How US ‘Free Trade’ Policies Created the Central American Migration Crisis

[Judi Lynn]

How US ‘Free Trade’ Policies Created the Central American Migration Crisis
Michelle Chen on February 6, 2015 - 2:28 PM ET

When tens of thousands of Central American migrant children streamed across the US-Mexico border last year, some in this country received them as refugees fleeing violence and poverty; others demonized the “invasion” from the south with bigoted panic. What many overlooked was that these “unaccompanied minors” weren’t just coming in search of new homes—they were actually sent; their migration had been sponsored by some of the biggest corporations in the hemisphere.

A new report from the AFL-CIO examines the migrant influx in the context of global trade programs, tracing the the migration from one key “trading partner,” Honduras, back to the chaos wrought by years of transborder economic exploitation. Labor activists say that as the United States exports misery to the south, “free trade” has plunged a generation of youth into free fall.

While free-trade deals are routinely criticized in the US for promoting the outsourcing of “American jobs,” according to the research of a union-led delegation to Honduras, the trade system is systematically undermining democracy in the Latin American nations Washington has sought to control for decades through commercial exploitation and political coercion.

Honduras presents a case study in how the regime of free trade steels the corporate dominion that is both cause and effect of Latin America’s violence and oppression. One major factor is the 2009 coup that ousted the populist Zelaya government—a right-wing plot clandestinely supported by the Obama administration—and ushered in a wave of regressive economic policies in rural and industrial sectors and intensified corruption.

…since the 2009 coup, the ruling governments have failed to respect worker and human rights or create decent work, and instead have built a repressive security apparatus to put down dissent. Numerous trade unionists and community activists who participated in resistance to the coup were killed, beaten, threatened and jailed.

More:
http://www.thenation.com/blog/197313/how-us-free-trade-policies-created-central-american-migration-crisis

[pipoman]

1. I don't disagree with the base of this article. ...

I'm not sure calling them 'US free trade policies' is exactly accurate. ...seems all of these agreements have multiple countries membership and negotiating....

[SpearthrowerOwl]

2. The U.S. pushes for them pretty hard

The "free trade agreements" devastate the economies of Central American countries, not as much the U.S. economy.

This is largely because American multi-nationals prevent domestic, high-value-added firms from appearing in Central America due to the competition with highly subsidized and well-developed U.S. products.

Some domestic elites in Central America do benefit from them and so push for them at the expense of their domestic population -- much like here in the U.S.

[pipoman]

3. I guess maybe by my own age limited recollection,

It seems to me Democrats have historically been the party to defend workers. There was partisanship to the battle between labor and industry and that partisanship drove happy mediums. In the last 40 years or so, I feel the Democratic party has abandoned labor in favor of corporatism, the same masters the republicans have always bowed before. It is both saddening and maddening.

[SpearthrowerOwl]

4. Yeah, there's been a "rightward" shift in the "center" for many decades.

Though I wouldn't say they formed a historical "happy medium": business should have no say in policy, though citizens can advocate for business themselves.

The political parties lag behind policy trends -- they don't really have much of an affect on public policy. Instead, the nation moves as a whole to the right or left depending on certain events: depressions, wars, etc.

Also, the political parties are really competing for investors -- it's more important than what the public wants. So you can have a large percentage (majority) in favor of "Medicare for all" no matter one's age -- 59% of the public according to a poll in December, and usually it's more than that -- but political candidates won't touch the issue because it will offend a large business sector (private insurance firms.) And then there's issues that the public doesn't really care about or is outright against the public interest -- like the Trans-Pacific Partnership -- that is extremely important to the business sector, so it certainly *is* on the agenda.

A really good book on this topic -- political parties court investors, not voters -- is "Golden Rule: The Investment Theory Of Party Competition" by Thomas Ferguson.

Right now I think the Democrats and Obama are so far to the right that I can't even see them.

[polly7]

5. I remember how it devastated the Mexican farmers,

millions who had to move into all the new factories and work for slave wages in the cities. Many of those who still couldn't make it, tried for the border. I KNOW that none of this was unexpected for all those designing NAFTA. Those pushing so hard for all these new 'Free Trade' deals know it also - the poorest of the poor in any nation without a strong gov't willing to stand up to those with the most power will suffer in exactly the same way. These deals are obscene.

FAIR TRADE.