Skip to content or view screen version

The end of the Amazon: A New Ecuadorian Constitution

colonos | 27.09.2008 19:59

“Being in favour of the Ecuadorian constitution, then, is to sentence the Amazon to death, notwithstanding any little points they have thrown in here and there to make environmentalists jump and cheer with laughter.” It is voted upon tomorrow and could spell the end of the Amazon. It enshrines environmental destruction in law.

This blog post with active links etc. can be be found here:
 http://colonos.wordpress.com/2008/09/27/the-misleading-guardian-and-the-end-of-the-amazon-a-new-ecuadorian-constitution/

It is circulating on many global civil society mailing lists, Ecuadorian politrix are once again on everyone’s lips. “A new law of nature“, writes The Guardian, “Ecuador [tomorrow, Sunday, Sep 28] votes on giving legal rights to rivers, forests and air. Is this the end of damaging development? The world is watching.“

What people marvel at is the inclusion of something in the order of “respect for Pachamama”, so to speak: “Ecuador’s tropical forests, islands, rivers and air similar legal rights to those normally granted to humans“.

“Una nueva Constitución y una nueva decepción“

Although it has some interesting aspects to it (that can give jobs to lawyers and environmental rights experts), including this new right for pachamama, the new Ecuadorian constitution that is put to the vote tomorrow [September 28, 2008], is principally speaking the most decisively industrialist, progressivist constitution ever written, because it defines a very specific and environmentally destructive trajectory for the Ecuadorian economy, including article 321, which affirms that the capitalist owners of the means of production can sleep tightly and secure forever after:

“Articulo 321: El Estado reconoce y garantiza el derecho a la propiedad en sus formas publica, privada, comunitaria, estatal, asociativa, cooperativa y mixta“.

The provisions celebrated by many environmentalists are most likely a tactical manoeuvre: included to make you go “Wow!” - and then forget about reading the rest of the draft, which also includes this provision (NB: Correa calls environmentalists and indigeneous people “infantile”):

[See full .pdf document.]

This very specific element of the constitution, which breaks entirely with the tradition of a constitution as a collection of abstract ideals, visions or conceptions of freedom, ties Ecuador to the development of the IIRSA project. IIRSA is a World Bank developer’s wet dream, and a capitalist, expansionist nightmare - IIRSA is an elaborate plan that details many development projects of the usual industrial, progressivist kind. Large scale changes to nature through the building of many roads, river ways, canals, and so on.

Comision Prensa, an independent media collective states that IIRSA is “totally incompatible with the conservation of the Yasuni”, as has been a recurring point made clear in this blog:

“Es totalmente incompatible con la conservación del Parque Yasuní, no se puede implementar un corredor comercial internacional al lado de una zona de tal fragilidad ecológica” - and they also state that such projects would never be supported by a revolutionary, leftist and ecological government and calls Correa’s industrialist, progressivist government “realist and pragmatic” (the kind that will sit on any fench with anyone, just to stay in power):

“Un gobierno revolucionario, de izquierda y ecologista (que por supuesto no es el caso de Ecuador, aquí tenemos un gobierno realista y pragmático), tendría que estar en contra de estos proyectos. Pero no es así, no sólo lo apoyan sino que además pretenden poner la palabra IIRSA en la Constitución. Consideramos que el IIRSA podría ser algo semejante al Ministerio de Obras Públicas del tan denostado ALCA, por eso consideramos muy peligrosa la propuesta.“

The new legal terrain that the Ecuadorian draft constitution charts, then, is two-sided: with the one hand it provides a human rights-like protection for the environment:

“In the same way, compensation is measured in terms of that injury to a person or people. Under the new system, it will be measured according to damage to the ecosystem. The new system is, in essence, an attempt to codify sustainable development. The new laws would grant people the right to sue on behalf of an ecosystem, even if not actually injured themselves.“

However, with the other hand it taketh away this nominal protection for the environment through the inclusion of IIRSA. Constitutionally sanctioning IIRSA is a de-facto go ahead for most major development projects, since they can probably be said to form a part of IIRSA, the concerns of which, presumably, then, overrrides most other concerns.

Giorgio Agamben has written a very illuminating story of liberal democracies and constitutions in “The State of Exception” which sums up the history of constitutional powers in a very long (11 pages) footnote. The German constitution of 1968 entrenches that Germany, indisputably, is a liberal/capitalist country:

“[O]n June 24, 1968, the “great coalition” of Christian Democrats and Social Democrats passed a law for the amendment of the constitution (Gesetz zur Ergänzung des Grundgesetzes) that reintroduced the state of exception (defined as the “state of internal necessity,” innere Notstand). However, with an unintended irony, for the first time in the history of the institution, the proclamation of the state of exception was provided for not simply to safeguard public order and security, but to defend the “liberal-democratic constitution.” By this point, protected democracy had become the rule.“

(from:  http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/009254.html )

