On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Afthab Ellath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.countercurrents.org/salzman210508.htm > > *"The "New" Left In Latin America: What Chomsky Didn't Tell You* > > *By Lorna Salzman* > > 21 May, 2008 > *Countercurrents.org* > > *T*he pursuit of social justice doesn't always benefit the environment. > Indeed, it often does just the opposite. > > What Noam Chomsky, referring to the new leftist governments in Latin > America, recently described in the International Herald Tribune as a > "promising sign of deliverance from the (American corporate) demons of the > past" is turning out to be a Business As Usual policy of full speed ahead on > resource exploitation and economic growth regardless of the ecological > consequences. > > In response to the cliché that "You can't stop progress", someone once > said: "When you are standing on the edge of a cliff, progress is taking one > step backward or turning around 180 degrees and moving forward." The new > leftist governments in Latin America - Venezuela, Brazil, and Bolivia, and > to a lesser extent Chile - are taking a new tack. Standing at the edge of > the cliff, they have decided to construct their own ladder down the cliff in > order to move forward in the same direction as the detested neo-liberals > have urged. > > Accordingly, they are moving rapidly to exploit, develop and export their > natural resources, agricultural products, and energy infrastructure in the > same unsustainable direction charted by the WTO, IMF and World Bank, with a > new entity called Mercosur and other consortiums involving European > industries. Chile, on the other hand, has committed itself to following the > old IMF/World Bank guidelines, but with a "compassionate capitalism" face > that will emphasize social justice within the same old expansive capitalist > growth model. > > > Brazil, for whom environmentalists once had high hopes, is still > experiencing rampant deforestation in the Amazon, slash and burn > agriculture, destructive cattle ranching and once-banned (but never > suppressed) genetically modified soybean (GMO) cultivation. President Lula > Inacio da Silva has abandoned his campaign opposition to GMOs, additional > nuclear power plants, and Amazon deforestation, and instead has accepted a > World Bank multi-year loan of up to $1.2 billion to purportedly balance > economic growth with social development. The environment doesn't seem to > enter into it at any stage. > > As a result, 2004 showed the highest economic growth ever in Brazil, mostly > from agribusiness, the largest contributor to Amazon destruction. Those who > oppose the anarchic ranchers and farmers in the region are murdered as were > Chico Mendes, Dorothy Stang and others. Frontier vigilantism still reigns. > > Brazil is now the leading beef exporter in the world, thanks to its ranches > on Amazonian land and the second largest exporter of soybeans (all > genetically modified) after the U.S. Also on the books is another > trans-Amazon superhighway, a giant hydroelectric dam to provide cheap power > for the Brazilian and foreign aluminum industries, a third nuclear power > plant at Angra dos Reis, and a 5000- mile natural gas pipeline (proposed by > Hugo Chavez, Venezuelan president) from Venezuela south, smack across the > state of Amazonas. > > > Within the state of Amazonas, Lula and the Brazilian oil company Petrobras, > long a target of criticism from local peoples for its oil leaks, want to > creaate an extensive network of gas pipelines within the state, a forested > area larger than Britain, France, Italy and Germany combined. The one > proposed to go south to Porto Velho would invade indigenous lands, and to > the west Petrobras wants to develop other oil and gas deposits, which would > have to be moved out through dense rainforest areas. As for Chavez' > 5000-mile pipeline dream, any analysis of its environmental impact does not > yet seem to be in the cards. > > Chile's ancient forests of Araucaria and southern beech (Alerce and > Nothofagus), have gotten more protection than formerly but mainly because of > large purchases by foreigners like Doug Tompkins, of Esprit clothing fame, > conservation organizations and others. The country remains the 4th largest > exporter of wood, cellulose and wood chips in the hemisphere and is likely > to become the second largest soon. While there are 30 million acres of > protected national parks, preserves and monuments, many of these are "paper" > preserves with little actual protection, and forest agreements have > loopholes that will allow mining. Meanwhile, plans are afoot for extensive > gold mining in Argentina on the Chile border. > > Chile's president Michelle Bachelet is constrained