Older news

enca newsletter April 2002

WATER SCARCITY AND WATER PRIVATISATION

Throughout 2004, but particularly since the onset of the dry season in November/December, and throughout the first few months of 2005, we have been receiving regular news about water problems, especially, but not exclusively, in Costa Rica and Nicaragua.

In Costa Rica, water shortages are becoming common and a major crisis is predicted by some for 2006. Given its plentiful rainfall, this situation is strange to say the least. In various regions of the country water is turned off for a number of hours each day. For the hospital in Coto 44 in the southern Pacific zone of the country the shortage is not due to a lack of water. The water pump that supplies the hospital has been stolen, but because the pump was privately owned it is not the responsibility of the social security system to replace it.

In Guanacaste, Costa Rica's driest province, shortages are even more frequent and widespread. Here the vital liquid is sought after by agriculture (especially for rice cultivation), industry and tourism. Golf courses for the tourists seem to be springing up in Guanacaste along with the hotels and condominiums to cater for them. As a result local people sometimes have to go short of water and promised improvements in the supply fail to materialise. As Jean McNeil explains: "with hotels with golf courses being the latest development craze - a seemingly mad idea in this semi-arid landscape, environmentalists fear that the enormous amount of water needed to maintain these golf courses will be abstracted from wetlands, mangroves and other delicate habitats, whilst the locals are worried that their water supplies may be curtailed".

It is reported that "nearly 65% of Costa Rica's water infrastructure is in disrepair, with massive quantities of water being lost every day through structural defects and leaks."

In Nicaragua, this year has so far seen a host of reports in the Nicaraguan daily newspapers and in the Nicaragua Network Hotline of communities being cut off from their water supplies. In January, authorities threatened to ration Managua's water supply, and in April various barrios of the capital were reporting that their water supply was turned on only from 10 pm to 6 am. In February the village of San Nicolas near Estelí was receiving only a trickle of water from their only well which is located on private land but distributed through a hose. Other communities in the department of Estelí were also reported to be running short of water. In March, the daily newspaper El Nuevo Diario reported that eight communities in the Boaco region of central Nicaragua were experiencing water shortages. All the region's streams and rivers had dried up in the previous two months and wells were also beginning to dry up. In April stories of rivers and wells drying up continued and in Jinotepe citizens threatened civil disobedience and non-payment of water bills until their water supply was restored.

Nicaragua and Costa Rica are the two examples used here, but all around Latin America one of the most important current social battles is that being conducted against the privatisation of water. Wherever problems occur with water supply, the privatisers and free marketeers point to the inefficiency of the public sector. But wherever the water supply is privatised, prices increase and the problems of supply continue, especially for poor barrios and communities where infrastructure repair and continuity of supply are deemed by the companies to be cost-ineffective. It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the privatisation of water is effectively about converting a public asset into a private profit; and it can hardly be a surprise that there is such a widespread wave of protest against such moves when people are aware that they stand to lose both the quality and quantity of such a vital element of their lives unless they accept rapid and substantial increases in its price.

That European water companies and governments are heavily involved in the privatisation of water services in Latin America should also come as no surprise. Organisations such as the World Development Movement, Christian Aid and War On Want, among others, have for years been exposing the practice of giving aid only on condition that public assets and facilties are privatised - to the benefit, of course, of European companies. The publicity for the campaigns of these organisations are crucial to public information, and all our readers are urged to visit their websites (given below), get hold of their pamphlets and reports and distribute them as far and wide as possible. Additionally, we recommend one particular article, by Cory Schott in Mesoamerica (details below), to readers who wish to follow up the particular issue of water supply problems in Latin America. t

Notes Other references World Development Movement website: www.wdm.org.uk Also see www.dirtyaid.org/campaignpack for WDM campaign on Dirty Aid and Dirty Water. War On Want website: www.waronwant.org Christian Aid website: www.christian-aid.org.uk Cory Schott 'How Much is Clean Water Worth?', in Mesoamerica, April 2005, Institute for Central American Studies, San José. 'Water Privatisation - opposition growing', in Comp@s, Jan. 2005, Wales Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign Newsletter.

