"El Presidente." Image from Allan Sanders "Loopland." (Click to check out his gorgeous illustration portfolio.)
Marcelo Bucheli – of the University of Illinois at Urbana and Champaign College of Business – published a fascinating paper on the relationship between the United Fruit company (Chiquita) and Latin American dictatorships. Here’s the abstract:
“The US multinational United Fruit Company has been considered the quintessential representative of American imperialism in Central America. Not only did the company enjoy enormous privileges in that region, but also counted on authoritarian governments in dealing with labor unrest. The literature assumes that United Fruit and the dictators were natural allies due to their opposition to organized unionism. This paper shows that this alliance could only survive as long as the multinational provided the dictators with economic stability for the country. However, when the multinational proved to be incapable of doing that, the dictators allied with the working class to confront the multinational and extract higher rents from it.”
Bucheli is one of the most respected and thoughtful banana scholars out there. His work was primary source material for my book. You can read the whole paper (PDF download) here. (Thanks to Steven Kinzer, another primary source, for the link.)
For decades, there have been calls for justice on the industrial plantations – and in the nations that support them – for banana workers. Progress has been spotty, at best, mostly because of a disconnect between those laborers and consumers of the world’s most popular fruit. The Banana Land Campaign is a new effort to create that connection, and – unlike some others – it offers very concrete steps toward that goal. The Campaign is focusing on Colombia, where Chiquita (and possibly Dole) have made payments to terrorists, and where there’s a long history of banana-related bloodshed (see earlier posts on that topic.) Here’s a video from Jason Glaser – director of an in-progress documentary called “The Affected” – and one of the organizers of the campaign.
These are the campaign’s “Six Things You Can Do” to help make the changes that just about anyone who knows banana history need to happen:
2. Write or callDole and Chiquita’s (Chiquita doesn’t provide a email but you can write them on here) Corporate Social Responsibility Departments and ask them to make meaningful compensation to the victims of AUC (United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia) violence in the banana lands and improve their labor relations. For US citizens: Write your congressperson and Senator. There is already an investigation by Congressman Bill Delahunt of Massachusetts. being pursued in relation to Colombian paramilitary payments made by U.S. companies. However, more pressure is needed if we want to see results. Apathy gets us nowhere, only by demanding action from your government and expressing your disdain for what Dole and Chiquita have engaged in will your government see the value in pursuing this issue. You pay their salaries through your taxes, PUT THEM TO WORK!
CSR Department for Dole: dole_consumercenter@na.dole.com
Sylvain Cuperlier
Vice President – Director of Worldwide Corporate Social Responsibility
Dole Food Company, Inc.
+33 (0) 1 44 17 30 60
Write Massachusetts Congressman Bill Delahunt and let him know you think it’s important that he continue his investigation into this issue: William.Delahunt@mail.house.gov
Washington, DC
2454 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
202-225-3111
Fax: 202-225-5658
South Shore Office
1250 Hancock Street
Suite 802-N
Quincy, MA 02169
617-770-3700
Toll-Free: 800-794-9911
Fax: 617-770-2984
Cape and Islands Office
146 Main Street
Hyannis, MA 02601
508-771-0666
Toll-Free: 800-870-2626
Fax: 508-790-1959
3. Travel directly to the affected areas in Colombia. Witness For Peace and other groups are beginning delegations to the banana zone. Here you can see first hand what has occurred and work with local experts on coming up with solutions for the affected communities. For more information visit the Witness For Peace Delegations to Colombia website.
4. Volunteer for the campaign and use your talents to help bring a solution for the affected workers and families. We have space for generalists and specialists in tech, public relations, research, outreach, education, networking and more. Are you an artist? Create a piece related to this issue and we will feature it on our website. Only with a dedicated network of volunteers can we make this campaign a success. Contact Brenna McLaughlin at bl.campaign@gmail.com for more info.
