Lula on the Washington Consensus and more

Evo Morales: A divisive president

Came across this article in the Economist. Very interesting…

Evo Morales is a popular president, but his brand of politics is dividing his country

Reuters

ON THE high plane, the altiplano, surrounding La Paz, where the landscape is drawn in shades of dusty brown, new brick buildings stand out against the bright sky. Most are residences of a couple of storeys, but there are schools and clinics too. Some even boast cement balustrades, a flourish that echoes the Spanish colonial style. In a place where there are still adobe houses, and where a dowry may be measured partly in potatoes freeze-dried by nights spent above 4,000 metres (13,000 feet), this is a transformation.

President Evo Morales’s government has shovelled money towards this part of the country ever since he was elected in 2005. But its time in power has been deeply divisive. Leopoldo Fernández, an opposition politician who is governor of the Pando province in the north, has been in prison for ten months without standing trial. In March Victor Hugo Cárdenas, an Aymara Indian who was once the country’s vice-president, had his house attacked by a mob after opposing a new constitution proposed by the government.

Abroad, Mr Morales’s government has revelled in the worsening of a number of its most important relationships. It expelled the United States’ ambassador, along with his country’s drug-enforcement agents. The accusations of American plots against the government had abated in anticipation of the new Obama administration, but business has now returned to usual, with President Morales expelling another American diplomat and lambasting the United States for refusing to renew a preferential trade agreement that is linked to Bolivia’s performance on combating its drug barons. Bolivia’s relations with Peru are awful and it has failed to convince Brazil to abandon plans for new hydro resources in the Amazon which will lessen its demand for Bolivia’s gas.

In part this drive to isolate the country is deliberate. Many in the government dream of an economic autarky, powered by gas. Yet Mr Morales has accepted help from Venezuela, Cuba, Russia and Iran to further his “Movement to Socialism” (MAS) party. Venezuelan troops helped quell a rebellion centred on the airport at Santa Cruz in the east in 2007.

The antagonism between the government in the Andean city of La Paz and its opponents in Santa Cruz is Bolivia’s clearest fault line. The conflict is usually described as pitting indigenous Bolivians in the uplands against descendants of Spain in the lowlands, or poor versus rich, but in fact Santa Cruz is ethnically mixed and average incomes in the two cities are comparable. Instead, the conflict is one of identity. The cruceños see themselves as pioneers who carved prosperity out of a pestilential jungle. Those who live on the altiplano are likely to view Mr Morales, the country’s first indigenous president, with pride and to think that his government offers them a chance to get their share of revenues from the gasfields around Santa Cruz. By contrast, the cruceño elite fear losing their property, businesses and power.

This fear has increased since April, when government troops burst into the Hotel Las Américas in Santa Cruz, killed three men and arrested two others. The government claimed that this raid prevented an assassination attempt on Mr Morales. The hotel, all brown marble and glass with a few sad ferns in the atrium, seems an unlikely base for a terrorist cell, and the supposed terrorists were an unlikely bunch. That three of them were killed in their beds rather than spared for interrogation has aroused suspicion that they were in effect executed.

Whatever the case, a continuing investigation acts as a useful reminder to would-be rebels that they should stay in line. It has also destroyed any kind of moderate opposition. Carlos Dabdoub Arrien, one of the more constitutionally minded of the government’s opponents in Santa Cruz, describes Mr Morales as an “indigenous fascist”.

Those new brick houses on the altiplano are likely to keep Mr Morales in power in the elections due at the end of the year. He has handsomely increased government spending for the past three years, including much-needed increases in cash-transfer programmes. Some of these were inherited from the previous government, but they have been boosted and renamed. One programme is called “Bolivia changes, Evo delivers”.

Maybe. But at least one pundit, reckoning that the voters are still unlikely to give Mr Morales the landslide he craves in the legislature, says Bolivia is suffering a classic bout of Latin American populism: personalised politics, mild paranoia, bad economic policy and a weak opposition.

ABC interview new Honduran “president”

Jeffrey Kofman from ABC interviewed the new Honduran leader. In this video he shares some of the interview details.

Alvaro Vargas Llosa on Honduras: CNN Video

Excellent interview with Vargas Llosa. His analysis of the geopolitical implications of the Honduras situation is super interesting. The video is in spanish.

HRF calls on the OAS to suspend Honduras’ antidemocratic government

The following is the HRF press release on the Honduran crisis:

The Human Rights Foundation (HRF) has called on OAS Member States to apply the democratic clause and suspend the government of Honduras that forcibly overthrew President Zelaya. Pursuant to the Charter of the OAS and the Inter-American Democratic Charter, the situation in Honduras amounts to a grave alteration or interruption of the democratic order, and it is the duty of the OAS to act, said HRF.

“In application of its own rules, the OAS must undertake every diplomatic measure that may be conducive to the immediate reinstitution of Honduras’ constitutional President”, said Javier El-Hage, General Counsel of the HRF. “But in case these measures do not render prompt results, the OAS must suspend Honduras’ government from participation in all bodies of the OAS.”

According to the Charter of the OAS, “[a] Member of the Organization whose democratically constituted government has been overthrown by force may be suspended from the exercise of the right to participate” in the OAS (Art. 9). Along the same lines, the Inter-American Democratic Charter states that “access to power in accordance with the rule of law” is an essential element of democracy (Art. 3) and that “an unconstitutional interruption of the democratic order or an unconstitutional alteration of the constitutional regime that seriously impairs the democratic order in a member state, constitutes, while it persists, an insurmountable obstacle to its government’s participation” in the OAS (Art. 19).

“It is profoundly antidemocratic to attempt to solve a crisis between the branches of government, by having the chief of the executive power forcibly sent to exile. The unconstitutional actions by President Zelaya must be addressed in absolute respect of his constitutional rights and not through further unconstitutional acts,” said El-Hage. “The armed forces claim to have acted in compliance with a judicial order and under the approval of the legislative power, but Art. 102 of the Honduras Constitution expressly bans the ‘expatriation’ of any Honduran citizen, let alone a democratically elected president that has not been duly prosecuted. Latin-American politicians must once and for all understand that forcibly overthrowing a President, is simply not an option,” he concluded.

As part of its “Mr. Insulza and the Democratic Charter” project, the HRF has already sent five letters to the Secretary General of the OAS criticizing him for failing to apply the democratic clause against the governments of Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador, which have repeatedly and with impunity violated the essential elements of democracy set forth in Art. 3 of the Democratic Charter. HRF has also strongly condemned the recent resolution favoring the government of Cuba’s reincorporation to the OAS, decrying Castro’s appalling human rights record and its failing to comply with any of the essential elements of democracy, as recognized in the Democratic Charter. “The forcible overthrow of a government is not the only fact that must trigger the activation of the democratic clause. Antidemocratic governments, whether self-defined left-wing or right-wing, simply cannot participate in the OAS,” said HRF.

HRF also announced that in the following days it will publish a legal report that thoroughly addresses the conflict of powers that deteriorated into President Zelaya’s forcible overthrow. The purpose of the report will be to individualize those responsible for each of the constitutional violations effected in Honduras, and to recommend actions for Honduras’ branches of government to democratically solve the political gridlock in the country.

HRF is an international nonpartisan organization devoted to defending human rights in the Americas. It centers its work on the twin concepts of freedom of self-determination and freedom from tyranny. These ideals include the belief that all human beings have the rights to speak freely, to associate with those of like mind, and to leave and enter their countries. Individuals in a free society must be accorded equal treatment and due process under law, and must have the opportunity to participate in the governments of their countries; HRF’s ideals likewise find expression in the conviction that all human beings have the right to be free from arbitrary detainment or exile and from interference and coercion in matters of conscience. HRF does not support nor condone violence. HRF’s International Council includes former prisoners of conscience Vladimir Bukovsky, Palden Gyatso, Armando Valladares, Ramón J. Velásquez, Elie Wiesel, and Harry Wu.

Contact: Javier El-Hage, Human Rights Foundation, (212) 246.8486, info@thehrf.org

Human Rights Beyond Ideology (From the WSJ)

From the Wall Street Journal
By JOHN FUND

Oslo

Twenty years ago, as Soviet communism was collapsing and new democracies were springing up everywhere, there were bright hopes for the spread of human rights. But while this year marks the anniversary of the Berlin Wall falling, yesterday was also the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen massacre in China, a reminder of just how unyielding authoritarian governments can be.

Tiananmen was very much on the minds of the 200 human-rights activists who gathered in this tidy capital city where the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded every year. But the Oslo Freedom Forum, organized by the New York-based Human Rights Foundation, was unlike any human-rights conference I’ve ever attended. As at other such gatherings, racism and gender discrimination were on the minds of plenty of participants. But there was no desire to blame such problems on the U.S. or other Western nations. The emphasis was on promoting basic rights in all nations at all times.

“It’s pretty simple,” says Thor Halvorssen, a human-rights activist and the conference’s 33-year-old founder. “We all should want freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom from torture, freedom to travel, due process and freedom to keep what belongs to you.” Unfortunately, he explains, “the human-rights establishment at the United Nations is limited to pretty words because so many member countries kill or imprison or torture their opponents.”

Indeed, the U.N. Human Rights Conference held in Geneva last month was a disgrace, with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad denouncing Israel as a “racist regime” and saying that “Zionism” was dominating the media and financial systems of the West. The U.S. didn’t send a delegation to Geneva, and a number of the European representatives walked out during Mr. Ahmadinejad’s rant.

The Oslo Freedom Forum, by contrast, was a serious gathering of grown-ups. Even Oslo’s leftist newspaper Klassekampen (Class Struggle) overcame its initial skepticism, declaring the forum “an impressive assembly of people.”

Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel, former Czech president Vaclav Havel and Yelena Bonner, the widow of Soviet dissident Andrei Sakharov, couldn’t attend due to ill health, but all sent videotaped statements. Ms. Bonner challenged delegates to combat the “anti-Semitism and anti-Israeli sentiment growing throughout Europe” since she accepted the Nobel Peace Prize here on behalf of her husband in 1975. Vladimir Bukovsky, a scientist who was tortured by the KGB for years, warned that many of Russia’s old oppressors were “safely in power again” in new guises.

The conference also brought together activists from far-flung corners of the world. Palden Gyatso, a diminutive Tibetan monk, told horrifying tales of being imprisoned for 33 years and being tortured by Chinese captors who wedged electric batons into his mouth and destroyed all of his teeth. After his talk, he was embraced by Harry Wu, a survivor of 19 years in China’s network of labor camps, which still contain untold numbers of prisoners.