TOURISM RELATED LAND CONFLICTS IN THE LOWER LEMPA, EL SALVADOR

Throughout 2004, the Association of United Communities for the Economic and Social Development of the Lower Lempa Jiquilisco (ACUDESBAL) and Voices on the Border, a Salvadoran NGO, closely followed debates in the Salvadoran National Assembly on the Law for Natural Protected Areas. Lower Lempa community leaders are fearful that the law could be used to nationalise areas surrounding the salt mangrove forests that cover large areas of the Lower Lempa basin.

First drafts of the bill to pass the law contained language suggesting that land titles in areas "previously covered by salt water forest vegetation" could be annulled. Aspects of the bill appear to be aimed at evicting all or large numbers of inhabitants of the Lower Lempa and other coastal areas. Tourism plans for the salt forests of Jiquilisco Bay have been public knowledge for some time, and nullifying land titles in the area, as the bill proposes, would allow for land concessions to be granted by the Salvadoran government, especially to large investors in tourism for luxury hotels in the Bay area.

The 1992 Peace Accords (which brought an end to the twelve year violent conflict in El Salvador) included a Land Transfer Programme which legalised the transfer of most of the Lower Lempa lands to ex-combatants and refugees. Since that time, the Salvadoran government has repeatedly sought the removal of the inhabitants in order to return these lands to the wealthy families that had owned them prior to the civil war. Former President Armando Calderón Sol (1994-1999) tried to promote re-location in the wake of Hurricane Mitch. President Francisco Flores (1999-2004) launched a new effort in the aftermath of the 2001 earthquakes. In July 2003, during a discussion about the levées around the Lempa River, the Minister of Agriculture insisted to community leaders that their communities need to re-locate to other areas of the country. This led to demonstrations by communities on both sides of the Lempa in December 2003. Throughout 2004, communities in San Marcos Lempa cantón have suffered government-sponsored land grabs, giving legal rights to property to campesinos from other parts of the country rather than to inhabitants of these areas who have been seeking to legalise their land for years.

It is this context which feeds and justifies the fears that the wording of the proposed bill and its failure to recognise land rights in these areas inhabited by the poor are the latest attempt to re-possess these lands. Strangely - or perhaps not too strangely - the bill recognises individual land titles in other natural areas in which wealthy families have their country mansions such as Lake Coatepeque in Santa Ana.

On 30 Sept. 2004, over 300 people (mostly from the Lempa River basin) protested outside the Legislative Assembly to stimulate debate and awareness about the bill. Community leaders speculate that the bill will prepare the groundwork for transnational corporations not only to promote tourism enterprises but also to facilitate access to the local plant and animal life by pharmaceutical companies seeking monopoly patent ownership under the Intellectual Property component of CAFTA.

For updates on this issue, visit the website of Voices on the Border at: www.votb.org

ONE YEAR ON: BANANA WORKERS RETURN TO MANAGUA,

SHAME ON SHELL, DOLE AND DOW

Banana workers affected by nemagon have to protest again

Last year in Issue 36 of the ENCA Newsletter, our main story covered the plight of the Nicaraguan banana workers who had been affected by the use of the chemical nemagon (also known as DBCP) on banana plantations in Nicaragua in the early 1980s, when the chemical had already been banned in the USA. We highlighted the plight and march to Managua of the workers who were seeking the support of their government in their struggle against the three transnational companies (Shell, Dole and Dow) who were responsible for the health problems from which they now suffer. These include sterility, liver, kidney and lung damage. The workers had been awarded a multi-million dollar judgement by a Nicaraguan court which the companies found liable have refused to pay.

At the beginning of March this year the banana workers returned to Managua to protest outside the National Assembly against the non-compliance of the government with an agreement made last year for the payment of $14 million to cover the health expenses of the workers. The victims are expected to pay for medicines with their own money, even though many are too ill to work. 9,500 people were affected by the poisonings and in 2004 alone 400 died of cancers of the kidney, uterus, liver and breasts.

Last year 4,000 workers camped outside the National Assembly for several weeks in unsanitary conditions. This year 6,000 workers installed themselves in the same location opposite the government building, but this year they got themselves organised on building latrines and even showers. In one corner of the encampment they have dug a number of graves which they have threatened to use if their demands are not met. "We are returning to Managua with 107 more deaths since we signed an accord with the President last year," explained Victorino Espinales, a leader of the workers. "We have come to demand they pay us the monthly pensions we were promised as compensation for the physical and mental suffering imposed on us by the unsafe conditions we were exposed to by irresponsible owners of multinationals," stated Melba Poveda, a former banana worker now suffering from uterine cancer and other health problems as a result of her 29 years on the banana plantations.

