Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Chevron Lobbyist: 'We Can't Let Little Countries Screw Around With Big Companies'
Chevron Hires Lobbyists To Squeeze Ecuador in Toxic-Dumping Case
WASHINGTON/QUITO, Ecuador - Few legal battles have been more exotic than the lawsuit tried over the past five years in a steamy jungle courtroom in Ecuador's Amazon rain forest. Brought by a group of U.S. trial lawyers on behalf of thousands of indigenous Indian peasants, the suit accuses Chevron of responsibility for the dumping (allegedly conducted by Texaco, which Chevron bought in 2001) of billions of gallons of toxic oil wastes into the region's rivers and streams. Activists describe the disaster as an Amazon Chernobyl. The plaintiffs-some suffering from cancer and physical deformities-have showed up in court in native garb, with painted faces and half naked. Chevron vigorously contests the charges and has denounced the entire proceeding as a "shakedown."
But this spring, events for Chevron took an ominous turn when a court-appointed expert recommended Chevron be required to pay between $8 billion and $16 billion to clean up the rain forest. Although it was not the final verdict, the figures sent shock waves through Chevron's corporate boardroom in San Ramon, Calif., and forced the company for the first time to disclose the issue to its shareholders. It has also now spawned an unusually high-powered battle in Washington between an army of Chevron lobbyists and a group of savvy plaintiff lawyers, one of whom has tapped a potent old schoolmate-Barack Obama.
Chevron is pushing the Bush administration to take the extraordinary step of yanking special trade preferences for Ecuador if the country's leftist government doesn't quash the case. A spokesman for U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab confirmed that her office is considering the request. Attorney Steven Donziger, who is coordinating the D.C. opposition to Chevron, says the firm is "trying to get the country to cry uncle." He adds: "It's the crudest form of power politics."
Chevron's powerhouse team includes former Senate majority leader Trent Lott, former Democratic senator John Breaux and Wayne Berman, a top fund-raiser for John McCain-all with access to Washington's top decision makers. (A senior Chevron exec has met with Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte on the matter.) Chevron argues that it has been victimized by a "corrupt" Ecuadoran court system while the plaintiffs received active support from Ecuador's leftist president, Rafael Correa-an ally of Venezuela's Hugo Chávez. The company says a loss could set a dangerous precedent for other U.S. multinationals. "The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company," said one Chevron lobbyist who asked not to be identified talking about the firm's arguments to U.S. officials. "We can't let little countries screw around with big companies like this-companies that have made big investments around the world."
But Chevron's foes are not without their own resources. Just recently, Donziger and other trial lawyers in the case retained their own high-profile D.C. superlobbyist, Ben Barnes, a major Democratic fund-raiser. And they have tapped a capital connection that may pay off even more. Roughly two years ago, when Donziger first got wind that Chevron might take its case to Washington, he went to see Obama. The two were basketball buddies at Harvard Law School. In several meetings in Obama's office, Donziger showed his old friend graphic photos of toxic oil pits and runoffs. He also argued strongly that Chevron was trying to subvert the "rule of law" by doing an end run on an Ecuadoran legal case. Obama was "offended by that," said Donziger. Obama vetted the issue with Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy (who has long worked on Latin American human-rights issues), and in February 2006 the two wrote a letter to the then U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman urging the administration to permit the Ecuadoran peasants to have "their day in court."
The Obama letter, written before the senator had even announced his run for president, is now the wild card in the Ecuador-Chevron dispute. Donziger said he has had no further discussions with Obama on the issue (although he has co-hosted a New York fund-raiser and, together with his wife, raised between $40,000 and $50,000 for Obama's campaign). An Obama spokesman last week said the senator "stands by his position" that the case is a "matter for the Ecuadoran judicial system." So now the prospect of an Obama presidency has given additional urgency to Chevron's plea for help in Washington. Waiting until next year could leave the oil giant at the mercy of a judge in the Amazon jungle.
With Stephan Küffner in Quito
© 2008 Newsweek
72 Comments so far
Show AllCommentor Doom n Gloom has a good point. While the legal battles are one way to fight, we as humanity (the local indigenous) should come up with other (non violent) means to effect change.
Some cultures use shaming to punish. Even corporate execs are subject to embarrassment. Part of their power is in their anonymity. Even if the corporation is in a legal suit, few executives are personally held accountable. This built in shield enables them to do actions which they know are wrong but profitable.
Silence is golden... to corporations.
The last thing the people who make the decisions in a corporation want is to be held to account as PEOPLE themselves in any way. They expect anonymity - unaccountability.
We have the net.
As yet anyway.
Hey Doom n Gloom... shame them. Do a little net research on Chevron and keep us all posted. Shame them...shed some light in anonymous places.
A single person armed with the net can do what you said Doom n Gloom.
Silence is golden to corporate officers. No wonder the assault becomes concentrated on the net.
We have the net... as yet.
Snag them with it. It's legal.
Shed a little light... and join the fight.