5. SupportLa Isla Foundation through a donation. La Isla Foundation is coordinating the campaign and needs your support. If you don’t have money but have time you can organize a fundraising event for the campaign and the affected communities. No donation is too small, the key to success is broad based support. Contact Jason Glaser at laislafoundation@gmail.com to donate or organize an event. Soon you will also be able to donate directly at: bananalandcampaign.org
6. Eat locally as much as possible. It’s nutritious, it can be a lot of fun, it’s great for getting to know your area and community better and it takes the demand away from industrialized food and the nasty consequences it brings. (Note from Dan: Not so sure on this one, but…)
The campaign will be kicking off December 6, 2009, with a party/premiere at The Harlem School of the Arts in New York City. Open bar, music, and speakers (including me; my talk will almost certainly be made more fascinating by the free drinks.) I’ll have some comments on the campaign’s goals after the event. I hope to meet you there.
PLUS: See the film in New York Wednesday, October 21, at 7:15 PM. Details here.
But still not cuddly. Image: Fresh Plaza
After pressure from the Swedish government - efforts to boycott the banana company were underway, with a strong chance they would spread to other EU nations – Dole dropped a lawsuit it had filed against Swedish filmmaker Fredrik Gertten and his film, “BANANAS!*”, which tells the story of the company’s pesticide use in the 1970s and the damage that practice inflicted on Nicaraguan workers.
Here’s the full text of Dole’s statement:
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, CALIFORNIA – October 14, 2009 Dole Food Company, Inc. today announced that it is dismissing its defamation lawsuit against filmmakers Fredrik Gertten, Margarete Jangård and WG Film AB in the Los Angeles Superior Court, relating to the film BANANAS!*.
Dole made its decision in light of the free speech concerns being expressed in Sweden, although it continues to believe in the merits of its case. Dole strongly believes in freedom of speech and expression, which are so important in Sweden and the United States. [Emphasis added. Dole's view of our own First Amendment rights is, apparently, mostly, afterthought.]
“While the filmmakers continue to show a film that is fundamentally flawed and contains many false statements we look forward to an open discussion with the filmmakers regarding the content of the film,” said C. Michael Carter, Dole’s Executive Vice President and General Counsel.
I wrote about Dole’s financial motivation for suppressing in Sweden’s Dagens Nyheter newspaper earlier this month; the English version of the story is here. While this is a great win for the film, the question that has to be asked is why it took Swedish concerns about free speech to kill the court action. Unfortunately, I can answer that: institutions in the U.S. – ranging from our government to the Los Angeles Film Festival (which shamefully caved to Dole pressure and disavowed the film, a measure that seems all the more cowardly given this news), as well as much of our national media - generally didn’t see the banana company’s action as something worth questioning, let alone resisting.
What next? Well, if you happen to be in New York, you’ll have a chance to see the film this coming Wednesday, as part of the CMJ Music Marathon and Film Festival. Gertten will be there to answer questions (I’m going to be in attendance, as well.) One hopes that U.S. distributors will now be more open to putting the film in widespread circulation.
It is important to remember that the Nicaraguan story continues, and Dole’s attempts to discredit those who’d hold it responsible for its actions remains underway, too, as the below ad, auto-placed alongside the Los Angeles Times account of the lawsuit’s end, shows.
One more thing: the Dole release states that the company “is dismissing” the lawsuit. Actually, the proper term is “dropping.” Only a judge can dismiss a suit, something that comes with finding that suit invalid. Standard corporate press release nano-literacy or Freudian admission of the dopiness of the strategy to begin with?
The Democracy Now radio program interviewed Nicholas Kozloff, who argued that there’s a Chiquita connection in the current Honduran political crisis, which saw President Manuel Zelaya deposed in either a coup or a constitutional emergency, or both, depending on which side you’re on, in June. The banana industry once made Honduras its largest exporting nation; that changed with Hurricane Mitch, in 1986, which devastated the crop, but there’s still a huge plantation network there. Here’s what Kozloff had to say:
“…there’s this revolving door of Washington insiders that are supporting companies like Chiquita banana. I just wrote an article about Chiquita, formerly known as the United Fruit Company. And, you know, throughout history, Chiquita banana has had enormous sway and power over Central American nations.
