Living in Peru : your everyday companion

Bolivia keeps Peru from implementing free trade deal with the U.S.

Living in Peru
Israel J. Ruiz

Peru's Minister of Foreign Trade and Tourism Mercedes Araoz announced on Tuesday that Bolivia had not been willing to make changes to an Andean Community document that would permit Peru to implement a free trade deal with the United States.

As one of the final steps in implementing the free trade agreement signed with the U.S., Peru must modify Decision Nº 486, a decision made by the Andean Community (CAN) - a trade bloc comprising the South American countries of Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru.

The article that is to be modified of Decision Nº 486, which is a common intellectual property regime, has to do with the use of patents.

A meeting was held from June 15 - 17 in Lima with the Andean Community's Council of Ministers of Foreign Affairs to deal with the issue.

"It was a difficult meeting," assured Araoz, stating Peru had Colombia and Ecuador's support but did not have Bolivia's approval.

"For political reasons, Bolivia has rejected the Peruvian proposal to modify Decision Nº 486," said Araoz.

She affirmed this had strongly bothered Peruvian delegates because changing Decision Nº 486 was an essential step in implementing the free trade deal with the U.S.

"Peru will continue insisting," said the tourism minister. "We've asked Bolivia to consider the mutual respect that should exist between the two nations, especially in decisions that affect the country's development."

 | |

• Sports : Peru's Pan American chess champ raises $1,000 for Vietnam championship
• Law and Order : Lima University suspends students for extorting Peru businessman
• Transportation : Peru's transportation ministry hopes to reduce highway deaths 50 percent
• Transportation : Peru congress passes new law - Sets prison time for drunk driving
• Law and Order : Witness accusing Peru mayor of murder found dead

# Anonymous Dave says :
17 June, 2008 [ 17:22 ]

This story has no point being here without a good explanation of what "Decision Nº 486" is. For all we know it outlaws genocide.

# Mark says :
17 June, 2008 [ 17:44 ]

My thoughts exactly Anonymous Dave.

There is absolutely no point without telling us what this No 486 is about.

Israel, I'm sure there are lot's of us here that would like to know what this is. Is it possible we could have a follow up on this so we can form an opinion on this subject.

It is impossible to make an informed response to this article without this knowledge.

Maybe Morales has a point, but we can't tell right now can we

Mark

Peace

# Mike says :
17 June, 2008 [ 18:15 ]

The article does say what it is: it has to do with intellectual property and patents.  Probably the US wants more effort to have them protected.

# Sr. IP says :
17 June, 2008 [ 18:21 ]

Why in the world wouldn't the Bolivian government want to protect their country's intellectual property?  Oh, I get it....they don't have any to protect. 

# Mark says :
17 June, 2008 [ 18:37 ]

You're right Mike, it does say what it is referring to but the article gives no detail regarding it other than to say what you've already stated.

This is a very important agreement that will have long lasting effects for not only the Peruvian people and the US people but for people everywhere as FTAs are in the process of being finalised everywhere.

There is a hidden agenda with each and every one of these FTAs and people are unable to make informed decisions regarding them without all of the information.

If reporters can produce articles relating to these FTAs surely they can inform the public with the exact details or provide a link that will give us that info.

I'll see what I can discover out there in cyberland but my hopes aren't high

Mark

Peace

# Anonymous Dave says :
17 June, 2008 [ 18:57 ]

In all seriousness... what it probably says is something about cheap copies of drugs, I.e. Peru must make the poor pay for expensive brand names when joining the FTA whereas the CAN says the poor must be given drugs cheapily despite owners of US drugs companies starving to death. The whole CAN taking that view would make it less of a target of the US, whereas it being Bolivia's independent policy would leave them out in the open, and unlike Brasil, unable to defend themselves.

That's my guess.

# CapitanDan says :
17 June, 2008 [ 19:14 ]

Hi Friends, This FTA may never be fully implemented anyhow. The U.S. elections may end or really limit these deals. Remember Bill Clinton advocated these deals and it came back and bit Hilliary in the behind. She had to denounce them, but it did her no good. Obama's most avid supporters ( the ones that pull his strings) the Unions are completely against them.Why? The exportation of jobs to countries paying slave wages. As to Bolivia hindering or stopping something that affects the people of Peru by Invoking CAN,. It is sad ,because we as a People have given up our Destiny and our own right to self determination, by joining this coalition. Chau

# David Rockefeller says :
17 June, 2008 [ 19:20 ]

We could use our new base to force Bolivia's hand in this. If they don't bow to pressure a war could be quite profitable for the US, especially if Ecuador and Venezuela get pulled in. Yes, a lot of profit to be had.

# Mike says :
17 June, 2008 [ 19:26 ]

I don't think war is profitable for any country per se, but certainly can be for a handful of individual countries.

As to Mark - I don't subscribe to the "hidden agendas" idea on everything.  I think if we researched enough, we could find copies of these documents - treaties in the US are public.  I bet they are in Peru also.

# Israel says :
17 June, 2008 [ 19:33 ]

I apologize for the lack of information but that is all that is in the news at the moment. Decision 486 is quite extensive, here is a non-official translation if you'd like to take a look.



DECISION 486



I'll be sure to post more specific information as it is released.

# Israel says :
17 June, 2008 [ 19:46 ]

Here's an explanation given by ANDINA

The Decision 486 includes definitions regarding compensation before the use of non-pharmaceutical patents, the right for using patents protected in preparatory acts and adhesion, among others.

-link-

# Mark says :
17 June, 2008 [ 19:53 ]

Wars are profitable for international bankers as they are the entities that hand out the cash to pay for them. Which in turn own most of the major corporations that benefit from them.