"Chevron is pushing the Bush administration to take the extraordinary step of yanking special trade preferences for Ecuador"
It's very important for progressives to recognize the USA's "special trade preferences" for what they are - a lever of coercion, akin to blackmail. Progressives may support the people of Ecuador against the capitalists simply by continuing the systematic construction of our alternate eco/economic system in the USA - the local economy - which resonates with all the people worldwide and helps strengthen our united front in this grand-daddy of all wars - the class war. It's very important as we all know the capitalists are relentless in their quest to destroy the economic independence of all people and make them into consumption slaves, after stealing their natural resources and wrecking their ecosystems.
'"The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company," said one Chevron lobbyist who asked not to be identified'
Newsweak doesn't want to identify the lobbyist who tries to reinforce the fascist dominance of capital over people. What are they afraid of?
"We can't let little countries screw around with big companies like this-companies that have made big investments around the world."
Latin America is turning on the evil US empire - even the imperial toehold in Columbia is shaky at this point. Latin America has run the WB and IMF out too. Soon enough there will be no more Yankees to go home.
grrrr. fuck you chevron. unapologetically shitting on indigenous people and the land. "little countries...big companies", i'm gonna puke.
see you in richmond, chevron.
NO CHEVRON EXPANSION IN RICHMOND, CALIFORNIA!
Equador, Burma, Nigeria, Richmond: Clean your messes Chevron.
Yes, I'm certain that the Messiah, I mean Obama, will attend to this.
Incidentally, I was watching him on TV the other day and found myself cured, quite suddenly, of everything that was wrong with me. And everything that will ever be wrong with me. Ever. Forever.
He gets my vote.
BugsBBunny III July 30th, 2008 12:28 am -- "Will it become a world where corporations are not only declared citizens but are in effect are quasi-nations themselves?"
The power of major corporations passed that "quasi-national" stage some time ago and their combined efforts are now well on the way toward all-encompassing world governance.
Globalization and the "New World Order" are not merely semantic contrivances. In fact, the U.S. and its co-conspirators are quite sincere when they speak of bringing "freedom and democracy" to other nations. It's just that the only constituents with a voice in their "democracies" are corporate persons, not mere mortal individuals like you and me. And the "freedom" they strive to achieve relates to markets for unfettered capitalist exploitation, not human rights and individual liberty.
Billions of ignorant peasant consumers simply cannot be allowed to decide what is in their own collective best interests within discrete geographic boundaries. That absurdly "quaint and obsolete" concept of popular self-governance and national sovereignty is long dead and rotting in its grave.
I would venture to suggest, moreover, that many (most?) self-described progessives don't disagree. They just want their own (somewhat incoherent) governance values and perspectives globally to supplant those of the monied classes and their corporate instuments.
$10 Billion? Thats not even a years bloodsoaked profits...spread out over the 20 years of the cleanup, the shareholders would not even notice it.
Some top execs may have to forgo their annual new Rolls Royce, only only use their private jets every OTHER day....
'"The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company," said one Chevron lobbyist
Shades of United Fruit!!
Anyone taking bets on how soon Bush Junior delares Ecuador a "terrorist state" and invades?
One of the most constant claims expressed on this site, and in fact throughout humanity, is our choice between the lesser of 2 evils [well it would be surprising, just shy of a miracle really if we were only limited to 2] in any one event/decision.
Well here's a clue to all of you - the choice of a lesser [if not least] evil still leaves the final choice as EVIL.
Ahhh finally we have come to recognize, without necessarily understanding, that we truly live in an EVIL environment and that, on the whole, people are inherently EVIL; even if it is only a tiny evil.
Fuckin' moronic, non ?
And you do know what invariably transpires in the lives of most morons, right ?
Oh well one could get real fortunate and end up like your moronic weenie of a pressie.
About the fate of your grandchildren ! Hahahaha
Why the outrage when it has been known for nearly a century, voiced by a Presdent that the Business of America is Business . No one messes around with American Corporations particularly furriners its like messin with God. This is normal behaviour and has been for generations it is what has kept you all "fat and happy". You let Chevron get this big, you nutured it what do you expect, its arrogance has been learned right here in the good ol US of A. Talk about Booboise. Me I think those secessionists in Vermont have the right idea.
JamesHall July 30th, 2008 9:47 am -- "... people are inherently EVIL; even if it is only a tiny evil."
I suppose that would depend on one's definition of evil. The human animal is hardly unique in seeking to avoid discomfort and to maximize pleasure.
While recognizing that some measure of self-interest is essential for survival, philosophers are generally inclined toward such concepts as "the greatest good for the greatest number" or some variant thereof. Religious concepts of evil can get rather more complicated (and even quite perversely convoluted in some cases) but might possibly be summed up in the notion that evil arises from levels of self-interest that override due consideration for the impacts on others -- greed, covetousness, etc.