The latest news we have is that on May 13 President Bolaños signed an agreement with the bananeros to provide them free lifetime healthcare amongst other things which include the provision of coffins. 300 bananeros chose to stay outside the National Assembly "to ensure that the government does not simply forget about this agreement as soon as we are out of sight," said Espinales. t

Sources Interview on site with Victorino Espinales and Danilo, 2.4.05. Banana Trade News Bulletin No. 32, January 2005. Nicaragua Network Hotlines, 22.2.05, 8.3.05, 15.3.05, 11.4.05, 3.5.05, 10.5.05, 17.5.05. Mesoamerica (Julia Tulba), April 2005.

SHRIMP PHARMING IN CENTRAL AMERICA

Weak International Laws Protect Companies rather than Consumers

From Public Citizen (Washington) at www.commondreams.org/news2005/0214?06.htm

The majority of shrimp that consumers eat in the United States is imported, but the international laws and institutions that govern its production and trade protect neither the consumers who eat the shrimp nor the countries whose environments and coastal communities are being destroyed by the shrimp farms, said Public Citizen in its fourth report on Shrimp Pharming.

The World Trade Organization (WTO), which enforces global rules regarding the exportation of farm?raised shrimp, prioritizes deregulation to the benefit of large corporations, and to the detriment of small?scale fishermen and coastal communities both in the producing nations and the consuming nations. In the wake of new trade negotiations on Non?Agricultural Market Access (NAMA), which target fisheries and seafood production as a priority area for greater deregulation and liberalisation, millions of people in developing nations are being threatened by the exploitation of natural systems to create more shrimp farms.

"One of the consequences of the WTO's unfair trade rules is the protection of corporations rather than people," said Andrianna Natsoulas, field director for the shrimp campaign at Public Citizen. "Traditional fisherfolk, dependent on coastal resources in these targeted countries, are fighting for their survival, while small?scale US wild shrimpers can't meet the current insatiable demand for shrimp in the United States. Giant companies like ConAgra are the only ones getting rich off shrimp production."

Meanwhile, despite the good intentions of some international agreements that call for the protection of wetlands and other coastal areas, many companies either skirt or ignore these existing conservation laws. For example, the 1971 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands, signed by 141 countries, is supposed to provide "the framework for national action and international cooperation for the conservation and wise use of wetlands and their resources." More than 300 million acres are designated worldwide for protective measures, including protection from any unsustainable aquaculture activities harmful to coastal wetlands and mangrove forests. But the resolution has no teeth, as is made apparent by the shrimp company El Faro, which is operating a shrimp farm in La Barberie, Honduras, a protected wetland on the Ramsar list, without any repercussions.

"The situation in Honduras is a classic example of how companies get away with breaking the rules - all at the expense of the people and environment where they're operating," said Natsoulas. "When the Honduran president is also an investor in a large shrimp company that operates in his country, Granjas Marinas San Bernardo, his bias causes him to turn a blind eye to the shrimp aquaculture industry. These companies tend not to be penalized when they break the rules. Instead, those punished are the people whose lives are being destroyed by massive shrimp farms that take over their land and livelihoods and force them out."

Public Citizen urges governments of countries where shrimp is produced to better enforce international conventions and resolutions that protect coastal communities from being destroyed. It also encourages countries to block WTO trade negotiations that attempt to increase market access to natural resources, such as fisheries. t

GMOs IN FOOD AID TO CENTRAL AMERICA

World Food Programme and U.S. denounced for the distribution of GMOs

StarLink, a Genetically Modified maize illegal for human consumption in the US, has been found in food aid distributed by the World Food Programme (WFP) in Central America. In February more than 70 environmental, consumer, farmer, human rights groups and unions from six Central American and Caribbean countries denounced the presence of unauthorized Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in food aid distributed by the WFP, and in commercial imports of food originating mostly from the US. The organisations have requested the WFP to recall all food aid containing GMOs immediately.

Food aid has been identified as the main gate for the introduction of GMOs in the majority of the countries of the region. "In Nicaragua our farmers produce enough food and the WFP should buy any needed food within our country, instead of using imported food with GMOs", said Julio Sánchez from Centro Humboldt in Nicaragua.