And we know that prior to the coup d’état in Honduras, Chiquita was very unhappy about President Zelaya’s minimum wage decrees, because they said that this would cut into their profits and make it more expensive for them to export bananas and pineapple. And we know that they appealed to the Honduran Business Association, which was also opposed to Zelaya’s minimum wage provisions.
And we also—and what I find really interesting is that Chiquita is allied to a Washington law firm called Covington, which advises multinational corporations. And who is the vice chairman of Covington? None other than John Negroponte, who your previous guest mentioned in regards to the rampant human rights abuses that went on in Honduras throughout the 1980s. So I think that’s a really interesting connection.”
As I’ve pointed out earlier, assertions like this have fundamental credibility, because the banana industry’s business model absolutely mandates cheaply-produced product. Chiquita and Dole would collapse if they couldn’t sell this perishable fruit, transported from thousands of miles away, for less than any other fruit – even locally grown apples – in the supermarket. That’s why Dole sues filmmakers whose work might rally support for lawsuits brought by injured workers; and why the banana industry has been involved – time and again – in coups, bribery, payoffs, and general skullduggery (tons documented in my book and this site. Here’s a link to one of the more recent incidents.
CBS’s “60 Minutes” reran its May, 2008 segment, called “The Price of Bananas,” on Chiquita’s payments to a Colombian paramilitaries. New information included the extradition of a member of that group to the U.S., confirmation by additional sources, and the expansion of an investigation of similar alleged payments made by Dole.
I just got back from a trip to the Democratic Republic of Congo, where I was on assignment for National Geographic. More on that in the coming weeks. We were in the central part of the country. Eastern Congo – along the borders of Uganda, Tanzania, and Rwanda – has been locked in fighting for years now, and the battles have ratcheted up since last August, resulting in a huge humanitarian crisis, with hundreds of thousands of people being forced into refugee camps, along with thousands of deaths.
The region is where people depend on bananas as part of their diet more than anywhere else in the world, and the fruit there is being attacked by what is probably the most virulent banana disease: a fungus bacterium called Xanthomonas wilt. Its spread can be slowed through clean-farming techniques – making sure tools and clothing are kept free of dirt as they move from village to village – and there have been extensive informational campaigns designed to carry this information to local families, who would face starvation if the disease hit their crops.
The image above is of Laurent Nkunda, the leader of the Congolese rebels. It appeared last year in the pages of a magazine called Jeune Afrique (Young Africa). He’s vowing that he will take his forces all the way to Kinshasa, the Congolese capital. His fortunes have since changed, but the disease hasn’t – and the poster behind him, which advertises how to stop it, will probably outlast his reign.
Update: Nkunda’s reign is over. He was arrested yesterday in Rwanda, his former state sponsor. The Guardian has a good piece on it.
Two of the world’s biggest banana companies, the American chemical companies who supply them, along with several other companies they do business with, are being sued by pilots, ground crew, and residents of the Ecuadorian plantation town of Puerto Viejo for health damage they allegedly suffered during years of spraying of Mancozeb, a fungicide used to combat Black Sigatoka, the most common and costly disease affecting commercial bananas.
The suit was filed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (Washington, D.C.) on September 18, 2008. It names Dole, Monsanto, Dupont, Dow Chemical and Noboa – which markets bananas in the U.S. under the “Bonita” brand name – as primary defendants, and accuses them of using the chemical despite knowing that it would cause birth defects, cancer, and respiratory and fertility problems among banana workers and their families.
Mancozeb is listed by the Pesticde Action Network as having “toxicity to humans, including carcinogenicity, reproductive and developmental toxicity, neurotoxicity, and acute toxicity.” Mancozeb is a fairly common garden fungicide, and the U.S. EPA regards it as safe, but only in small quantities and with proper protective gear and usage. The suit alleges all were lacking.
