<html>
  <head>

    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <div id="content-header">
      <h1 class="title"><big><big>WikiLeaks shows US fought Correa on
            behalf of big business</big></big></h1>
      <big><big> </big></big></div>
    <big><big> </big></big>
    <div class="meta"><big><big> </big></big></div>
    <big><big> </big></big>
    <div class="field field-type-date field-field-publication-date"><big><big>
        </big></big>
      <div class="field-items"><big><big> </big></big>
        <div class="field-item odd"><big><big> <span
                class="date-display-single">Monday, September 29, 2014</span>
            </big></big></div>
        <big><big> </big></big></div>
      <big><big>
        </big></big></div>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <div class="glw-authors"><big><big>By <span
            class="glwnews-article-location"><a
              href="https://www.greenleft.org.au/taxonomy/term/4261">Linda
              Pearson</a></span></big></big></div>
    <div class="field field-type-filefield field-field-image"><big><big>
        </big></big>
      <div class="field-items"><big><big> </big></big>
        <div class="field-item odd"><big><big> <img
                src="cid:part2.00070605.07070103@comcast.net" alt=""
                title="" class="imagecache imagecache-article-image
                imagecache-default imagecache-article-image_default"
                height="200" width="300"> </big></big></div>
        <big><big> </big></big></div>
      <big><big>
        </big></big></div>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <div class="field field-type-text field-field-image-caption"><big><big>
        </big></big>
      <div class="field-items"><big><big> </big></big>
        <div class="field-item odd"><big><big> Cables published by
              WikiLeaks show how the US Embassy in Quito colluded with
              drugs manufactorers to stop measures pushed by the Correa
              government that would adversely affect their profits. </big></big></div>
        <big><big> </big></big></div>
      <big><big>
        </big></big></div>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Cables from the first term of Ecuadorian President
          Rafael Correa show how the US sought to defend the interests
          of US companies in Ecuador, and protect the position of
          foreign investors in general. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Moves against the power of transnational corporations
          by Correa's government, first elected in 2006, were seen as
          attempts to increase control over the economy, which the US
          government views as the domain of private interests. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The US Embassy in Quito therefore tried to influence
          Ecuadorian economic policy in conjunction with allies from
          other embassies and from within the private sector.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In May 2009, Correa announced that Ecuador would
          withdraw from the World Bank's investment dispute court, the
          International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes
          (ICSID). </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big><strong>ICSID</strong></big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Dominated by Western powers, ICSID provides the means
          for transnational corporations to directly challenge, and
          often defeat, the policies of elected governments. ICSID had
          become deeply resented in Latin America after a series of
          cases demonstrated its anti-democratic power. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In Argentina, several companies brought ICSID cases
          against the government over its decision in 2002 to unpeg the
          peso from the US dollar. Even though the decision had been
          taken to avoid economic collapse, ICSID ordered Argentina to
          pay hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation for loss
          of profits resulting from the peso’s depreciation.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In Bolivia, the Bechtel Corporation brought an ICSID
          claim against the government for US$50 million it claimed had
          been lost in relation to the privatisation of water in the
          city of Cochabamba. Bechtel subsidiary Aguas del Tunari had
          been forced to close in 2000 after mass protests against its
          decision to raise water rates by more than 50%.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>An international campaign was mounted against the
          Cochabamba case and in 2005 Bechtel dropped it due to the
          ongoing negative publicity. In 2007, Bolivia withdrew from
          ICSID.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>According to <a
            href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/07/09QUITO579.html">a
            July 2009 cable</a>, Ecuador had claims against it at ICSID
          totalling US$10 billion. Many of those cases had been brought
          by foreign oil companies challenging the windfall revenue tax
          introduced by the former Alfredo Palacio administration.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Ecuador’s new constitution reflected popular opposition
          to ICSID, stating: “Treaties or international instruments
          where the Ecuadorian State yields its sovereign jurisdiction
          to international arbitration entities in disputes involving
          contracts or trade between the State and natural persons or
          legal entities cannot be entered into.”</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Another article stipulates that foreign direct
          investment should be complementary to state investment.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Correa said the withdrawal from ICSID was needed to
          liberate Ecuador from “slavery with respect to transnationals,
          with respect to Washington, with respect to the World Bank”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Correa also said Ecuador would promote an initiative
          among the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) to abandon
          ICSID. In August 2009, foreign minister Fander Falconi
          announced that Ecuador would promote the creation of a Latin