Samples of maize and soy, taken from food aid and commercial imports distributed in Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic, were sent to Genetic ID, an independent U.S. laboratory, to verify whether GMOs were present. In more than 80% of all samples sent to the laboratory, GMOs were identified and the presence of GMOs in one of the samples was greater than 70%.

StarLink has never been authorized for human consumption anywhere in the world due to scientific concerns that it could cause potentially severe allergic reactions. This maize was initially authorized for animal feed, but in 2000 it was found in human food products and authorities immediately removed it from the market and banned its cultivation altogether. Subsequently, it was found in Japan and Korea and was also immediately recalled. In 2002, it was also found in USAID food aid sent to Bolivia.

"It is not acceptable that a maize which is illegal for human consumption in the U.S. is distributed in our country. The appearance of StarLink contamination four years after it was banned clearly shows that genetic engineering of food is unpredictable and out of control", added Mario Godinez of CEIBA in Guatemala.

Commercial imports of food containing maize and soy, mostly from the US, were monitored in Costa Rica and the Dominican Republic, countries which are not food aid recipients. Over 75% of all the samples sent to the laboratory tested positive. "The confirmation of the presence of GMOS clearly shows that Costa Rica urgently needs a moratorium. In order to protect our population it is of the utmost importance now more than ever to apply the precautionary principle", said Fabián Pacheco of the Social Ecology Association in Costa Rica. t

For more information visit: http://www.humboldt.org.ni/ For more information contact: In Nicaragua, Julio Sánchez, Centro Humboldt?FoE Nicaragua, biodiversidad@humboldt.org.ni (Spanish) or Juan López, Friends of the Earth International, (Spanish, English, French, Italian) In Guatemala Mariano Godinez, CEIBA?FoE Guatemala, ceibauno@terra.com.gt (Spanish) In El Salvador, Ricardo Navarro, CESTA?FoE El Salvador, cesta@cesta?foe.org (Spanish, English) In Honduras, Francis Osorio, Madre Tierra?FoE Honduras, atoldeelote@hotmail.com (Spanish) In Costa Rica, Isaac Rojas, COECOCEIBA?FoE Costa Rica, gavitza@rasca.co.cr , and Fabián Pacheco, AESO,

A YEAR IN PANAMA'S ENVIRONMENT

In April 2004, a report on Panama's environment recorded that of 729 companies that dump waste water in Panama's rivers, 483 of them dump unfiltered sewage; only a very small proportion of the 400,000 tons of solid waste dumped in Panama every year is recycled; deforestation within national park areas is proceeding apace; and a large oil spill affected the Isla Galeta in the province of Colón. Then at the end of the year the governments of Colombia and Panama revived plans to finish construction of a 54 mile stretch of the Pan-American Highway through the Darién Gap, threatening biodiversity and indigenous land rights. Opposition to the plan from environmentalists is strong and in the 3rd Annual Conference for the Conservation of Nature, held in Thailand, conservationists named the Darién Gap as one of the world's 25 top hotspots for global diversity and pleaded with both governments not to complete the road.

2005, however, saw a number of initiatives in favour of the environment. The country's National Environmental Authority (ANAM) launched a campaign to safeguard endangered species from poachers, to deter nest-robbing and the use of chemicals and explosives in fishing. The campaign uses environmental education through radio and newspaper advertisements, organises a programme of vigilance by the public and employs guards to supervise areas inhabited by endangered species. Alike with other Central American nations, Panama suffers from two types of poachers: those who are forced to poach through economic necessity and those who hunt endangered species for personal entertainment.

In January, new Panamanian President Martin Torrijos passed the Law for Crimes Against the Environment, a law that had first been proposed in 1999. The law provides for penalties of imprisonment for the irreversible destruction, extraction, contamination or degradation of natural resources, penalties which can be substantially increased if the damage occurs in an environmental area deemed to be historically, biologically or scientifically valuable. The law also covers damage produced by construction projects, the intentional diversion of rivers and the burning of vegetation that results in soil ersoion. In May another law was passed creating a marine sanctuary for whales migrating along the Pacific coast of Panama, "a historical success for Panama and the international environmental community" in the words of Panama City's mayor, Juan Navarro.

