Is it grandstanding? sure, but if you agree with human rights it is exactly the right kind of grandstanding.
Also, I have no problem with people considering themselves humans before they consider themselves members of a nation-state, even government officials of a nation-state.
At the margin, it seems incredibly likely. You don't cut yourself off from the largest wealthiest market in the hemisphere and continue to sell exactly as many flowers as before at exactly as high a price...
The removal of the agreement wouldn't then be embargo/sanctions, it would mean normally trade that other countries conduct with the US. So the price for US importers would increase and so at the margin as you rightly point out there would be some loss of profit and some loss of sales. We don't know how much though, and we don't know if those could be replaced by other purchasers and if so at at what price reduction.
In any event it wouldn't be a loss of $23m a realistic estimate might be closer to 10% of that so around $2-3m. For a country with $5bn in oil exports that's chump change and given that its a leftist government any local workers that suffer will probably be have a decent social safety net in place until they get back on their feet.
? Where are you getting this $23m from? The article says that they export to the USA "$166 million of cut flowers". 10% of that would be $16.6 million, not $2 million...
In a cheeky jab at the U.S. spying program that Snowden unveiled through leaks to the media, the South American nation offered $23 million per year to finance human rights training.
The funding would be destined to help "avoid violations of privacy, torture and other actions that are denigrating to humanity," Alvarado said. He said the amount was the equivalent of what Ecuador gained each year from the trade benefits.
I'm not sure the $23m applies only to the flower industry - it reads like it applies to the value of the total agreement to Ecuador. - I do mention upthread that without actually knowing the details of the agreement we're all just speculating.
But you asked where I got $23m from... and the answer was the article.
and my larger point still stands anyway... Ecuador apparently sell $5 billion in oil to the US... BILLION not million. A loss of $23million is still chump change. A loss of $230m probably wouldn't affect much.
Oh, and buy Fair-Trade if possible.
Which makes the move even less sensible from the U.S. side, because the U.S. program is not only some kind of selfless charity, but an attempt at reducing drug trafficking. Placing tariff barriers on legal exports like flowers and fruits just shifts the curve of how economically attractive illegal exports like coca look in comparison.
Why do you assume this money is set aside and actually exists when it sounds like a simple stunt?
China and others have their own set of problems, but they might make for better trade partners than the U.S., and China in particular is really lobbying itself as an option... lots of multibillion dollar government works and stuff that usually went to U.S., Europe, Japan or Korea by default are going to China now.
And Ecuador is now selling its oil to China, not the U.S.
The U.S. is losing control of its "backyard", which used to be economic colonies.
However, Ecuador is uniquely tied to the U.S. by having adopted the dollar, and the U.S. still imports twice as much as China, so yes, this will hurt.
The U.S. is a few Dick Cheneys away from getting worse than China.
Not to mention many people over here still HATE the U.S. because of their support to the murderous dictatorships of the 70's - I don't think China is going to get much worse than that. I was born in 1981 so I obviously don't have memories of the time, but the current Uruguayan president was a former guerrilla fighter from that time, so the memories are ever present.
You may not believe yet that China could be bad. I would love to dream of a benificent Chinese world hegemon. But if China can't even give freedom to its own people, what's it going to do to others?
The US is, in my view, the least worst option by a long way.
So far China is worse in its regard for ecology and human rights, but the U.S. is backwards in shoving down our throats absurd legislation, especially copyright and patent laws (one of the main reasons Uruguay doesn't have a preferential trade treaty with the U.S.), and it's almost a radical religious country in some points (Uruguay is secular), and extremely self-absorbed (much like China!).
It is ironically easier for me as an Uruguayan citizen to visit China than the U.S. due to increased visa restrictions and xenophobia.
I didn't say Chinese hegemony was good, they're probably not much better, but I do think and see them getting better, while I see the U.S. sliding down. At which point Chinese would be more tolerable (the lesser evil, not necessarily better or good) than the U.S., I don't know, but they're getting nearer than an U.S.-centric view might lead you to believe.
Maybe it provides morale for the average Ecuadorian, some faith and pride in their government. I wish ours would sometimes take a stand on human rights in the face of a more economically convenient option. However, I'll admit I'm not very familiar with Ecuador's political climate, it very well could be a hollow scheme.
Heck, journalist alone will probably spend a million over the next several years following Snowden around