The Bushwhacks in Mexico make first chess move to privatize Mexico's oil

[Peace Patriot]

Ever since the Bushwhacks helped Felipe Calderon steal Mexico's presidential election in 2005--which the leftist Lopez-Obrador came within 0.05% of winning-- I have suspected that the trade-off was privatizing Mexico's constitutionally protected, nationalized oil industry--a No. 1 Bushwhack agenda item--and a very unpopular idea in Mexico. The leftist opposition has thus far blocked privatization. So now they are trying to change the Constitution, reduce the number of members in the legislature, and enact other "reforms" to strengthen the president's power, so the rightwing, "neoliberal" agenda can be imposed by fiat.

The Miami Hairball's Andres Oppenheirmer of course supports this idea. You can be sure, though, that if Lopez-Obrador had been able to get all the votes counted, and had won in 2005, and then proposed something like this, in order to enact policies that benefit the poor majority, Oppenheimer and other corpo-fascist flaks would be crying...yup....

DICTATOR! DICTATOR! DICTATOR!

http://www.ihavenet.com/Mexican-Politics-Not-Economics-Sinking-Mexico-Andres-Oppenheimer.html

:thumbsdown:

[Braulio]

1. Mexico needs the investment, and technology

The Mexican government has felt a need to encourage outside investment in their oil industry ever since the Cantarell field started to decline. The best solution for Mexico is to allow private investors, because they have the money and technology Mexico lacks. The Brazilians and Colombians allow private industry to invest in their respective oil industries, and they're doing very well.

[Peace Patriot]

2. Investment in is not the same as privatize.

For instance, Lulu da Silva insisted that Brazil maintain a majority share in their new, big oil find, the profits of which will be used to benefit the poor. Brazil keeps control. Same in Venezuela. The oil was nationalized before Chavez, but the Chavez government turned a 10/90 split, favoring the multinationals, into a 60/40 split, favoring Venezuela and its social programs--through several contract negotiations. Exxon Mobil stomped out and tried to punish Venezuela for this assertion of sovereignty, but others remained and agreed--including British BP, France's Total and Norway's Statoil.

Now what do you suppose a corpo-fascist like Calderon will do, when it comes to a choice between Exxon Mobil and the people of Mexico? He'll fatten the pockets of him and his friends, and give the rest of away--just as the rightwing in Venezuela did, before Chavez.

This issue in Mexico is not mere investment. The issue is how the deals are structured and maintaining principles of sovereignty and the peoples' ownership of the resource. I've also read arguments that Mexico's state oil company, run by Mexican workers, is doing just fine, and that this whole argument that it isn't, that it 'needs' Exxon Mobil's help, is just typical corporate BS, promoted by the corporate media. We've seen it with Social Security--which the Bushwhacks wanted to turn into a Wall Street ponzie scheme (and can you imagine what would be happening now if the pensions of the elderly in this country had been been entrusted to the banksters?!). The BS is that global corporate predators and looters are "more efficient" than government. .We've seen it in the health care system debate (somehow health care can't be "efficient" without the insurance corpos--LOL!) We've seen it with other corporate privatization plots. Hell, they've privatized the US military--and what do we get? Massive looting! They loot. They plunder. They are not efficient. So I'm not inclined to believe the basic argument. But even if it's true--that Exxon Mobil & brethren just want to help Lil 'Ol Mejico--I would never, ever entrust cutting the deals to a rightwing elitist and Bush buddy like Calderon. Give me a Chavez. Give me a Lulu. Give me a Morales. And you would know that the interests of the Mexican people will be served. Calderon and his scheme to disempower the legislature and empower himself are not to be trusted.

If you give your sovereignty away, it will be nearly impossible to get it back.

[Braulio]

3. Investment IS the same thing as privatize

Control isn't the issue. In Venezuela, control had always been in the government's hands - it's a sovereignity issue. What Venezuela did by changing the investment medium was to eliminate international arbitration, and exercise CLOSER control - which PDVSA had chosen not to exercise in the past.

Today, Mexico chooses not to allow ANY form of private investment - it's a dinosaur from old times. Regarding Brazil, it allows investment and close operational control by private firms. Colombia has a similar system. Venezuela's problem is more serious, because nobody is going to invest if they're denied external arbitration - the Chavez government has shown it's too erratic and prone to nationalize private enterprises, therefore nobody in their right mind will invest large sums of money in Venezuela any more. I suspect the Venezuelan government is going to understand this point eventually, and agree to international arbitration, or they won't have much investment.

Mexico could use a form of investment similar to what Venezuela had under their old system, which worked a lot better than the system they have now. However, they should learn from Venezuela's mistakes in using such a system (there were mistakes made, but the system itself just needed fine tuning). Such a system would allow international arbitration, and control can be carried out by an oil ministry - which can exercise very close control due to its sovereign nature.

In other words, don't let the propaganda coming out of Venezuela to confuse you. They ALWAYS had control, the had chosen not to use it as much as they could have. The new system has led to LOWER production, and PDVSA is not able to carry the load by itself - it lacks the ability to do so, period. International arbitration, which has been eliminated in Venezuela, is needed by companies when investing in nations with a poor track record, which means Latin American nations in general. Neither Mexico nor Venezuela can escape this reality. Therefore nobody will invest in Venezuela (not real cash), and Mexico needs to implement something similar to what is used in either Brazil, Colombia, or what they had in Venezuela in the 1990's, to get the foreigners to invest.