Despite the good start to 2005, however, the Darién Gap continued as a focus of concern for environmentalists, not just because of the Pan-American Highway plans but also because of an electrical integration project between Panama and Colombia. Four possible routes for transmission lines have been identified by Colombia's state-run electricity agency, ISA, and its Panamanian counterpart, ETESA. All four routes for the new transmission lines would require the construction of large towers on land, which together with the electricity lines themselves would pose a serious threat to the biodiversity of the region. Two of the routes pass entirely over land, whilst the other two use a combination of land and underwater routes.

Further threats to the environment include the government's proposed sale of part of the forest surrounding the Panama Canal, generating a dispute between those who wish to preserve the forests and those who see them as a source of revenue. Under US authority until the year 2000 when its control was transferred to the Panamanian government, development was forbidden in the Canal Zone - apart of course from the development of US military installations. Campaigners for the protection of the forest now accuse government authorities of ignoring the imperative of conservation and selling out to developers. Pressure on the government is high, however, not just from environmentalists but also from the world of commerce. The income from the canal is crucial to Panama's economic wealth and the forests in the surrounding zone are vital to keep it free from silt and obstructions. Dr. Michael Roy of Conservation Research Education Action said: "The trees and roots act as a sponge slowly releasing water into the canal, which is important during the dry season when the canal is dependent upon rainfall from the previous rainy season."

ENCA will keep a watchful eye on the rest of this year's developments in Panama's environmental ups and downs.

Sources: Mesoamerica, Vol.23 (nos. 5, 12); vol.24 (1,2,3,4,5).

COSTA RICAN COURT ANNULS GOLD MINING CONCESSION

In December 2004 it was reported by The Tico Times that Costa Rica's highest court annulled a US$70 million concession to allow Industrias Infinito, a local subsidiary of a Canadian company, to mine gold at Las Crucitas near the Nicaraguan border. Judges upheld an injunction filed by environmentalists in 2002 to block the mining project on the grounds that it violated the Central American Biodiversity Agreement as well as the country's constitution.

Industrias Infinito had estimated that a fully operational mine at Las Crucitas could one day uncover as much as 600,000 ounces of gold worth about US$435 million and claimed that the project would not harm the environment. FECON, the Costa Rican Environmental Federation, on the other hand, declared the ruling a victory. t

For more information, visit: www.feconcr.org

Marina Puesta Del Sol, Nicaragua

By Martin Mowforth The Marina Puesta Del Sol is located in the Pacific coastal community of Aserradores in the Cosigüina Peninsula of Nicaragua. The Cosigüina Peninsula is an agricultural area characterised by rural poverty surrounded by coastal communities such as Aserradores in which most families have traditionally made their living by artesanal fishing and small-scale shrimp farming. Few of the 143 communities in the area have electricity and outside the main town of El Viejo the water supply is from wells or rivers and the most sophisticated sanitation system is a sump latrine. The village of Aserradores has a population of approximately 500.

The Marina Puesta Del Sol is the project of Roberto Membreño, a millionaire US businessman who was born in Nicaragua. Begun in the year 2001, the marina and hotel complex, when finished, will have around 200 berths (which is small by modern yachting marina standards), and a hotel offering 260 beds, a driving range, a golf course, swimming pool, tennis courts, air strip, helipad, restaurants, shops and many other smaller facilities for guests. The hotel currently (early 2005) has 33 luxury suites.

Although the development has other investors, Mexican and North American, it is closely and personally identified with Señor Membreño, a personal friend of Enrique Bolaños, the Nicaraguan president. The development is rumoured to involve an investment of at least US$100 million on the part of Sr. Membreño.

The care and thoroughness with which the construction work is carried out and the few yachts that have so far berthed there suggest that this will be a resort from which even the mildly rich might find themselves excluded on economic grounds. But Membreño has been keen to focus some of the propaganda and publicity about his project on the benefits to the local community. Interviewed on site in May 2003, he remarked not just on the quality of workmanship but also pointed out the spin-offs for the local workmen: "Look at this. It's superb. My carpenters from Corinto have taught the local workers to do things like this. They have skills now that they could not have dreamed of before". Moreover, consider this endorsement from two of his yachting guests referring to Membreño and one of his event organisers, Gene Menzie: "these guys care at least as much about the local people as they do about profits. We've talked to Membreño a number of times, and he's giddy about the project in a large part because of the employment and educational opportunities it is and will afford the locals".