Now, if the Federal Reserve are the ones handing out that cash AT INTEREST to the US govrnment. Who's making the profit? Who runs and owns the Fed?

Agendas are clandestinely hidden in the wording of agreements like FTAs amongst many others. Unfortunately the people usually only realise the damage these agreements have done to them after the fact.

These bills are put through congress with next to no public discussion before the people have time to fully understand the implications.

The free trade agreements already signed off by your government and mine (Australia) amongst many others have already had devastating effects to our economies and our manufacturing industries.

Our manufacturing industries are becoming almost non existant as we rely more and more on cheaper imports of the products we used to make ourselves. This is yet another hot issue amongst many that need to be more broadly debated about by the people they affect - US. As in you and me and the millions of workers out there who stand to be the ones who will lose out.

The implications of an American airport/base/??? in Ayacucho iare far reaching and in the long term will have devasting effects on Peru and how Peru is seen by it's South American neighbours and it's other supporters in the international community. 

America needs to be pulling out of countries they are not wanted in and don't belong instead of creating more foreign bases to support it's idealogy.

Your economy ois collaspiing. Your $ is falling. Your education system is failing. Your people are losing both their jobs and their homes. Your government is turning the constitution into toilet paper and creating a new class of poor whilst your middle classes are being robbed of their wealth, but your government still cannot bring itself to admit that the American economy is in recession.

Very sad

Mark

Peace

# Mark says :
17 June, 2008 [ 19:56 ]

Thanks Israel, keep the information coming I appreciate it as I'm sure many others do as well.

On the surface looks like it is all about the protection of huge multinational corporations again and keeping the poor poor.

Can't say I'm surprised

Mark

Peace

# Splaktar says :
17 June, 2008 [ 22:06 ]

I don't think 486 has much at all to do with this.  It's just Bolivia trying to screw over Peru any way possible because they hate the US and because Peru.  Also because Morales hates Garcia because he won't join him as Chavez's lapdog.

# John says :
17 June, 2008 [ 22:09 ]

I think it is disgusting that countries like Bolivia want to continue buying and producing copies of drugs instead of the originals.
I work for GSK and I have 3 kids to put through college and two mortgages to pay. Every time an African, Brazilian or even a Bolivian patient buys a $1 rip-off rather than the original he is threatening the well-being of my family. Don't give me this BS about the drugs being too expensive, they are only as expensive as they cost to research plus my fair salary. If you don't like the price, take some herbs or something.
GSK and other drugs companies are not global charities. We are here to make money. I am glad my company and others lobbied the US Gov to include provisions in FTAs with countries like Mexico and Peru so that cheap copies of drugs can no longer be bought there. Liberals will tell you that the poor will suffer - but weren't they suffering anyway?

I applaud Peru for upholding IP rights, and wish all the best to them. To Bolivia and other evil little commie hell-holes... you will rot. I promiss you. Bring on the sanctions!

# Splaktar says :
17 June, 2008 [ 22:21 ]

I fully agree with you John.  Patents and the like need much stricter enforcement here in Peru.

# Mark says :
17 June, 2008 [ 22:21 ]

God Bless America

# Mike says :
17 June, 2008 [ 22:26 ]

I totally agree with you, Splaktar.

And, John, I agree with you - if a company or person puts time, effort, money, and brains into developing a product, they deserve to be protected and make the money they want.  If people can't or won't buy their products, the business adjusts its model and prices or dies.

And Mark, apparently you are uneducated.  All countries go through economic ups and downs.  The US is no exception, and I don't know anyone who ever claimed it was.  If people made poor personal financial decisions that lead to problems, I empathize with them, but you learn a lesson from that.  Every time there is a recession or depression, people think it is the end of the world.  It isn't.

So, getting back to Bolivia; things are not going well for them, and they will learn a lesson and evolve from that.  I fully expect Morales will be thrown out of office in August.

# drop em says :
17 June, 2008 [ 23:43 ]

I think Peru has outgrown this relationship with Bolivia and CAN.  If I recall there were problems also with negotiating a free trade deal with the EU because of the CAN relationship.  Peru is growing fast enough to be dealt with directly now as a country, they don't need politicized countries like Bolivia interfering.   Peru has a lot more common interest and future working with a country like Chile frankly.

# lewfine says :
18 June, 2008 [ 19:04 ]

Bolivia is a non-entity with its attitude.  It is a beautiful country and should capitalize on its own assets.  Why try to cripple Peru as it emerges as the 3rd most important country in SA with a great outlook on its assets and how well it is doing by capitalizing on those assets.  Push Bolkivia aside as practical as is possible and let Peru pursue its well earned destiny!!  Lew

# David says :
18 June, 2008 [ 23:51 ]

The more Peru and other SA nations bend to the American way the more they will be under there power in time to come.

This is not about helping Peru this is much more about helping the US exploit a lesser prepared nation.

Some will come out on top in all of this, I can't see it being Peru.

In short Peru needs to find economic developement from within and not cow tow to the US.

If your not screwing someone, someone is screwing you. Watch your back people.

# Walter says :
19 June, 2008 [ 01:47 ]

Great discussion, thanks to all.  US President George Washington suggested that the US avoid entanglements with foreign governments.  Peru should do the same, especially with the US whoes motives seem to reflect the agenda of the global corporate elite and preditory capitalists.

Walter

# Jeff says :
20 June, 2008 [ 09:08 ]

I have been waiting for the price on US-made cars to drop in Peru, when the terrible import duties go away because of the Free Trade Agreement.  Does this mean it's unlikely to happen in the near future?