“The FTAA is a project of continental domination”

In the opening conference of the III Hemispheric Encounter of Fight against the FTAA, the Cuban economist and member of the Organizer Committee Osvaldo Martinez, assured that United States wants to impose the FTAA project in the continent “asking for everything but giving nothing”

In the encounter’s official opening, over 800 participants from 37 countries listened to Osvaldo Martinez, who reviewed the present negotiations stage and the last ministerial meetings, as well as the different actions developed by the continent’s social organizations in order to stop the FTAA.

Last year meant a definition period, to the official negotiations as well as to the movements that are resisting the FTAA. Martinez said, “Between the 2002 encounter and the present one, it’s the entire year 2003, where very important things happened that should be studied in order to have conclusions that allow us to be more effective in this fight for life and development”

According to Martinez, 2003 meant the WTO meeting failure, which was a success to the Continental Social Alliance as well as to the Latin American and Caribbean people”

Respect to the negotiations to create the FTAA, 2003 left “a new way to make our people swallow the FTAA hook, now as a “light” FTAA, in company of the new piece of this domination scheme: the bilateral free trade agreements”

The Cuban delegate assured that, with the FTAA and because of the continent reality, the huge inequalities between United States and the rest of the countries can only generate even bigger inequalities

According to Martinez, this happens because Latin American countries are forced to pay “an external debt that is over the 50 % of the income in several countries, and that is not mentioned by the FTAA, although to speak seriously about economic development in Latin America it is necessary to remove this giant obstacle”

The information presented by the economist is conclusive: “between the years 2001 and 2003, while the FTAA was being negotiated without mentioning the external debt problem, Latin America paid around 464.000 million dollars that mean 150.000 annual millions”

Martinez denounced that the North American interest on creating a Free Trade Area hide an economy on crisis. He affirmed that “the US trade reality shows an economy that is remaining behind in competence matters, which means a commercial deficit that couldn’t be stopped, not even by the dollar devaluation”

In order to prove this North American economy’s crisis, Martinez literally used the secretary Robert Zoellick words, who considers the FTAA “as a historic opportunity to increase trade, extend prosperity, spread democracy and make the hemispheric association deeper within the world competence”

While US is pressing for the Latin American markets opening, it keeps “a true stock of protectionist measures to agriculture products, steel and other products protected by subsidies, internal support, technical barriers to trade, anti-dumping and more”, denounced Martinez.

The real FTAA goal is, according to the Cuban economist, “the search and penetration of markets where North American companies can sell, make profitable investments and easy movements of capital”

Finally, the resistance options to the US project have basically two fronts, deeply connected between them.

One of them is the one carried out by the social movements, articulated by the Continental Social Alliance, where “several actions against world neoliberal economic institutions such as the IMF, the World Trade Organization and the World Bank were made”

Martinez recognized the actions in the different countries, mentioning, “The Continental Campaign of Fight against the FTAA developed surveys among the people in Argentina, Mexico, Ecuador, Peru, Chile, Uruguay, Haiti, Canada.”

He considers the Argentinean example as outstanding, “where the anti-FTAA and the anti-external debt campaigns had the support of over 2,5 million people”



The other way of resistance to the FTAA was the one carried out by the governments that reject the FTAA’s goals as well as the North American procedures in order to have the agreement started on 2005.

In this area, Martinez pays especial attention to Venezuela:

“The government of the Bolivarian Revolution of Venezuela has firmly rejected the FTAA’s neoliberal contents (…) proposing an opposite meaning to the FTAA in order to have real Latin American and Caribbean cooperation and integration”

Also emphasized what was done by the Brazilian and Argentinean governments within the MERCOSUR block, even though recognized the resistance of the US allied governments, such as Chile and Uruguay that have broken the unity of the region’s position.

“The Brazilian government denied to accept the one-sided negotiation proposed by US, expressing that in those circumstances the FTAA hurt its national interests. Brazil and Argentina defended a MERCOSUR position, despite the willing to please the US government showed by Uruguay”, assured Martinez.

A true Latin American integration can’t be reached under these formats. Martinez assured that a “light” FTAA could be as dangerous as the original project.

“Two changes in the original FTAA project came out from the Chancellors meeting that took place in Miami: a “light” and doubtfully limited FTAA, and the bilateral free trade agreements, that may be even harder than the original FTAA.”

To the Cuban economist, the meaning of the November meeting in Miami is a proof of the social movements and the government’s resistance.

“Miami meant that Us has lost its capacity to convince about the free trade advantages, while showing the strength to impose its goals, by isolating the governments that have different opinions”, said Martinez.

“The “light” FTAA and the bilateral agreements are not proofs of the FTAA’s failure, but new tactics to keep on dominating Latin America, making irreversible the neoliberal politics, with any name”

The two main ideas came out of the Miami meeting, the “light” FTAA and the bilateral agreements, are just different ways to achieve the same by the military and economic power nation.

According to Martinez, the “light” FTAA can be even more dangerous, because it contains the same essential neoliberal spirit (...) the fake image of development with a market economy and society”

“The bilateral agreements are just little FTAA’s, designed to the US needs, which make them even worst than the original project.”

The continent’s alternative to the FTAA is the organized resistance, assured Martinez, who believes that “keeping and increasing the anti-FTAA actions and mobilizations remains necessary”, said Martinez, emphasizing the actions of the Continental Campaign against the FTAA.

According to Martinez, “the campaign has proved that it can’t be ignored. In Quebec, Quito, Cancun and Miami, challenging tear gases, rubber bullets, security fences, repression, arrests and lots of other threats, the social movements with their low resources have given lessons about courage and dignity”