[NYTr] CAFTA: Costa Rica after the Referendum

[All the News That Doesn't Fit]

Progreso Weekly - Oct 25, 2007
http://progreso-weekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=200&Itemid=1

Costa Rica after the referendum

By Eduardo Dimas

A Costa Rican political analyst said in an interview that the
referendum on the free-trade agreement (FTA) with the United States had
become "the best social alarm clock Costa Rica has had in the past 100
years." He was right.

Although the FTA was approved 51 percent for and 48 percent against,
the popular sectors remain mobilized to prevent its enactment, which is
to take place before February 2008. If it isn't enacted then, the
accord -- signed by George W. Bush and Oscar Arias -- will become void.

The mobilization is due, among other reasons, to all the violations
committed by the government of Oscar Arias and the White House
spokesmen in previous days, when all political campaigns were forbidden
by law. Also, to the fact that many workers for foreign companies were
threatened with being fired if they didn't vote in favor of the FTA.

The 3-percent difference between those who approved and those who
rejected the FTA amounts to only 50,000 votes, while almost a million
Costa Ricans entitled to vote abstained (about 40 percent). Whether or
not such a narrow margin can change the fate and well-being of a nation
deserves a deeper analysis, especially if we consider the tricks and
threats used by the Costa Rican government and the White House
spokesmen.

As journalist Rogelio Cedeño Castro stated in his article “A nation
installed in lies,” “... in the midst of a neoliberal night that hasn't
ended, the people of Costa Rica have accomplished a feat whose reach
will be seen only in years to come: the organization of patriotic
committees throughout the national territory, as a democratic, plural
and creative demonstration of the best of the Costa Rican people, as it
faces patronage and neoliberal dictatorship.”

In fact, an important segment of the Costa Rican people, brought
together by the Patriotic Committees, prepares now to fight another
battle: to keep the legislature from approving the 13 articles that
reform the Constitution so the FTA may be enacted. The U.S. Congress
does not have to make any changes in its own Constitution.

It is said that the political parties of the oligarchy, the main allies
of the transnational corporations, have enough votes in Parliament to
ratify the constitutional reforms. However, the opposition has
announced that it will boycott the sessions of Parliament by any means
at hand, so as to prevent ratification. In other words, there's a long
road ahead. At least, that's what it seems.

Another variation, submitted by the leader of the Citizen Action Party,
Ottón Solís, is to allow the 13 constitutional amendments to be
approved, under the condition that “measures will be approved to soften
the impact of the FTA on the more vulnerable groups of society,” that
is, the peasants, the low-income workers and sick people without Social
Security, among others.

That tactic is extremely dangerous, because many of the FTA's clauses
oblige the Costa Rican government to open wide the doors to
agricultural and industrial products, as well as investments by U.S.
companies in most of the sectors of the economy, including the state
economy. The FTAs don't contain many measures that “soften [their
negative] impact on the more vulnerable groups of society.”

In reality, as I argued in a previous article about the FTAs (see "The
FTAs and Latin American integration"), only the oligarchic sectors
linked to transnational capital and the exportation of agricultural
products could be interested in a treaty that substantially limits the
maneuverability of the national economy.

As journalist Cedeño points out in his aforementioned article, in the
countries with FTAs with the United States, the presidents become a
kind of “majordomos of the transnationals,” because they practically
cannot make any decision that affects the foreign interests, especially
U.S. interests.

The effects of the FTAs on underdeveloped economies are well known. The
example most mentioned is Mexico, but there are others, such as Chile,
where wealth has polarized, the number of poor and marginal people has
increased (about 3 million in a population of 12 million), and the
ancestral land of the Mapuches is being seized with the apparent
consent of the government.

In Mexico, in addition to the fact that the basic branches of the
economy (except oil) have fallen into the hands of transnationals, the
social effects of the FTA have been disastrous. Forty percent of the
population, or more than 40 million people, live in poverty, more than
14 million of them in destitution. (Mexico's FTA was the first one to
be enacted in Latin America, in January 1994.)

The exodus from the countryside to the cities has been massive in
recent years and no end is in sight. That is one of the causes of the
increase in the number of Mexicans who try to enter the United States
illegally.

So far, and for a great many years, Costa Rica has been the most stable
nation in Central America, with standards of living, social security,
education and health care that are much superior than its neighbors'.
Despite several neoliberal measures of privatization applied in recent
years, many of those achievements remain standing, although not with
the same effectiveness as before.

It remains to be seen what will happen if the constitutional reforms
that would allow the enactment of the FTA are finally approved. The
small and midsize businesses are very worried by the impact that the
importation of subsidized agricultural and industrial products from the
U.S. will have.

Industrial workers, especially textile workers, fear losing their jobs
and the social benefits they have enjoyed for more than 50 years.
Several organizations representing farm workers have expressed their
total opposition to any changes that endanger their already low
standards of living. They are the people most endangered by the
application of the FTA.

But there are other, lesser-known aspects of the treaty that will also
affect most Costa Ricans. Among them is the disappearance of the
so-called generic medicines manufactured in Costa Rica, whose cost is
lower than those manufactured in the U.S. According to the FTA,
transnational pharmaceutical laboratories will have access to their
Costa Rican markets and their patents may not be used by third parties.

Another clause of the FTA (a bit macabre) authorizes the exportation of
human organs for transplant in the United States. Regardless of the
established regulations, the sale of human organs can generate -- as it
has in other Latin American countries -- criminal and absolutely
inhuman activities.

Several observers agree that most Costa Ricans, after 50 years of a
relatively comfortable standard of living and enjoying a cultural level
higher than its neighbors', could impede the application of the FTA, in
case they stand to lose the benefits they have enjoyed until now.

I don't know if that is wishful thinking. The truth is that, after the
FTA was approved in the referendum of Oct. 7, the Patriotic Committees
remain active. They have not fallen apart and continue to act as a
team. On the other hand, Costa Rica has maintained relatively
democratic traditions for about 60 years.

If the administration of Oscar Arias, or any other in the future,
should apply repressive measures (as might happen), the reaction of
important sectors of the Costa Rican people could be unpredictable.

Reportedly, Costa Rica has no army, but it does have a repressive
military organization called the Civil Guard. That institution has
little to envy the armies of Latin America, which are used to repress
the people, along with the police, also trained in repressive methods. 

To dare talk about the future, though it be immediate, is always a
risky exercise. What can be predicted (and with a narrow margin of
error) is that, after the campaign against the FTA, Costa Rica will
never be the same. The "social alarm clock" rang, and the people have
mobilized. Time will tell.