Although quiet and reserved, Abdel Nasser Ould Ethmane kept his audience riveted as he told of how he’d been raised in an elite Mauritanian family that kept slaves even after the practice was officially abolished in his land in 1981. While living in Paris as an adult, he became infuriated at the world’s indifference to slavery and teamed up with a former slave from Mauritania to provide legal help to escapees and also conduct covert rescue operations of those still in bondage. Mr. Ethmane’s talk was followed by presentations from two powerful speakers from Kurdistan and Uzbekistan, both women who had served time for democratic activism.

Some voices at the Oslo meeting are seldom heard in the West. Victor Hugo Cardenas of Bolivia prides himself on his indigenous background but is an implacable opponent of leftist President Evo Morales, a protégé of Hugo Chavez. Mr. Cardenas, a former vice president of Bolivia, called Mr. Morales a “false indigenous icon” who was deploying “shock troops” to silence critics. Indeed, he said that some of Mr. Morales’s thugs had recently attacked his house and beaten members of his family. “But you will hear little of this from our media, much of which is bought by the Venezuelan money of Hugo Chavez,” he thundered.

The Norwegian hosts seem keen on repeating the event next year. The forum certainly attracted the right enemies. During the conference, Norwegian papers reported that the Cuban Embassy had emailed a lengthy denunciation of the forum, accusing Mr. Halvorssen and former Cuban political prisoner Armando Valladares of being CIA agents. The embassy also wrote that Mr. Valladares was a “terrorist,” and it accused the Human Rights Foundation’s Bolivian representative of “providing the bulk of the funds for the terrorist gang” that had supposedly plotted to assassinate President Morales.

Mr. Halvorssen expressed both amusement and exasperation at the charges. “They accuse me of working for the CIA in countries I’ve never visited,” he told me. “As for Ambassador Valladares, he was Amnesty International’s first prisoner of conscience from Cuba. Amnesty doesn’t usually protect CIA agents.”

Mr. Fund is a columnist for WSJ.com.

Bolivia 6 vs Argentina 1

aaaah, good to day to love Bolivia.

HB

Morales opens the door to mob justice… consequences begin to pop up

An outbreak of government paranoia

From the Economist

IN THE mid-1990s, when he was vice-president, Víctor Hugo Cárdenas, an Aymara Indian, oversaw the introduction of bilingual education: pupils were to be taught in their indigenous language as well as Spanish. You might think that would still endear him to Bolivia’s Indians. Not so, to some of them at least.

Having disappeared from the political limelight for a decade, Mr Cárdenas recently emerged as a powerful opponent of the new constitution promoted by Evo Morales, a fellow Aymaran who, as president since 2006, claims to be refounding the country along indigenous-socialist lines. Ahead of a referendum in January in which voters approved this document, Mr Cárdenas appeared in opposition television advertisements. He says that the constitution’s endorsement of “community justice” is a “mechanism of abuse”.

document.write(‘<script language=”JavaScript” src=”http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/web.economist.com/all_articles;nav=world_politics_v_the_americas;pos=mpu_left;tile=4;sz=350×300,336×236,300×250,250×250;subs=’ + isSubscriber() + segQS + ‘;ord=’ + ord + ‘?” type=”text/javascript”><\/script>’);

On March 7th a mob of indigenous people several hundred-strong attacked Mr Cárdenas’s house in a village on the shore of Lake Titicaca, violently evicting his wife, Lidia Katari, herself an indigenous-rights activist, and two of his children before setting fire to his belongings. The few police who turned up did nothing. The assailants claimed that they had staged an act of “community justice” against Mr Cárdenas. They later said that they would not allow him, the police or public prosecutors to enter the area, claiming that the new constitution gives them control over a large swathe of surrounding territory.

Mr Morales may well have had nothing to do with the attack. But his opponents have long claimed that he is opening the way to this kind of mob rule. The government information service implausibly claimed that Mr Cárdenas had staged the incident himself as a publicity ploy.

Certainly, Mr Cárdenas has emerged as a potential leader for an opposition hitherto dominated by lighter-skinned Bolivians from the eastern lowlands. Under the new constitution, a presidential election is due to be held in December in which Mr Morales will seek a second term. And he suddenly looks rattled.

In an opinion poll in January by Ipsos-Apoyo, a respected pollster, the president’s popularity rating had slipped to 53%, nine points down from November and the lowest level for two years. Since then the government has been shaken by a corruption scandal at YPFB, the state-owned oil and gas company which Mr Morales revived. Santos Ramírez, the company’s president, was sacked and arrested, accused of orchestrating backhanders of over $3m from a company contract. Other YPFB officials are implicated.

What makes this so damaging is that Mr Ramírez was a senior leader in Mr Morales’s Movement to Socialism. And the nationalisation of the natural-gas industry, along with the new constitution, is the president’s main initiative. The opposition claims that the policy of giving state companies free rein to sign contracts—which the government says is necessary to sidestep bureaucracy—is a recipe for graft.

In another sign of growing official paranoia, Mr Morales blamed the YPFB imbroglio on the CIA, expelling an American diplomat this week who he claimed was involved (he turfed out the ambassador last year). He still has a bedrock of support among poorer Bolivians of Indian descent in the west of the country. But he is starting to look as if he is on the defensive.

Indians challenging Morales in Bolivia face danger

From the Associated Press

SANCKAJAWIRA, Bolivia (AP) — Evo Morales’ opponents have figured out one thing as they look ahead to presidential elections this year: To beat Bolivia’s first Indian leader, you need to run an Indian.

Morales’ supporters have come to the same conclusion — and shown no reluctance in attacking an indigenous politician for suggesting he might challenge their champion in elections expected in December.

When Victor Hugo Cardenas, a native Aymara like Morales and a former vice president, hinted he would run, the response was brutal: A mob of Aymaras violently evicted Cardenas’ family from their house here on Lake Titicaca’s shore, beating his wife and 24-year-old son with whips and sticks so badly they were hospitalized for two days.

Then, on Friday, the community ceremoniously banished the Cardenas family. A man and a woman in red ponchos bullwhipped the politician’s effigy, then symbolically buried it.

“We don’t pardon those who betray our brother Morales,” a leader of the 400-strong mob, Alfredo Huaynapaco, told The Associated Press. Reporters found the house garbage-strewn, nearly all the furniture gone. “Taken over by the people,” someone painted on a wall of the two-story brick home.

Neither police nor prosecutors have acted against the aggressors. While Morales condemned the violence, he also said: “The Bolivian people have no tolerance for traitors, nor do they forgive them.”

Cardenas, who wasn’t with his family at the time, brought his injured wife and children to the relative safety of their apartment in La Paz, the capital. He told the AP in an interview Monday that his sons still wake up jumpy at night, but a flood of telephoned insults has diminished.

The 58-year-old university professor and linguist has had a long career of representing Bolivia’s oppressed Indian majority. Like Morales, he grew up poor on Bolivia’s barren high plains. He made his name as a social agitator during military rule that ended in 1982.

Rising to vice president under President Gonzalo Sanchez de Losada from 1993-97, he did much to enshrine in Bolivia’s legal code greater equality for its natives — particularly in bilingual education — in a society where Indians only won the right to vote in 1952 and still face discrimination.

“The political fight is part of my personal history. They jailed and tortured me during the dictatorships but never did anyone take action against my wife and children. And if (former dictator Hugo) Banzer couldn’t shut me up, neither can Morales,” Cardenas told the AP.

Until Morales’ 2005 election, no other Indian had attained a higher political post. But many Morales supporters resent Cardenas’ association with Sanchez de Losada, a mining industry executive who fled into U.S. exile during his second term after troops in 2003 fired on Morales-affiliated protesters, killing 63 people.

Cardenas says Morales’ ruling Movement Toward Socialism has turned Bolivian discrimination inside out, exploiting age-old resentments.

“The indigenous peoples are used as shock troops,” Cardenas told the AP in August. The Bolivian Indian “had a lot of respect in the world (but) is now seen as a symbol of the discrimination of revenge, of confrontation and racism.”

Two days later, Morales won a recall election by a 2-1 margin.

Cardenas later campaigned against the centerpiece of Morales’ “anti-colonialist agenda,” the new constitution, saying that instead of truly empowering the Indians, it will concentrate power in an undemocratic leftist regime.

In January, the new charter was endorsed by 61 percent of voters.

Until Cardenas’ family was attacked, he didn’t appear to be a big concern for Morales. But now even the president’s supporters think the sacking and banishment will become a touchstone in this year’s campaign. Pro-Morales congressman Jorge Silva predicts it will encourage the opposition to “use known indigenous figures to divide and weaken Morales.”

The banishment came under a centuries-old community justice system still practiced in highland settlements once ruled by the Incas, where old methods often trump the modern democratic state.

But Cardenas claims his neighbors were put up to it by a pro-Morales activist in the National Federation of Peasant Women, Beatriz Quispe. He’s filed a formal complaint against Quispe, Huaynapaco and two others. The chief prosecutor’s office said it would interview them this week.

Meanwhile, Cardenas says he is working on uniting Morales’ foes in the highlands as well as the pro-autonomy eastern lowlands, where wealthy landowners resent the president’s attempts to expropriate land for redistribution to the poor.

Cardenas and Morales have not yet formally declared they’ll run in elections expected in December, and the opposition is badly splintered, with nobody approaching a national leader.

Already, another indigenous politician has announced his presidential campaign — Mayor Rene Joaquino of the highlands mining city of Potosi — but he hasn’t used anti-Morales rhetoric.

Joaquino, 42, is Quechua, from Bolivia’s largest ethnic group, the Incas’ direct descendants. The Aymara are No. 2 and dominate La Paz.

The two ethnic groups meld in Bolivia’s new political elite, which is copper-colored and proud, Indian and mestizo. It runs the ministries, the military and police, Congress, the state-run energy company YPFB and more than three in five city halls.

Some analysts say Morales can no longer control this new elite, some of whom show little regard for civil liberties while others have ignored his anti-corruption agenda.

“Morales’ greatest adversary these days isn’t the opposition, it’s MAS itself, due to the great corruption scheme involving a good part of the executive branch,” said Carlos Toranzo, an academic who consults for the U.N. and European governments.

Valdez reported from La Paz, Bolivia. Associated Press Writer Frank Bajak contributed from Lima, Peru.

Carnaval in Bolivia

The video is in spanish and includes an impromptu interview with the mayor of Santa Cruz, but the video provides some neat images of the first night of Carnaval in Santa Cruz.

Enjoy.

