Tag: International trade

Europe needs to embrace pragmatism to not lose the Global South

Post By World , , , , ,

The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

The EU and other like-minded allies must fully wake up from our previous unipolar dream — and stable world — and step forward as a credible key partner for the Global South in this turbulent decade, Radu Magdin writes.

ADVERTISEMENT

It’s an open secret that Western diplomacy is not having its best days in the Global South. 

When it came to the UN to condemn Russia in 2022, most countries that abstained were in the Global South — and very much in line with public opinion: polling at the time suggested only 45% of the public would have supported any overly bullish condemnation of Russia. 

Meanwhile, while only 5% of US citizens surveyed suggested that they see Russia as an ally, over 80% of Indians, 79% of Chinese and 69% of Turkish respondents described Russia either as an ally or partner.

If the unipolar moment is taken as point of reference, then some of this might very well be surprising. But the reality on the ground for most of the Global South (despite some contesting the term, will use it as the most general and inclusive for this article’s arguments) was always ambivalent. 

If this prompts a diplomatic awakening for Western diplomacy, the global commons might be better for it. Still, several aspects need to be understood first: promoting liberal democratic values is increasingly harder, money is not a dirty word and alliances based on temporary interest are to be accepted.

I want to buy the world a Coca-Cola

Since the 1970s and the midst of the Cold War, the US relied on building a public image based on a mix of social liberalism and a showcase of material prosperity: you get to have your cake and eat it too was the subtext of American diplomacy. 

To an extent, it was a master-stroke — of luck as well, as the Soviets were relying too much on ideology and having a non-competitive economic model. 

The Nixon administration positioned the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency and the US fully took up the mantle of the world’s trading empire from the UK. 

As trade networks spread across the world and incomes increased, that ideology became the first port of call to every person from the factory worker to the local intelligence officer everywhere, including the Soviet Union. 

As Jackson J Spielvogel said in Western Civilisation: “most Soviet citizens didn’t want democratic freedom, they wanted the freedom to shop till you drop”. 

In fact, that ideology became almost universal, to the extent that Francis Fukuyama’s proposition in the 1990s that it doesn’t have any rivals left was actually true. 

The advantage this gave Washington in foreign policy would be hard to quantify but when your product becomes the default, it’s a sign that your market position is rather strong: think Xerox or Kleenex in the 1990s.

That age is over. It didn’t end with the Twin Towers or other events when pundits felt obliged to grandiloquently declare that history is back — but with a whimper: a lot of Western citizens can’t shop till they drop, and everyone can duly see that. 

The West/North is no longer alone in global prosperity. There is a need for economic reinvention and renewed competitiveness, while other countries’ citizens exhibit global prosperity. 

In turn, that means that Western diplomats in general can no longer rely on entering each negotiating room as the default winners and need to engage with their foreign counterparts while truly accounting for their wants and needs, factional loyalties, and personal interests.

Time to change focus

The West should acknowledge what works (and what does not) in this new reality. 

Promises of golden futures in exchange for the golden strait-jackets of SWIFT, international FDI (aid to trade is more desired in the Global South, the question is how to get there faster) and IMF loans have been ringing hollow for over a decade. 

So, it should not be surprising that many abstaining countries are also those over which the US and the EU — as well as other Global North allies — have little real leverage. 

ADVERTISEMENT

In no small part that is because they never became as integrated in the global economy as assumed, and the world remains imbalanced while global competition increases, with Asia a bigger player at the global table, including for African and Latam futures.

As long as the promise of a nightcap was on the table, many countries in the Global South were willing to forgo other alternatives. 

Still, the reality is that Western policymakers will have to put forward genuine economic and financial goods that can either help foreign counterparts or represent something that could be sold to the general populace as worthy of re-election.

We’ll always have self-interests

Due to its cultural supremacy, the US has been able to rely on a grand strategy of soft power, beyond obvious hard power advantages. Europeans also counted on their soft power, while joining the Americans in virtue-signalling. 

But the plain reality is that we all also follow our own interests as well. And sometimes our interests include not only permanent alliances but also temporary ones. 

ADVERTISEMENT

In fact, short-term alliances based on matching interests should no longer be dismissed, especially at a time of great power competition.

It is time to accept that issues such as fentanyl trafficking or helping Ukraine will ultimately involve working with entities one is not comfortable with. In other words, the normalcy of pragmatism is needed to succeed. 

That is valid, including for global charm offensives, and here the Europeans have the advantage, in the EU framework, by exploring in the Global South the idea of lead countries, who due to their history have more soft power and affection on the ground than the average. 

For example, in recent months, Eastern European states such as Romania have adopted Africa strategies, and they can work closely with partners to help raise Western credibility on the continent.

