|
|
Brazil and Venezuela have
great power Argentine economist Eric Calcagno, one of the members of the panel "Regional Integration and the FTAA," organized within the framework of the XXVII Regular Meeting of the Latin American Council of SELA, said that historically the Latin American and Caribbean countries have become accustomed to seeing the strongest party win in any negotiation, that is the United States. "But the case of the FTAA is atypical. The United States may bring all its influence to bear and align on its side almost all the countries of the region, but if Brazil and Venezuela do not participate, there is no FTAA, " said Calcagno. The specialist pointed out that Brazil and Venezuela account for 42 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Latin America and the Caribbean, and if Argentina is added, the total is 56 percent. "What free trade area can be established with the remaining countries that together do not represent even half of the regional GDP? Thus Brazil and Venezuela (and possibly Argentina) have an implicit veto power. Without them there is no FTAA. That is why the region can negotiate strongly," added the expert. Meanwhile the ex-Minister of Foreign Affairs of Venezuela, Simón Alberto Consalvi, focused his presentation on the specific case of the United States, because he considered that two important changes can be perceived, although he warned that few moments are "as propitious for making mistakes as the times in which we are living, because there is no better common place than this to affirm that history changed on 11 September and for this to be the truth." In this regard, he went on to say that although after the events of 11 September the climate has changed in Washington with respect to foreign policy, the U.S. International Trade representative, Robert Zoellick, appears to see this as "an opportunity" for that country. Citing Zoellick, Consalvi reaffirmed that the United States is being left out of the negotiation and integration processes taking place in the world. He gave, as an example, the fact that 130 free trade agreements are in effect in the world at present and the United States is only a party to two of them. There are 30 agreements in the Western Hemisphere and the United States belongs to only one, the North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA). He also added that besides "the complexity of the FTAA negotiations and the economic crises of the 34 countries committed to this process, the recession in the United States, the consequences of competition in South America and the Caribbean, the uncertainty and lack of trust seem to be gaining ground, more as signs of the times than as a theoretical discrepancy." In his opinion the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean should reaffirm and consolidate their subregional schemes (CAN, MERCOSUR, CARICOM, etc) before proceeding with FTAA negotiations. Another panelist, Mexico's current Ambassador to Venezuela, Jesús Puente Leyva, referred to his country's experience six years after NAFTA went into effect, to which Mexico, the United States and Canada belong. As positive effects, Leyva mentioned that as of the signing of NAFTA Mexico's foreign trade tripled, an unprecedented occurrence in Latin America. As a result, the country's exports, which on the average represented 10% of GDP at the beginning of the 1980s, currently represent 30% of GDP. He also pointed out that in 2000 his country's exports amounted to US$166 billion, equivalent to almost half of those of all the Latin American countries as a whole. And of this amount, only 10 percent corresponds to oil sales. However, one of the disadvantages of the commercial opening up with the Northern partners is that the United States has become the principal destination for Mexican exports (90 percent), which means a growing dependence on cyclical swings for the Mexican economy. Other disadvantages are that Mexico's export activity is concentrated in a limited number of companies, principally foreign companies; that these exports require a high and increasing content of imported materials which is an obstacle to sustaining economic growth based on the internal market; and that this exporting boom has not allowed the generation of the number of jobs required by the demographic growth of a country with 100 million inhabitants, nor the creation of adequately remunerated jobs. The fourth panelist, the Secretary General of the Association of Caribbean States (ACS), Norman Girvan, focused on the need for the negotiations for the creation of the FTAA to take into account the broad differences with respect to size, sources of resources and levels of development existing among its member countries. In his opinion, this new form of hemispheric integration should provide opportunities for accelerated development of the lesser developed countries and regions; it should address the vulnerabilities of the smallest countries, which are derived from their size; and should include compensation mechanisms for the "losers" such as social security, job retraining programs and loan plans for the restructuring of companies. "An important characteristic of the FTAA to date is the absence of provisions for these types of opportunities and mechanisms," said Girvan. The Secretary General of the ACS indicated that in accordance with indicators that measure the size and population of countries, the source of resources comprising their GDP and human development, known as the "PSPH index," the only countries that remotely approach the 96.66 figure of the United States, are Brazil (48.35) and Canada (39.87). These are followed by Mexico (18.88) and Argentina (14.85), the countries of the Andean Community and Chile (between 8.78 and 2.15), the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Paraguay and Uruguay (less than 2) and the other countries including those belonging to the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the remaining Central American countries and Panama (less than 1). Girvan said that it would be
"useful to consider alternative patterns for Latin America and the Caribbean that are
specifically geared to raising the levels of development and competitive capacity of the
smaller and least developed economies, when addressing the social agenda."
|
|
http://www.sela.org |
