Corporate Collaborators
By Carlos Alberto Montaner
Wall Street Journal,
March 3, 2006; Page A11
A new economic model of a collectivist nature is emerging in parts of Latin
America with the complicity of some private-sector foreign companies. It was
first developed in the 1990s by Fidel Castro's government as a consequence
of the sudden cutoff of Soviet aid and was later adopted by Venezuela after
the rise to power of Hugo Chávez. Very likely, Bolivia will move in the same
direction. It is what Chávez calls "21st-century socialism."
In 1991, when the Soviet subsidy to Cuba -- estimated at $5 billion a year
-- ended, the demise of communism on the island seemed inevitable. Suddenly,
the Cubans' already low levels of consumption shrank by 30% to 50%, plunging
the country into a real famine. Faced with this situation -- which left
thousands of Cubans disabled by malnutrition -- Castro was forced to find
capital and know-how in the West to keep his foundering economy afloat. But
he did so without renouncing his dictatorship or the economic model based on
state monopolies tightly controlled by the government.
Quite simply, he invited foreign businessmen to become partners with his
government in "joint ventures" in which the foreign investors contributed
the capital and management while the Cuban state leased to them a docile and
cheap labor force, a sales territory and a captive market that was not
subject to the risks of competition or the conflicts of labor unionism.
To ensure that the entrepreneurs would not be the Trojan horse of feared
democratic changes, the government appointed numerous retired army officers
and members of the political police as directors and top executives of the
joint ventures. To them, the government assigned a dual mission: to make
sure that corrupt foreign businessmen did not contaminate the selfless Cuban
workers, and to watch the workers closely so they wouldn't deviate from the
noble principles of socialism.
By late 1998, when Hugo Chávez came to power, Castro already had proven that
he could avail himself of foreign capitalists to finance -- without risk --
the largely unproductive Cuban dictatorship. So the Venezuelan gradually
began to re-examine and rewrite the contracts with the foreign investors,
especially in the sector of the exploration and exploitation of oil fields,
heeding the premise of his Cuban comrade that association with international
businessmen would strengthen state-owned capitalism. Oil companies operating
in Venezuela that were affected by the rewriting of contracts included
British Petroleum, Chevron, BP, ConocoPhillips, Total, Repsol YPF and
Statoil. Exxon preferred to sell its installations to Repsol and withdraw
from Venezuela. Whereas Lenin had stated that capitalists would be willing
to sell the rope with which they'd be hanged, Castro had demonstrated that
capitalists would gladly build the gallows using the executioner's blueprint
if they could somehow make a buck.
After the presidential election victory of Evo Morales, Bolivia may be the
third Latin American country to go this route. Vice President Álvaro García
Linares, a former university professor and one-time guerrilla sent to prison
for fighting against a democratic government, said so recently in an article
published in Paris by Le Monde Diplomatique. Bolivia, he said, is going to
develop "Andean-Amazonian capitalism," in reality a new name for the old
discredited socialism. Of what does that new contrivance consist? According
to Don Álvaro, of "constructing a strong state that will regulate the
expansion of the industrial economy, extract its surpluses and transfer them
to the communitarian sector, so as to foster forms of self-organization and
mercantile development that are properly Andean and Amazonian." To achieve
that objective, which basically means to exploit the major natural-gas
deposits that exist in Bolivia, Messrs. Morales and García Linera will have
to become partners with big foreign companies. Companies that are likely to
be most affected are Spain's Repsol YPF and Brazil's Petrobras.
To participate in these joint ventures in countries where human rights and
labor laws are not respected should constitute a serious ethical problem for
foreign businessmen and investors. It is absolute hypocrisy to state that an
international entrepreneur should not invest in countries that use child
labor or violate certain ecological standards while allowing that
entrepreneur to associate with tyrannical governments that horribly mistreat
the workers and, in particular, the societies they subjugate.
For example, the foreign hotel chains operating in Cuba allow their partner,
the government, to practice a policy of apartheid by forbidding Cubans to
use hotel facilities, even if they can pay with foreign currency. According
to Delfin Fernandez, a defector from Cuban counterintelligence writing and
speaking in the Spanish media, some foreign hotels even allow the
installation in their rooms of concealed video cameras to record guests in
compromising situations that lead to blackmail. To what degree are those
businessmen participating in criminal activities? Note that it is not the
same to invest or create an enterprise in a country ruled by dictatorship as
to join the dictators and become accomplices of their misdeeds.
Business schools in the Western world usually teach courses in ethics. And
that's good, because we assume that the system of market economies and free
enterprise, the counterpart of democracy, rests on moral convictions whose
tenets are the upholding of truth, the observance of fair rules and respect
for people's dignity. If we expect politicians and professionals to behave
in accordance with a strict deontological code and demand that they be
punished if they deviate from the rules, why should we exclude businessmen
from the same obligations and standards?
International businessmen and investors should ponder hard the type of
responsibility they assume when offered a partnership in Latin America with
tyrannical governments or tyrannies in the making. It is well to remember
that some of the German companies that collaborated with the Nazis in World
War II ended up paying indemnities to the regime's victims for several
decades. Something like that might happen again.
Mr. Montaner is an
author and syndicated journalist living
in Madrid.
Imprimir
esta página