Taking such core considerations on board can enable the US, the EU and other like-minded allies such as Japan and Australia to fully wake up from our previous unipolar dream — and stable world — and step forward as a credible key partner for the Global South in a turbulent decade. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Otherwise, we risk losing ground to global and regional challenges; losing face and competitiveness on a global stage; and losing, importantly, the trust of the youthful Global South whose next generation of leaders is looking actively at fast development options.  

Radu Magdin is CEO of Smartlink and former advisor to prime ministers of Romania (2014-2015) and Moldova (2016-2017).

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#Europe #embrace #pragmatism #lose #Global #South

Asthma, cancer, erectile drugs sent from abroad make up are most confiscations, despite opioid claims | CNN

Post By Health , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

For years, the FDA has defended its efforts to intercept prescription drugs coming from abroad by mail as necessary to keep out dangerous opioids, including fentanyl.

The pharmaceutical industry frequently cites such concerns in its battle to stymie numerous proposals in Washington to allow Americans to buy drugs from Canada and other countries where prices are almost always much lower.

But the agency’s own data from recent years on its confiscation of packages containing drugs coming through international mail provides scant evidence that a significant number of opioids enters this way. In the two years for which KHN obtained data from the agency, only a tiny fraction of the drugs inspected contained opioids.

The overwhelming majority were uncontrolled prescription drugs that people had ordered, presumably because they can’t afford the prices at home.

The FDA still stops those drugs, because they lack U.S. labeling and packaging, which federal authorities say ensure they were made under U.S. supervision and tracking.

The FDA said it found 33 packages of opioids and no fentanyl sent by mail in 2022 out of nearly 53,000 drug shipments its inspectors examined at international mail facilities. That’s about 0.06% of examined packages.

According to a detailed breakdown of drugs intercepted in 2020, the lion’s share of what was intercepted — and most often destroyed — was pharmaceuticals. The No. 1 item was cheap erectile dysfunction pills, like generic Viagra. But there were also prescribed medicines to treat asthma, diabetes, cancer, and HIV.

FDA spokesperson Devin Koontz said the figures don’t reflect the full picture because U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the primary screener at the mail facilities.

But data obtained from the customs agency shows it likewise found few opioids: Of more than 30,000 drugs it intercepted in 2022 at the international mail facilities, only 111 were fentanyl and 116 were other opioids.

On average, Americans pay more than twice the price for exactly the same drugs as people in other countries. In polling, 7% of U.S. adults say they do not take their medicines because they can’t afford them. About 8% admit they or someone else in their household has ordered medicines from overseas to save money, though it is technically illegal in most cases. At least four states — Florida, Colorado, New Hampshire, and New Mexico — have proposed programs that would allow residents to import drugs from Canada.

While the FDA has found only a relatively small number of opioids, including fentanyl, in international mail, Congress gave the agency a total of $10 million in 2022 and 2023 to expand efforts to interdict shipments of opioids and other unapproved drugs.

“Additional staffing coupled with improved analytical technology and data analytics techniques will allow us to not only examine more packages but will also increase our targeting abilities to ensure we are examining packages with a high probability of containing violative products,” said Dan Solis, assistant commissioner for import operations at the FDA.

But drug importation proponents worry the increased inspections targeting opioids will result in more uncontrolled substances being blocked in the mail.

“The FDA continues to ask for more and more taxpayer money to stop fentanyl and opioids at international mail facilities, but it appears to be using that money to refuse and destroy an increasing number of regular international prescription drug orders,” said Gabe Levitt, president of PharmacyChecker.com, which accredits foreign online pharmacies that sell medicines to customers in the U.S. and worldwide. “The argument that importing drugs is going to inflame the opioid crisis doesn’t make any sense.”

“The nation’s fentanyl import crisis should not be conflated with safe personal drug importation,” Levitt said.

He was not surprised at the low number of opioids being sent through the mail: In 2022, an organization he heads called Prescription Justice received 2020 FDA data through a Freedom of Information Act request. It showed that FDA inspectors intercepted 214 packages with opioids and no fentanyl out of roughly 50,000 drug shipments. In contrast, they found nearly 12,000 packages containing erectile dysfunction pills. They also blocked thousands of packages containing prescription medicines to treat a host of other conditions.

Over 90% of the drugs found at international mail facilities are destroyed or denied entry into the United States, FDA officials said.

In 2019, an FDA document touted the agency’s efforts to stop fentanyl coming into the United States by mail amid efforts to stop other illegal drugs.

