Christopher Cook reports that U.S. designs for Iraq’s agricultural sector go beyond wresting food contracts from nations like Australia that traded with Iraq during the sanction years and Order 81 of the 100 legal orders left behind by Paul Bremer is just one spoke of the squeaky wheel in motion.
Exposed by Focus on the Global South and GRAIN in an October 2004 report, the “Patent, Industrial Design, Undisclosed Information, Integrated Circuits and Plant Variety” makes it illegal for Iraqi farmers to reuse seeds of protected varieties like those peddled by Monsanto, Syngenta, Bayer and Dow Chemical, and while it doesn’t force Iraqi farmers to use GMO seeds, the law applies to new varieties of non-GMO seeds that have been patented as well.
GRAIN emphasises that “for generations, small farmers in Iraq operated in an essentially unregulated, informal seed supply system. Farm-saved seed and the free innovation with and exchange of planting materials among farming communities has long been the basis of agricultural practice. This is now history.”
Is this the future?
By dramatically expanding legal definitions of what can be patented under the TRIPs Agreement, the WTO has endangered food sovereignty and security in poor countries. In most developing countries, the majority of the population lives on the land and feeds itself by replanting saved seeds. Yet over 150 cases have already been documented of research institutions or businesses applying for patents on naturally-occurring plants, some of which have been widely farmed for generations. After the WTO TRIPs Agreement becomes fully binding for developing countries in 2006, governments that fail to enforce patents on seeds—by pulling up crops or by forcing subsistence farmers who can not afford to do so to pay royalties—will face trade sanctions.
Cook writes it’s part of “the overall neoliberal strategy to open up and deregulate Iraq’s markets,” which includes:
And he finds USAID’s $100m agricultural reconstruction budget going towards pushing for the privatisation of “state-run enterprises like the Mesopotamia Seed Co.,” “deploying U.S. companies such as Case New Holland(2)* to rehabilitate Iraq’s dilapidated farm machinery,” and “helping the new government phase out farm subsidies.”
Yet in America, “payments from farm subsidies will top $24 billion, according to USDA estimates, up from $14.5 billion in 2004,” and are one reason prime farm land has doubled in value in some places since 2000. Tax breaks are another.
Most are taking advantage of a sweet tax deal known as a 1031 exchange, which gives a lucrative benefit to agricultural landowners in fast-growing metro areas.
Generally, a big gain from the sale of property must be recognized for tax purposes. But under Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code, farmers can roll their proceeds into another farm while deferring taxes on the profits.
Although it’s not a new law, the impact is growing as suburban farmers unload their holdings at top dollar for residential real estate development, then shop for rural land elsewhere.
No help for the rentor being squeezed off the land, though.
Only Saxby Chambliss riding to the rescue of subsidies despite the USDA’s prediction that the “2005 farm income of $64.4 billion,” is the “second highest on record, exceeded only by last year’s $73.6 billion.”:
Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) has said that Congress should take more from food stamps, school lunches and other programs for the poor instead of large farm operations. “I want this to be as painless to every farmer in America as we can make it,” he told the Associated Press.
* my links