Perú: Sí al TLC, no al ALBA
En el Brujo Político hemos criticado fuertemente a ministros del gabinete de Alan García, que han cometido gruesos errores-tales como Luis Alva Castro del Interior y Vallejo de Salud- pero a diferencia de aquellos que señalan solamente lo malo del gobierno, aquí resaltamos las cosas que se hacen bien.La ministra de comercio Exterior, Mercedes Araoz, es tal vez la que tiene mejor imagen en el Ejecutivo presidido por Alan García. Anteriormente habíamos resaltado su gestión al frente del proyecto de lograr que Machu Picchu fuera reconocida como una de las 7 maravillas modernas de la humanidad.
Actualmente todo indica que la ministra culminara exitosamente el TLC con EE.UU. Al respecto, ella ha concedido una entrevista a BBC Mundo. EE.UU. y Perú firmaron el Tratado de Libre Comercio (TLC) en abril de 2006, pero éste todavía necesita la ratificación del Congreso de Estados Unidos para que entre en vigor. Por tratarse de asuntos de interés nacional, extractamos lo declarado por la ministra Mercedes Araoz.
¿Qué ventajas tiene el TLC con EE.UU.?
El TLC es una ventana de oportunidad. Nos asegura un acceso preferencial, que ya teníamos pero que era parcial con la ATPDA (Ley de Preferencias Arancelarias para las naciones andinas), ahora lo confirma y lo reafirma.
Es un acceso que va de manera permanente con lo que te asegura nueva inversiones, y obviamente inversiones, es empleo. Es un tema también de acceso a importar de manera más barata bienes de capital, insumos, que son importantes para nosotros.
Son elementos bien importantes para una economía que usa la globalización como una herramienta de desarrollo.
Nosotros no usamos la globalización porque queremos estar en la globalización simplemente, sino porque creemos que es una herramienta que nos permite acceder a una posición mejor frente a nuestros competidores que ya lograron estos acuerdos comerciales.
Si se sabe que Estados Unidos no va a crecer tanto en los próximos cinco años, entonces ¿se puede pensar que el superávit en exportaciones que Perú tiene ahora se puede llegar a transformar en un déficit , o no?
En eso nosotros tenemos una estrategia comercial que no se llama sólo TLC con Estados Unidos, a diferencia de la gestión anterior a la nuestra, nosotros tenemos una agenda muy agresiva de negociaciones comerciales con el mundo. Sabemos que hay creación de comercio con Estados Unidos, pero además creemos que no podemos quedarnos sin tener la posibilidad de otros mercados.
Por eso estamos negociando con China, con Europa, con la Asociación Europea de Libre Comercio (EFTA), con Canadá estamos por cerrar, hemos cerrado con Singapur, estamos negociando con México, hemos cerrado con Chile, tenemos un área de libre comercio ya definida entre los andinos y el MERCOSUR.
El tema de la agricultura para algunos es clave para quienes están contra el TLC. ¿Hay algún sistema de compensaciones o subsidios a los productores locales?
Sí, hay un sistema de compensaciones para tres productos: algodón, maíz y trigo. El sistema de compensaciones además va dirigido a los sectores más pobres de la población, a pesar que el precio de estos tres productos ha subido muchísimo debido a los nuevos usos en biodiesels, etcétera.
¿No puede afectar la liberalización de las importaciones de los productos agropecuarios a los productores locales?
Honestamente, no creo que se de ese daño tan fuerte como se ha mencionado. El problema es un problema de productividad local, de mala administración del tamaño de la tierra, hay problemas de propiedad de la tierra y hay problemas de agua, de administración del recurso hídrico.
Entonces las reformas que tenemos que hacer, y estamos trabajando en ello, están ligadas a eso, sobre todo con respecto a los sectores más pobres, para sacarlos de dificultades técnicas, productivas, hacerlos capaces de producir con mayor capacidad.
Mencionó antes al ATPDA. ¿No se sienten que van a estar más atados con el TLC? ¿Va a ser mayor el beneficio?
Es mayor, es cómo que te dan un regalo condicionado y es un regalo que nunca sabes si te lo van a quitar. Te genera un espacio de incertidumbre muy alto si bien nosotros lo hemos aprovechado bastante en algunos productos.
Podríamos haberlo hecho más quizás en algunos productos pero en otros cómo ser agroindustrias y textiles hemos sido bastante exitosos.
Ante este elemento de incertidumbre un tratado ya no te lo pueden quitar, es un compromiso de las partes, internacional, por lo tanto te da seguridad jurídica de largo aliento. Te da visión de largo plazo.
A pocas semanas de la ratificación, ¿cuáles son los aspectos negativos que puede tener el TLC para el Perú?
Parte de los problemas que han tenido otros países ha sido la falta de hacer alguna estrategia directa con el sector agrícola, por ejemplo, que creo que nosotros estamos tratando de tener.