Report on Political Violence in Bolivia

The Human Rights Foundation released a report on political violence and human rights in Bolivia. (report is in spanish only). The report succinctly touches on the causes for the political violence that has taken 21 lives and left hundreds of injured and displaced people. The report also states that the governments discourse is limiting freedom of expression in the country by provoking attacks against the press and encourages racial hatred. Both of these are in direct violation of Article 13 of the American Convention on human Rights.

The sign calls for the death for the opposers to Morales' political project... also calls them "sell outs" to the American empire

CNN rapping kids are back

Just can’t get enough of them. so good…

Eye on Democracy: Chavez Expels Human Rights Watch

This occurred before the blog got started but is worthy of mention.

After the Human Rights Watch released a report which touches on the current political intolerance under Chavez and makes clear ties between a decade under Chavez and a resulting reduction of institutionalization of democracy, the Venezuelan government found it appropriate to kick HRW out of the country.

From the HRW website: “The Venezuelan government’s expulsion of two Human Rights Watch staff underscores the Chávez administration’s increasing intolerance of dissenting views, Human Rights Watch said today. The government expelled José Miguel Vivanco, Americas director at Human Rights Watch, and Americas deputy director Daniel Wilkinson on September 18, 2008, hours after they held a news conference in Caracas to present a report that describes how the government of President Hugo Chávez has weakened democratic institutions and human rights guarantees in Venezuela.”

By kicking out the messenger, Chavez has only brought more attention to the message. The report is a long 230 page testament to the concerning situation of human rights in that country… a must read for those with a few hours in their hands.

The international community has an obligation to, at the very least, investigate this further. The lack of action is concerning.

Must watch: HRF Caracas Nine

I encourage the blog readers to check out this video and the corresponding campaign. It is a year old, but is as relevant today as it was created, if not more. I believe Uson has now been conditionally released but speaking your mind still has a high cost in Venezuela. Programs like this help illustrate what is happening to democracy and fundamental freedoms in parts of the Americas.

From the Caracas Nine website: The “Caracas Nine” campaign focuses on the plight of nine Venezuelans who spoke their minds and paid a price.

These nine men and women are from all walks of life—from a law student to a judge; from a military general to a journalist. Their stories bear witness to the deplorable state of human rights in Venezuela today, where only those who conform utterly to the demands of the regime are safe from persecution. The Caracas Nine include survivors of discrimination, censorship, intimidation, false arrest, imprisonment, and torture.

Dinosaur tracks in Bolivia

Bolivian farmer Primo Rivera had long wondered about the dents in a rocky hill near his home. Paleontologists solved the mystery this month: they are fossilized dinosaur footprints — the oldest in Bolivia. the footprints belong to the nasty looking dino in the picture.

Two things stand out here:

1. The fact that dinosaur footprints continue to be discovered is incredible and speaks to all that is left to discover on our planet.

2. Good things come from naming your kid Primo.

Eye on Democracy: Freedom of the Press

In its most recent Press Release, the Human Rights Foundation has brought the world’s attention to the ongoing attacks and abuses againts the press in some Latin American countries. The press release mentions the letter the organization has sent Mr. Insulza requesting him to activate the democratic clause in countries that are trampling democracy.

Chavez and Morales in particular, continue to get away with publicly calling the members of the media liars, traitors and a number of adjectives that lead to a deterioration of the public discourse so necessary for democracy to flourish.

In his last visit to DC, Morales was saluted by a crowd of Bolivians demanding action from Mr. Insulza on this issue (picture).

Press release is in spanish.

Eye on Democracy: Nicaragua

Esteban Phoenix/Associated Press

Can it be that there is yet another pillar rising in the fight against open and free democracies in Latin America? Recent days have seen riots in Nicaragua due to claims of rigged elections favouring Daniel Ortega. People have been facing off on streets and a free for all is already in place. How much 10 years have changed! We were supposed to be moving in the direction of consolidating and institutionalizing democracies in the Americas… instead, the essential elements of democracy are being trampled upon everywhere. I am not claiming Ortega is guilty. That has to be proven and, God willing, the OAS can avoid being completely useless and find a way to work with Nicaragua to see what really happened.

In the meantime, the fact that elections are not perceived to be free, fair and transparent is a big, big problem and pisses a lot of us off. When will the OAS start providing the support needed to ensure such an essential component of democracy is protected and promoted?

Read the New York Times article.

Tapping the tappers

Evo Morales has publicly accused the United States of trying to tap his phone. Some thoughts:

1. It seems strange that a president who has been accused of tapping phones in Bolivia and using intelligence services to follow his opposition around (See Bolivian papers from the summer) would have the guts and audacity to make that accusation in the United States.

2. To the CIA: From what I hear you want to tap the VPs phone. He seems to run the show.

3. Tapping phones is a bad idea. Can we all agree on it being an intrusion of our basic freedoms?

On a kind of related note, click here for an awesome tap dancing video.

Living la vida coca…

The announcement that Bolivia will not allow the recently expelled Drug Enforcement Agency officers into the country came on the same week Morales made a whole big hoopla about trying to create a positive working relationship with President-Elect Barack Obama.

This should reeeaaally help. Talk about terrible politics.

Funny of the week: Weird soccer goals

Enjoy your weekend everyone. Here is something to get you started on a good note.

Will Clinton be the democracy watchdog?

It seems set in stone: Hillary Clinton will be the next administration’s Secretary of State. This means that she will be the face of this administration abroad and will be responsible for much of the foreign afffairs portfolio. It also means that defending the essential elements of democracy in the Americas may rest on th shoulders of the former Democratic Candidate for President.

She has been vocal in her opposition to Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro and leaders that tend towards authoritarianism. President-Elect Obama and Clinton now have an opportunity to put their money where there mouth is and make a serious effort to stregthen democracies in the Americas.

Eye on Democracy: Key elections in Venezuela this weekend

Photo: AFP/GETTY

As Venezuela approaches a number of mayoral and municipal elections this weekend, several senior opposition figures have been banned from standing for office by the government-controlled judiciary.

Leopoldo Lopez, who was the favourite to win the elections’ top prize, mayor of Caracas, was barred on the grounds of corruption despite having no conviction or any pending trial.

Chavez seems to always find creative ways of trampling democracy and ensuring his political project continues to impede a free and open society in Venezuela. This is just the latest in a number of measures aimed at impeding the opposition from having a fair shot during the elections this weekend.

Other opposition candidates, including Mr Chavez’s former wife, have accused the controversial Venezuelan leader of effectively becoming a dictator. Wow, talk about  a bad break-up.

Liberalitas will keep our readers posted on what happens in the elections this weekend.

Chavez – “The Revolution is Him”

“Chavez is the face, the leading figure and the image of the revolution. The revolution is him“

Eduardo Semtei, electoral analyst

Does this scare anybody else? Whether you love the guy or hate him, shouldn’t the “revolution” be about the ideas and the results and not about the person? How many times are we going to witness the repetition of the mistakes of the past? I feel the same way about blind support for anybody, from Chavez to Obama (a man I happen ro respect and like). The idea is the same; the democratic exchange of ideas should be about exactly that, an exchange of ideas… not about tying power to an individual. If history has taught us something it is that placing our faith in the person rather than the purpose, usually leads down a dangerous path. When did the Cuban revolution become about keeping the Castro’s in power and not about serving the best wishes of the Cuban people?

As Venezuelans head to the polls, we can only hope that the ballots are cast in a transparent, free, and fair manner. Good night and Good Luck.

Dios Bendiga a Venezuela.

Martial Law lifted in Bolivia

March for Peace in Pando

Bolivian President Evo Morales ended martial law in the northern province of Pando on Sunday more than two months after government supporters were killed in the region as a wave of political violence swept the country.

The decision made by Morales, finally brings the current constitutional referendum in line with the Bolivian Referendum law, which clearly states that a referendum cannot be called with martial law in place. Morales, however, decided to ignore this “minor” detail, which restricts the civil liberties of Bolivian citizens in Pando, until last night. His signing of the referendum law in October with martial law in place in Pando is on very dubious legal standing.

Earlier this month, the Bolvian electoral court said the law calling for the referendum states the vote cannot take place if civil liberties are restricted anywhere in the country.

What needs to be a priority for this government is to identify, in a transparent and unbiased manner, who the indviduals responsible for the deaths of September are and have the full weight of the law brought upon them. It is not clear how many people were killed in clashes between backers of Morales and anti-government groups in Pando, but local media estimates between 15 and 20.

Bringing peace and reconciliation to Pando will not be easy but it is possible. To do so however, the inflammatory language that Morales continues to use against all those who oppose him, needs to stop… and the same goes for the opposition.

Venezuela: Chavez reportedly wins 17 of 20 states while opposition takes key posts

Chavez on Election day (AP Photo/Ariana Cubillos)

As of midnight on Sunday, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s allies have reportedly won a majority of the state elections. However, the opposition is claiming some key victories, that of the two of the most populous states and the mayoral post in Caracas.

From the Associated Press: Venezuela’s electoral agency says with more than 95 percent of votes counted, opposition candidates won at least three states, while Chavez’s allies had won 17 in Sunday’s vote.

Election chief Tibisay Lucena said the opposition won in the two most populous states — Miranda and Zulia, as well as Nueva Esparta. The Caracas mayor’s office also shifts to the opposition.

Chavez’s brother, Adan, won the governor’s race in the president’s home state of Barinas. The results of two states were too close to call.

Chavez and Venezuela: Election aftermath

Here are some links covering the Venezuelan election. Chavez and the opposition candidates have both stated that the results are a victory for them. Two states remain too close to call.

- Venezuela vote emboldens Chávez

- Hugo Chavez’s candidates leading in Venezuela elections

- Venezuelan opposition gains power despite Chavez poll wins

- Venezuelan opposition gains in vote

- Record poll loosens Chavez hold

Any other good ones? Please include as comment.

Election Fraud in Nicaragua?

Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega (left) embraces Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez in Caracas, Venezuela, Jan. 25, 2008.

I came across this article in the Wall Street Journal and decided to share it. What caught my attention were the actions the author alleges President Ortega has been engaging in to secure a victory for his party. As a defender of democracy and transparent processes, it is difficult for me not to take the following comments seriously:

1. Ortega blocked the Organization of American States, the European Union and the Carter Center from receiving credentials to observe the balloting.

2. He barred Nicaragua’s highly respected independent watchdog, Ethics and Transparency — which had recognized Mr. Ortega’s 2006 victory — from the polling stations.

3. Despite getting shut out, Ethics and Transparency managed to post observers to watch from outside polling stations. It estimated that one-third of the stations experienced irregularities. There were also reports that in some places opposition-party observers were kicked out of polling stations, and some polling stations closed ahead of schedule.