          American regional centre for arbitration as an alternative to
          ICSID.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Ecuador’s withdrawal from ICSID was closely tied to the
          Correa government’s decision to terminate 17 bilateral
          investment treaties, which allowed foreign companies recourse
          to ICSID. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big><strong>US opposition</strong></big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>An <a
            href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/10/09QUITO905.html">October
            27 cable</a> reported that Ecuador’s acting foreign
          minister, Lautaro Pozo, told US Ambassador Heather Hodges that
          the Ecuadorian government wanted to negotiate new investment
          treaties that “allow only local or regional dispute
          arbitration, and align foreign investment with Ecuador's
          national development plan”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The cable shows that the US Embassy regarded the
          decision as the latest in a long list of Ecuadorian
          transgressions. Under the heading “Bad Timing, Bad Idea”,
          Hodges listed the “difficult issues” the two countries had
          been dealing with. These included a new pharmaceutical
          licensing scheme which threatened the profits of US companies,
          and Ecuador’s decision not to renew the lease at Manta air
          base.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The cable reported on what appears to have been a tense
          meeting between Hodges, Pozo and the foreign ministry's legal
          advisor, Marco Albuja. According to the cable, the ambassador
          told the Ecuadorians that they “would find it difficult to
          explain the decision to Washington”. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Under the heading “They Want it Their Way”, Hodges
          wrote: “This decision is entirely consistent with the Correa
          government's desire to have increasing control over all
          resource flows and over the economy writ large.”</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In other words, Correa’s government had offended the US
          by asserting Ecuadorian sovereignty and rejecting the economic
          policy dictates of the US.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>A <a
            href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/11/09QUITO973.html">later
            cable</a> reported on a meeting between Falconi, Albuja, and
          the ambassadors of the countries whose bilateral investment
          treaties were to be terminated, including France, Germany,
          Britain and the US.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Albuja told the meeting: “From the GoE's [government of
          Ecuador] perspective, international arbitration permits legal
          challenges to Ecuador's public policies in fora outside
          Ecuador's national jurisdiction, contrary to what is permitted
          under Ecuador's 2008 Constitution.”</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>This argument held no sway with the US Embassy. The
          cable concluded that while Ecuador was unlikely to reconsider
          its decision, “There may be a window of opportunity in which
          the USG [US government] and like-minded countries can reason
          with the GoE regarding the negative repercussions that are
          likely should they follow through with their plan”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big><strong>Pharmaceutical companies</strong></big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In October 2009, Correa announced that his government
          would introduce compulsory licensing for patented
          pharmaceutical products. This allows an individual or a
          company to use another company’s patent without that company’s
          permission, thereby allowing the production of generic
          versions of expensive patented drugs.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Correa’s proposal threatened to cut the profits of US
          pharmaceutical companies in Ecuador, whose patent monopolies
          allowed them to dictate prices.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Correa also announced that the public tender system for
          medicines would be reformed to favour local producers. This
          was <a
            href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/10/09QUITO998.html">described
            in a cable</a> as another “significant blow to U.S.
          pharmaceutical companies”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The same cable reported that embassy staff met with
          local representatives of US pharmaceutical companies Pfizer,
          Merck Sharp and Dohme, Schering-Plough and Wyeth to discuss
          Correa’s statements. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big><a
            href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/10/09QUITO998.html">Hodges
            reported</a> that US companies were “trying, through well
          placed contacts, to get a better idea of President Correa's
          core objectives”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>A week later, <a
            href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/10/09QUITO893.html">another
            cable</a> reported that the embassy was continuing “to
          consult with representatives of U.S. pharmaceutical companies
          and have suggested they present President Correa with data
          that would help dispel his misperceptions regarding the extent
          to which wholesale compulsory licensing will yield a
          substantial increase in local production”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>According to the cable, the French Embassy had told the
          US that European Union countries, which also stood to lose
          business in Ecuador under the compulsory licences scheme, were
          “calling a meeting next week with representatives of Member
          States to devise a common approach”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>These machinations failed to stop Correa issuing a
          decree on October 23, 2009, allowing for compulsory licensing.