In either context, there would seem to be some element of "relativity". So, perhaps, it's not entirely invalid to contemplate lesser or greater evil as judgemental criteria. The tricky part is deciding how far along that path one is willing to proceed before the distinctions become meaningless for all practical purposes.
If Washington crushes Ecuador on this, I suggest they solicit help from other South American countries. A group of them can fight back causing the Bush administration to back off. This is power politics and can only be resolved with power. Ecuador needs reinforcements.
Why do any of you feel happy about Obama's money people basically doing the same thing Chevron's money people did?
GET MONEY OUT OF POLITICS. Most of the time the buyer is on the wrong side of the issue.
these lobbyists and lawyers are best for crab bait
they server no purpose for for themselves
and their masters
all need to be hung as traitors
HEMP now is the only solution
for quick results hemp seed oil
see FINOLA and hemp car and VOTE HEMP
of course Sen. Patrick Leahy is from the state that just also legalized hemp production
Texas will be the last one
Early in this discussion some wanted to know who the criminal Chevron officers were who caused this catastrophe. This was caused by Texaco, and their officials are the ones to hold in deepest contempt. However, since Chevron bought Texaco, they now must assume responsibility for Texaco's actions. We know that only average people are supposed to take responsiblity for their actions, and while it's wildly radical, I believe that the rich and powerful should be held accountable also.
when you buy a company, you buy their debts just as much as you buy their assets.
If they didn't do the proper Due Diligence and bought Texaco "sight unseen", well too damn bad. Of course I believe they knew exactly what they were buying they just never figured on an honest court in a third-world country.
Greenisgood July 30th, 2008 11:55 am wrote:
"If Washington crushes Ecuador on this, I suggest they solicit help from other South American countries. A group of them can fight back causing the Bush administration to back off. This is power politics and can only be resolved with power. Ecuador needs reinforcements."
----
Hugo Chavez is in the process of organizing a South American defense force, with the aid of Russia. Certainly Ecuador and Bolivia will go along with this. It is questionable how many of the remaining SA countries will, but it's possible that all except Columbia and Peru will. It appears the days of big stick diplomacy from the north have about five minutes remaining on the station clock.
Hugo is also organizing a development bank which will provide SA countries with services which the WB and IMF purport to provide but don't.
Great! Maybe Obama feels comfortable standing up for what's right in this case since noboby in America knows or cares about it!
"The ultimate issue here is Ecuador has mistreated a U.S. company," said one Chevron lobbyist. Ah, reminds me of our mistreatment by the Vietnamese. How could those ingrates expect us to NOT impose trade sanctions against them after we sacrificed almost 60,000 of our finest. Our carpet bombing of 3.5 million was for their benefit. This view that we can do no wrong has been around since the beginning of this beacon of democracy. It shone brightly as we committed genocide against the Indians and bought and sold blacks. Why should it be any different today? Chevron need not worry. It is likely that Correa's fate will be similar to Ecuador's former president, Roldos. Now, you would think that the CIA would try to be a little more creative than rigging another plane crash. OK. So they did exercise a little more creativity in the recent attempt to take out Chavez with a helicopter crash. Whatever happened to hemlock? Perhaps our troops in Colombia will accidentally kill him while "pursuing drug runners"; i.e. while running the drugs themselves. As for Obama? You don't get as far as he is now by saying the things Kucinich says. Remember, the definition of politics is to speak and behave in a manner that will get you elected. One can only hope that if Obama does get elected, he will THEN proceed to behave like Kucinich. And folks, that is a big IF. As Hillary noted: RFK was killed prior to his Fall elections. Now, wouldn't it be droll of Obama also died in a plane crash? On the other hand, if he happened to be flying with Correa, the CIA might just accept such lack of creativity.
As I recall, Chevron (and formerly Texaco) claims that they did fund the cleanup and previously paid the Ecuadorian government but basically nothing was done. A subsequent company took over these operations and the pollution has continued. The Ecuadoran government is now seeking compensation to cleanup the pollution. Of course, the Ecuadoran court will decide which side prevails and where truth and justice lay. I hate to ruin Mr Isikoff's perfectly good Big Oil rape-the-earth and F*%K-the-little-people story with these minor details, but I admit I am naive to think that the reporter was trying to report a story in any sort of balanced way.
Point of clarification: It was not a group of US trial lawyers nor the Ecuadorian government that brought this class-action suit against Chevron. Rather, a citizen-activist, Luis Yanza, founded the Amazon Defense Front on behalf of 30,000 inhabitants of the Ecuadorian Amazon that have been affected by the toxic waste that Texaco left over 30 years ago. Pablo Fajardo, who is from one of the affected communities is the lead lawyer in the case. His story is told in "Jungle Law", the cover article of the May, 2007 issue of Vanity Fair. And these two men received the prestigious Goldman Award for their work. Check it out at http://www.goldmanprize.org/2008/centralsouthamerica
The US just plain doesn't get it why it is so hated all over the planet. Stop stealing, start minding your own business and most importantly, start cleaning up your own backyard. Plenty of shit in it.