This is concerning. Should this be true, citizens interested in promoting and defending democracy throughout the Americas should be bothered and, quite frankly, outraged. The people of Nicaragua deserve a free, fair and transparent election. The result of the election is important, but it is time we all recognize the importance of the need to play by the same rules, respect the democratic processes in place and guarantee that a citizen’s political opinion will not get him kicked out of a voting poll or treated unfairly.

The Washington Office on Latin America has already voiced some concerns that must be troubling the people of Nicaragua and trouble me. In a November 6 Communication it stated:

“We are alarmed by the growing climate of intolerance for those who are perceived as critics of the federal government. The physical attack on a march of opposition party activists, and the apparent unwillingness of the police to restore order, the criminal investigations of several civil society organizations and their leaders, as well as the investigation of international NGOs that have funded some of these organizations, is extremely troubling.” The Washington Office on Latin America also referenced “violent acts by government supporters against human rights defenders.”

Something to think about my friends.

“Chinese Democracy” banned in China

Who would have thought that Axl Rose would be in the headlines again?

Ok, so this article is not about democracy per se, but I think there may be a closely related story here. According to the Wall Street Journal, an official at the Chinese Ministry of Culture reportedly sent word that record distributors shouldn’t bother stocking the album, stating that any title with the word democracy is “not going to work”.

If you were wondering why the name of the recent Guns n’ Roses album, here you go: the title track from the album includes lyrics with references to Falun Gong, a meditation practice banned in China, and the line “if your Great Wall rocks blame yourself,”which has been interpreted as a critique of the Chinese government’s authoritarian rule.

I dont know if the album is any good or if the Chinese people are actually missing out on anything, but they should at least have the opportunity to choose.

Russia in America’s “backyard”

Chavez and Medvedev have a chat

Russia is in the middle of a concerted effort to strengthen ties wth Latin American countries, particularly Venezuela and its close allies in the “Bolivarian revolution”. It seems as though Russia has been waiting to present one of the most visible challenges in years to American influence in the region.However, it may not be the best time to do so.

Only a few months ago, with oil prices high, Russia was flush with cash and planning a variety of measures, including helping Venezuela build a nuclear reactor and strengthening military ties with Cuba, a former cold war ally of the Soviets.

But here is where we sit now:

1.Oil prices have plunged and the soaring revenues are gone

2.Latin Americans are much less wary of President-Elect Barack Obama than they have been of George Bush for the last 8 years. Obama has raised hopes throughout Latin America of a new era of improved relations with the United States.

What is interesting here is that Obama is going to be sworn in as president at a time in which democracy has suffered some serious setbacks in some Latin American countries and at a time in which Russia is, once again, trying to be a balancing power in the region and is courting increased partnerships with countries like Venezuela, Nicaragua and to some extent, Brazil (among others). Obama’s approach towards Latin America needs to be strategic and should forge further economic ties with the folks in the south, while always keeping the promotion of the essential elements of democracy in mind (something already agreed to in the OAS charter).

Things to consider:

Two Russian long-range strategic nuclear bombers landed in Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, for the first time in September. Mr Chavez described their visit as a “warning” to the United States.

Igor Dygalo, the Russian Navy spokesman, said that the joint manoeuvres would begin on December 1. The Peter the Great carries 20 nuclear cruise missiles and up to 500 surface-to-air missiles.

Latin America was the focus of intense ideological competition between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Venezuela has signed deals to buy Russian arms worth more than $4 billion since 2005.

Something to think about my friends.

The Hugo Chavez Show – Chapter 1

I will be posting the different chapters of the PBS documentary on Hugo Chavez called “The Hugo Chavez Show” on the blog. I found them intriguing to say the least and should help the blog readers make up their minds about the Venezuelan President (in addition to the ongoing blog posts on Chavez and democracy).

Enjoy Chapter 1: Live! Alo Presidente!

Something to think about my friends.

Eye on Democracy: Violations of Freedom of the Press

The Human Rights Foundation released a press release today outlining the contents of a letter sent to Mr. Insulza (Secretary General of the OAS), which highlights some of the violations against the freedom of the press taking place in the Americas. The letter denounces Insulza’s inaction with regard to flagrant violations of freedom of the press in the Americas, including the shutdown of television and radio stations and government-encouraged attacks on journalists.

From the HRF Release:
In Bolivia, members of groups supportive of President Morales have physically attacked reporters, journalists and other members of the media each time the president labels them “enemies” or “friends of the empire.” On October 8, 2008, Jorge Melgar Quette, host of a Bolivian television program, was arbitrarily detained by masked men following his release of a video showing a cabinet minister inciting criminal violence. Melgar is in prison on charges of terrorism and sedition.

In Ecuador, President Correa referred to the press in his country as “the lowest of the low,” labeled them as “slanderers,” and accused them of being his main opposition. On July 8, 2008, the Ecuadorean government seized three private television channels and appointed government officials as their directors (TC Television, Cable Vision and Gamavision).

In Nicaragua, President Ortega is the principal instigator of harassment aimed at journalists and other members of the media by the “blue shirts,” a group that forms part of the president’s security forces. The blue shirts continue to employ intimidation tactics aimed at members of the media, including the assault of at least two journalists in the last year.

In Venezuela, President Chavez’s constant threats against the press resulted in the 2007 closing of television channel RCTV. Journalists and stations critical of the government have also fallen victim of harassment by government supporters. In the last five years the remaining independent station, Globovision, has seen its reporters physically attacked at least 25 times, and independent journalists have faced repeated attempts on their lives for their work.

Best. Apology. Ever.

I came across this video online and was absolutely impressed with the eloquence and sincerity of this outstanding Australian Citizen. Please note his response at the end regarding what he advises other youth to do when thinking about throwing a party.

This is priceless.

She saw it all – world’s oldest person passes away at 115

World

115 years old… wow. What a life. I read the news article and could not help but think how the world has changed during her lifetime. I found myself surfing the net to review the events of the last century and kept on thinking about all the major events Edna Parker was alive for. Here is a refresher of some of the things that happened during this womans life:

1. World War One
2. Russian revolution
3. Great Depression
4. World War Two
5. Rise and Fall of Communism
6. The walk on the moon
7. Invention of Television and movies
8. Internet
9. Universal suffrage
10. Atomic Bomb
11. Emergence of AIDS
12. Mobile Phones
13.Election of a Black President in the United States of America

This list could be longer and the merits of the top ten should be the theme of a television program. The point is, this woman had the privilege of being among us for 115 years and has seen our world change tremendously. Let’s pause and think about that for a second.

Now think about the 100 years ahead of us.

Rest in Peace Edna Parker. Rest in Peace.

President Morales blames Bush… again

President Morales has been busy calling the U.S. decision to exclude Bolivia from tariff benefits “political revenge”. The accusation followed the decision of the United States to suspend Bolivia’s special trade benefits on grounds that it has not cooperated in fighting drugs.

What did President Morales think was going to happen?  After kicking out the American Ambassador, kicking out the Drug Enforcement Agency officials and blaming the U.S. for most of Bolivia’s structural problems, how did he think the Americans were going to respond? He must have seen this coming. If anything, it just gives him more material to use against the Americans. I guarantee he will blame the United States when the Bolivian Economy goes down the drain… cause it will. The merits for expelling the agencies is a debate of its own, but what is clear is the fact that the Bolivian economy will suffer because of this.

Losing these trade benefits could end up costing the Bolivian economy up to almost a half billion dollars in the middle of a global economic downturn and will cost the Bolivian people who depend on the industries bound by the agreement the most.

Bad politics have repercussions and the Bolivian people are about to suffer because of irresponsible politics by the current government. At what point is this government going to learn that you engage your “adversaries” rather than simply antagonizing them and kicking them out of your country?

The Hugo Chavez Show – Chapter 2

As promised, here is the second installment of the Hugo Chavez Show (documentary).  I could only get it in two separate videos.

Apparently, Hugo Chavez wanted to be a baseball pitcher when he was younger. How different Venezuela would be.

Something to think about my friends.

Stephen Harper takes a lesson from Hugo Chavez

As a new week filled with excitement and uncertainty begins in Canada, it is an opportunity to pause and reflect about a couple things that happened in the past 7 days.

1. We saw how institutionalized checks and balances on power can limit the ability of a government to ram bad public policy down the throat of a nation. When the Conservatives tabled an economic update that included the elimination of public funding for political parties and a number of other interesting items, the remaining political parties in Parliament (representing the majority of Canadian voters) threatened to put a serious check on the government’s power and form a coalition government.

2. Harper’s Conservative government tried to introduce a plan to eliminate public subsidies for political parties, presenting the most significant blow to Democracy in Canada in… well, a long time. The plan attacks one of the essential elements of democracy;  the pluralistic system of political parties and organizations.

Without public funding, smaller parties that represent the views of millions of Canadians, such as the Green Party, would have a difficult time continuing to exist.  The Conservatives also know that eliminating the subsidy would hurt their opposition significantly in coming elections, as they consistently do far worse in private fundraising. How would a party focused on eliminating poverty and giving the neediest Canadians a greater political voice continue to exist if it would depend on private donations? Something tells me people struggling to get by don’t have too much disposable income to donate.

These kind of actions are an affirmation that democracy needs to be protected from leaders that are bothered by checks on power, be they from the left or the right. The principle is the same: any action that is intended to systematically weaken those who disagree with your policies tend to hurt democracy. Look at Venezuela for example, Hugo Chavez has shutdown media outlets that were critical of his political project and recently prevented a number of strong candidates of the opposition from running in the municipal and regional elections without clear evidence to sustain the allegations against them.

By attempting to eliminate one of the mechanisms in Canada’s democracy aimed at strengthening a multi-party system, it seems like Harper has taken a lesson from Chavez on how to weaken those who disagree with your political project.

Here are a few other lessons from Chavez I hope Harper is not interested in:

1. Shut down media outlets that are critical… (CBC seems like a good target and you get to pretend like it is good for the economy because it cuts spending.)

2. Eliminate the ability of the courts to serve as a check on power. They tend to protect the interests of voting blocks that vote for the other parties anyway.

3. Consider ruling by decree, in the name of efficiency.

4. Eliminate any funding made available to organizations that do not share the same views, why stop at political parties?

I understand Chavez and Harper are very different leaders and represent very different political perspectives. My concern is that these kind of actions are forms of weakening democracy and are aimed at systematically limiting the ability of those who disagree with the governing party to pose a serious threat to their power.

