The U.S. ambassador to Chile, Brandon Judd, has sharply criticized Chile’s ministers for their public criticism of Washington’s decision to impose 12.5 percent tariffs on Chilean goods under the pretext of concerns over forced labor in imported products. In a pointed statement, Judd warned that such comments, made by officials not directly involved in ongoing trade negotiations, will hinder progress toward a deal that could exempt key Chilean exports, including fresh fruit, salmon, wine, and timber, from these tariffs. Judd made his remarks during a press briefing following his participation in the U.S. Southern Command's International Forum on Organized Crime. He expressed frustration with statements from Chilean ministers who have publicly questioned the legitimacy of the U.S. action. On Tuesday, Agriculture Minister Jaime Campos called the move “arbitrary” and claimed it violates the Chile-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA). Defense Minister Fernando Barros echoed similar criticisms, adding a personal jab at Judd, accusing him of applying a form of punishment for alleged tolerance of forced labor, which he described as “unjust.” Judd escalated his response, stating that such public commentary from non-negotiators undermines efforts to reach a resolution. “There will be no agreement if there are people speaking about these negotiations who aren’t part of them,” he said. He emphasized that the ongoing talks aim to address the issue of forced labor in supply chains, not within Chile itself. “When this happens, it makes it very difficult for our negotiators in the United States to believe that anything meaningful is happening here,” Judd added. Earlier in the week, Foreign Minister Francisco Pérez Mackenna attempted to temper tensions, stressing that the government’s ultimate goal is to reach a compromise with the U.S. “What matters is understanding that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is conducting the negotiations,” Pérez told T13 Radio. The minister also reiterated that the focus should remain on achieving a mutually beneficial outcome rather than allowing public disputes to derail the process. In another exchange, Judd clarified that the U.S. is not targeting forced labor within Chile but rather addressing instances where foreign-made goods are produced using such practices. “That’s not what we’re talking about. I’m not referring to forced labor in Chile. We’re discussing products imported into Chile that are made through forced labor outside the country,” he explained. Judd argued that such conditions create unfair competition and violate the FTA’s principles. He also noted that the FTA includes provisions allowing for the imposition of tariffs if certain criteria related to labor standards are not met. “So again, I don’t think those ministers have actually read the Free Trade Agreement. It would be helpful if they were better informed about what the agreement truly entails,” Judd said. Despite his sharp critique of the ministers, he praised the work of Paula Estévez, head of the Chilean National Service for Economic Research (Subrei), calling her a “very good negotiator.” “Let her do her job,” he concluded.
2 servizi
La TerceraIndipendente🔒ConservatoreFattualità 88Obiettività 72l’altro ieriL'ambasciatore degli Stati Uniti in Cile, Brandon Judd, ha fortemente criticato i ministri cileni che hanno pubblicamente messo in discussione la decisione degli Stati Uniti di imporre un dazio del 12,5% sui beni cileni, citando preoccupazioni per il lavoro forzato. Judd ha espresso delusione per il fatto che i ministri non coinvolti nei negoziati in corso stavano facendo commenti usando termini come 'frode', che secondo lui mina la fiducia nelle relazioni bilaterali. Il ministro Jaime Campos ha accusato gli Stati Uniti di agire arbitrariamente e di violare l'accordo di libero scambio, mentre il ministro della Difesa Fernando Barros ha criticato direttamente Judd, accusandolo di imporre sanzioni su questioni relative al lavoro forzato. Judd ha avvertito che tali critiche pubbliche da parte di non negoziatori ostacolerebbero gli sforzi per esentare da dazi le principali esportazioni cilene come frutta fresca, salmone, vino e legname.
Lettura del bias (Conservatore): L'accento posto sulla posizione degli Stati Uniti e l'avvertimento di Judd che tali commenti pubblici ostacolano i negoziati suggeriscono una prospettiva pro-statunitense.
Perché fattualità (88): This article closely mirrors the primary source document, including quotes from Ambassador Judd and the Chilean ministers. It accurately captures the dispute over the tariffs and the implications for trade negotiations. The mention of specific products like fruit and wine adds contextual detail that
Perché obiettività (72): While the article presents both sides of the conflict, ministers criticizing the tariffs and the ambassador responding, it leans slightly toward portraying the U.S. position more sympathetically. The language used to describe the ministers’ comments as 'arbitrary' may carry a subtle negative tone, tho
BioBioChileIndipendenteCentroFattualità 85Obiettività 70l’altro ieriSecondo quanto riferito, gli Stati Uniti hanno fermato i ministri cileni che hanno criticato una tariffa, affermando che non ci sarà alcun accordo se parlano senza avere un interesse nella questione. La situazione coinvolge discussioni commerciali in corso tra il Cile e gli Stati Uniti, in cui i funzionari cileni hanno espresso preoccupazioni per alcune tariffe imposte dagli Stati Uniti. Tuttavia, gli Stati Uniti sembrano resistere a un ulteriore dialogo a meno che i rappresentanti cileni non siano visti come direttamente interessati dalla questione.
Lettura del bias (Centro): L'articolo riporta un'interazione diplomatica che coinvolge le politiche commerciali, che è intrinsecamente politica, ma non mostra una chiara parzialità verso nessuna delle due parti, presentando la situazione come una posizione reciproca senza favorire apertamente la posizione di un paese rispetto all'altro.
Perché fattualità (85): The article reports on U.S. Ambassador Brandon Judd’s response to Chilean ministers who criticized U.S. tariffs, aligning with the primary source document. It accurately reflects his warning that 'there will be no agreement' if non-participants comment on negotiations. However, it does not provide f
Perché obiettività (70): The tone is somewhat confrontational, particularly when quoting the defense minister’s criticism of the ambassador. While the facts are reported fairly, there is a slight bias in emphasizing the U.S. perspective and the ministers’ criticisms without presenting alternative viewpoints or nuances.
★
Manteniamo le notizie oneste.
ObjectiveNews è finanziato dai lettori e senza pubblicità: ti mostriamo il bias invece di nasconderlo. Sostieni il giornalismo indipendente per 5 €/mese.
Diventa sostenitore
CL