Membreño recognises that few of the locals will be able to provide the services he requires for his guests in Marina Puesta Del Sol without training. He argues forcefully, however, that not only are the benefits of his seafaring tourism development trickling down to the locals through the construction phase of the project in which some of them are hired as labourers and trainees, but also that some of them can be trained as service providers, attendants and in other posts when the development is fully up-and-running. He also believes, credibly, that a development such as Marina Puesta Del Sol will give rise to a range of other related businesses in the vecinity. There is little doubt that the potential for this kind of benefit in the community is great, and it is hard to find anyone in Aserradores who does not acknowledge that some local people have benefited and will continue to benefit through employment in the development.

It is not difficult, however, to find local opposition to the marina - the story of Marina Puesta Del Sol is not as clear-cut and as widely beneficial as the developer's publicity would have us believe. The development has necessitated the purchase of a considerable amount of land in Aserradores, most of which is now policed by private guards and protected by barbed wire and 'Private Property' notices. The fishermen of the community have been left with only one narrow access point to the estuary, now crowded with boats; access to the estuary and the sea is prohibited in all but a few points which are not owned by Sr. Membreño; most of the land previously owned by the Mario Carrio Chevez fishing cooperative in agreement with the municipality was sold off, in dubious and undemocratic circumstances, to Sr. Membreño; the lack of suitable provision of potable water to residents of Aserradores is a major issue for the residents, especially when set aside the luxury provision of a swimming pool and a number of hydro-massage whirlpools; two short stretches of estuarine mangrove vegetation have been destroyed to be replaced by white sand imported from the Pacific Ocean coast of the area; and heavy pressure is being exerted on one particular family to quit their land which forms something of an island surrounded by the Marina Puesta Del Sol.

On the destruction of mangroves either side of the major quay to make way for white sand brought in from the nearby Pacific coast, in 2003 Sr. Membreño was fulsome in his praise of the geologist who had assured him that the respective ecosystems would not be adversely affected. It has to be remarked, however, that it would be difficult to find an environmentalist anywhere in the world or a geologist not in Sr. Membreño's pay who would agree that such actions would have no effect. The problem of water supply in the community is probably the one issue that generates the most heated sentiment. For years the community has had problems with its water supply. Water in the wells in the immediate area is too saline to be potable and subterranean water in general in this area is too contaminated with agrochemicals to be of use. In 2003 the supply of water was identified as the highest priority for resolution by over half the population, the next major problem (the lack of electricity) being identified by less than twenty per cent. Francisco José Maliaño Molina, a former leader of the community now retired and tending his herd of goats, explains how in 2002 he sent a letter to Sr. Membreño, signed by over 80 residents, asking him to take into account in his development the community's need for potable water. He never received a reply and concludes that: "he's not interested in the community". Juan Alberto Chieres Casco, a member of the local administrative committee, relates that "members of the local committee have discussed the problem [of water suppy] with him [Sr. Membreño] and he suggested that he was going to do something about it; but we don't know when".

Regarding the land ownership in and around the community, various residents report that Sr. Membreño's supposed benevolence towards the local community has concealed his aggressive approach to acquiring the land he required for the development. The family of Max Garay in particular has felt threatened by the acquisition of land for the marina and hotel complex. Sr. Garay is one of the few Nicaraguans resident in Aserradores who own sizeable parcels of land. He explains:

"The [fishing] cooperative gave up its rights to the Marina Puesta Del Sol and the marina began to develop a hostile attitude towards various residents, including my family. My wife's uncle, for instance, was cruelly evicted from his land of which he was the legal owner. ... He [Sr. Membreño] has managed, through buying influence, to turn the illegal into the legal. ... Bit by bit he has closed down our spaces along the estuary and at his whim they have closed our access to the sea for subsistence. ... The judicial system in Nicaragua is very easy to corrupt."

Max Garay's wife, Tadea, also interjects: "I wanted to talk directly with him so that we could put all our cards on the table and tell him that I am not against his project. Our country needs progress. The only thing that I am asking is that he respects our rights." And Allan Bolt, a journalist with El Nuevo Diario, one of Nicaragua's leading daily newspapers, confirms this version of events:

"Everybody, including the Garay family, welcomed the new tourism project enthusiastically because it meant work and increasing affluence for all. But it seems that this investor has his own vision of how he wants the countryside to appear and what type of people he wants to see there, such that he has closed the public right of way to the shore (which is unconstitutional, but which the authorities have allowed), he has prohibited his employees from making purchases in Garay's pulperia [mini-store], he has tried to throw them off the Island of Aserradores (despite their land titles), and he has been supported in this dirty game by all the powers of the state. ... But if we aren't institutionally prepared, and if our officials do not work for the common good, then the big fish from outside are going to gobble up all the local fish, large, medium and small."