Harper’s people have already stated that the elimination of public subsidies will be postponed, FOR NOW. Although there is no guarantee they will not bring it in the near future, it is clear that the Canadian people want to protect and strengthen democracy, not weaken it. The Harper government can take the public reaction to its proposed cuts to subsidies for political parties as a call to strengthen democracy in Canada and further consolidate it.

Democracy may be imperfect but it is the best form of governance we have. Promoting and defending it is a commitment all nations in the Americas have made in the Inter-American Democratic Charter. It is time for Canada to step up and not only ensure that its democratic institutions are strengthened locally but that it is a leading nation in the attempts of the OAS to defend democracy in the Americas.

Let’s hope Harper’s lesson is, in fact, not to follow the Chavez example, but to help eliminate the “Chavista” approach to undermining the essential elements of democracy. Mr. Harper, or whoever the Prime Minister is after this week, should be leading the fight for democracy in the Americas, not setting a weak example.

Something to think about my friends.

Democracy 101

I will expand on this later, but a reader pointed out that I speak to the essential elements of democracy consistently in the blog, yet have failed to define them. Well, here it is…

Essential Elements of Democracy:

1. Respect for Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

2. Access to and exercise of power in accordance with the rule of law

3.The holding of periodic, free, and fair elections based on secret balloting and universal suffrage as an expression of the sovereignty of the people

4. The pluralistic system of political parties and organizations

5. The separation of powers and independence of the branches of government.

Funny of the week: Family Guy does Democracy

I came across this Family Guy video and figured it was worthy of being this week’s “funny”. It is a couple minutes long but does finally make allusions to the benefits of democracy at the end. Gotta love some good ol’ satire.

Enjoy.

The good, the bad and the ugly

FIgure out which one is which. Harper, Chavez, Morales.

What a week it has been! Canada is close to a transfer of power from the Conservative party to an opposition coalition while Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez seeks to eliminate constitutional limits on presidential terms and Bolivian President Evo Morales has started to officially target his opposition on charges of terrorism.

The good: Canada abides by its constitution and could see a legal transition of power in take place in accordance with the law and without violence or turmoil. Many Canadians will experience a democratic process that occurs once in a lifetime if the opposition parties manage to form a coalition government, further consolidating the notion that constitutions are the law of the land and that democratic institutions allow for power struggles to occur within a peaceful setting. Prime Minister Stephen Harper may not be happy with where this week has lead and with the prospect of losing power, but he is still playing by the rules.

The Bad: Following municipal and regional elections, Hugo Chavez made it clear in Venezuela that he is not leaving. The president said Sunday that he would seek changes to the Constitution that would lift his term limits, allowing him to run for indefinite re-election. The move, which would have to be approved by a nationwide referendum, is expected to polarize the country further, coming a year after voters rejected a broad constitutional overhaul that included a similar measure.

The Ugly: Bolivia’s government said on Sunday it was preparing to charge a top leader of an autonomy movement with “terrorism”. The government of President Evo Morales said Branko Marinkovic, who helped lead an autonomy push by Bolivia’s four richest provinces, would be charged for instigating attacks in which at least 17 people were killed. The evidence is sketchy and he just happens to be a prominent political figure that is outspoken in his opposition to Morales.
Evo has also targeted Governor Ruben Costas as a person of interest in relation to other “crimes”, the leading opposition figure in the department of Santa Cruz. Opposition leaders are claiming this is political persecution by the Morales government.

“Che” Guevara coming to film

Steven Soderbergh directed the Spanish-language movie “Che,” which may be released in theatres in two parts titled “The Argentine” and “Guerrilla”.

Soderbergh originally intended to make a film only about Guevara’s bid to stoke rebellion in Bolivia, but felt audiences needed to know about what happened in Cuba first.

The first half of “Che” jumps between Guevara’s involvement in the Cuban uprising that helped Fidel Castro seize power in 1959, their first meeting in Mexico and Che’s visit to the United States in 1964 when he addressed the United Nations.

After Cuba, the Argentine-born doctor set off for Congo to foment revolution there, but his African campaign failed.

In the second part, Soderbergh picks up Guevara’s life again in Bolivia, where he traveled dreaming of a Cuban-style uprising.

Love him or hate him, Che will forever be part of Latin American history and Soderbergh tends to make good movies so this might be an interesting watch.

Here is the trailer:

Conservative Attack Ads out in Canada

As expected, the conservatives have finally released the attack ads aimed at making Dion and the Liberals look like they are “taking power” by getting in bed with the ’separatists’. Never mind the fact that the Liberal- NDP- Bloq coalition is following constitutional and democratic processes.

Here is the attack ad:

Independence of the Bolivian Judicial Branch at risk

A Minister of the Bolivian government led by President Evo Morales has stated that the Judicial Branch in Bolivia does not have the ethical or moral authority to be protecting or speaking about the separation and independence of powers. Walker San Miguel, Bolivian Minister of Defense stated that the Supreme Court of Justice is filled with corrupt individuals who are a result of appointments of past governments that include dictators and corrupt presidents.
The Minister’s statements yesterday tried to connect most of the members of the Supreme Court of Justice with a past government or political leader that has been found to be guilty of a crime or alleged to be corrupt. The constant allusions to a lack of ethics and morals within the judicial branch were clearly aimed at discrediting the members of the Court.

Let me be clear, this is not a defense of the members of the Supreme Court of Justice. I do no know what their histories are and am not aware of their past ties to possible cases of corruption. However, the separation of powers and the independence of the judicial branch is one of the fundamental pieces of a healthy democracy. The Organization of American States considers it to be one of the essential elements of democracy and has clearly connected the elements of democracy to the full protection of human rights. An independent and separate judcial branch and supreme court is one of the ways in which we guarantee the defense and protection of rights. Without it, maintaining an effective check on power, a balance of power among the branches of democracy and preventing authoritarian governments from abusing power becomes very difficult.

With that in mind, the Organization of American States and organizations committed to preserving and maintaining democracy and human rights, need to be wary of the comments made by the Bolivian Minister of Defense. Ensuring that the selection of judges and justices is done in a transparent and fair selection process is incredibly important and we have already seen Morales appoint judges without proper consultation of the opposition before. Minster San Miguel’s comments could be a warning sign of future actions the Morales government might want to take against “unethical” and “immoral” judges.

History has taught us that maintaining an institutionalized check on power is important. It is how we prevent dictatorships from taking place and how we ensure that our basic freedoms are not violated. Let’s keep history’s lessons in our minds as Bolivia continues to struggle through a tense political time.

Hugo Chavez Show- Chapter 3

This chapter covers the election of Hugo Chavez to the Venezuelan presidency. This particular episode helps the viewer better understand where some Chavez supporters are coming from and how committed they are to their leader.

We do what we have to do to do what we want to do…

Too often, our leaders don’t abide by this basic, yet important, principle and seem to forget that they have to abide by the rules of the game before they can implement the political vision they have.

In democracies we have outlined a few basic rules: you need to get elected by a fair and transparent process to access power, when in power you are bound by the constitution and other laws, the authority of the courts and the legislative body is granted by law and should be respected and, finally, a leader cannot have control over the mechanisms meant to prevent abuses of power. These are the rules that help us protect our societies from political abuse. These are the rules that help every citizen in a democracy dream of accessing power, regardless of colour, income level or where they were born. These are the rules, my friends, that help guarantee freedoms and rights to all of us. Finally, these are the rules that help maintain peace, order and good government.

The pursuit of freedom has cost too many lives. It has taken generations and it is not worthy of abandoning. The pursuit of justice has taken too many lives. It has taken generations and should never be abandoned. Let’s remember this next time a President closes a congress. Let’s remember this next time a court is closed or judges fired for disagreeing with a leader. Let’s remember this next time a citizen is imprisoned for speaking his mind. Let’s remember this next time the press is censored because it is critical and, please, let us remember this next time anybody wants to govern by instituting fear rather than by doing what they have to do to do what they want to do…

Something to think about my friends. Have a wonderful weekend.

Russia, the U.S. and the Americas

For all of you out there who have an interest in foreign affairs and international relations, this article from the Economist on Russia’s recent tour to South America and its possible implications for diplomacy in the region might be of interest.

Here is an excerpt:

It is Mr Chávez’s search for allies in his rhetorical and political battle against the “empire”, as he likes to call the United States, that pricked the interest of Russia and Iran. For Russia, its Caribbean naval jaunt is a symbolic riposte to America’s plan to place missile batteries in Poland and to its dispatch of naval vessels to distribute aid in Georgia after Russia’s incursion in August. The same goes for its recent revival of ties with Cuba.

But Mr Medvedev’s main purpose in Latin America is business. Mr Chávez has already bought arms worth $4.4 billion from Russia—including a Kalashnikov factory due to start producing 50,000 rifles a year in 2010. Russia was reported this month to have signed a contract to sell Venezuela portable air-defence missiles. That would alarm Colombian officials, who will fear their onward unofficial sale to the FARC guerrillas. Russian oil, gas and mining companies have signed deals to invest in Venezuela. Mr Chávez would like the Russians to build a nuclear power station.

Click here for full article

Bolivia: A divided year ahead

Bolivia's Congress during the session in which the text for the new constitution was passed

The political divide in Bolivia is stark. Often portrayed as East vs West, Indigenous vs White, Rich vs Poor or Capitalism vs Socialism, the divide is, in reality, much more complex. In the most recent recall election, Evo Morales won his re-election by more than 60% of the vote, but the governors of the departments where the opposition is strong also won by similar margins. It remains clear that Morales’ support is strong in the Andes, but has significantly decreased in the eastern lowlands. The challenge for Morales is to find a way to get cooperation from the eastern departments as they control more 60% of the economy. Unfortunately, the Morales’ government has repeatedly used inflammatory rhetoric to describe those who oppose or disagree with him as traitors, racists or friends of the “empire”. The opposition has responded with a similar tone and the political unrest has been intensifying.

On September 11, 2008, violent conflict between Morales supporters and pro-autonomy groups erupted in the department of Pando resulting in over 20 deaths. A recent commission has found that most of the responsibility lies with opposers of Morales and the opposition has already labelled the commission’s report as biased. The truth probably lies somewhere in between but there is no prospect of a political resolution in the country in the near future.

On January 25th, Bolivia will hold a referendum to approve the text of the new Constitution. Odds are, the political divide will once again be clear once the votes have been counted and that the campaign leading up to the presidential election set for December of 2009 will be long and divisive.

