Investors including China and Saudi Arabia have made Latin America part of the global land grab. Plots of land have been purchased or leased directly and indirectly for agriculture and other development. In response, Brazil, Argentina and others have passed laws to restrict foreign ownership of land.
What if a country made the opposite policy, making its land easier to buy for foreigners? And what if there was a rich and willing investor? This creates a hypothetical scenario in which well over 50% of a country's land is purchased or leased by foreign investors. At an extreme, a foreign power or corporation could buy an entire state or province and gain almost full control over it.
Does the rest of the region get a say in this? This is a question that goes right to the heart of the sovereignty debate in Latin America. On one hand, a country should have a right to sell, lease or give its own land to whomever it wishes. On the other hand, the idea that a country could literally sell its own sovereign territory and leave its neighbors dealing with a foreign power controlling a border area impacts regional security.
1 comment:
You may want to check this article out from the Economist: http://www.economist.com/node/13692889
It delves into some of the domestic political/sovereign issues.
The more interesting aspect is the water angle. A number of countries are making these investments because they don't have the long-term water supplies to support agriculture if they did set up the farms domestically.
If the water supplies are shared by neighboring nations then there might be international meddling in regards to water treaties. Not sure how applicable this is in LATAM though.
Post a Comment