The suit is one of several that banana companies are facing and have faced in U.S. courts for their actions overseas. Last year, Dole received a mixed verdict in a similar pesticide suit involving Nicaraguan workers, with some receiving damages, and some charges being dismissed. Chiquita is currently being sued by families who allege that payments the company made to Colombian terrorist groups directly funded activities that led to the deaths of their loved ones.
Eric Holder, Chiquita defender and Obama pick for U.S. Attorney General.
I’ve gotten dozens of emails in the 48 hours since Eric Holder emerged as President-elect Barack Obama’s choice as U.S. Attorney General. To summarize: Holder is a former deputy U.S. attorney general in the Clinton administration who has been described as a “long-time Obama advisor.” He was part of the committee that helped Obama choose Joe Biden as vice-presidential nominee. Holder would be the nation’s first African-American attorney general. He’s currently in private practice with the law firm of Covington & Burling, which is where the banana trouble begins.
Here’s the key part of the Wikipedia page on Holder that explains it (I urge you to read the whole entry, which summarizes his entire career.)
“In 2004, Holder helped negotiate an agreement with the Justice Department for Chiquita Brands International in a case that involved Chiquita’s payment of “protection money” to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, a group on the U.S. government’s list of terrorist organizations. In the agreement, Chiquita’s officials pleaded guilty and paid a fine of $25 million. Holder represents Chiquita in the civil action that grew out of this criminal case.”
The civil action mentioned in the article is a lawsuit on behalf of the families of seven missionaries who were murdered by Colombia’s United Self Defense Forces (AUC). The suit alleges that since Chiquita was funding the AUC at the times the killings occurred, the banana company bears some responsibility for them.
I agree, and I’ve blogged about the issue numerous times. Here are links to some of the previous entries:
In May, the CBS News program “60 Minutes” did a segment on the Colombia-Chiquita story. It included an interview with Chiquita CEO Fernando Aguirre. Read (and view the interview) here.
Here’s the entry about the lawsuits that Holder and his law firm, Covington and Burling, are defending Chiquita against.
The families of U.S. victims of the AUC aren’t the only ones suing Chiquita. Similar cases have been brought by 400 Colombian families. My November, 2007 entry on is here.
So what to do about this?
Silence isn’t an option. Anyone who reads this blog knows where my political sympathies lie. I was, and remain, and Obama supporter. I know that the Washington merry-go-round – and especially when it comes to attorneys – makes for strange bedfellows. I don’t know if I’d excuse the fact that Holder represented Chiquita in negotiating the terms of the fine it paid to the Justice Department. But I know that representing the company against the families of the AUC victims is inexcusable. As my colleague Jason Glaser – whose upcoming documentary, “The Affected,” directly illustrates how dangerous the lives of banana workers in Latin America are, even when they don’t have to deal with terrorism – notes, “isn’t it about time we have a lawyer in [the U.S. attorney general's] position from a plaintiff’s firm [italics mine], someone who may have at one time served the interests of a mammal as opposed to a corporate entity?”
The liberal/progressive community is going to do a lot of hand-wringing about this. It needs to do more. We elected Obama – and we need to keep him honest. To fail to do so would be to write him the same kind of blank check that supporters of the previous administration handed over to the officials they elected. Holder owes us an explanation, though I don’t see how any words from him could be convincing – especially to those in Latin America whose trust we have already lost. Getting Chiquita to agree to agree to full disclosure and restitution would be an appropriate way for Holder to spend his remaining weeks in the private sector – and a good start.
So here’s what to do.
First, learn about Holder – not just about his actions regarding Chiquita, but his entire career. Decide for yourself whether he deserves a pass. Then, use the network – the one we used so successfully to get Obama elected. Blog, Twitter, and email the links about Holder that you think are most important, good or bad (my Twitter handle is “soulbarn”, if you want to follow my posts.) The point is to make sure the information gets out there. The most important thing we can do right now is establish, early, that transparency is one of the things we voted for on November 4th. Our ability to spread this information quickly, and spark a public debate about it – rather than use this information simply in a destructive way – is key.