In this case there seems little doubt that some benefits have trickled down and will continue to trickle down to some members of the community of Aserradores and beyond. These appear to have been offset to an uncertain extent by the trickle-down of a number of disbenefits to various residents, and it is an impossible task to quantify the net effect of these different impacts. But putting aside all the verbose and eulogistic publicity material in favour of the

development, all the local criticisms against it and all doubts about the very notion of the trickle-down effect, probably the most telling comparison to make is the fact that the amount of money invested in the Marina Puesta Del Sol could have provided a safe potable water supply system for every person in the whole of the Cosigüina Peninsula. Such an investment would have spread the health and security benefits of this amount of money to a huge number of people instead of leisure benefits to a small number of people whose wealth is already great enough to ensure their basic human needs and rights. t

CAFTA UPDATE

Central American presidents are rushing to ratify the Free Trade Agreement between the United States, Dominican Republic and Central American nations, commonly referred to as DR-CAFTA. The 5 Central American nations involved are Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua.

El Salvador was the first country to ratify the agreement in December 2004, but only after members of civil society protesting against the treaty had occupied the legislative assembly. According to student activist Claudio Rosa, the right-wing Salvadoran press and ARENA government of President Tony Saca conducted "a dirty campaign of misinformation ... to create a false perception of the supposed benefits of CAFTA." Social activists, trade unionists and others opposed to the agreement admit that they lost the first battle, but say the fight is just beginning. In April, more than 5,000 protesters took to the streets to mark the end of the Week of Global Action and to deliver the message: "No to the rich and powerful who impose indiscriminate liberalisation, unfair trade treaties and general privatisation on the poor."

Honduras ratified the treaty in March this year, but again ratification was set against widespread protest. Protesters occupied the legislative chamber and held a 'popular assembly' which rejected DR-CAFTA.

Guatemalan legislators also ratified DR-CAFTA in March amidst violent protests. Several days after the ratification, over 30,000 people protested in Guatemala City to be met by tear gas and bullets; and in Puente Naranjales three people were shot dead by police in another protest.

In August 2004 a Costa Rican demonstration, called for a variety of reasons, the most important of which was dissatisfaction with DR-CAFTA, led to the withdrawal of legislation to ratify it. Costa Rica still has not ratified the treaty, and civil organisations are still holding events to express their opposition to it.

In Nicaragua, President Enrique Bolaños has promised George Bush that he will get the National Assembly to ratify the agreement, despite which relations between the President and the two main parties (the leftist FSLN and right wing PLC) currently ensure that legislation for the ratification will not be passed. Both parties have indicated that vulnerable sectors (such as agriculture, medicines, water, the environment and labour) need to be protected before they could consider ratification.

But the greatest stumbling block to passage of the treaty seems to be the United States itself where on this issue President Bush is 50 votes short of a majority in the House of Representatives.

One of the major arguments used to persuade presidents and governments to ratify DR-CAFTA is that it will stimulate additional investment, especially foreign investment. A paper by Kevin Gallagher[1] in March this year cites a 2003 World Bank study which shows that "the agreements themselves did not stimulate additional investment", and that "signing an investment treaty with the United States does not correspond to increased foreign direct investment flows."

Opposition to DR-CAFTA has, if anything, intensified rather than dissipated. This has happened largely due to the exposure to public view of its clauses from which it becomes ever clearer that those who stand to gain are the transnational corporations and those who stand to lose are the national populations.

For details of DR-CAFTA and the arguments of those opposed to it, we refer readers to the sources listed below, as well as to ENCA Newsletters 33 and 35. t

Sources: [1] Kevin Gallagher (2005) 'CAFTA's False Promise', IRC Americas, (March) www.americaspolicy.org Central America Report (Spring 2005.) Reports from the Centro de Intercambio y Solidaridad (San Salvador), 9.10.04, 14.10.04. Nicaragua Network Hotline, 10.5.05 and 17.5.05. José Eduardo Mora (29.12.04) 'The War on CAFTA is Just Beginning', San José, IPS. Mesoamerica, 24 (4), April 2005. Alfredo Carías, 14.4.05, www.unes.org.sv