What will happen in Bolivia is unclear. However, Morales has already begun to target his opposers by filing charges of corruption against most of the Governors of the departments where the opposition is strong. They are unlikely to not respond. Things in Bolivia’s could get a whole lot worse before they get better.

Professor John Crabtree from Oxford University’s Centre for Latin American Studies provides a brief overview of the year ahead and the year that has past by in this short article. He states that the political polarisation between the government and its most bitter critics in the dissident civic committees will not disappear.

The Comité Pro-Santa Cruz, which is by far the most powerful of the civic organisations in eastern Bolivia, has already indicated its dissatisfaction with the agreement on the constitution between the government and the main opposition parties. Indeed, most of Santa Cruz’s Podemos congressmen voted against the law enabling the referendum to go ahead, an act of defiance against the party leadership of former president Jorge Quiroga. The local leaders in Santa Cruz say they will rally their supporters for a “no” vote in the January referendum. The civic leaders in Sucre are equally bitter, since their demands that their city be restored to its historical role as full capital of Bolivia were blatantly ignored in the agreement.

Chavez: “14 years is enough”

Venezuela’s opposition parties issued a joint statement saying the president’s re-election proposals were “anti-democratic, unconstitutional and against the national interest”and that “fourteen years are sufficient”. Opposition politician Omar Barboza said it would strengthen the actions of a government which persecutes and harasses those who do not think as it does.

The statement marked the launch of their No campaign ahead of a referendum President Chavez hopes could be held in February. Chavez is looking to approve new measures that would allow for indefinite re-election. Once his current term comes to an end, Chavez would have been president for 14 years (read more about it in this BBC article).

Hugo Chavez can propose holding a referendum to the electoral authority only if he collects 2.5 million signatures supporting it, or if the request is supported by 30% of Congress, which is currently dominated by his allies. He told supporters outside the palace that he had decided to set the constitutional amendment plans into motion – but said it should be done with full support of people, in streets gathering signatures.

The coming year will be a continuation of the political turmoil in place in Venezuela and will determine the future of the country’s democracy.

The Hugo Chavez Show: Chapter 4

Part 4 of the documentary “The Hugo Chavez Show”. I consider chapter 4 of the documentary to be the turning point of the film. The end of this chapter begins to show some of the concerning traits of the Chavez government and what it has meant for Venezuela.
Enjoy.

Dinosaur footprints in Bolivia

As a follow-up to a previous post on this topic, here is a video on the dinosaur footprints that have been discovered in Bolivia. Apparently, at the time the dinosaurs were alive, it is believed that Africa and America were all one land mass. Bolivia already has its own version of “Jurassic Park” which has a variety of dinosaur footprints on display near the city of Sucre. It is definitely worth checking out if you are ever in the area. I was in Sucre last year doing some research on the constitutional assembly and took a few hours to check it out… definitely recommend it.
BTW, are they suppoed to be called footprints? Do those things count as “feet”.

Reporters Without Borders: Hugo Chavez Targets Globovision (TV Channel)

Chavez targets those who criticize him... again

Reporters Without Border issued a press release in late November of this year in which they deplored the legal irregularity and purely political intent of the administrative move made against the privately-owned TV station Globovisión for allegedly violating the country’s electoral law and said it was clearly an attempt to cancel the station’s broadcasting licence.

From the Press Release:

“ Globovisión did nothing wrong by showing a speech by an election candidate claiming he had won,” the worldwide press freedom organisation said. “It did not say he had won and was simply doing its job of reporting.”

“The National Elections Council (CNE) said no rule had been broken. Why have none of the other media outlets which may have filmed the same footage been targeted? It seems anything goes in efforts to cancel the licence of a station that has criticised the government,” it said.

At President Hugo Chávez’ request, the National Telecommunications Commission (Conatel) told Globovisión on 27 November that action was being taken against it for breaking the electoral law, which bans media outlets giving election results before they are officially announced by the CNE. The 2004 law on TV and radio social responsibility provides for a broadcasting suspension of up to three days for this infraction and immediate licence cancellation if repeated. Globovisión ‘s licence is due to expire in 2013.

Globovisión is the only non-satellite newsstation to criticise Chávez and has never been able to get a licence to broadcast outside the capital. Its main offices were recently attacked by pro-government activists and its head, Alberto Federico Ravell, is regularlly accused by the government of “conspiring” against the president.

Honduras Plans Media watchdog

The Inter American Press Association (IAPA) voiced concern at a plan by the government of Honduras to sponsor the creation of a national news media watchdog whose objective would be to assess and keep an eye on editorial content.

Minister of the Presidency Enrique Flores Lanza announced that President Manuel Zelaya’s government is promoting “the setting up of a national watchdog on news media, in which different sectors of society could assess how news of national interest are handled objectively and professionally or on the contrary are manipulated, tendentious and irresponsible.”

IAPA President Enrique Santos Calderón, editor of the Bogotá, Colombia, newspaper El Tiempo, declared, “It is not the responsibility of the government to oversee, assess or evaluate the content of information that the media disseminate. When the authorities assume the role of watchdogs over the press they act contrary to freedom of expression and of the press guaranteed under the constitutions of our hemisphere, and such action thus becomes an interference.”

See full Press Release here.

The Presidency Minister went on to say that the Watchdog would be run by community organizations and would “determine which news media outlets become enemies of the general interests of the population by tendentiously manipulating information and systematically harming the image not of the government but of the country.”

This is a little scary and could lead to the demonization of the profession in Honduras. The Watchdog is not, in and of itself, a dangerous institution and could help point out irresponsible journalism. However, crossing the line from a watchdog to a censoring body may be a little too enticing for those who disagree with what the media outlets may be saying.

7 reasons why Bolivia is in trouble…

Check out this article for more on this.

-Declining commodity prices. Prices for Bolivia’s main export commodities have, and will continue to, suffer from the decline in world prices for its main exports.

-Decline in remittances. Remittances overwhelmingly come from Spain (40%), the United States (21%) and Argentina (16%). The downturn in economic performance in these countries is likely to hit immigrant populations disproportionately. Bolivians typically are employed in these countries in low-productivity jobs, which offer little or no job security.

-Impact of US trade preferences withdrawal. US President George Bush’s decision to suspend Bolivia’s trade preferences under the Andean Trade Preferences and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA) will compound the effects of already shrinking US demand for imports from Bolivia. It will stymie a number of industries, like textiles, clothing and furniture, which in recent years ATPDEA trade privileges encouraged to grow.

-Suspension of investments. Bolivia has not proved an attractive investment destination in recent years, and foreign direct investment (FDI) has reduced to a trickle. In the first nine months of this year, it was only 370 million dollars. In the present international climate, it is unlikely that planned investment projects will proceed at hoped-for speed.

Social impact. A sharp reduction in growth will aggravate social problems:

-Unemployment. Low mineral prices are already affecting parts of the country, like Potosi and Oruro, where mining is the main source of employment. The effects are likely to become more widespread as other sectors become affected. The ending of ATPDEA preferences could have a major impact in El Alto.

-Poverty. Falling employment levels will help push up poverty. In absolute terms, the numbers of people in poverty have continued to rise throughout recent years, despite relatively rapid economic growth. The relative percentage of people living in poverty is also set to increase.

-Social welfare. Falling fiscal income may make it harder for the government and localities to finance the various welfare schemes to which they are committed.

World Press Associations Committee: Freedom needs to be guaranteed in Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela

The Global Coordinating Committee of Press Freedom Organizations yesterday demanded more guarantees for freedom of the press and of expression in Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela during a special session on the eve of the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.The organizations present at the half-yearly meeting which discussed the major press freedom issues in the world, in addition to the IAPA, were the International Association of Broadcasting, World Press Freedom Committee, Committee to Protect Journalists and International Press Institute. They are not alone in their calls for more and better guarantees in the Americas. Reporters without Borders and the Human Rights Foundation have also recently released statements bringing attention to some concerning occurrences in some countries in Latin America. The freedoms of the Press and of Expression are fundamental to a healthy and are essential to help guarantee a healthy exchange of ideas. Democracy is at risk in these countries and world leaders can continue to ignore it, but it will be at a high cost.

Former Presidents to Obama: “Democracy in Latin America Needs Support”

I came across this letter online and felt compelled to share it on the Blog. I read it here, but think it was originally posted on the Wall Street Journal. Authors: Mr. Jose Maria Aznar is a former prime minister of Spain. Mr. Vicente Fox is a former president of Mexico. Mr. Andres Pastrana is a former president of Colombia. Mr. Julio Maria Sanguinetti is a former president of Uruguay. Mr. Francisco Flores is a former president of El Salvador.

We are friends of the United States. We admire the long firm commitment of the American people to the values of freedom, democracy and individual dignity. When we served our countries, we did our best to strengthen hemispheric and transatlantic links with the U.S.

A few weeks ago, the American people held their 56th presidential election. The freedom of the American people to express their will through the democratic process has shown the world once more that the achievements of a great nation rely on the strong respect for the principles of pluralism, free public opinion, and the rule of law.

We have always believed that close relations among democratic nations is not only good bilaterally but globally as well. Friendship, respect, cooperation and trade among democracies promote prosperity, encourage stability, and reinforce freedom.

President-elect Barack Obama and his new administration and Congress will face difficult challenges and threats. Their decisions and actions will play a decisive role in the promotion of democracy and prosperity throughout the world.

Right now, we are undergoing a financial crisis of unprecedented dimensions. In this globalized world, cooperation, leadership, intellectual honesty and political courage are required more than ever. Judging from our experience governing, we can see that some new answers will be required to address this crisis. We need creative solutions, and they should be based on the sound principles of accountability and transparency. However, we should not neglect the other problems we face.

Mr. Obama’s choice for secretary of state — Hillary Clinton — will help build bridges of understanding and cooperation with Latin America. Latin America is an integral part of the community of nations that share the values of liberal democracy and market economy. Its combined GDP is larger than China’s GDP.

History shows that whenever Latin America has been neglected the cause of freedom and prosperity has been undermined. Therefore, it is essential that nations that embrace the principles of freedom and democracy band together to face today’s security threats.

We live in a dangerous world. The demise of communism was a step forward in the cause of liberty. But history has returned. The old enemies of free and open societies pose new challenges to the world. Terrorism, whatever its nature, continues to pose a threat to civilization and peace. Islamism is both a model and a yoke for millions. Regressive utopianism is spreading in many Latin American countries through a wave of populism. Nationalism and religious fanaticism continue to feed conflict and instability.

