Exporting American products will harm developing country

Thursday, October 2, 1997

Exporting American products will harm developing country

FREE-TRADE: Lucrative embrace of U.S., NAFTA drives Chile deeper
in debt

By Erin Claire Morris

Daily Texan

Those poor South American consumers don’t know what they’re
missing. President Clinton, however, has a plan to make sure they
get exactly what their lives lack: American largess. Clinton wants
the "fast track" authority to create international trade agreements
to expedite the globalization of American businesses. Congress is
now contemplating whether to empower Clinton with this tool of
American imperialism.

Corporations which have backed this measure are lining up for
access to world markets such as Chile. Their objective: to turn
every citizen – from Santiago to the Strait of Magellan – into a
good consumer. If our legislators relinquish their power to amend
trade agreements, they would be declaring free trade inherently
good. The aftermath of NAFTA and the vision of a homogenized world
culture offer evidence to the contrary.

Chile has kowtowed for a favorable economic glance from our
nation, and for 12 years, its economy has grown by 7 percent.
ProChile, the bureau that encourages foreigners to invest capital,
provides to potential investors a Ten Commandments-type list
boasting all the traits of a compliant developing country. On this
list, Chile sports a "capitalistic market economy," a
"sophisticated financial system," a "solid infrastructure," a
"stable government policy," and a "qualified labor force."

These economic pillars of First World approval conceal reality.
While keeping plenty of foreign financiers well fed, Chile
maintains one of the largest per-capita debts in the world. Chilean
income disparity has risen significantly – over 40 percent of the
people now live in poverty, as opposed to 20 percent in 1970. In
major industries, 80 percent of laborers work without benefits or
the right to strike. The nation’s "qualified labor force" is
nothing more than a group of poor people unable to demand improved
conditions.

Chilean politicians couldn’t envision a better lure for U.S.
companies, and the United States won’t settle for less. The stock
market is closing at record highs, and cautionary policies are out
of favor.

With an appetite for commerce whetted by a recent 2.9 percent
drop in the trade deficit, the United States aggressively pursues
foreign trade. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce estimates that $480
million is lost each year from tariffs in Chile – a large sum that
could be reduced by entering into a free trade agreement. No one
questions the origin of this revenue, but recent trends indicate a
substantial redistribution of wealth from the poor to the rich.
Instead of the wealthy Chileans receiving the windfall, the United
States just wants American plutocrats to get even richer.

Overzealous crusaders for free trade must not be applauded for
defending "inalienable" consumer rights. A popular sentiment is
that by pumping markets full of previously unavailable goods, an
entire society will benefit from need fulfillment. Instead of
drinking water, beer or juice, impoverished Chileans could include
Coca-Cola in their diets. The presence of just any consumer items
won’t do, however. They must be American goods.

Judging from NAFTA’s legacy, American corporations are governed
by nothing more than the profit motive.

The maquilladora factories which employ Mexican workers on the
border for 55 cents an hour have sprung up to take advantage of lax
standards. The Canadian, Mexican and U.S. governments, in
accordance with NAFTA, have rewarded these companies by granting
permission to dump their products tax-free into any of their
markets. Now, America wants to emulate this precedent in another
country, hoping to eventually reach an Americas’ Free Trade Area
(AFTA) by 2005.

This process must be stopped. Although the United States does
not have a history of humility, the presumption of exporting our
cultural excess under the guise of improving consumer choice
remains disturbing. More – not less – caution is needed before
indulging the whims of multinational corporations.