Bolivia announces expulsion of USAID
Bolivian president Evo Morales gestures during an official meeting celebrating May Day in La Paz on May 1, 2013. Morales announced the expulsion of USAID from Bolivia, accusing the US development agency of meddling in the country's internal affairs. AFP PHOTO
Posted Thursday, May 2 2013 at 05:13
President Evo Morales on Wednesday announced the expulsion of USAID from Bolivia, accusing the US development agency of meddling in the country's internal affairs in a new souring of often-tense relations.
The United States quickly dismissed the allegations as baseless, and said Bolivia's action showed it did not want good ties with Washington.
In a fiery speech to workers on May Day, the leftist president of South America's poorest country said the US Agency for International Development was in Bolivia "for political purposes, not social ones."
"No more USAID, which manipulates and uses our leaders," Morales said in the address in La Paz's Plaza de Armas.
He did not explain why he felt the US agency was interfering in Bolivian affairs. USAID has operated in the Andean nation since 1964.
Morales, a populist and Bolivia's first indigenous president, has been in power since 2006 and has followed a sometimes nationalist agenda hostile to Western governments and companies.
In 2008 he expelled the US ambassador and agents of the US Drug Enforcement Administration, accusing them of meddling in Bolivia's internal affairs. Bolivia is a major producer of coca leaves, the raw material of cocaine.
The United States responded by expelling the Bolivian ambassador and ending trade privileges that it had granted the country.
After a long period of frosty ties, the two countries in 2011 signed a framework agreement to normalize relations and exchange ambassadors again, but tensions remained.
US State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said Wednesday that all USAID had done in Bolivia was try to improve the standard of living there, adding that Washington deeply regrets Bolivia's decision.
"We deny the baseless allegations made by the Bolivian government," he said.
After five years of efforts to normalize relations after the 2008 crisis, he said, "this action is a further demonstration that the Bolivian government is not interested in that vision."
"What is most regrettable is that those who will be most hurt by the Bolivian government's decision are the Bolivian citizens who have benefited from our collaborative work on education, agriculture, health, alternative development, and the environment," Ventrell added.
The new US Secretary of State John Kerry had encouraged improved relations with Bolivia.
But bilateral ties suffered another blow recently when Morales said the United States was conspiring against the new government that assumed power in Venezuela after the death of his ally Hugo Chavez.
And in early April, the United States announced it was ending the financial and logistical support it had given to Bolivia's struggle against drug traffickers, although it did donate several aircraft.
In his speech Wednesday Morales said Bolivia was offended by Kerry's recent comments to the effect that Latin America was the United States' backyard.
The United States, he said, "probably thinks that here it can still manipulate politically and economically. That is a thing of the past."
Morales instructed Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca to inform the US embassy of the expulsion of USAID, "that tool which still has a mentality of domination."
USAID has worked to help Bolivia improve its health care system and also runs a sustainable development and environmental program.
Specific goals include boosting farm productivity and food security, expanding access to social services and enhancing the competitiveness of small and medium-sized companies, according to the USAID web site.
During Wednesday's speech, Morales also announced several laws to benefit workers and recalled the seventh anniversary of his nationalization of the oil and gas sector, which affected nearly a dozen foreign oil companies.
Morales, a socialist, also marked May Day with an announcement that he would nationalize Spanish-owned power company TDE
Harvard’s exploitation in Chile
Published: 29 Apr 2013
Posted in: Chile | Harvard Endowment Fund
The Crimson | 29.04.2013
Harvard’s exploitation in Chile
By KRISHNA DASARTHA and SANDRA Y.L. KORN
Agrícola Brinzal is a Chilean logging company currently facing lawsuits for
felling 189 acres of native forest and then reforesting with foreign tree
species. The corporation’s practices, which include growing water-intensive
eucalyptus trees, have been accused of harming both the environment and nearby
communities. According to a recent university tax
filing from 2011, Harvard
owns 99.99 percent of Agrícola Brinzal, which generated more than half a
million dollars in income for our endowment. As students who benefit from the
profits of this company’s business model, we are disturbed that Harvard has
stood by as Agrícola Brinzal has been accused of degrading the environment and
neglecting local laws.