Levitt was pleased that Congress in December added language to a federal spending bill that he said would refocus the FDA mail inspections. It said the “FDA’s efforts at International Mail Facilities must focus on preventing controlled, counterfeit, or otherwise dangerous pharmaceuticals from entering the United States. Further, funds made available in this Act should prioritize cases in which importation poses a significant threat to public health.”

Levitt said the language should shift the FDA from stopping shipments containing drugs for cancer, heart conditions, and erectile dysfunction to blocking controlled substances, including opioids.

But the FDA’s Koontz said the language won’t change the type of drugs FDA inspectors examine, because every drug is potentially dangerous. “Importing drugs from abroad simply for cost savings is not a good enough reason to expose yourself to the additional risks,” he said. “The drug may be fine, but we don’t know, so we assume it is not.”

He said even drugs that are made in the same manufacturing facilities as drugs intended for sale in the United States can be dangerous because they lack U.S. labeling and packaging that ensure they were made properly and handled within the U.S. supply chain.

FDA officials say drugs bought from foreign pharmacies are 10 times as likely to be counterfeit as drugs sold in the United States.

To back up that claim, the FDA cites congressional testimony from a former agency official in 2005 who — while working for a drug industry-funded think tank — said between 8% and 10% of the global medicine supply chain is counterfeit.

The FDA said it doesn’t have data showing which drugs it finds are unsafe counterfeits and which drugs lack proper labeling or packaging. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection data shows that, among the more than 30,000 drugs it inspected in 2022, it found 365 counterfeits.

Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, the trade group for the industry, funds a nonprofit advocacy organization called Partnership for Safe Medicines, which has run media campaigns to oppose drug importation efforts with the argument that it would worsen the fentanyl epidemic.

Shabbir Safdar, executive director of the Partnership for Safe Medicines, a group funded by U.S. pharmaceutical manufacturers, said he was surprised the amount of fentanyl and opioids found by customs and FDA inspectors in the mail was so low. He said that historically it has been a problem, but he could not provide proof of that claim.

He said federal agencies are not inspecting enough packages to get the full picture. “With limited resources we may be getting fooled by the smugglers,” he said. “We need to be inspecting the right 50,000 packages each year.”

For decades, millions of Americans seeking to save money have bought drugs from foreign pharmacies, with most sales done online. Although the FDA says people are not allowed to bring prescription drugs into the United States except in rare cases, dozens of cities, county governments, and school districts help their employees buy drugs from abroad.

The Trump administration said in 2020 that drugs could be safely imported and opened the door for states to apply to the FDA to start importation programs. But the Biden administration has yet to approve any.

A federal judge in February threw out a lawsuit filed by PhRMA and the Partnership for Safe Medicines to block the federal drug importation program, saying it’s unclear when, if ever, the federal government would approve any state programs.

Levitt and other importation advocates say the process is often safe largely because the drugs being sold to people with valid prescriptions via international mail are FDA-approved drugs with labeling different from that found at U.S. pharmacies, or foreign versions of FDA-approved drugs made at the same facilities as drugs sold in the U.S. or similarly regulated facilities. Most drugs sold at U.S. pharmacies are already produced abroad.

Because of the sheer volume of mail, even as the FDA has stepped up staffing at the mail facilities in recent years, the agency can physically inspect fewer than 1% of packages presumed to contain drugs, FDA officials said.

Solis said the agency targets its interdiction efforts to packages from countries from which it believes counterfeit or illegal drugs are more likely to come.

Advocates for importation say efforts to block it protect the pharmaceutical industry’s profits and hurt U.S. residents trying to afford their medicines.

“We have never seen a rash of deaths or harm from prescription drugs that people bring across the border from verified pharmacies, because these are the same drugs that people buy in American pharmacies,” said Alex Lawson, executive director of Social Security Works, which advocates for lower drug prices. “The pharmaceutical industry is using the FDA to protect their price monopoly to keep their prices high.”

Source link

#Asthma #cancer #erectile #drugs #confiscations #opioid #claims #CNN

EU has neglected Latin America as a trade partner. That has to change

Post By World , , , , ,


The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not represent in any way the editorial position of Euronews.

When Russia embarked on its full-scale invasion of Ukraine last February, the European Union realised that Moscow’s act of aggression meant Brussels had to look for economic partners elsewhere.

South America should have been the first on Brussels’ speed dial.

Yet, in reality, the two continents tend to treat each other with a combination of indifference and contempt.

Latin American diplomats would say that Europe tends to take the region for granted — especially its former colonies. At the same time, the EU appears not to have worked out clearly what it wants of its relationship with Latin America.

The detachment between the two blocs is summed up by the fact that the last EU-Latin America summit took place seven years ago, while a trade agreement between the EU and the Mercosur union — comprising Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay — has been stalled for more than two decades.

