Britain not just a pawn in Latin America

While agreeing with much of Atilio Boron's analysis ( How South America sees the Assange case , 21 August), it's a mistake to reduce Britain's role to that of mere pawn in US strategy. British government policy converges with the US for its own reasons, foremost of which are the economic interests in play. Over the past 20 years European investments in Latin America, and the profits they generate, have outstripped the US. British corporations in the extractive industries benefit hugely, especially from mining in the Andean region. Britain has promoted European free-trade agreements. Peter Mandelson took the lead as EU trade commissioner. On the Latin American side, there has been a split. Chile, Colombia and Peru have adopted FTAs, against vehement social movement opposition. Venezuela and Bolivia remain opposed. Ecuador has wavered between the two camps, and has recently tilted towards China as an investment source, rather than Europe. In 2010 Ecuador withdrew from the World Bank's arbitration body, because it was too heavily loaded in favour of the corporations; and Ecuador has terminated similarly onerous bilateral investment treaties, including with Britain. President Correa's government has indicated it will regulate and tax corporations to a greater degree than its pro-free market neighbours. So, alongside the strategic alliance with Washington, corporate interest is a major factor shaping UK government policy. Progressive opinion here should challenge both aspects, as both are potential threats to Ecuadorean sovereignty. Dr Andy Higginbottom Principal lecturer, Kingston University