The Ecuadorian constitution takes it all one step further: it defines what kind of hands-on (industrial) things have to happen in order to steer the industrial economy forward, namely motorways through the Amazon and across the Andes (environmental destruction becomes law!):

“Carlos Lessa, former president of the Brazilian Development Bank (BNDES, by its initials in Portuguese) agrees, pointing out, “The Andes mountain range is certainly beautiful, but it’s a terrible engineering
problem.” This kind of logic that regards nature as a “barrier” in some places and a “resource” in others pervades all aspects of the plan.” - from:  http://americas.irc-online.org/am/3313

The wider plan, to which Ecuador signs itself up if they approve the constitution, encompasses:

• Andean Axis (Venezuela-Colombia-Ecuador-Peru-Bolivia)

• Amazon Axis (Colombia-Ecuador-Peru-Brazil)

• Central Inter-oceanic Axis (Peru-Chile-Bolivia-Paraguay-Brazil)

• Capricorn Inter-oceanic Axis
(Antofagasta/Chile-Jujuy/Argentina-Asunción/Paraguay-Porto Alegre/Brazil)

• Guyana Shield Axis (Venezuela-Brazil-Suriname-Guyana)

• Mercosur-Chile Axis(Brazil-Uruguay-Argentina-Chile)

• Southern Axis (Talcahuano-Concepción/Chile-Neuquén-Bahía
Blanca/Argentina)

• Southern Amazon Axis ( Peru-Brasil-Bolivia)

• Atlantic and Pacific Maritime Axis (all countries)

“Each axis involves a variety of infrastructure projects. For example, the Amazon Axis, which unites the Pacific Ocean with the Atlantic and crosses three large ecosystems (coastal, Andean mountain, and rainforest), must tie the Amazon River and its tributaries to the ports of Tumaco (Colombia), Esmeraldas (Ecuador), and Paita (Peru). This will require major improvements to existing roads and construction of others.

Since the axis aims to create a dense network of river transportation systems, several rivers will be dredged and straightened, while in other places river ports will have to be completely overhauled. These infrastructure projects and the spike in transportation flows they generate will result in massive environmental impacts on the Amazon ecosystem.“

Being in favour of the Ecuadorian constitution, then, is to sentence the Amazon to death, notwithstanding any little points they have thrown in here and there to make environmentalists jump and cheer with laughter.

Meanwhile, despite all rhetoric about Yasuni, contracts for oil fields (or “bloques” as they are called locally) are being drawn up anyway, according to insider information, so there is really no need for uncritical celebrations here.

Let us stay focused - and not be blinded by Correa’s shining spin. Many people who can read and understand constitutional politrix reject the constitution on these grounds, but of course there is a new funding niche for academics and yet another cash crop to harvest for lawyers. As an indigenous friend said when Correa was elected (as opposed to banana tycoon Noboa): “…it will be good for parts of the middle classes, but for us it is a disaster“.

Read more about IIRSA here: IIRSA: infrastructure for the FTAA? and here IIRSA: Integration Custom-Made for International Markets and throughout this blog’s existence where we time and again have pointed to these and related issues.

Finally, a list from Friend of the Earth followed by Comision Prensa’s communique:
Why is IIRSA a risk for communities and the environment?

1. Because its transport, waterways and agribusiness network projects crossing ecologically fragile areas, will have a negative effect on biodiversity. For example, the impact in the Andes, the Amazon Basin, the Mato Grosso, the Pantanal, and the Paraguay and Paraná rivers, will be significant, and in many cases irreversible.
2. Because these projects are likely to put the products of peasant communities at a great disadvantage. IIRSA roads and waterways aim to facilitate the transport of export products like soy, while doing little to strengthen food security and sustainable livelihoods for local citizens.
3. Because the mega- infrastructure projects have been drawn up with excessive focus on the needs of the private sector compared to the needs of the local economy and nearby communities.
4. Because of the failure to incorporate appropriate environmental, social and cultural considerations in IIRSA’s large infrastructure projects.
5. Because IIRSA projects are now set up to follow previous large infrastructure projects financed by international financial institutions. These projects continue to cause harm to indigenous communities (for example the Camisea gas pipeline) and the environment (Bolivia-Brazil gas pipeline), and can rack up devastating national debts (Yacyreta hydroelectric plant).
6. Because the role played by European transnational corporations in Latin America has already generated conflicts between consumers of public services, putting access to basic services (such as water, electricity, telecommunications) at risk, and promoting the privatization of public services. Giving these companies a greater role, as envisaged by IIRSA, is potentially very harmful.
7. Because IIRSA offers little public access to information about their projects and related policy reforms.
8. Because IIRSA does not have monitoring and evaluation programs in place to demonstrate that poverty will be reduced or that sustainable economies are being promoted.
9. Because IIRSA does not make concrete connections between its projects and the reduction of poverty or improvement of the environment.
10. Finally, and in summary, because IIRSA has a logic that is purely economic instead of a logic that is about sustainable integration and healthy local economies.