In Brussels’ absence, Beijing became Latin America’s best friend

However, if the EU wants to wean itself off Russian energy and lead the clean-energy transition, officials in Brussels will need to renew ties with their Latin American counterparts by forging new trade deals, as the region is home to several metals that are critical to building a green economy. 

The demand for rare earth metals in the EU — already at its highest — is expected to surge fivefold by 2030, yet Europe produces a negligible share of the minerals it needs in its race for renewables.

By contrast, Chile owns 42% of the world’s lithium reserves, a key component of electric car batteries, and a quarter of its copper deposits, used in everything from grids to turbines. Peru, too, holds nearly a quarter of the world’s silver, which is essential in producing solar panels and electric cars.

Putting new life into that old relationship would also help the EU diversify trade to avoid strategic dependencies with China, as concerns are mounting in Brussels about the bloc’s over-reliance on Beijing as a market for goods and raw materials for its green transition.

In turn, deepening ties would also alleviate the economic semi-stagnation of Latin America, hard-hit by globalisation, enabling European companies to shift production from China to the Americas.

Another reason the EU should increase ties with Latin America is to counter Beijing’s rising influence in the region. To avoid the same mistake as in Africa — where Chinese firms have monopolised cobalt mining, essential for electric vehicle batteries, accounting for an estimated one-eighth of the continent’s industrial output — the EU needs to step up its game.

Over the past decade, China has been systematically building its supply chain in these critical minerals. It increased its investments in Latin America 26-fold between 2000 and 2020 and is now the primary stakeholder in two of the ten biggest lithium mines in Chile, as well as Mercosur’s largest single trade partner (and the second-biggest for Latin America as a whole).

In Brazil, China Three Gorges, the world’s largest hydropower provider, controls almost half of its hydro plants. At the same time, China’s State Grid Corp is the country’s largest power generation and distribution company.

Moreover, 19 governments across Latin America and the Caribbean have joined Xi Jinping’s signature Belt and Road Initiative, a nearly €1-trillion transcontinental trade and infrastructure network.

‘Pink wave’ of left-leaning leaders a chance for relations reset

However, after years of EU disengagement, it seems that the political stars have aligned to enable a qualitative leap in relations between the bloc and Latin America. 

Putin’s war in Ukraine and China’s rising authoritarianism have woken Brussels to the enormous challenges the bloc has to face, and politicians are now scrambling to forge new deals to secure raw materials.

Last December, the EU concluded a trade deal with Chile that will give it easier access to lithium, copper and other minerals vital to its renewable energy industry. Currently, 67% of Chile’s copper exports go to China, while just 5% go to the EU.

Yet another disadvantage for Brussels can be gleaned from the fact that Chile’s raw materials are processed in China and resold at a markup, with the difference often coming out of the pockets of Europeans.

Some things have changed as of late, however.

Chile’s leftist President Gabriel Boric is seeking to boost manufacturing jobs by reducing the country’s reliance on raw exports to China and instead having more of the production process based locally.

Moreover, socialist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s victory in Brazil’s presidential election on 30 October has revived EU trade hopes for Latin America.

It was Lula’s return that also brought back talks about the EU-Mercosur trade deal, now poised to be ratified by the end of the year — a pact blocked by European countries in 2019 after his predecessor, far-right firebrand Jair Bolsonaro, allowed Amazon’s deforestation to spike by 59.5%.

Boric and Lula both belong to the so-called “pink wave” of left-leaning Latin American heads of state at the helm of six out of seven of the region’s biggest economies.

Strike while the iron is hot

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s recent trip to the region was, in many ways, a chance for Europe to use this new era to its advantage.

In late January, he met with Boric to secure additional supplies of the lithium needed for its electric car industry, promising in return to help Chile develop its processing sectors. This week with Lula, he talked Mercosur.

Others in the EU, too, are looking to boost relations: a mix of trade-friendly countries — Sweden and Spain — are set to hold the bloc’s Council presidency this year, and the need to decouple from Russian gas and reduce Chinese dependencies are at the top of the agenda, which is bound to incentivise officials to forge new deals.

Yet, none of this will happen if Europe doesn’t strike while the iron is hot.

In the face of mounting geopolitical challenges and the urgent need to speed up the energy transition, Brussels needs a major reset of policy towards Latin America. It’s time to open political dialogue and diversify friendships.

Carla Subirana is an economist who has worked as a policy analyst for the Bank of England and Europe analyst for Economist Intelligence.

At Euronews, we believe all views matter. Contact us at [email protected] to send pitches or submissions and be part of the conversation.

Source link

#neglected #Latin #America #trade #partner #change