Will Coca-Cola do the right thing in Cambodia?

12/06/2013 4:46 PM

12/06/2013 7:59 PM

Many Southeast Asians and others around the world owe their thanks to the Coca-Cola Co.

No, I’m not expressing gratitude for the sugary drinks that can help make people fat. But to make those drinks, Coke is one of the world’s largest sugar consumers. The company buys sugar from distributors all over the world.

Well, it happens that some of the largest growers and distributors are in Thailand and Cambodia. And as a recent lawsuit made clear, much of the Cambodian sugar is grown on large plantations that used to be farmland for hundreds of poor family farmers.

Across Asia, many countries are guilty of baldly seizing their citizens’ land without significant compensation and then selling it to corporations or developers, leaving the owners homeless and often destitute. Arguably, however, Cambodia has the biggest problem. Over time, the Cambodia Daily newspaper reported recently, the government has seized almost 5 million acres — about 10 percent of the nation’s entire land mass.

Human-rights advocates and others are now calling the crop produced on this illegally seized land “blood sugar.” (Sometimes landowners who refuse to leave their property are jailed — or shot and killed.)

The Cambodian government contends that the land seizures are lifting citizens out of poverty, because the companies that buy the land create jobs. But in truth, it’s a net loss, because the landowners are thrown off their property and most often find themselves unemployed.

It happens that the sugar grown on the seized land in question was processed first in Cambodia and then in Thailand until finally it wound up with Tate & Lyle Sugars, Britain’s largest sugar marketer.

Earlier this year, Mark Moorstein, a Northern Virginia land-use lawyer, took on a “blood sugar” case as pro-bono, charitable work. He and a partner firm in London sued Tate & Lyle, claiming that 200 villagers “are the owners of the land” and “are entitled to the sugar cane.”

As soon as the lawyers filed their suit, Tate & Lyle seemed to panic. Very quickly, it sold its entire sugar-production unit to American Sugar Refining, better known in the United States for its name-brand product: Domino Sugar. That company became the defendant.

Enter the Coca Cola Co. As the lawsuit rolled forward, the company apparently realized that its soft drinks were being made with “blood sugar.” Or perhaps the company already knew that — but grew contrite. After all, a Thai sugar-producing giant, Mitr Phol, gets much of its sugar from Cambodia and is one of Coke’s top three suppliers.

“The Coca-Cola Company commits to zero tolerance for land-grabbing,” the company announced in a statement last month. Coke committed to hire third-party investigators to look at its sugar suppliers to be sure none is buying “blood sugar.”

Cambodian human-rights groups lauded the move. “Coke’s statement is a watershed moment for the communities” victimized by land grabbers, said Eang Vuthy, executive director of Equitable Cambodia. But he and others said they hoped that forceful action will follow Coke’s laudable statement.

Land-grabbing is endemic to Asia, including China, Myanmar, Laos and Vietnam. All those nations, including Cambodia, are thoroughly corrupt with court systems that often do nothing but mirror the government’s view.

That’s why Coke’s decision — if in fact the company follows through — is quite important.

Following Coke’s lead, PepsiCo investors filed a shareholders resolution urging that company to account for alleged land-rights violations in Cambodia, where much of its sugar comes from as well.

All of this holds the potential to benefit tens of thousands of poor Southeast Asian people whose governments are mercilessly victimizing them. The corporate “blood sugar” customers hold the greatest power to put a stop to these vile acts.

Videos

Join the Discussion

The Kansas City Star is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere on the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Terms of Service