November, 28 2013, 07:08am EDT
Water Financialization Exposed in New Report on Eve of WTO Meeting
On the eve of a key World Trade Organization meeting in Bali [1], Friends of the Earth International launched a new report exposing how trade and investment strategies, including WTO negotiations, act as economic drivers of water financialization. [2]
The report, "Economic Drivers of Water Financialization" [3] includes 12 cases, from the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Colombia, El Salvador, England, Mexico, Mozambique, Palestine, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, United States, and Uruguay.
BALI
On the eve of a key World Trade Organization meeting in Bali [1], Friends of the Earth International launched a new report exposing how trade and investment strategies, including WTO negotiations, act as economic drivers of water financialization. [2]
The report, "Economic Drivers of Water Financialization" [3] includes 12 cases, from the following countries: Argentina, Australia, Colombia, El Salvador, England, Mexico, Mozambique, Palestine, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, United States, and Uruguay.
The cases show how many corporations, financial institutions, trade agreements and cooperation strategies are paving the way for water privatization and financialization.
The report also exposes that these factors often cause territorial conflicts while providing greater impunity and profits for the corporations concerned.
William Waren, from Friends of the Earth US, one of the authors of the publication, said:
"International trade and investment agreements threaten people's right to water. It is essential that nations that are members of the WTO and other trade and investment agreements listen to their people and stop any attempt by corporate and financial interests to turn water into a mere commodity traded on international markets. The traditional view under international law is that water is a natural resource and part of the public commons, not a good or product."
The report includes proposals from communities around the world to secure community water management and to keep water as a common good and a human right.
A key case study of this report exposes the major injustice of the water situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (West Bank and Gaza Strip), where locals suffer from structural water scarcity due to inequitable distribution.
"The Palestinian population endures significant water deficits, and most water resources are concentrated in the hands of Israel. In some places, Palestinian farmers have been forced to purchase water at high prices from water sources controlled by the Israeli Water Company. This leads to many problems, including increased production costs for agricultural crops," said Jagoda Munic, chairperson of Friends of the Earth International, who led a solidarity visit to Palestine in October 2013.
The report includes a case study from Colombia. Danilo Urrea, from Friends of the Earth Colombia, said:
"In Colombia, international cooperation supposedly focused on the development of a national policy framework for water and water management has been turned into an investment protection system. This is a huge problem which also prevents us from delivering more successful public, community-based water management solutions such as our 'aqueductos communitarios'."
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT
In Bali, Indonesia (from Dec 2 to 7): Lucia Ortiz, Friends of the Earth International Program Coordinator - Economic Justice, resisting Neoliberalism: lucia@natbrasil.org.br or skype: lucia_natbrasil
In the US: William Waren, Friends of the Earth US: +1 202 22 20 746 or email wwaren@foe.org
In Colombia: Danilo Urrea, Friends of the Earth Colombia: + 57 30 030 47 322 or agua@censat.org
In Croatia: Jagoda Munic, chairperson of Friends of the Earth International: +385 98 17 95 690 (Croatian mobile) or email jagoda@zelena-akcija.hr
NOTES
[1] For more information about the 3-6 Dec. WTO meeting visit https://mc9.wto.org/
[2] "Financialization is a term that describes an economic system or process that attempts to reduce all value that is exchanged [...] either into a financial instrument or a derivative of a financial instrument," according to Wikipedia. For more information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financialization
[3] The report is online at https://www.foei.org/water-financialization and UNDER EMBARGO until December 2, 2013 at 00:00 am CET (07:00 am Central Indonesian Time)
Friends of the Earth International is the world's largest grassroots environmental network, uniting 74 national member groups and some 5,000 local activist groups on every continent. With over 2 million members and supporters around the world, FOEI campaigns on today's most urgent environmental and social issues.
LATEST NEWS
'A Clear Breach': Watchdog Hits FIFA With Ethics Complaint Over Made-Up Trump 'Peace Prize'
Multiple rights organizations have slammed FIFA for giving Trump a "peace prize" given what they describe as his "appalling" human rights record.