================

COMUNICADO DE PRENSA

Ecuador. Francisco de Orellana, 01 de Julio de 2.008 (12:15h)

EL GOBIERNO PRETENDE DAR AL IIRSA RANGO CONSTITUCIONAL

Les adjuntamos una propuesta enviada el 14 de Mayo a la Asamblea
Constituyente, por el asambleísta de Alianza País, Edison Narváez
Guerra. Aunque no sea Correa o alguien de su gabinete quién la suscriba,
estamos seguros que dentro del gobierno tiene un apoyo total. Además en
el mismo escrito se dice explícitamente que Correa respalda estas tesis,
que Ecuador se convierta en la puerta de acceso al Atlántico para los
países asiáticos, como alternativa al canal de Panamá.

La Iniciativa de la Infraestructura Regional Suraméricana (IIRSA), es un
macro-proyecto para construir infraestructuras en toda Sudamérica, con
el fin de poder extraer con mayor facilidad todos los recursos naturales
que quedan en esta rica región, (petróleo, minerales, madera, agua),
además se podrían incorporar a la producción muchas tierras ahora
ocupadas por bosque (Ej. Extensión de las plantaciones de caña de azúcar
y soya en Brasil, Argentina, Colombia, etc.). IIRSA, pretende que todo
ese flujo de riquezas se incorpore a la economía global, es decir, a
unos cuántos bolsillos. El proyecto es impulsado por todos los gobiernos
sudamericanos y tiene los parabienes de todas las agencias
multilaterales de crédito, (Banco Mundial, CAF, BID), deseosas de
prestar fondos para tan golosas obras. También tiene el visto bueno del
gobierno de los Estados Unidos y nunca hemos escuchado pronunciamiento
alguno en contra, por parte de ninguna
transnacional.

IIRSA fue diseñada durante la �larga noche neoliberal� (tan mencionada
últimamente), por neoliberales convencidos, que crearon un proyecto
pensando la forma más rápida y eficaz de finiquitar el expolio de
América Latina, que comenzará hace 500 años. IIRSA supone la
profundización del modelo extractivista de recursos naturales, propone
seguir mandando al Norte todo lo que necesiten, perpetuando en la
historia nuestro papel de países exportadores de materias primas. Ese es
el modelo de integración que propone IIRSA.

Un gobierno revolucionario, de izquierda y ecologista (que por supuesto
no es el caso de Ecuador, aquí tenemos un gobierno realista y
pragmático), tendría que estar en contra de estos proyectos. Pero no es
así, no sólo lo apoyan sino que además pretenden poner la palabra IIRSA
en la Constitución. Consideramos que el IIRSA podría ser algo semejante
al Ministerio de Obras Públicas del tan denostado ALCA, por eso
consideramos muy peligrosa la propuesta.

En Orellana, la iniciativa IIRSA se particulariza en la hidrovía del
Napo (dentro del Eje Manta-Manaos). Entendemos que este proyecto supone
una amenaza para la amazonía mayor aún que el petróleo.

Es totalmente incompatible con la conservación del Parque Yasuní, no se
puede implementar un corredor comercial internacional al lado de una
zona de tal fragilidad ecológica. Es una desfachatez tremenda decir que
no va a afectar en nada. Uno de los aeropuertos de carga que se pretende
construir (para transporte mercancía, no de gente, los que viven allí no
tienen plata para pagar un viaje en avión), el de Rocafuerte, se
encuentra a unos 5 kilómetros del límite del parque, se supone que con
el gran tráfico que se espera, la ciudad crecerá. Hay quién asegura que
puede convertirse en una nueva Iquitos en medio de la amazonía. Una gran
cloaca al lado del Yasuní.
No beneficiará las economías locales. La gente aquí, principalmente las
comunidades kichwas que están en la ribera del río, practican una
economía de subsistencia, viven de la caza y la pesca y de una
agricultura mínima. Así han vivido siempre y esto les permite una
relación armónica con la naturaleza que les rodea. Este macro-proyecto
hará saltar en pedazos la forma de vivir de esta gente.

En fin, esto es un llamado de atención a las personas que pelearon
contra el ALCA y contra el TLC. De los grandes comerciantes de Manta,
que ya se están frotando las manos con el negocio, no esperamos nada.
Por cierto que algunos también son prominentes figuras de la nueva
�revolución ciudadana�

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 27, 2008 at 14:53 (662) and is filed under Amazonia, Capitalism, Ecuador, Environmentalism, Globalisation, Green Politics, Politics, South America, grass-roots. Tagged: Ecuador, correa, amazon, News, IIRSA, Politics, deception, ecuador's constitutional vote, corridors, correa's spin, constitutent assembly, death of the amazon, environmental rights, pachamama, spin. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Edit this entry.

colonos
- Homepage: http://colonos.wordpress.com