Creemos que Perú tiene que, de nuestro lado, poner todo el esfuerzo en eso, en que no haya diferencias sociales, que no haya diferencias regionales, tratar de conseguir que esto sea un elemento que equilibre no que desequilibre las regiones.
Por eso estamos trabajando en una agenda de competitividad regional para que puedan aprovechar estas ventajas.
Hace poco el ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, José Antonio García Belaúnde, casi dijo no al ALBA (Alternativa Bolivariana para las Américas, iniciativa promovida por Venezuela y Cuba) ¿Por qué no al ALBA y sí al TLC?
Es que no entiendo cual es la agenda del ALBA. Si me dijeran que vamos a hacer una apertura comercial entre nosotros, y vemos un equilibrio de balances entre nosotros puede ser, pero esa no es la agenda.
Si es una agenda de colaboraciones y de cooperación, hasta ahora no la encuentro, no le he visto esos elementos de cooperación en donde nos hagamos mejores. Sino que es una agenda ideológica.
No sé que aporte le trae a Perú el ALBA en particular. Al menos nuestra visión del mundo es una visión donde la justicia social se logra a través del crecimiento económico.
La pobreza no se elimina dando dádivas, la pobreza se elimina a través de la creación de un empleo digno, entonces creemos que la agenda de comercio, y no digo TLC solamente, es mucho mejor.
Fuente
TAGS:Perú, Alba, Alan García, actualidad,TLC
Etiquetas: economía, noticias, Perú, Política
Vínculo
posted by El brujo político at 5:52 p. m.
Revistas, libros
1 Comments:
.
MAS DE 10 ORGANIZACIONES SE UNEN CONTRA EL TLC PERU-EEUU
OPEN LETTER TO
THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS
OPPOSE PERU FREE TRADE AGREEMENT
Dear Members of the U.S. Congress:
We are concerned Peruvian-Americans, immigrant organizations and human rights advocates in the United States. We are writing to express our strong opposition to the Free Trade Agreement with Peru (FTA) and to request its further renegotiation for the following reasons:
LABOR RIGHTS
In August, Peru’s President Alan Garcia agreed to issue presidential decrees to clarify specific labor laws during a congressional visit from U.S. Representatives Rangel and Levin. Yet Peruvian labor leaders argue that this is insufficient because it does not change the labor laws through legislation and will not guarantee effective enforcement.
Like many workers in Latin American countries, Peruvians face constant threats to their labor rights. Violations include discrimination against union organizers, illegal firings and forced overtime without pay. Further, the new system of fixed-labor contracts and subcontracting radically undermines workers' rights because it does not guarantee a 44 hour work week or labor standard. Nor will the presidential decrees protect the rights of the majority of people, seventy-five percent, who work in the informal sector.
In addition, any of the remaining twenty-five percent work for private employment contracting agencies that are not obligated to enforce labor rights.
A free trade agreement with Peru should not be approved by the U.S. Congress until legislation is passed by Peruvian Congress, which guarantees compliance with ILO standards and guarantees enforcement.
AGRICULTURE, POVERTY & IMMIGRATION
Agriculture is an integral part of Peru's economy with nearly a third of the population depending on this sector for their livelihood. In the FTA, the U.S. demands that Peru renounce its rights under the WTO agreements to apply Special Agricultural Safeguards, designed to protect sensitive sectors. After a thorough analysis of the trade text on agriculture, the Peruvian National Convention on Agriculture (CONVEAGRO) estimated that hundreds of thousands of Peruvian farmers would be negatively affected by the agreement.
The U.S. agricultural subsidies constitutes unfair competition for Peruvian agricultural goods and will impoverish the 700,000 producers of cotton, corn, barley, wheat, oilseeds and dairy products in that country. Considering that only 3% of Peruvian farmers export their products, it’s very likely that as hundreds of thousands of Peruvian small farmers lose their markets, they will be pushed into drug production, and to migrate with their families to already impoverished Peruvian cities, or as undocumented immigrants to countries like the U.S.
Even though Peru's economy has been growing continuously in the last 7 years, almost 50% of the population is still living under $2 per day as a result of neo liberal economic policies that are very similar to those promoted by this FTA. According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), close to one fourth of Peruvians live in extreme poverty. People in rural areas are the worst affected; nearly 70 percent of them are extremely poor.
After NAFTA, over 1.3 million small farmers lost their livelihoods in Mexico due to agricultural rules that are nearly identical to those included in the U.S.-Peru FTA. As a result, undocumented immigration from Mexico to the U.S. increased by 61 percent in the years following the implementation of NAFTA, according to Pew Hispanic Center.
U.S. policies like NAFTA-style “free trade agreements” influence the economy of Latin America directly. Therefore, solving the problem of undocumented immigration is a shared responsibility, and it must be addressed by a comprehensive immigration reform that includes fair trade legislation and that prevents interest groups from promoting human trafficking, exploitation of workers, broken communities and cheap labor.
