Uribe has made lots of it since he was overwhelmingly elected and reelected. I know you dont want to talk about this anymore than you want to talk about the FARC terrorists who started the problems in the first place, but you can look at pretty much any social or economic statistic in Colombia and Uribe's policies are trending in a positive direction. http://www.usatoday.com/travel/destinations/2006-05-10-colombia-tourism_x.htm
"Isn't one life lost enough to at least make us question ratifying this treaty?"
Do you really think that's persuasive? The United States loses lives every year to violence, should we be allowed to trade with anyone?
"Do we really want to maintain ties to a government that is infiltrated by paramilitary groups which the U.S. government categorizes as terrorists?"
Once again, do you put gas in your car?
"Clearly, the one size fits all approach of this trade agreements is not applicable and especially not in such a violent and corrupt context."
The thing that aggravates me the most about you people is that you are basically saying you want to keep Colombians poor since they are victims of violence. Forget about the corruption in government for a moment, think about the jobs
that will be created to help the Colombian people rise up. But that wouldn't be advantageous to Chavez, Castro, and your FARC pals, would it?
Oh yeah, I fully expect to have my comments deleted and unanswered. That's how you people roll.
Post a Comment