Like many universities, Harvard funds much of its staff and faculty salaries, student financial aid, operating costs, and research budget with its endowment earnings. Unlike many universities, however, Harvard’s endowment directly owns more than 100 companies, many of them natural resource and timber companies in the developing world. And unlike most universities, Harvard directly owns at least one company that has been implicated in illegal land exploitation practices.
Last month, two investigative reporters in Chile released a report detailing the exploitative logging practices of Chilean companies owned by Harvard. The report, published by the Center of Investigative Journalism of Chile (and later translated into English), quotes a government official explaining that the scale of Agrícola Brinzal’s logging is unprecedented on the island of Chiloé. Harvard’s company has either bought up recently clear-cut land or engaged in the felling of native trees itself, and reforested that land with eucalyptus trees. Recognizing the destructive environmental effects of this deforestation, CONAF, the Ministry of Agriculture’s National Forestry Corporation, has brought multiple lawsuits against Agrícola Brinzal. The lawsuits allege that the company’s logging practices are both illegal and environmentally devastating, wreaking irreversible havoc on Chile’s prized natural forests.
Furthermore, locals have maintained that the company’s actions have been detrimental to local communities. Carlos Muñoz Grandón, president of an organization of residents living near land owned by Agrícola Brinzal, was quoted in the report stating that the company’s reforestation negatively affects local farmers: “It’s a great impact—it’s a huge one—from the fumigations to the growth of eucalyptus, because we will have huge problems with water distribution...That’s going to affect animal and milk production, which is the economic source for people here.”
In recent years, Harvard Management Company has invested heavily in the timber asset class. The University first entered the sector in 1997 based on a suggestion by Jane Mendillo, now President and CEO of HMC, and began investing in Chile in 2004. According to Harvard’s 2011 tax filing, Harvard now owns at least 11 companies in Chile. Harvard holds these companies through subsidiaries—for example, Agrícola Brinzal is owned by Phemus Corporation, one of HMC’s wholly owned investment companies that enjoysnon-profit tax status.
Despite the fact that Agrícola Brinzal is 5,000 miles away from our Cambridge campus, Harvard is responsible for its practices and the practices of all its companies. Harvard often brags about the Harvard Forest, the site of the Harvard Forest Program on Conservation Innovation, where experts investigate the destructive effects that habitat degradation and development can have on the environment and local communities. Why should a company owned by Harvard allegedly neglect the environmental regulations and practices that our University’s own researchers deem so important?
Harvard’s aggressive approaches to timber and agribusiness in Latin America are unique among universities. A recent report identified only one university endowment with direct holdings in forestry and agriculture investments in Latin America: Harvard. Our peer institutions have so far entered the markets through indirect ownership schemes and externally managed funds. We are concerned that Harvard’s problematic practices may set new standards for endowment investing.
Jane Mendillo wrote in a September 2012 message that HMC employees “fully vet potential investments and investment partners for long-term viability” and perform “legal and operational due diligence” for every investment decision. Harvard’s ownership of Agrícola Brinzal casts serious doubts on the wisdom of HMC’s current policies. HMC ought to review, revise, and publish its due diligence policies and processes before the end of the semester so we can be sure such abuses will not happen again.
As a nonprofit education and research institution, Harvard University has the responsibility to ensure that it does not negatively impact the world. If Harvard is committed to funding research, student life, and financial aid from the profits of natural resource companies, it should, at the very least, ensure that its approach to natural resource investment does not actively violate the law as Agrícola Brinzal allegedly has.
Sandra Y. L. Korn ‘14, a Crimson editorial writer, is a joint history of science and studies of women, gender, and sexuality in Eliot House. Krishna Dasaratha ‘13 is a mathematics concentrator in Quincy House. They are part of the Responsible Investment at Harvard Coalition.