The enemies of freedom that share anti-Western views are now forming new alliances. Liberties and freedoms are progressively being diminished inside some Latin American countries while hard-power foreign policies are being implemented as a means to increase influence and weaken the common enemy: the West. Latin Americans must continue to work with their American partners and friends to ensure the protection of democracy and other civil institutions. We must promote a transition to democracy in Cuba and direct our efforts to avoid the resurgence of authoritarian regimes.

Poverty is a painful reality in many countries. Millions of people do not have access to health care or education. This is unacceptable. We strongly believe that the benefits of globalization should be available to everybody. We have found in our own countries that strengthening democratic institutions, providing good governance, and opening up our borders to trade is the best way to improve social conditions and economic welfare.

Latin America has much to gain from free trade. Successfully negotiating free-trade agreements will help bring progress and prosperity to Latin American countries, as well as around the globe.

Today, there are over 40 million people with strong links to Latin America who live in the U.S. and, through their dynamism, contribute to its greatness. The tradition of freedom embraced by the U.S. is in accord with Hispanic traditions and culture. The peaceful coexistence of the American and Hispanic traditions reinforces the idea of Latin America being part of the Western world.

Latin America needs support against the threats it currently faces. It is essential that Latin America be able to count on the support of the U.S. if it is to succeed at promoting and consolidating common values and principles.

Latin American democrats share the dream of freedom and progress with the American people. President-elect Obama embodies a hope that should be fulfilled.

Flights gone crazy

Absolutely amazing video showing every flight in the world in 72 seconds. Kudos to Nunc Scio for finding it.

Bolivia: 245 attacks against reporters in 1 year

Bolivia’s National Media Observatory recently stated that there have been a total of 245 attacks against reporters and members of the press and that the attacks have increased over the past few months. The incidents have mostly taken place during coverage of political events and the Observatory notes that reporters from different channels are associated to a certain political viewpoint or agenda and are targeted because of that.

President Morales has followed the example set by his coach, Hugo Chavez, and has repeatedly stated that the media is part of his opposition. His supporters have been targeting reporters because they consider them to be enemies of the political vision set by Evo Morales.

These attacks and the political situation in Bolivia will not get better until Morales realizes he has been given the honour to serve the Bolivian people, not the authority to be their supreme leader. The language his government uses should reflect that.

Castro’s first foreign trip as leader

The Cuban leader met his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chavez, a key ally of the communist-run island state and a long-time admirer of Fidel Castro.

After their meeting, the two leaders presided over the signing of a series of joint energy and commercial deals. Mr. Castro, 77,and Mr. Chávez discussed a range of cooperation projects in areas including agriculture, education, medicine and athletic training that are supported by thousands of Cuban advisers operating in Venezuela. The two leaders signed an agreement opening the way for Venezuela to continue assisting Cuba in increasing its oil-refining capacity and to eventually build a plant in Cuba to import liquid natural gas.

Cuba is by far the largest beneficiary of Venezuela’s foreign aid, receiving more than $150 million to build a petrochemical complex in Cienfuegos on Cuba’s southern coast. But with oil prices plunging recently, the financing for some of Venezuela’s foreign aid projects has come into question.

More articles on this:

New York Times

BBC World

CNN

Hugo Chavez Show Part 5

CHAPTER FIVE
The Chávez Paradox
As seen weekly on Aló Presidente, it’s not the opposition, but Chávez’s own supporters and cabinet members who most lack freedom of expression.

Books on Democracy

Here are a few must reads that I enjoyed. The language is somewhat academic but very relevant when some democracies are moving away from consolidation.

Assessing the Quality of Democracy -Ed. Larry Diamond and Leonardo Morlino

Consolidating the Third Wave Democracies

Constitutionalism and Democracy – Ed. John Elster and Rune Slagstad

UNASUR’s growing pains

Excerpt from a good article by Alexei Barrionuevo from the New York Times. Click here for full article:

“Latin American leaders took another step away from the decades-old orbit of the United States at a meeting here that brought together nearly all of Latin America and the Caribbean, but excluded the United States and Europe.

The 31 Western Hemisphere leaders at a three-day meeting in Brazil included, clockwise from upper left, Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, Raúl Castro of Cuba, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil and Evo Morales of Bolivia. The United States was not invited.

And in the process of convening the leaders of 31 countries, Brazil once again flashed its credentials as the undisputed leader of Latin America.

But the host country’s highly popular president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, an ally of the United States, did not prevent the leaders from celebrating the inclusion of Raúl Castro, Cuba’s president, and from using the occasion to attack the United States and Europe for their roles in causing the global economic crisis that is roiling this region as well.

“Cuba is returning to where it always should have been,” Hugo Chávez, Venezuela’s president, told reporters. “We are complete.”

The United States became a punching bag at the three-day conference, which ends Wednesday, in this tourist haven in Brazil’s Bahia State. Mr. Castro was hardly alone in assailing the United States and what he called its “neo-liberalist” model for the credit crisis, which is affecting many other economies.

But even as the Latin American leaders spoke of their collective power and growing unity, regional strains have been evident.

In Bolivia, Oscar Ortíz, the president of the Senate and a prominent critic of President Evo Morales, called on Unasur, the new regional body, to investigate further recent killings in northern Bolivia, which a Unasur commission described unequivocally as a massacre.

The region’s leaders continue to struggle to pick a leader for Unasur. Tabaré Vásquez, Uruguay’s president, said in October that he would oppose the nomination of former President Néstor Kirchner of Argentina, a stance that reflects the tense relations between the countries in the past year.

Tension has also been increasing between Ecuador and Brazil, with President Rafael Correa of Ecuador expelling executives from Odebrecht, a major Brazilian construction company, and disputing a loan by Brazil’s powerful national development bank, which finances public works projects throughout Latin America.

Funny of the week: Top Ten W. Bush Moments

As many of you start to enjoy the holidays and are about to begin the weekend, I thought I would leave you with some of the funniest George W Bush moments of the last 8 years.

Enjoy

Evo Morales “double” almost lynched by Bolivia’s Aymara Indians

Excerpt from article from the Latin American Herald Tribune:
Peasant leader Valerio Queso, who played the president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, in a movie was attacked and kidnapped by members of an Aymara Indian community that accused him of leading the occupation of their lands, according to an article Saturday in the local press.

Queso, 33, whose strong likeness to Morales led him to star in the 2007 film “Evo Pueblo,” has become in recent months the top leader of the “Movimiento Sin Techo” (Homeless Movement) in La Paz that seeks land on which to build homes.

According to the daily La Prensa, police rescued Queso and two other leaders of the movement on Friday from 400 Indians holding them captive in the town of Tacachira on the outskirts of the city of El Alto near La Paz.

Queso’s followers occupied on Thursday 10 hectares (25 acres) belonging to that Aymara community, which reacted by taking leaders of the Homeless Movement hostage, beating them and threatening to burn them alive at a community assembly.

Police negotiated with the Tacachira leaders and persuaded them to hand over the hostages after a series of scuffles, since the most radical Indians insisted on lynching Queso.

For the rest of this article please click here.

The Hugo Chavez Show Part 6: “Fidel”

It’s a rare Sunday when Chávez doesn’t mention Fidel Castro in his broadcast. He admires Castro and helps him. There are many ways they are united.

Chavez Intends to Expropriate Shopping Centre

On his Sunday program “Alo Presidente” President Hugo Chavez announced the expropriation of an American style shopping mall situated in the heart of Caracas. The president announced his intentions to build a hospital or school in the expropriated land.

Over the years, Chavez has urged Venezuelans to shed their materialism and their taste for designer clothes, big cars, Scotch whiskey, plastic surgery and American consumerism.

In addition to 273 stores, Sambil Candelaria, the shopping centre, also was built to have 4,300 square meters of offices, a convention center with capacity for 2000 people, a 10-plex movie cinema, restaurants and a food court.

With this, Hugo Chavez has moved his attacks on consumerism beyond simple rhetoric and has delivered a hard blow to retail and corporate investors in his country in the middle of the most important shopping period of the year.

Clip from the show (Spanish):

Enjoying the good things in life this Holiday Season

This video of a few interesting commercials helps put some of the good things in life in perspective.

Morales: “The far right tried to kill me”

As reported in CNN — A top Bolivian government official said Monday that the country’s intelligence services had uncovered a plot to assassinate President Evo Morales.

“A few weeks ago, the state organizations of intelligence received information about plans in relation to an assassination, and that those plans came from the far-right opposition,” Minister of Government Alfredo Rada told reporters in La Paz.

Rada said the plan was to be carried out by an indigenous person while Morales was in a crowd.

The assertion came after Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said over the weekend that Morales, the nation’s first indigenous president, had revealed to him in a telephone call the existence of the alleged conspiracy to kill him.

Liberalitas note: After reviewing the spanish media coverage and the statements made, the evidence provided to support this claim is sketchy. Any allegation of an assassination attempt is  not to be taken lightly and should also be accompanied by evidence that is credible. It is not the first time Morales alleges that there is a conspiracy against him led by the United States. He shares the rhetoric of the U.S. blame game with his close ally Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and it seems that both presidents are less interested in speaking to a concrete plan to address the sociall ills that continue to affect their countries and are glad spending their precious public time speaking to conspiracies and plots against the southern Bolivarian revolution.

Secretary General of the OAS Jose Miguel Insulza expected to run for Chilean Presidency

According to Noticias24.com, Jose Miguel Insulza will be leaving his post as Secretary General of the Organization of American States to stand as a candidate for the Chilean presidency. According to the paper’s source, Insulza’s likely replacement will be Aristides Royo, former president of Panama.

Insulza has led the OAS at a time in which democracy in the Americas has seen the rise of leaders that have weakened democratic institutions in their countries. Insulza stood by as attacks against the freedom of the press were blatant in Venezuela, Bolivia and Honduras. Insulza stood by as the independence of the judicial branch was eroded in the continent and decisions made by courts were ignored. Insulza stood by when opposers of undemocratic governments were imprisoned for speaking their minds or were politically persecuted because they would not stand by and allow the trampling of democracy to take place. That is his legacy.

Mr. Insulza’s replacement will be stepping into the position as Mr. Obama steps into the White House. The responsibility to protect democracy and promote the principles of freedom and human rights in the Americas will be, in large part, carried forward by these two men. The timing for a new leader could not have been better. Democracy is at risk and it is time to take action.

Insulza will stay at the OAS until the end of his current term: Says no to Chilean Presidency

Jose Miguel Insulza, the secretary- general of the Organization of American States, announced his withdrawal as a candidate in Chile’s presidential election.

