Bush is sending 6000 soldiers to the Mexican border

Where will Europe send its troops when the EPAs are signed?

Perhaps you wonder: “What is an EPA?” You are not alone. I just met a Euro-Parliamentarian, who did not know either. And that is indeed worrying.

 An EPA is one of the agreements that the EU is now about to sign with various regions in Africa (and also in the Pacific and the Caribbean). Initially, the term was Free Trade Agreements, but as they seemed alarming to some (and rightly so, please see below), the Europeans changed terminology and are now talking of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs).

 A few days ago I heard President Bush announce that he was despatching 6000 soldiers to the Mexican border to stop illegal immigration. These troops are a reinforcement of the border patrols already in action.

 In doing so President Bush pays heed to some strong feelings among U.S. citizens and the Congress in particular. Indeed, on December 16, 2005 and overwhelming Congress majority voted in favour of an extremely repressive anti-immigration Bill. It provides for the construction a 1000 km long and 4.5m high wall, in 5 sections, along the border between the U.S. and Mexico (lining one third of the entire length of the border).

 The announcement had the effect of a bomb in Mexico. President Vicente Fox, who usually keeps a low profile in his relations with his northern neighbour, lashed out against the “hypocrisy” of such a step. He found it inconceivable that “in the 21^st Century a wall could be put up between two countries, fellow nations living in association with one another”.

 How come that the Mexican President talks of “fellow nations” in “association with one another”? The explanation is that in January 1994 Canada, the U.S. and Mexico launched the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which became the world’s largest free trade area. Therefore President Fox speaks of fellow nations and associated nations, while Europe goes for partnerships.

 Today it is about time to ask the question: Who benefits from NAFTA? One thing is certain: Not the Mexican farmers.

 Already in 2003 André Maltais wrote:

“In the year 2000 a study by Professor Alejandro Nodal of the College of Mexico revealed that since the 1994 entry into force of NAFTA, 15 million out of 20 million Mexican farmers had lost so much of their earnings that they were thinking of abandoning their land.

 At present, one million small-scale producers of maize have given up and every day 600 more do the same. A further million has to leave their homeland at least for part of the year and look elsewhere for a living that they previously earned by selling their harvested crop.

 The situation will deteriorate further in the coming years, because the two most important crops, beans and maize, will have to pass through the NAFTA treadmill by 2008.

 Maize alone occupies 60% of arable land in Mexico and accounts for 60% of the aggregate value of its agricultural production. It provides a livelihood for three million peasants and their families and for 40% of all labourers in agriculture, i.e. 8% of the country’s population.

…/…

“Mexican farmers have lived on maize for over 5000 years.  But within only nine years of its existence NAFTA has enforced a  40% increase of Mexico’s imports of American maize (which benefits from American subsidies!).

Source: http://www.lautjournal.info/autjourarchives.asp?article=1449&noj=220

 NAFTA did not start the emigration of Mexicans to the U.S., but in destroying its farming land, it certainly did swell the exodus considerably.

EPAs and NAFTA are two sides of the same coin.

There is one difference only, but an important one: In 1994 Mexican peasants made up 25% of the population. In many African countries over 70% are farmers or livestock herders. Where will they go when the EPAs have been signed? That is to say when Africa (with no import duties to protect it) will be in direct competition with European agriculture, which is technically more advanced and on top of it all subsidised! Where will they turn when the devastating effects of free trade agreements will have pushed the peasantry down into misery? African towns and cities do not have the capacity to care for them. Where will they try and go if not - most of them -  to Europe?

How will Europe react then?

    Where will it post its troops?

             Where will it build its wall?