And now:Ish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: This message is forwarded to you as a service of Zapatistas Online. Comments and volunteers are welcome. Write [EMAIL PROTECTED] Send submissions to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 19:32:39 -0800 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: Commandante Null <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Multiple recipients of list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: 100 Years of United Fruit Rights-Central America: 100 Years of United Fruit By Nefer Munoz Inter Press Service 30-MAR-99 SAN JOSE, Costa Rica, (Mar. 29) IPS - The United Fruit Company founded one hundred years ago on March 30, 1899, is known infamously in some quarters for the controversial role it played in Latin America, ushering in a period of social tension, political unrest, and the era of the greatest "Yankee expansion" in the region. Benefitting from enormous land concessions, privileges, tax exemptions and cheap labor, in just a few years United Fruit consolidated its monopoly over banana production. The company's greatest influence was exercised over four Central American countries: Guatemala, Honduras, Costa Rica and Panama. In the Caribbean, the end of the 19th century witnessed the emergence of a vast landscape of banana trees, and the start of what would become a new order of social relations for thousands of workers. Like other banana companies, United Fruit grew as the railways expanded, and the extent of its social impact has been depicted - - and denounced -- in a wide number of books. "At that time, the imperialist phase of the expansion of capitalism was being experienced," recalls historian Virginia Mora at the University of Costa Rica. She pointed out that the spread of United Fruit and other companies was favored by the facilities granted by governments in the area. In Costa Rica alone, United Fruit leased 148 kms of railway and was granted a concession for 334,000 hectares of land, when it acquired the business concerns of U.S. entrepreneur Minor Keith. Summing up United Fruit's 100 years of history, Mora said that although the banana company brought the region jobs and comparatively higher wages, in the end the damages outweighed the benefits for the countries where the company set up shop. None of the revenues generated by the company ended up in the local economy. "The workers received their pay, but they had to shop in the company store, which was located on the plantation," said Mora. The huge privileges granted by the governments through so- called "contract-laws" were thus only partially compensated. Honduras and Costa Rica yielded United Fruit enormous tracts of land in exchange for the construction of railways, while Guatemala and Panama were satisfied with the development of the banana-growing sector. Among the privileges enjoyed by the company were wide-ranging rights to extract and exploit natural resources in the area and total exemption from import duties on capital goods and inputs. In his book "Banana Transnationals in Central America," published in 1983, Frank Ellis stated that in exchange for such privileges, United Fruit only paid a duty on exports -- the only tax local governments were able to impose on banana production - from 1910 to 1930. Throughout Central America, that tax was held steady at 1.5 to 2 cents per bunch of grapes. In the meantime, United Fruits' assets ballooned. In 1910, the company owned -- in the four abovementioned countries � 601 kms of railways and 194,392 hectares of land, which included 30,544 hectares of banana plantations. By 1930, those figures had climbed to 2,467 hectares of railway, 1.4 million hectares of land and 76,553 hectares of plantations. The difference between the total quantity of land available and the cultivated area allowed the company to shift to new areas once land fertility on plantations began to wane. In the book "The United Fruit Company in Latin America," Stacy May showed how the company started out with an initial capital of $20 million, surprising when compared to the economic power it achieved half a century later. In 1947, the company accounted for 16.5, 22.7, 38 and 12.3 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) in Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras and Panama, respectively. But the banana plantations brought new social woes such as alcoholism, prostitution and ethnic clashes. "The banana companies found the way to exacerbate the differences between black and white workers," said Mora. "That was their strategy to prevent the union movement from taking a united stand." In spite of that "divide and conquer" strategy, however, the banana plantations became the cradles of strong trade union and political movements, like the Communist Party in Costa Rica. Discontent over working and living conditions was expressed in a number of strikes, the most memorable of which took place in 1934 in Costa Rica and 1954 in Honduras. Around 10,000 workers from around the country took part in the 1934 strike in Costa Rica. Although in 1942 things began to change in the country dubbed the "Switzerland of Central America," when the government established social guarantees for all workers, little change was seen in the rest of the region. The "contract laws" continued protecting the interests of banana companies. But in 1974 the so-called "banana war" broke out between local governments and United Fruit, due to the low prices that the company paid local producers, and its refusal to pay taxes. Out of the tension arose the currently inactive Union of Banana Exporting Countries (UBEC) in September 1974, made up of Costa Rica, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama and Venezuela. Besides providing information on the earnings of transnationals like United Fruit, Standard Fruit, Dole and Del Monte, UBEC set a $1 tax on each box of bananas exported from the region, with the exception of Nicaragua and Colombia, where sales were in the hands of local firms. Up to the early 1990s, state coffers in the countries that levied the tax saw an influx of more than $1.2 billion thanks to the duty -- which was later suspended, nevertheless, by most of the countries. United Fruit is now known as Chiquita Brands, and although it still has banana plantations -- around 12,000 hectares in Panama -- it is mainly involved in the export business. In a number of countries, the shift of banana companies from the Atlantic to the Pacific coast, where better ports and still-fertile land were available, left behind entire towns that were completely dependent on the plantations for jobs. Describing what occurred in the province of Limon, along Costa Rica's Caribbean coast, historian Victor Hugo Acuna once wrote that the town had become "a cemetery of banana trees." The suffering, discrimination, poverty and every other aspect of the living conditions on and around banana plantations in Costa Rica were brought to life by Communist leader Carlos Luis Fallas. "The dollars of the United Fruit Company worked miracles in Costa Rica," Fallas wrote in his book "Mamita Yunai." "The most influential political leaders of the bourgeoisie sang the praises of the civilizing works of United. Writers and journalists, with very few exceptions, presented United as the loving mother of Costa Ricans." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NPC Information Associates "Intelligence for the Underdog!" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 770-457-6758 -- To unsubscribe from this list send a message containing the words unsubscribe chiapas95 to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Previous messages are available from http://www.eco.utexas.edu/faculty/Cleaver/chiapas95.html or gopher://eco.utexas.edu. &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&& Tsonkwadiyonrat (We are ONE Spirit) Unenh onhwa' Awayaton http://www.tdi.net/ishgooda/ &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