CORRUPTION vs. DEMOCRACY
We must remind you that there are pending cases of human rights abuses and corruption involving Garcia’s first government. Garcia was reelected in 2006 on a platform against Toledo’s free trade policies and with a promise to renegotiate the FTA – the agricultural rules in particular. But, once elected, he instead visited Bush to request its approval.
This FTA was passed by Peruvian Congress in 2006 in a lame-duck session with very little public support and ignoring a request for a national referendum. Eighty percent of Peruvian Congress members who voted for this FTA had already lost their seats in the elections that predated the vote.
Meanwhile foreign mining and natural gas corporations are making huge profits in Peru but leave behind underpaid workers, pollution and environmental destruction. The Garcia administration has ignored popular protests and strongly supports extractive industries.
The Garcia government has abandoned dozens of towns destroyed by the recent earthquake, even though it has the biggest budget surplus in history. Public protests regarding this matter have been silenced or ignored by the government, including closing down a radio-TV station in the city of Pisco that had been critical of the relief efforts.
We believe that if this FTA is ratified now by the U.S. Congress, it will send a signal to the Garcia government that its current heavy-handed and anti-public interest policies are supported by the U.S. Congress. It will further perpetuate the perception that the U.S. favors the interests of multinationals over protecting human rights and reducing corruption.
INDIGENOUS RIGHTS & THE ENVIRONMENT
Most Peruvians are of Indigenous and Afro descendant heritage. According to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the poorest of the poor in Peru are the Indigenous/Native peoples. About 73 percent in Indigenous communities live below the poverty line.
This FTA is a threat to indigenous peoples' heritage and way of life, as it allows agribusiness and pharmaceutical corporations to take over their traditional medicine and nutrition knowledge for profit.
Mining, oil and natural gas exploration and extraction projects would increase dramatically with this FTA, leading to extensive damage to the Peruvian environment, especially the Andes mountains region and the Amazon basin, which is the largest virgin forest on the planet. With this FTA, multinational corporations would have the right to sue governments if any attempt to protect the environment would cause the companies to see their profits reduced.
In addition, this agreement establishes secret trade tribunals, making trade rules more powerful than democratic institutions and domestic laws.
As a result, entire Indigenous communities could be displaced from their lands and pushed into extermination. These FTA regulations directly contradict the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples recently adopted by the United Nations, which includes the rights to protect their land and natural resources.
PUBLIC HEALTH & INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
Hundreds of thousands of Peruvians will not be able to afford generic medicines because of new patents and data-protection regulations included in this FTA are intended to protect and boost the already outrageous profits of pharmaceutical corporations.
This FTA promotes the privatization and deregulation of services such as water, health care and education. At the same time, it protects the interests of multinational corporations benefiting from Peru's bungled privatization of its social security system at the expense of workers, women, children, senior citizens and the chronically ill.
CONCLUSION
We strongly encourage you to reject the Free Trade Agreement with Peru – and ask instead for it’s further renegotiation – because it is not fair for most Americans nor most Peruvians, and because it was negotiated ignoring the voice of the people of both the United States and Peru.
We believe that a free trade agreement with Peru must provide safeguards that will protect vulnerable sectors of Peruvian society, instead of worsening its economic, social and political inequality.
Trade should be used to promote social justice and progress for all, and not just for the benefit of the few rich and powerful. The United States can truly spread democracy and freedom by example, not by imposing economic policies that will increase corruption, poverty and abuse among impoverished nations.
We believe that fair trade is necessary to address poverty and hunger, and to promote economic progress and decent living standards, while respecting the UN Declaration of Human Rights and guaranteeing the protection of our planet.
Respectfully,
PAFT - Peruvian-Americans for Fair Trade
Group of Andean Immigrants in DC
WOLA - Washington Office on Latin America
NNIRR - National Network for Immigrants and Refugee Rights
LULAC - League of United Latin American Citizens
NETWORK – National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
United Methodist Church - General Board of Church and Society
Casa de Maryland, Inc – Immigrants rights advocacy group
Global Exchange – Human rights for social, economic and environmental justice
Alianza Indígena Sin Fronteras - Indigenous human/civil rights advocacy group
Global Rights - Human rights advocacy group
Intercontinental Congress of First Nation People of North and South America
Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth
Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns
KAFT - Korean Americans for Fair Trade
Manuel Zapata Olivella - Center for Immigrants Education and Human Development
AFRODES USA - Association of Displaced Afro Colombians
Mexico & U.S. Solidarity Network - Red Solidaria México & EEUU
Movement for Peace in Colombia - Movimiento por la Paz en Colombia
NYC People’s Referendum on Free Trade
NICANET – The Nicaragua Network
WAQIB´ KEJ - Coordinación y Convergencia Nacional Maya
Washington, DC September 24, 2007
Publicar un comentario
<< Home