          However, the US Embassy continued to work covertly on behalf
          of pharmaceutical companies. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In February 2010, the embassy was informed by a source
          at Ecuador’s Intellectual Property Institute that two
          compulsory licence petitions had been made under the decree. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The <a
            href="https://wikileaks.org/cable/2010/02/10QUITO75.html">embassy
            passed on the information</a> to one of the affected
          pharmaceutical companies, US firm Abbott Laboratories, but
          “asked that they not give attribution to the Embassy when
          discussing with GoE officials”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The ambassador also asked Washington to look into
          whether Ecuador’s new compulsory licensing regulations were
          compliant with the World Trade Organisation's (WTO)
          Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
          agreement.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big><strong>Mobile phone manufacturers</strong></big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In the case of tariffs on mobile phone imports, the US
          hoped that corporations could directly persuade the Ecuadorian
          government to change its policy. The tariffs were imposed by
          the Ecuadorian government in January 2009 to cut Ecuador’s
          trade deficit. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Instead of terminating the tariffs by January 22, 2010,
          as the WTO had stipulated, the Ecuadorian government planned
          to gradually reduce the safeguards over six months. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>A <a
            href="http://wikileaks.org/cable/2010/02/10QUITO53.html">cable
            from February 2010</a> said the US Embassy had hoped that a
          visit by “three of the most recognizible companies in the
          world” would persuade Ecuador to remove the tariffs. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>However, the cable reported that representatives from
          Apple, RIM (Blackberry) and Nokia concluded their three-day
          visit “with the impression that they have limited to no
          ability to influence GoE trade and investment decisions”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The cable reported that the US and Canadian embassies
          had helped the companies arrange meetings with the Ecuadorian
          government, after which the representatives concluded that
          their “arguments were not working with government officials
          focused on protecting existing local jobs and complying with
          President Correa's orders to eliminate Ecuador's [balance of
          payment] deficit”.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In particular, wrote Hodges, the Apple and RIM reps
          “concluded their visit with the impression that stories of how
          private individuals and entrepreneurs can get rich writing
          applications do not resonate with an openly socialist
          government that regularly calls for wealth redistribution and
          advocates a much greater government role in the economy”. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>The ambassador concluded that, instead of “welcoming
          these companies with open arms”, Ecuadorian government
          officials had demonstrated that “the current government is
          short-term focused and lacks the vision necessary to make sure
          this country of only 14 million people remains economically
          competitive in the coming decades”. </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>“As the companies figured out for themselves, GoE
          leaders are not looking to unleash the entrepreneurial spirit
          in Ecuador, rather are more interested in leveling society,
          protecting what they have, and allowing foreign companies into
          Ecuador on their terms.”</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>Since taking office, Correa has <a
            href="http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/ecuador/ecuador_economy.html">doubled
            spending</a> on education, health and public infrastructure.
        </big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>In rejecting the economic model the US sought to impose
          on Ecuador, the Correa government has <a
            href="http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/ecuador/overview">significantly
            cut</a> inequality, poverty and unemployment. Moreover, <a
href="http://truth-out.org/news/item/14605-ecuador-chooses-stimulus-over-austerity">Ecuador’s
            economy has grown</a> at a rate of two to three times that
          of the US since the global financial crisis of 2008.</big></big></p>
    <big><big>
      </big></big>
    <p><big><big>[This is part six of <a
            href="https://www.greenleft.org.au/taxonomy/term/5517">a
            seven-part series</a> based on about 1000 secret US
          diplomatic cables published by WikiLeaks, most of which have
          never been reported on before.]</big></big></p>
  </body>
</html>