Dec 09, 2025
International soccer organization FIFA has now been hit with an ethics complaint over its widely criticized decision to award President Donald Trump its first-ever "FIFA Peace Prize" last week.
The Athletic reported on Monday that FairSquare, a watchdog organization that monitors human rights abuses in the sporting world, filed an eight-page complaint with FIFA’s Ethics Committee alleging that FIFA president Gianni Infantino has repeatedly violated the organization's own code of ethics, which states that "all persons bound by the code remain politically neutral... in dealings with government institutions."
The complaint then documents multiple cases in which Infantino allegedly broke the political neutrality pledge, including his public lobbying for Trump to receive a Nobel Peace Prize; a November interview at the America Business Forum in which Infantino called Trump "a really close friend," and hit back at criticisms that the president had embraced authoritarianism; and Infantino's decision to award Trump with a made-up "peace prize" after failing to help him secure a more prestigious version.
FairSquare zeroed in on Infantino's remarks during the 2026 World Cup draw last week in which he told Trump that "you definitely deserve the first FIFA Peace Prize for your action for what you have obtained in your way, but you obtained it in an incredible way, and you can always count, Mr. President, on my support."
The organization remarked that "any reasonable interpretation of Mr. Infantino’s comments would conclude that he a) encouraged people to support the political agenda of President Trump, and b) expressed his personal approval of President Trump’s political agenda." This was a particularly egregious violation, FairSquare added, because Infantino was "appearing at a public event in his role as FIFA president."
Even without Infantino's gushing remarks about Trump, FairSquare said that "the award of a prize of this nature to a sitting political leader is in and of itself a clear breach of FIFA’s duty of neutrality."
FairSquare isn't the only organization to criticize Trump receiving a "peace prize" from the official governing body behind the World Cup.
Human Rights Watch was quick to blast FIFA last week for giving Trump any sort of peace prize given what it described as the administration’s “appalling” human rights record.
Jamil Dakwar, human rights director at the ACLU, also said that Trump was undeserving of the award, and he noted the administration “has aggressively pursued a systematic anti-human rights campaign to target, detain, and disappear immigrants in communities across the US—including the deployment of the National Guard in cities where the World Cup will take place.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Says Ground Attack on Venezuela Imminent—Plus Colombia, Mexico Also in US Crosshairs
"It's now taken as a given... that Trump is mulling a ground invasion of Venezuela and a dramatic expansion in his bombing campaign with no congressional authorization," said one critic.
Dec 09, 2025
President Donald Trump said in an interview published Tuesday that a US land attack on Venezuela is coming and signaled that he is open to launching similar military action against Colombia and Mexico.
“We’re gonna hit ’em on land very soon, too,” Trump told Politico's Dasha Burns, citing the pretext of stopping fentanyl from entering the United States.
Trump repeated his baseless claim that during the administration of his predecessor, the "very stupid" former President Joe Biden, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro "sent us millions of people, many from prisons, many drug dealers, drug lords," and "people in mental institutions."
Burns then noted that most of the illicit fentanyl sold in the United States "is actually produced in Mexico," which along with Colombia is "even more responsible" for trafficking the potent synthetic opioid into the US. She asked Trump if he would "consider doing something similar" to those countries.
"I would," Trump replied. "Sure, I would."
Pressed on his contradictory pardon of convicted narco-trafficking former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández while threatening war against Venezuela, Trump feigned ignorance, claiming that "I don't know him" and asserting that "he was set up."
Trump's latest threat against Venezuela comes amid his deployment of warships and thousands of troops off the coast of the oil-rich South American nation, his approval of covert CIA action against Maduro's government, and more than 20 airstrikes on boats his administration claims without evidence were smuggling drugs in the southern Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean.
The Trump administration's targeting of Venezuela evokes the long history of US "gunboat diplomacy" in Latin America and continues more than a century of Washington's meddling in Venezuelan affairs. It also marks a historic escalation of aggression, as the US has never attacked Venezuelan territory.
