Isn't
it ironic how when the tables are turned, what was once justified and
merely business becomes theft, murder and robbery? If one needs an
example of this type of incident, they need look no further than the
recent decision by Bolivia to nationalize its natural gas industry.
Private corporations (and public ones historically controlled by the
owning state's elites) moved into Bolivia decades ago and connived deals
that essentially robbed the Bolivian nation and its people. Now that the
popular anti-corporate government of Evo Morales has turned the tables
on the previous owners by nationalizing the industry with no intention
of compensating the losing entities, those who stole the resource from
Bolivia in the first place are now calling it theft.
What we have here is a case of duplicity
and hypocrisy. It's okay for the corporations of the world (and the
governments that work for them) to force free trade deals down smaller
and less powerful nations throats -- deals whose only intention is to
expropriate the weaker nations resources and people while creating a
market that makes locally grown products unprofitable for the locals to
grow or buy. This dynamic locks the less powerful nations in these
so-called trade agreements into a cycle of greater and greater
impoverishment and an accompanying destruction of their social and
cultural fabric, leaving them with an empty capitalist approximation of
culture and no money to buy that culture's trinkets. Bolivia's history
is not unusual. Indeed, it is the history of most nations in the
Americas. However, the movement that Evo Morales represents is tired of
the rip-off and is taking back what was theirs to begin with.
In those countries where free trade deals won't work -- say Iraq or Iran
-- that's where the murder comes in. Instead of robbing the people of
these countries with a fountain pen, the world's richest robbed (and
continue to rob, in the case of Iraq) them at gunpoint. After an initial
massacre or two, there are those in the countries under attack who throw
their lot in with the invaders. Backed by the invader's army, these men
and women sell off resources that aren't theirs to sell and stuff their
part of the profits in their bank accounts. Then they kill and imprison
their countrymen that oppose the theft, calling them traitors and worse
on their way to the torture chambers.
Of course, the acts of betrayal described above can only be maintained
by force and intimidation, at least for a generation or two. By then,
the thieves hope their power will be firmly ensconced and their history
will be considered the one truth. If the books can be rewritten and the
teller of the legends dispensed to the museum of irrelevance, then the
robbers have won. Their murder and theft becomes the story of national
pride and the gods of profit and exploitation the national religion.
Those who lived before and fell before the invaders and their
accomplices are dispelled to the category of savage -- romantic or
otherwise. Simpler men and women, they just had to make way for the
tides of history. History driven by the desire to destroy and conquer
in
the name of acquisition.
So, while the US media tries to compare the liberal-minded and popularly
elected Morales to the worst of the world's strongmen because his
government wants to renegotiate contracts with outside energy companies
on terms favorable to the Bolivians and not the corporations, Washington
and its northern allies struggle to intimidate Iran into conceding its
independence in energy matters. It's not that nuclear power is a good
way to go, but any national leadership worth its salt knows that
long-term energy independence is essential to survival in the world of
the future. This is what the politicians in Washington claim to want for
the US, yet when the rulers in Tehran claim the same for the Iranians,
they are threatened with war.
The common denominator between Morales' Bolivia and Tehran is
their insistence that they owe those that have historically exploited
their resources nothing. Morales stated as much when he told the world
that he would not provide compensation to those companies that used to
control Bolivia's energy industry. It is Morales' contention that those
corporations have already received such compensation over the years that
they have exploited trade deals that were very favorable to those
corporate groups. Even Petrobas, the Brazilian resource group that is
calling foul the loudest, has been party to this. It is important to
remember that until recently Brazil was a textbook case of foreign
exploitation and rampant with corruption and military repression. Social
Democrat Lula's election has changed that somewhat, but it takes more
than an election or two to change a country as manipulated by (and
integrated into) the international capitalist system as Brazil was.
Despite the hopes of the US press, the debate between the Bolivian and
Brazilian governments over compensation for Petrobas' holdings in
Bolivia is not the beginning of the end of Latin America's recent
rejection of northern imperialism. It was primarily the previous
governments of Brazil that robbed Bolivia, not Lula's government. In all
likelihood, most of those monies are no longer in the Brazilian
treasury, just like the monies made by pre-Chavez Venezuela were taken
out of the hands of the Venezuelans.
Indeed, to provide further compensation would be comparable to a
robbery victim signing over their bank account to the person who beat
and robbed them after the thief was arrested. Time and the force of arms
were what legitimized the theft of their resources in the first place,
and their actions are a provocative attempt to undo the lies that time
created.
Ron Jacobs is a writer and library
worker. He lives in Asheville, NC
Other Articles by Ron
Jacobs
*
Neil Young
Kicks Out the Jams!
* How Does
One Convince The Occupied That This Mayhem Is For Their Own Good?
* Resistance:
The Rx for Fear
* Why Leaving
Iraq Now is the Only Sensible Step to Take
* Capital is
Not God
* This Ain't
No Video Game: A Review of Jeffrey St. Clair's Grand Theft Pentagon