Like many universities, Harvard funds much of its staff and faculty salaries, student financial aid, operating costs, and research budget with its endowment earnings. Unlike many universities, however, Harvard’s endowment directly owns more than 100 companies, many of them natural resource and timber companies in the developing world. And unlike most universities, Harvard directly owns at least one company that has been implicated in illegal land exploitation practices.
Last month, two investigative reporters in Chile released a report detailing the exploitative logging practices of Chilean companies owned by Harvard. The report, published by the Center of Investigative Journalism of Chile (and later translated into English), quotes a government official explaining that the scale of Agrícola Brinzal’s logging is unprecedented on the island of Chiloé. Harvard’s company has either bought up recently clear-cut land or engaged in the felling of native trees itself, and reforested that land with eucalyptus trees. Recognizing the destructive environmental effects of this deforestation, CONAF, the Ministry of Agriculture’s National Forestry Corporation, has brought multiple lawsuits against Agrícola Brinzal. The lawsuits allege that the company’s logging practices are both illegal and environmentally devastating, wreaking irreversible havoc on Chile’s prized natural forests.
Furthermore, locals have maintained that the company’s actions have been detrimental to local communities. Carlos Muñoz Grandón, president of an organization of residents living near land owned by Agrícola Brinzal, was quoted in the report stating that the company’s reforestation negatively affects local farmers: “It’s a great impact—it’s a huge one—from the fumigations to the growth of eucalyptus, because we will have huge problems with water distribution...That’s going to affect animal and milk production, which is the economic source for people here.”
In recent years, Harvard Management Company has invested heavily in the timber asset class. The University first entered the sector in 1997 based on a suggestion by Jane Mendillo, now President and CEO of HMC, and began investing in Chile in 2004. According to Harvard’s 2011 tax filing, Harvard now owns at least 11 companies in Chile. Harvard holds these companies through subsidiaries—for example, Agrícola Brinzal is owned by Phemus Corporation, one of HMC’s wholly owned investment companies that enjoysnon-profit tax status.
Despite the fact that Agrícola Brinzal is 5,000 miles away from our Cambridge campus, Harvard is responsible for its practices and the practices of all its companies. Harvard often brags about the Harvard Forest, the site of the Harvard Forest Program on Conservation Innovation, where experts investigate the destructive effects that habitat degradation and development can have on the environment and local communities. Why should a company owned by Harvard allegedly neglect the environmental regulations and practices that our University’s own researchers deem so important?
Harvard’s aggressive approaches to timber and agribusiness in Latin America are unique among universities. A recent report identified only one university endowment with direct holdings in forestry and agriculture investments in Latin America: Harvard. Our peer institutions have so far entered the markets through indirect ownership schemes and externally managed funds. We are concerned that Harvard’s problematic practices may set new standards for endowment investing.
Jane Mendillo wrote in a September 2012 message that HMC employees “fully vet potential investments and investment partners for long-term viability” and perform “legal and operational due diligence” for every investment decision. Harvard’s ownership of Agrícola Brinzal casts serious doubts on the wisdom of HMC’s current policies. HMC ought to review, revise, and publish its due diligence policies and processes before the end of the semester so we can be sure such abuses will not happen again.
As a nonprofit education and research institution, Harvard University has the responsibility to ensure that it does not negatively impact the world. If Harvard is committed to funding research, student life, and financial aid from the profits of natural resource companies, it should, at the very least, ensure that its approach to natural resource investment does not actively violate the law as Agrícola Brinzal allegedly has.
Sandra Y. L. Korn ‘14, a Crimson editorial writer, is a joint history of science and studies of women, gender, and sexuality in Eliot House. Krishna Dasaratha ‘13 is a mathematics concentrator in Quincy House. They are part of the Responsible Investment at Harvard Coalition.
No comments:
Post a Comment