Unless so subordinated, the semic colonial country faces the threat of social protection to which American labor has given its imprimatur, though the real interest is the valorization of imperialist capital. It's an aggressive alliance between US capital and US workers--social imperialism which is followed to its logical conclusion, no matter the horrific human consequences.
March 7, 2000
THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Don't Punish Africa
_________________________________________________________________
T here is a travesty brewing in Congress that, if allowed to continue,
will be a source of shame for all Americans. It will certainly be an
ugly stain on the U.S. labor movement, particularly the apparel union
and the A.F.L.-C.I.O. -- a stain that will highlight all the unions'
phony-baloney assertions in Seattle that they just want to improve
worker rights around the world and help the poor.
This controversy has to do with a stalled trade bill called The
African Growth and Opportunity Act. And the bottom line is this: At a
time when Africa is ravaged by AIDS, at a time when 290 million
Africans -- more than the entire population of the U.S. -- are living
on a dollar a day, the main U.S. textile union, UNITE!; the main
textile manufacturers' lobby, ATMI; and the lawmakers who bow to both
of them are blocking a bill that would allow Africans to export
clothing to America duty free -- instead of with the current 17
percent import tax.
Why the opposition? Because Africa might increase its share of U.S.
textile and apparel imports from its current level of 0.8 percent!
Shame on the people blocking this bill. Shame on them.
Some 85 percent of the garments sold in the U.S. today are already
sewn abroad. Honduras, little Honduras, already exports seven times
more textiles and apparel to the U.S. than all 48 nations of
sub-Saharan Africa combined. With our minimum wages, we can't produce
jeans that retail for $16 and we don't want to. North Carolina's
textile industry has already become highly automated and has moved
away from low-value goods to high-value, high-tech fabrics. Much of
the unionized labor force sewing clothes in the U.S. is in large
cities and comprises new immigrants, many not citizens, since most
Americans don't want these jobs.
If Africa were given duty-free access to our market, sophisticated
textile plants in North Carolina wouldn't move to Madagascar. China
would be the big loser, because Africans have the same skills to knit
cashmere sweaters cheaply as people in China, and if Africa were given
a 17 percent import tax advantage in shipping to the U.S.,
manufacturers would move their production from low-wage China to
low-wage Africa. Which is why a study by the U.S. International Trade
Commission concluded that "the impact of quota removal [for African
imports] on U.S. producers and U.S. workers would be negligible."
So why do the unions still oppose it? Sheer knee-jerk protectionism --
even though the bill has tough measures to protect against any surge
in imports from Africa, and restricts free-trade status to African
countries moving toward democracy, economic reform and real worker
protection.
No matter. ***Right now the only version of the bill the textile makers
would permit is one that says Africa can only import duty-free into
the U.S. if it first buys all the fabric, thread and yarn from U.S.
factories, then ships it to Africa to be sewn, and then ships it back
to the U.S. to be sold -- a costly obstacle course that would prevent
any new investment in African factories.*** The real motto of U.S. trade
unions is: We're for more worker standards in Africa, not more work.
This is really bad. This bill isn't a panacea for Africa, but it's
important. Throughout the history of industrialization, poor countries
have started down the road of development by sewing clothes. It's the
one thing that poor people can do right away. It's critical that this
bill go through now because by 2005 all the quotas on textile imports
into the U.S. will expire. It will be a free-for-all. Right now
investors are deciding where to locate plants for 2005 -- whether to
stick with China or branch out to Africa, Vietnam or Mexico. If Africa
is shut out from these investment decisions, it will fall even further
behind.
The Clintonites talk the talk of Africa and AIDS, but, sadly, they
have been afraid to get tough with the unions on this textile issue.
Why is AIDS spreading so quickly among young women in Africa? One
reason is that women have so few jobs they have to sell themselves to
men with AIDS. Apparel jobs largely employ women. They make a
difference.
But this is of no interest to the A.F.L.-C.I.O. crowd. All they care
about is that Africa not sell more than 0.8 percent of garments here.
Shame on them for what they are doing, and shame on us if we let them.
Copyright 2000 The New York Times Company