In Latin America, a leftist vision is taking hold

International Herald Tribune ^ | DECEMBER 9, 2005 | Juan Forero

[1rudeboy]

Umm . . . those aren't "trade agreements."

[1rudeboy]

CAFTA? Let's try to find some of that language "codified" in the CAFTA. Thanks in advance.

[hedgetrimmer]

The WTO Promotes Sustainable Development

From the beginning, the WTO has recognized the importance of sustainable development. The Preamble of the Agreement establishing the WTO calls “for the optimal use of the world’s resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development , seeking both to protect and preserve the environment and to enhance the means for doing so in a manner consistent with [Members’] respective needs and concerns at different levels of economic development.”

[hedgetrimmer]

Final Environmental Review of the U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement
Pursuant to Section 2102(c)(4) of the Trade Act of 2002 and Executive Orders 13277 (2002) and
13141 (1999), the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative provides the following Final
Environmental Review of the U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement.

Principal Trade Negotiating Objectives:

to strengthen the capacity of U.S. trading partners to protect the environment through the
promotion of sustainable development (Section 2102(b)(11)(D));

[hedgetrimmer]

Preamble

The preamble to the Agreement expresses the Parties’ common goals regarding trade and the implementation of the Agreement. The U.S.-Chile FTA preamble recognizes environmental issues, stating that the Parties are, “resolved to: Implement this Agreement in a manner consistent with environmental protection and conservation; Conserve, protect, and improve the environment, including through managing natural resources in their respective territories and through multilateral environmental agreements to which they are both parties; Preserve their flexibility to safeguard the public welfare; and Promote sustainable development.”

[hedgetrimmer]

Environmental cooperation is a central component of the environmental provisions of the FTA. The United States and Chile have agreed to undertake eight initial environmental cooperation projects, and to negotiate a separate Environmental Cooperation Agreement (ECA) that will guide future efforts undertaken pursuant to the ECA work program. As discussed above, Congress provided a principal negotiating objective in the Trade Act to strengthen the capacity of U.S. trading partners to protect the environment through the promotion of sustainable development.

[hedgetrimmer]

Australia-US FTA

ARTICLE 19.6 : ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION
1. The Parties recognise the importance of strengthening capacity to protect the environment and to promote sustainable development in concert with strengthening bilateral trade and investment relations. Toward this end, the Parties acknowledge the importance of ongoing joint bilateral, regional, and multilateral environmental activities. The Parties agree to negotiate a United States – Australia Joint Statement on Environmental Cooperation under which the Parties will explore ways to further support these ongoing activities.

[wtc911]

No, that's a stupid assumption. Carter's been out of power for years,

--------------------------------------------------

No, Carter has been very active in SA since leaving DC. He was especially crucial to keeping Chavez in power when the opposition staged a coup a couple of years ago. He went to VZ at that time and essentially dared Washington to come out of the shadows. He has been similarly active with Morales in Bolivia.

Chavez and Carter - Morales and Carter - Castro and Carter - Chavez and Castro and Morales and FARC - it's a daisy-chain of marxism in our backyard. We are foolish not to be more active there. Remember...just because we don't read about it doesn't mean it's not happening...and Google is our friend.

[snowsislander]

Umm . . . those aren't "trade agreements."

No, they aren't trade agreements; as I said, they are non-binding language from the various declarations from the various Summits of the Americas. However, they are directly connected with trade agreements, being the principles that will shape the FTAA:

The effort to unite the economies of the Americas into a single free trade area began at the Summit of the Americas, which was held in December 1994 in Miami, U.S.A. The Heads of State and Government of the 34 democracies in the region agreed to construct a Free Trade Area of the Americas, or FTAA, in which barriers to trade and investment will be progressively eliminated. They agreed to complete negotiations towards this agreement by the year 2005 and to achieve substantial progress toward building the FTAA by 2000. The Heads of State and Government further directed their ministers responsible for trade to take a series of concrete initial steps to achieve the Free Trade Area of the Americas. Their decisions regarding these steps are contained in the Miami Summit's Declaration of Principles and Plan of Action.

I myself don't like such socialist nonsense being at the heart of any first principles for forming a FTAA.

[1rudeboy]

I forgot. You do not understand what a "Preamble" is. Let me explain. Here is a popular one:

We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility . . . .

Please note that "perfect union," "justice," and "domestic tranquility" are not defined. In other words, I cannot petition U.S. courts to compel Nicole Kidman to marry me on the basis of the above. Therefore, the terms are not "codified" in the legal sense of the term.

[backhoe]

One reason for Argentina to veer left is the effect of the IMF "reforming" their economy into one more suitable for supranational centralized management by the globalists at the WTO, paid for by the US taxpayer.

Yes- the IMF has a history of leaving ruin in its wake ( Mexico, for example ) and should join the UN on history's ashheap.

[hedgetrimmer]

Therefore, the terms are not "codified" in the legal sense of the term.

Disregard the true purpose of "free trade". Just make sure the grammar in a public forum meets your criteria for "legal sense". You must not have much time to do anything else.

[coconutt2000]

Take a good look at the new alliances the Bush administration is fostering.

India, Pakistan, the former Soviet Bloc nations, etc. Consider that we are moving more ships to the Pacific, and that we'll probably be adding to the number of ships that call Guam home, or at least base out of Guam for long deployments. Then there was the arms sale to Taiwan that finally passed Taiwan's assembly.

Last, but not least, the ballistic missile shield, coupled with our bases in the former Soviet bloc, added to the shift in Navy deployments... I don't think this Administration is ignoring China's threat to world stability. Before long, we're going to be embroiled in another Cold War with China. China will be trying to steal every scrap of technology from us, like they already do, and we'll be trying to intimidate them into staying within their borders. Eventually, either China will collapse or it will transition to another form of government. Or, if the Communists have enough power, they'll start a war to prevent either a collapse or a regime change.

We'll just have to find out, and hope that we keep a President in office who won't turn his/her back on the region in favor of diddling interns in the Oval Office.

[Thunder90]

We still have to worry about Russia acting up as well... They don't like us being anywhere near them. Also, China and Russia have entered an alliance together, and Russia is not going to allow any US bases on former Soviet land if it can prevent it.

[muir_redwoods]

"In Latin America, a leftist vision is taking hold"

Good. Now the better part of a whole continent has volunteered to be uncompetitive in the world economy. With any luck, as their fortunes dwindle, maybe they will go to war with each other. The US Economy will boom.

Suckers!

[coconutt2000]

Russia seems to have a burr under their saddle for no particular reason except maybe they have some jealousy issues when it comes to comparing the size and prowess of our respective ballistic missiles.