Chemicals giant Bayer AG and the US government last year cooperated closely to lobby Thailand to reverse its ban on glyphosate, used in the company’s controversial weed killer Roundup, documents obtained by an environmental group and reviewed by Reuters showed.
The lobbying, including US trade officials asking Bayer for information on Thailand’s deputy agriculture minister, is detailed in more than 200 pages of partially redacted documents and e-mails, some directly between US officials and a Bayer representative.
The documents were obtained under the US Freedom of Information Act by the Tucson, Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity, which shared them with Reuters.
Illustration: Yusha
Thailand dropped plans to ban glyphosate a few days before the ban was due to come into force in December last year. It had approved the restriction in October citing concerns over the chemical’s effect on human health.
Reuters was unable to determine the reasons for the reversal or whether efforts by the US and Bayer had played a role in Thailand’s decision.
A government spokeswoman denied any foreign influence on the reversal of the ban.
While regulators worldwide, including the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), have determined glyphosate to be safe, Bayer agreed in June to settle nearly 100,000 US lawsuits for US$10.9 billion, denying claims that Roundup caused cancer.
Thailand had initiated significant steps in August last year to ban glyphosate and other chemicals widely deemed toxic to humans.
The WHO’s cancer research arm classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans” in March 2015.
As Thailand considered the ban on glyphosate, Bayer began its lobbying effort.
The Germany-headquartered firm, which acquired US Roundup maker Monsanto Co for US$63 billion in 2018, made an appeal for help arguing against the ban to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) on Sept. 18 last year, the documents reviewed by Reuters showed.
“Our engagements with all those in the public sector are routine, professional, and consistent with all laws and regulations,” Bayer said in a statement. “The Thai authorities’ reversal of the ban on glyphosate is consistent with the science-based determinations by regulatory bodies around the world.”
Thai government spokeswoman Ratchada Dhanadirek said that the country supported safe agriculture and prioritized farmers’ and consumers’ health, adding that glyphosate is widely used internationally and there is no viable alternative.
The Office of the Prime Minister in Thailand denied knowledge of the US or Bayer’s lobbying efforts when asked to comment on the documents.
The Office of the US Trade Representative (USTR) did not respond to requests for comment on the documents and its role in the reversal of the ban.
The documents showed that Thai Deputy Minister of Agriculture and Cooperatives Mananya Thaiset was identified in particular by Bayer as “seeking to dramatically accelerate the imposition of a ban” on glyphosate and other farm chemicals.
In July, before the documents were shared, Mananya said that she was motivated to ban glyphosate and other chemicals after attending many farmers’ funerals in her previous job as a mayor.
USTR officials discussed Mananya in an internal e-mail chain dated Oct. 22, the day that Thailand approved plans to ban glyphosate, the documents showed.
In a separate e-mail to Bayer, an unidentified USTR official sought more information on her from the chemicals company.
“Knowing what motivates her may help with USG [US government] counter-arguments” to reverse the ban, the official wrote.
“She has no record of being diehard advocate of organic food and/or staunch environmentalist,” Bayer senior director for international government affairs and trade Jim Travis replied.
Mananya could not be reached for comment on whether she had been approached by Bayer or US officials and her office declined requests for comment on the documents.
While Bayer and the USTR sought to understand the mindset of Mananya, whom one USTR official described as “well-connected,” the documents make clear their main objective was access to the prime minister.
In an e-mailed response to the USTR on Oct. 24, Bayer’s Travis said: “All efforts should be focused on the PM,” referring to Thai Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha.
Prayuth could not be reached for comment. He has rarely expressed his views publicly on the chemical ban.
After the glyphosate ban was reversed, he only said that he had “no problem” with the decision.
On Oct. 17, USDA Undersecretary for Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs Ted McKinney wrote to Prayuth, asking for a postponement of the ban.
Prayuth repeatedly declined to comment on McKinney’s letter when asked by reporters.
“The US EPA ... has found that there are no risks to human health when glyphosate is used in accordance with its current label,” a USDA spokesperson said in response to a request for comment on the documents.
A ban on glyphosate would have meant grain grown using it could not enter Thailand, denying US exporters of bulk crops — including soybeans and wheat — access to a market that, like others in Southeast Asia, has grown massively from 2015 to nearly US$1 billion in value last year, US data showed.
Despite the initial lobbying efforts, the Thai National Hazardous Substances Committee formally approved the ban on Oct. 22 with an effective start date in December.
US officials continued their efforts as late as Nov. 26, the documents showed.
On Nov. 27, Thailand reversed course. A government committee announced that the country was abandoning the ban four days before it was due to take effect, citing concerns over the effect on foreign trade, alongside the impact on farmers, and food and animal feed industries.
China badly misread Japan. It sought to intimidate Tokyo into silence on Taiwan. Instead, it has achieved the opposite by hardening Japanese resolve. By trying to bludgeon a major power like Japan into accepting its “red lines” — above all on Taiwan — China laid bare the raw coercive logic of compellence now driving its foreign policy toward Asian states. From the Taiwan Strait and the East and South China Seas to the Himalayan frontier, Beijing has increasingly relied on economic warfare, diplomatic intimidation and military pressure to bend neighbors to its will. Confident in its growing power, China appeared to believe
After more than three weeks since the Honduran elections took place, its National Electoral Council finally certified the new president of Honduras. During the campaign, the two leading contenders, Nasry Asfura and Salvador Nasralla, who according to the council were separated by 27,026 votes in the final tally, promised to restore diplomatic ties with Taiwan if elected. Nasralla refused to accept the result and said that he would challenge all the irregularities in court. However, with formal recognition from the US and rapid acknowledgment from key regional governments, including Argentina and Panama, a reversal of the results appears institutionally and politically
Legislators of the opposition parties, consisting of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), on Friday moved to initiate impeachment proceedings against President William Lai (賴清德). They accused Lai of undermining the nation’s constitutional order and democracy. For anyone who has been paying attention to the actions of the KMT and the TPP in the legislature since they gained a combined majority in February last year, pushing through constitutionally dubious legislation, defunding the Control Yuan and ensuring that the Constitutional Court is unable to operate properly, such an accusation borders the absurd. That they are basing this
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) was on Monday last week invited to give a talk to students of Soochow University, but her responses to questions raised by students and lecturers became a controversial incident and sparked public discussion over the following days. The student association of the university’s Department of Political Science, which hosted the event, on Saturday issued a statement urging people to stop “doxxing,” harassing and attacking the students who raised questions at the event, and called for rational discussion of the talk. Criticism should be directed at viewpoints, opinions or policies, not students, they said, adding
RSS