by the coalition that > elected her, which includes Christian Democrats and two smaller leftist > parties. As a consequence, she has announced a continuation of the old > neo-liberal policies of her predecessor, Ricardo Lagos, and has thrown in > her lot with the same financial institutions of yore. She has shown no > inclination to question the development objectives of the funding > institutions, industry, corporations or previous administrations and plans > to keep the incredibly low rate of 3% royalties imposed on foreign mining > companies. > > In Ecuador, the new leftist president, Rafael Correa, seems not to have > heeded the tragic lesson of oil exploration in Ecuador's Oriente province in > the Amazon basin. While the government recently bought out Occidental Oil, > which represents 20% of Ecuador's oil output, the government seems intent on > repeating the catastrophe wreaked on the indigenous lands and peoples in the > Oriente by the criminal polluting oil exploration which has destroyed human > health, the forests, water supplies, and utterly degraded national parks > like the Cuyabeno preserve. > > While this destruction was mainly committed by foreign oil companies like > Conoco and Texaco, the national oil company Petroecuador was a partner in > this and, in any case, the government turned a blind eye to the pollution > and destruction, which are the subject of a pending multibillion dollar law > suit. > > Ecuador has the highest deforestation rate in South America, thanks to the > building of roads to facilitate oil exploration, which open up the forests > to illegal loggers and settlers. Despite this, Ecuador has plans for more > such roads in connection with a new pipeline, Oleoducto de Crudo Pesado, > funded by a consortium that includes JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup and oil > companies from the US, Canada, Italy, Argentina and Spain, as well as a > proposal for another east-west land-sea pipeline crossing the Amazon basin > and the Andes. A consortium of indigenous and conservation groups strongly > oppose any expansion of the oil industry and are asking for a 15-year > moratorium on all oil exploration. When they filed a complaint with the > Organization of American States (OAS), the Ecuadorian Minister of Energy and > Mines replied: "OAS doesn't give orders here". > > The 300- mile Oleoducto pipeline threatens the remarkable Nambillo cloud > forest preserve near Mindo, the first preserve declared an Important Bird > Area (IBA) in South America, and eleven other protected areas. If built, > this pipeline would double Ecuador's oil production, require hundreds of new > oil wells and flow lines, as well as processing and refining facilities that > would accelerate oil exploration. Despite the huge financial reserves reaped > from oil exploration, little of the wealth has trickled down to the poor. > Ecuador hasn't yet been able to provide a regular source of drinking water > for its cities despite the presence of the Andes. > > In any case, little is changing in the Ecuador oil scene, since the > president announced that while Petroecuador might take charge, oil > exploration and production would remain in foreign hands. Given the > disastrous environmental legacy of Texaco and Conoco, the future looks as > grimy as ever. > > Clearly, radical economic policies declaring independence from the US do > not include more deference to the environment. So just what does it mean to > declare independence from the old 'imperialist" institutions? Just where are > these countries diverging from the economic growth models and agendas of > capitalist economies everywhere? Where are the radical differences that > American investors and industry -- as well as leftist commentators like > Chomsky -- were anticipating with the so-called left turn in Latin America? > > Judging from the public statements of these new leaders, capitalism has > little to fear from Latin America's so-called leftists. They may reject IMF > and World Bank now and then, but their hearts remain in the same place, > dedicated to untrammeled, unsustainable resource exploitation and economic > growth just like their capitalist neighbors to the north but with a few more > crumbs allotted to the poor. Just read their lips: "No worries, mate". Plus > ça change, plus c'est la même chose. > > > *Lorna Salzman* has been an environmental writer and activist since the > mid-1960s, and served as natural resource specialist for the New York City > Dept. of Environmental Protection in the early 1990s. In 2004 she was a > candidate for the U.S. Green Party's presidential nomination. Her articles > on environment and energy can be found at *www.lornasalzman.com* > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
