bilaterals.org logo
bilaterals.org logo

Geopolitics & human rights

Bilateral free trade and investment agreements are not only economic instruments. They are tools to advance corporate and state geopolitical and “security” interests. Pro-free market journalist Thomas Friedman wrote: “The hidden hand of the market will never work without a hidden fist — McDonald’s cannot flourish without McDonnell Douglas, the builder of the F-15. And the hidden fist that keeps the world safe for Silicon Valley’s technologies is called the United States Army, AirForce and Marine Corps.”

Neoliberal globalization and war are two sides of the same coin. Throughout many parts of the world there has been little “hidden” about the links between corporate interests, globalization, and militarization. Under the guise of the war on terror, the war on drugs and “humanitarian” missions, U.S. military forces continue to back U.S. corporate and geopolitical interests from Iraq to Colombia, from Honduras to the Philippines. We can see it in the invasion and occupation of Iraq and how the US Agency for International Development (USAID) awarded “reconstruction” contracts to corporate backers of the Bush Administration. We see it in plans for a U.S. free trade agreement with the Middle East by 2013, based on imposing a network of bilateral FTAs on individual Middle Eastern governments. We can see it in the renewed U.S. military presence in South East Asia, especially in their joint exercises with the Philippine military alongside a continued wave of killings of hundreds of activists linked to movements resisting imperialism. Their mission is to make the world safe for capitalism and the U.S. empire and to crush communities and economies organized around different values and principles. Free trade and free market policies are frequently accompanied by repression of dissent.

Meanwhile human rights is invoked cynically by governments to stave off criticism of FTA negotiations with countries whose human rights record is widely denounced as appalling. Canada, for example, claims that its controversial FTA with Colombia will help strengthen its social foundations “and contribute to a domestic environment where individual rights and the rule of law are respected”. Opponents argue that this deal will benefit Canadian mining and agribusiness TNCs, at the expense of the majority of Colombians who live with daily killings of trade unionists and other activists by paramilitaries linked to the state, while adding legitimacy to the pro-US, neoliberal Uribe regime (see Canada-Colombia section).

While US economic, trade and foreign policy invokes the “war on drugs” in relation to Central America and the Andean countries, Washington has "rewarded" its allies in the "war on terror" (e.g. Australia and Thailand) by negotiating FTAs with them while trumpeting its FTA with Morocco as proof of its support for “tolerant and open” Muslim societies. And it has demanded that the governments of Gulf countries scrap their boycotts of Israeli goods as part of FTA negotiations. Other governments also explicitly link their international trade and economic policy with security and geopolitical interests. For example, the EU-Syria agreement has a special provision committing Damascus to the pursuit of a “verifiable Middle East zone free of weapons of mass destruction, nuclear, biological and chemical, and their delivery systems”.

Besides the obvious ways in which US geopolitical concerns are embedded in Washington’s pursuit of bilateral trade and investment deals, other countries are also pursuing bilateral free trade and investment agreements to further geopolitical goals. Increasingly, we can see access to energy resources (eg. oil, gas, uranium, agrofuels and water) as a factor in determining the priorities of signing bilateral FTAs for countries such as China and Japan (see Energy & environment).

last update: May 2012


Report: Human rights impact assessments for trade and investment agreements [EN, ES, FR]
A new report setting out key issues and methodologies for conducting human rights impact assessments for trade and investment agreements is now available on the Human Rights Impact Resource Centre website.
Mexico: Drug wars fuelled by free trade
In Mexico, a war involving rival drug gangs, law enforcement agencies and the national army has officially claimed 23,000 lives since 2006. The violence can be directly attributed to the corrosive impact of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Interest builds in Pacific trade zone
Momentum is building for a US-supported free-trade pact in the Pacific aimed to serve as a counterweight to China’s economic influence.
US drones prowl Mexico bicentennial
Perhaps, the most lucrative legacy of NAFTA has been the expansion of the drug trade. And the drug gangs are following the basic premises of free trade style capitalism to their logical conclusion: buy low, sell high, make profit, and eliminate your competitors.
Free trade, disputed waters
The full story of China-Asean relations is a mix of good and bad.
EU lawmakers urge probe of Colombian intelligence operations
EU parliamentarians have called on the Commission to look into Colombian intelligence operations in Europe designed to ‘neutralize the influence’ of critics of the Colombian government in parliament, the UNHCR and NGOs. EU officials fear that an investigation could torpedo ratification of the free-trade agreement, which they see as crucial support of Colombia.
EU boosts Israel ties, ignores illegal settlements
Diplomats representing the European Union have drawn up a new plan for strengthening their relations with Israel despite the expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Join the 2nd Global BDS Day of Action - 30 March 2010
The Global BDS Day of Action aims to promote a freeze or cancellation of free trade and other preferential agreements as a crucial and urgent step towards full-fledged sanctions against Israel
Human rights and the ASEAN-China FTA
Entering year 2010 is marked by the entry into a free trade area agreement between ASEAN and China, also known as the ASEAN-China FTA. Little attention was given to the possible impact of this FTA agreement to fulfill human rights in Indonesia.
Is the US ready to challenge China’s Asean influence?
Proposals by a prominent Washington senator to push the US government into a free trade agreement with Asean may be no more than a political prod to get President Barack Obama more engaged in Southeast Asia.