Here are some good places to find out more about Holder, and to discuss the nomination. I invite you to add more links in the comment thread.
Dan Kovalik, in the Huffington Post (11/18/08), not mincing words. Headline: “Lawyer for Chiquita in Colombia Death Squad Case May be Next U.S. Attorney General.”
Discussion thread at Democratic Underground forums.
Slate’s “Bananas of Mass Destruction” (2007), including Chiquita’s court filings.
“The Trouble With Eric Holder,” from The Nation, 11/18/08. Not just bananas – Holder, according to the story, also has some Patriot Act issues.
“Preliminary Facts and Thoughts About Eric Holder,” from Salon, 11/18/08. A still-being-updated, roundup on Holder’s dealings, positive and negative.
Do you enjoy reading the Banana Blog? Consider making adonationto help keep the flow of banana news coming. Orbuymy book.
The biggest news item I avoid in this blog are banana trade wars. That’s because it would take me thousands and thousands of words to explain why the U.S., Europe, and the big banana companies have been fighting for years over who gets to sell bananas where. There have been resolutions that have led to no resolutions, problems that have led to more problems, and lots of ugly behavior on both sides. Suffice it to say that the whole thing is corrupt, and that none of it really affects whether or not bananas show up on store shelves (though it does affect where those bananas come from, and prices, as you’ll see, below.) The problem is that when you enter the labyrinth, you just can’t find your way back. Sorry.
But sometimes, I just have to say something. Last week, Dole and Del Monte – Dole’s the second biggest banana company in the world, and Del Monte, depending on how you count, is probably third or fourth – were fined a total of $83 million by the European Union for conspiring to fix banana prices in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Sweden. These fines were good. Price-fixing is bad, and I’m always happy – we should all be happy – when banana company skullduggery is exposed.
The interesting thing about all this is who turned the Dole and Del Monte in: it was Chiquita, their rival, and the world’s biggest banana company.
This time, I won’t comment, other than to refer you to the source of the picture, above.
You really can’t help it when you see stuff like this. What does this mean? I can’t tell, because – and this is another news flash – Chiquita has redesigned its website so that it de-emphasizes bananas – and made it unnavigable in the process (I tried to find some kind of marketing info on the sticker. No luck.) But even weirder, given the company’s recent history of terrorist payoffs in Colombia – money which went directly for arms purchases – is the slogan itself. Fights for you? Does anybody at the banana giant’s corporate headquarters think about this stuff?
I would love to see some normal news come out of Chiquita – but there doesn’t seem to be much, other than an announcement of increased profits thanks to higher banana prices in the first quarter of this year.
Chiquita’s bad news leads to a bigger question. As I noted in the post before this one, Dole and Del Monte have also now been accused of paying protection money in Colombia. But it is Chiquita that is getting hammered in the media. I wonder if the company regrets going public. Probably. But the reason it is getting the beat down it is now receiving – in my view – is not because it went public. The reason is that it went public only halfway.Watch the 60 Minutes interview again, if you haven’t already. Chiquita CEO Aguirre is ducking and covering. He’s pretending to take responsibility while not taking responsibility. The company is getting hit because it is claiming to have done the right thing when it clearly didn’t, and that leads to the suspicion that it went public not because it felt that it was ethical, but because bad stuff was coming down the pike, and it needed some quick cover.
THE BANANA BLOG is about the world's most endangered - and dangerous - fruit. THE BIG PARADE is about stairways, route and transit geekery, and pedestrian pursuits in Los Angeles. ASYMPTOTES is about writing and obsession. It is new, like an abandoned subdivision about to be invaded by zombies. You can also read all the topics at once.
allan_sanders-2006-el-presidente-773353.jpg "El Presidente, by Allan Sanders")
