Robert Naiman, Just Foreign Policy, November 4, 2006
When you read this op-ed by former State Department "diplomat" Roger Noreiga, it's appropriate to experience two waves of relief.
One wave is for the fact that the Bush Administration is supporting the renewal of "the Andean Trade Preferences and Drug Eradication Act." This is definitely a good thing.
The other is for the fact that Roger Noriega is no longer employed by American taxpayers to represent their interests in Latin America.
Starting with the first: if you haven't been following this issue, you might not immediately realize that renewal of "Andean Trade Preferences and Drug Eradication Act" is a good thing. After all, the title combines two aspects of U.S. policy that are usually not in the public interest: trade deals and drug eradication.
But in this case, its in the interest of the majority of Americans and the majority of people in Bolivia and Ecuador that this deal be extended.
It's unfortunate that this has to happen in the "lame duck" session, when Congress is most unaccountable. It should have happened before. The current legislation expires on December 31.
But it got caught in a game of chicken initiated by the pro-"free trade" hawks in Congress. They want to replace the trade preferences of ATPDEA with so-called "free trade" agreements, that would force these countries to bind themselves to the Washington Consensus regime, including forswearing their rights under international agreements to make essential medicines available to their people when they are under patent in the U.S.
So, the political context is that the immediate alternative to extending this legislation is putting these countries under the gun to sign a "free trade" agreement with Washington. Such agreements would be certain to undermine pro-development policies.
Bolivia in particular has asked for an extension. The Bolivian government and the social movements there are asking for a different model for U.S.-Bolivian trade relations than a "free trade" agreement. But regardless of whether a different model is feasible in the near future, an extension will be better for the Bolivian government and the social movement organizations there than an immediate cutoff of trade preferences. The opposition would blame the economic dislocation caused by an immediate cutoff of preferences on the government and use it to argue that Bolivia cannot afford to chart its own path.
As a U.S. government official in 2002, Noriega praised the military coup in Venezuela against the democratically elected government of President Chavez, so for Noriega to call President Chavez divisive deserves some kind of chutzpah award.
Nonetheless, we should give the devil his due, as the saying goes. In advocating for ATPDEA extension, Noriega supports the correct policy, even if he gives noxious reasons for doing so and even if he has a financial interest in the outcome, since, as the Latin Business Chronicle informs us, his law firm is employed by the Ecuadoran economic development organization. Let's hope, like Nixon's trip to China, his advocacy helps turn back the tide of the "free trade" hawks in Congress.