Officials in Venezuela and Colombia, as well as relatives of men killed in the boat bombings, contend that at least some of the victims were fishermen who were not involved in drug trafficking.
The strikes have killed at least 87 people since early September, according to administration figures—including shipwrecked survivors slain in a so-called double-tap bombing. Legal experts and some former US military officials contend that the strikes are a violation of international law, murders, war crimes, or all of these.
Critics also assert that the boat strikes violate the War Powers Act, which requires the president to report any military action to Congress within 48 hours and mandates that lawmakers must approve troop deployments after 60 days. The Trump administration argues that it is not bound by the War Powers Resolution, citing as precedent the Obama administration's highly questionable claim of immunity from the law when the US attacked Libya in 2011.
A bipartisan bid to block the boat bombings on the grounds that they run afoul of the War Powers Act failed to muster enough votes in the Senate in October.
"Note that it’s now taken as a given—as an unremarkable and baked-in fact about our politics—that Trump is mulling a ground invasion of Venezuela and a dramatic expansion in his bombing campaign with no congressional authorization," New Republic staff writer Greg Sargent observed Tuesday in response to the president's remarks to Politico.
"What emerges from this interview," he added, "is that Trump is pulling all of this—the substantive case for these bombings, the legal justification for them, the rationale for mulling a massive military escalation in the Western Hemisphere—out of his rear end."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Cold Blooded Murder': US Rights Coalition Sues Trump Over Unlawful Boat Strikes
If the Office of Legal Counsel opinion “seeks to dress up legalese in order to provide cover for the obvious illegality of these serial homicides, the public needs to see this analysis,” said one attorney.
Dec 09, 2025
A coalition of US rights organizations is suing the Trump administration to obtain its documentation outlining the legal justifications for its campaign of military strikes against suspected drug boats in the Caribbean Sea and the Pacific Ocean.
The ACLU, the Center for Constitutional Rights, and the New York Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday announced they had filed a complaint under the Freedom of Information Act demanding the release of the Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion that provided the legal framework for the strikes, which many human rights organizations have decried as acts of murder.
The groups said that the Trump administration's rationales for the strikes deserve special scrutiny because their justification hinges on claims that the US is in an "armed conflict" with international drug cartels akin to past conflicts between the US government and terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda.
The groups argued there is simply no way that drug cartels can be classified under the same umbrella as terrorist organizations, given that the law regarding war with nonstate actors says that any organizations considered to be in armed conflict with the US must be an "organized armed group" that is structured like a conventional military and engaged in "protracted armed violence" with the US government.
Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, accused the administration of warping the law beyond recognition in defense of its boat-bombing campaign.
"The Trump administration is displacing the fundamental mandates of international law with the phony wartime rhetoric of a basic autocrat," Azmy explained. "If the OLC opinion seeks to dress up legalese in order to provide cover for the obvious illegality of these serial homicides, the public needs to see this analysis and ultimately hold accountable all those who facilitate murder in the United States’ name."
Jeffrey Stein, staff attorney with the ACLU’s National Security Project, said the American public deserves to know "how our government is justifying the cold-blooded murder of civilians as lawful and why it believes it can hand out get-out-of-jail-free cards to people committing these crimes."
Ify Chikezie, staff attorney at the New York Civil Liberties Union, said the Trump administration was making a mockery of government transparency by refusing to release its OLC documentation justifying the strikes, and demanded that "the courts must step in and order the administration to release these documents immediately."
The administration's boat-bombing spree, which so far has killed at least 87 people, has come under intense scrutiny in recent weeks after it was revealed that the US military had launched a second strike during an operation on September 2 to kill two men who had survived an initial strike on their vessel.
While the September 2 strike has drawn the most attention, Daphne Eviatar, director for security and human rights for Amnesty International USA, argued last week that the entire boat-bombing campaign has been “illegal under both domestic and international law.”
“All of them constitute murder because none of the victims, whether or not they were smuggling illegal narcotics, posed an imminent threat to life,” she said. “Congress must take action now to stop the US military from murdering more people in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular