 Cartoon by Khalil Bendib for Corpwatch.org This from the CBC:
On
Aug. 10, 2005, an “extraordinary challenge panel” under NAFTA dismissed
American claims that the earlier NAFTA decision in favour of Canada
violated trade rules.
"We
are extremely pleased that the ECC dismissed the claims of the United
States," said International Trade Minister Jim Peterson.
"This is a binding decision
that clearly eliminates the basis for U.S.-imposed duties on Canadian
softwood lumber. We fully expect the United States to abide by this
ruling, stop collecting duties and refund the duties collected over the
past three years," he said.
Washington’s initial response was that the ruling doesn’t settle anything – and that it will take more negotiations before this dispute is wrapped up. The amount at stake is about $5B plus accrued interest. Not only is Bush refusing to pay the amounts owed, they are continuing to collect the huge illegal duty on these goods. And does this duty go to offset the oppressive national debt? No -- it is paid over directly to a consortium of American lumber companies,
heavy supporters of the Bush election campaigns, in as blatant an
example of graft as the West has seen in decades. This is the latest
and final step in a long series of stalling and appealing by the US of
its preposterous claim that its 26% duty on Canadian softwood lumber is
somehow not a blatant violation of NAFTA, an agreement which they have
vigorously enforced whenever it is to their
advantage to do so. The poor third-world suckers who last week signed
CAFTA have no idea what kind of one-sided agreement they just locked
themselves into.
The stance of the Bush administration makes
abundantly clear (if there was any doubt) that it considers the US
above all international laws and bilateral agreements, but expects its
trading partners and other countries to adhere to them. This is nothing
short of unilateralist bullying, a criminal act of extortion. It shows
contempt for the law and for all other nations. It is a slap in the
face to Canadian sovereignty. It also shows that 'free' trade
agreements are fraudulent, and furthers the demise of globalization.
What do you do with someone who extorts money from you and then fails
to live up to their agreement anyway -- killing their hostages (the
Canadian lumber industry) after taking the payoffs for their
release? The total lack of ethics this demonstrates is mind-boggling --
this regime truly is psychopathic, and devoid of moral principles.
As
my readers will know, I'm ambivalent about this outcome. Under NAFTA,
Canada sacrificed its right to enact and enforce labour and
environmental laws that are more stringent than the lax American laws,
and has received nothing in return from Bush except deceit and theft.
The US embargo on Canadian cattle, done under the guise of protecting
the US from Canadian 'mad cow' while covering up America's own mad cow
occurrences, were similarly a complete fraud, an act of unabashed
protectionism. So I'm not terribly unhappy to see Bush renege on, and
jeopardize, so-called 'free' trade agreements. It is time for Canada to
get some balls and stop complying with agreements with the US that the
US does not, and has no intention of, complying with. The Canadian
government should immediately:
- Cancel its participation in NAFTA;
- Protest
through the UN our objection to the Bush government's rogue behaviour
-- and insist that Bush agree to abide by international laws or face
global sanctions; there is no doubt that under Bolton, the US will
withdraw from the UN anyway, and they are already seriously in default
on their dues, so expelling them first might actually sufficiently
embarrass them to get them to behave in a more civilized manner (and
there would be no downside to doing so, since they are already
seriously undermining it);
- Sue the Bush government for the
amount they owe Canada for this and other illegal acts; this will not
get them to pay, of course, but will show them to be the deadbeats they
really are, and may demonstrate to the American people that Bush and
his cronies are so badly undermining the reputation of the US that they
need to get him and the other politicians in the back pockets
of corporatist thieves out of office;
- Selectively introduce
countervailing duties, but only on goods that (considering our Canadian
climate) we can reasonably produce domestically; and
- Refuse to sell goods to the US (like water and natural gas) that are clearly not surplus to our own long-term domestic needs.
Our
federal government's position as quoted by the CBC is encouraging, but
it is principally posturing. As always, the Bush regime will ignore it.
If Canada goes back to the negotiating table (that's what the BC forest
products association, dominated by US-owned multinationals, wants it to
do) we will lose all credibility and what little respect we have left.
That's why the five steps above are our only recourse. What would Bush
do in response? Well, he could invoke additional duties of his own, but
that would hurt the US more than it would hurt Canada. He could try to
make things difficult for us by restricting Canadians' and Americans'
ability to cross the border, but in many ways that would be a good
thing for Canada -- we would have to learn to do more for ourselves,
and would have to establish trade partnerships with Europe that would
make us much less dependent on the horrifically fragile US economy. He
is already perpetrating other outrages against Canadians -- harassing,
kidnapping and sending Canadians who pass through US airports, to
foreign countries to be tortured and killed, and threatening the
government with veiled threats (using the wingnuts he sends here as
'ambassadors') if we don't gratefully agree to participate in his
criminal wars and ludicrous, unworkable star wars defence schemes. What
more could he do? Invade? I don't think even Bush is that politically
dumb.
Someone has to stand up to the schoolyard bully. Canada
is in a much stronger position to do so than many of the third world
countries Bush is pushing around. And now the bully has picked a fight
with us, expecting us to roll over and cower. Let's not, and see what
happens. |