http://foodwhistleblower.org/blog/22-2011/217-monsanto-interests-guide-us-diplomacy-wikileaks-cables-show
We know Monsanto and other biotech giants have been
U.S. diplomats have certainly been making an effort to protect GM interests abroad.
Truthout
真相透露报告：
Several cables describe "biotechnology outreach programs" in countries across the globe, including African, Asian and South American countries where Western biotech agriculture had yet to gain a foothold. In some cables (such as this
The promotion of agricultural biotechnology in dozens of countries was referenced in U.S. embassy documents ranging from 2005 to 2010. France, in particular, seems to be a major target since it has been slow to adopt GM crops despite outside pressure.
A
The film argues that Monsanto exerted undue influence on the USG. Former Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman is interviewed saying he had felt that he was under pressure and that more tests should have been conducted on biotech products before they were approved. Jeffrey Smith, Director, Institute for Responsible Technology, who is interviewed says that a number of Bush Administration officers were close to Monsanto, either having obtained campaign contributions from the company or having worked directly for it: John Ashcroft, Secretary of Justice, received contributions from Monsanto when he was reelected, as did Tommy Thompson, Secretary of Health; Ann Veneman, Secretary of Agriculture, was director of Calgene which belonged to Monsanto; and Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense, was CEO of Searle, a Monsanto subsidiary; and Justice Clarence Thomas was a former lawyer for Monsanto.
这部纪录片责备孟山都对美国政府施加的影响很过分。前农业部秘书长丹·格里克曼（Dan Glickman）在接受采访时说，他感觉自己承受了压力，并表示在批准生物技术产品之前，应当对其进行足够多的测试。负责任技术研究所的负责人杰弗瑞·史密斯【他今年2月访问过中国-顾】在接受采访时也说，布什政府的一大批官员都与孟山都关系密切，有的从这家公司受到了竞选资助，有的甚至直接受雇于它：律政司司长约翰·
Clearly disturbed by these points, embassy diplomats requested "that Washington agencies provide talking points" so the officers could respond to the documentary on an "if asked" basis. They didn""""t want to draw attention to the film, but instead focus on "the positive role that biotech can play in meeting world food needs." Sounds like Monsanto""""s PR claims
Talking points are one thing. Systematic retaliation against dissenting countries is another. You see, when it came to French efforts to ban a Monsanto GM corn variety, a more aggressive reaction resulted, as shown in a
Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits.
Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voices.
So not only were U.S. diplomats working on behalf of the biotech industry, they were also advocating threatening other governments who didn""""t follow suit.
It""""s not exactly breaking news that corporate and government power are intertwined at the federal level. But even for us dealing with whistleblowers every day, it""""s astonishing to see more evidence of how commonplace it is for corporate marketing to be propelled on government dollars.
Sarah Damian is New Media Fellow for the Government
莎拉·达米安
相关文章
头条焦点
精彩导读
关注我们
【查看完整讨论话题】 | 【用户登录】 | 【用户注册】