Notes on the NYTimes coverage of the farm strike in Argentina

Argentina -

For a decent synopsis of the historic stand-off between the government and "el Campo" (a unified front of farmers and agricultural producers across the country -- simple translations like "the farm" or "the country" fail miserably to describe them, so I'll stick to the spanish), click below.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/27/world/americas/27argentina.html?fta=y

"The strike has led to shortages of meat and dairy products, paralyzed local grain and livestock trade and forced major exporters of Argentine soy products to renege on some contracts. Thousands of people rallied nationwide on Tuesday evening in support of the farmers. The protesters banged on pots outside the presidential palace after the center-left president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, said she would not give in to “extortion.”"*

*Strangely, the article failed to mention the more controversial event surrounding the anti-government protest. After the march arrived in the Plaza de Mayo, a counter-protest led by an ex-functionary of the last Kirchner administration named D'Elia, amassed and attacked the protesters. Fistfights ensued, and the original protesters were forced out of the plaza. It's rumored that the counter-protesters are on the government payroll. The next day, D'Elia publicly announced his "hatred" for the "bitch oligarchy" which he saw embodied in the protesters, who hailed largely from the historically upper-middle class neighborhood Barrio Norte. D'Elia was fired from his last post for being too pro-Chavez, and in this administration and the last, that's saying something.

"Argentina has been one of the world’s main beneficiaries of a global surge in commodities prices. But farmers abhor government measures like export bans and price controls, which are being put into effect to stem inflation and to increase revenue."*

*Alfonso Prat-Gay writes, for La Nacion (opinion) - "The technical sophisms with which the Government tries to convince public opinion must not hide the true motivation of the tax increase. Its been some time since the taxes left off being a financial redistributive mechanism for social policy and transformed into a weapon for the construction of power and political domination of the central government, at the expense of the provinces and in contradiction with our federal principles." Basically, that the money is being used as leverage over impoverished provincial governors, so that they stay within the official line. Why is the purpose of these measures published as a bald statement of fact in the New York Times?


"Ms. Kirchner has said the taxes help redistribute wealth in a country where nearly a quarter of people are poor."*

*Cristina Fernandez' rhetoric has vacillated between tones of recapitulation and outright invective. She has, in her own words, "humbly" asked that the farmers lift the strike; she has also accused the anti-government protesters of being aligned with defenders of genocide. In a charged speech to thousands of "kirchneristas" bussed to the Plaza de Mayo from all over the country this Tuesday, she related the current strike with the lock-out which paved the way for the military coup in 1976 that would assassinate some 30,000 political dissidents. More specifically, she accused "some people" of "wanting to go back" to that time. This did not sit well with the leaders of the agricultural delegation currently in negotiation with the government. Eduardo Buzzi of the Agrarian Federation of Argentina (FAA) responds, also in La Nacion: "And we [also] have exiles and missing persons, and people punished by this process, in Cordona, in Olavarria and in many other places. It's important that those in the Executive Power inform themselves well so that they can define with clarity who was in the coup and who they abducted and exiled."


**Today "el Campo" announced a thirty-day truce, and lifted the roadblocks early this morning. They have also warned that if the government doesn't meet their demands the truce will only be temporary; the Kirchner administration has said that it will not roll back the export tax to its previous level. Supercharged rhetoric aside, I think (I hope) that both parties are seriously invested in the negotiations. A protracted lock-out of basic staples would have wide ranging consequences in the Argentine economy, much more significant than empty meat counters in urban supermarkets, including layoffs and skyrocketing prices of consumer goods, which could cause serious unrest for a very large group of people. What is unclear at this point is whether, if the mass of Argentines effected by the potential lock-out take to the streets, they would fall on the side of the government, or reject it as the party at fault for not negotiating fairly with "el Campo".