Insulza, 65, called on members of the ruling coalition parties to support the candidacy of former President Eduardo Frei, in a televised news conference in Santiago today. Frei, 66, was president from 1994 to 2000. During the 2000-2006 administration of President Ricardo Lagos, Insulza served as interior minister, which also doubles as vice president. He was an adviser to former Chilean President Salvador Allende, who was overthrown in a 1973 military coup by Augusto Pinochet.

Current President Michelle Bachelet, who was elected in 2006, must step down in March 2010 as presidents of Chile are now barred from serving consecutive terms.

Insulza has expressed his desire to stay at the OAS and serve the remainder of his term.

Link to this Bloomberg article here.

Morales will launch state-run daily paper

Bolivian President Evo Morales said on Sunday he would launch a state-run daily newspaper later this month, saying the paper would act as a counterbalance to the “anti-government” local media.

Morales has nationalized energy, mining and telecommunications firms since taking office in 2006. He is also starting an airline and plans to launch state paper, cement and sugar companies in an effort to tighten his government’s control over the economy.

During a radio interview, Morales accused some Bolivian media of attacking his administration and said the nascent newspaper will be charged with “gathering the truth,” ABI reported.

Morales, a close ally of Venezuela’s fiery leftist president, Hugo Chavez, frequently criticizes local media. Last month, he threatened to stop giving news conferences for local journalists.

Blog readers that have been following the attacks against the media led by the President’s supporters in Bolivia are aware that the Morales administration has been active in its efforts to silence the opposition and the media from voicing their concerns with the way the country is being mismanaged. (See this Blog post for more info on recent attacks against the press in Bolivia).

Evo Morales is establishing a new outlet for his “version of the truth” to be provided to the Bolivian people on a daily basis. My guess is it will be nothing more than state propaganda.

Hugo Chavez Show Part 7

CHAPTER SEVEN
2007 – Re-Elected and Newly Confident
He silences a TV station, presses for centralized powers in the presidency and, on his TV show, puts an Irish journalist in the hot seat.

Chavez expels Israeli envoy

I came cross this article From Bloomberg and thought I would post it for the blog readers. I wonder if other countries in the region are considering this type of action.
“Venezuela’s government expelled Israel’s ambassador and said the country’s leaders should be tried for war crimes after more than 600 Palestinians were killed by fighting in the Gaza Strip.

Some personnel at the embassy in Caracas also must leave, Venezuela’s foreign ministry said in a statement. President Hugo Chavez said yesterday that Israel’s fight against Hamas was “genocidal” and had the support of President George W. Bush.

“If there’s any shame in the world, the president of Israel should be taken to the International Criminal Court along with the president of the United States,” Chavez said today in comments broadcast by state television. “How much are the Palestinian children suffering?”

Chavez frequently seeks conflicts with U.S. allies and the rhetoric against Israel may be designed to bolster his pro-Arab credentials within the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, said Javier Corrales, an associate professor of political science at Amherst College. Venezuela, the fourth- biggest supplier of foreign oil to the U.S., is an OPEC member.

“Israel presents a great case, because it’s a clear ally of the U.S., and having this kind of fight has little cost,” Corrales said. “This is very much in line with being in favor of radical Arab countries.”

Chavez has over the past decade forged stronger diplomatic and trade ties with Iran, which the U.S. has labeled a state- sponsor of terrorism. Iran, the second-largest producer in OPEC and a Hamas supporter, has called for a suspension of crude exports to allies of Israel.

Condemning Violence

Calls to the Israeli embassy in Venezuela weren’t answered. The Venezuelan foreign ministry’s statement didn’t specify how many staff members from the embassy would be expelled.

Governments across Latin America, including Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico, have condemned the violence in the Middle East and called for an end to fighting.

Israeli forces struck a school run by the United Nations in the Gaza Strip today, killing at least 30 Palestinians hiding in the compound, according to Christopher Gunness, a spokesman for the UN Relief and Works in Jerusalem. Several mosques and schools have been struck since Israel began an assault on Gaza 11 days ago. Israel alleges Hamas was using the buildings to hide arms and wanted militants.

The Israeli army said in a faxed statement late today that its investigations showed that “among the dead in the school were members of the military wing of the Hamas terror organization and a cell firing rockets and mortars at Israeli forces in the area.”

Deaths, Injuries

At least 630 Palestinians have died in the conflict and 2,600 have been wounded, said Mu’awia Hassanein, chief of emergency medical services in Gaza. Six Israeli soldiers have been killed since the ground fighting began, the army said.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has been lobbying throughout the Middle East for a cease-fire, said the casualties at the school demonstrate the urgent need to stop the fighting.

All branches of the Venezuelan government showed support for Palestinians today. Lawmaker Cilia Flores, president of the National Assembly, along with several other lawmakers, wore a traditional keffiyeh cloth during today’s session.

“In this tragic and upsetting moment, the Venezuelan people communicate their unconditional solidarity with the heroic Palestinian people,” the foreign ministry’s statement said.

A dispute between Chavez and Israel may make it more difficult for U.S. President-elect Barack Obama to improve relations with Venezuela. The socialist South American leader has accused the U.S. of supporting opposition groups in Venezuela, and in September expelled the U.S. ambassador in Caracas.

“It will be much harder for Obama to extend a generous olive branch after this, because pro-Israel sections of the Democratic and Republican parties aren’t going to be happy,” Corrales said.

New Year’s attack on tv channel by Chavez supporters

Reporters Without Borders has condemned the tear-gas grenade attack on the Caracas headquarters of privately-owned TV news station Globovisión on January 1st. It has been claimed by La Piedrita, a radical group based in the west Caracas slum of 23 de Enero that has claimed previous attacks on news media critical of President Hugo Chávez’s government.

“La Piedrita has yet again acted on its insane view that certain privately-owned media should be regarded as ‘military targets’,” Reporters Without Borders said. “The government disowned the group’s stance after a physical attack on Globovisión journalists in October but its disavowal should have been followed by judicial measures and yesterday’s attack shows they have been too long in coming. Those responsible for yesterday’s incident must be identified and brought to justice before they do anything irreparable.”

The tear-gas grenade was thrown at the Globovisión building by two individuals on a motorcycle. It went off after landing on the roof and discharged tear gas into an air-conditioning duct with the result that the building had to be evacuated. Leaflets signed by La Piedrita, criticising Globovisión and the daily El Nacional, were found at the scene.

A radically pro-Chávez group, La Piedrita has in the past four months been responsible for two similar attacks on Globovisión, an attack on the daily El Nuevo País and an attack on the home of Globovisión reporter Marta Colomina. The government condemned the group’s “political infantilism” after it attacked a Globovisión crew that was covering a demonstration in 23 de Enero.

President Chávez regards Globovisión as a “coup monger” and “traitor to the motherland” and had an administrative investigation brought against the station for alleged “violation of the electoral law” after regional elections on 23 November. The move has been widely criticised, including by members of the National Electoral Council.

Human Rights Watch Responds to Criticism of Venezuela Report

Kenneth Roth, Executive Director of the Human Rights Watch has responded to a group of “experts” that had questioned some of the conclusions and statements made by Human Rights Watch regarding the situation of human rights in Venezuela. I found the report to be fair and accurate and was pleased to see HRW respond appropriately. Here is some context of the exchange from the HRW website:

• In December, over 100 Latin America experts called into question the HRW report, “A Decade Under Chávez: Political Intolerance and Lost Opportunities for Advancing Human Rights in Venezuela,” stating it “is politically motivated, as well as grossly exaggerated, based on unreliable sources, and advertises broad and sweeping allegations that are unsupported by the evidence.” To support their allegations of political bias, the critics quote the report’s lead author, Jose Miguel Vivanco, who said: “We did the report because we wanted to demonstrate to the world that Venezuela is not a model for anyone.”
• “A Decade Under Chávez,” published in September 2008, “examines the impact of the Chávez presidency on institutions that are essential for ensuring respect for human rights and the rule of law: the courts, the media, organized labor, and civil society,” states HRW. Specifically, HRW charges Chávez’s regime with openly encouraging political discrimination and failing to live up to the standards of its own constitution, such as the separation of powers and judicial oversight. Moreover, adds the human rights monitor, “the Chávez government has engaged in often discriminatory policies that have undercut journalists’ freedom of expression, workers’ freedom of association, and civil society’s ability to promote human rights in Venezuela.”

And an interesting paragraph included in the conclusion of the letter published by the HRW.

“I would like to take at face value your own professed concern for promoting accurate reporting on human rights in Venezuela. But I do not see how disseminating a grossly inaccurate depiction of our report can possibly contribute to that goal. Given what’s at stake in Venezuela today, I think your letter is an unhelpful distraction. If anything, its unfounded allegations will only contribute to the climate of political intolerance that currently exists in the country, undercutting local efforts to promote democratic pluralism and greater respect for basic human rights.”

Full Letter Here.

Campaigns in full swing for the vote on the Bolivian Constitutional text

On January 25th, the Bolivian people will go to the polls to decide whether or not they will accept the text of the new constitution. Campaigns for both sides are in full effect and the all political leaders are bombarding the media with their message of support of or opposition to the text.

The vote presents president Evo Morales with the opportunity to pass some of his political priorities in the new text.

Here are some of the campaign videos that I could find on YouTube. Please forward any other you ones you may be able to find to liberalitasblog@gmail.com

Bolivia’s New Constitution will create “chaos” if approved: Carlos Mesa

Former President of Bolivia, Carlos Mesa, outlines some of the reasons why the new constitution’s approval could be detrimental for the nation.

From Bloomberg.com
By Jonathan J. Levin

Bolivia’s proposed constitutional overhaul will create “chaos” in the Andean nation if it’s approved in a nationwide vote on Jan. 25, former President Carlos Mesa said.

The proposal, spearheaded by current President Evo Morales, would increase the power of the indigenous majority by setting quotas for the representation of ethnic groups in the government. The quotas threaten the rights of other Bolivians, Mesa said at a news conference today at his office in the capital La Paz.

“I will vote ‘no’ for the constitution on Jan. 25,” Mesa said. “The construction of a plural democracy is based in the free and equal election of citizens; this mechanism will generate chaos and inequality.”

Mesa, who governed Bolivia from 2003 to 2005, is running for president against the incumbent Morales in December elections. Morales is the first indigenous leader of the Andean nation and has a 56 percent approval rating, according to a January poll from La Paz-based pollsters Ipsos Apoyo.

Mesa said Morales has polarized Bolivia with policies that favor some groups at the expense of others.

The Morales government seizes land it decides was illegally acquired by large landowners with the aim of eventually redistributing the land to native communities for farms. The government also uses taxes on Bolivia’s natural gas industry to fund stipends for students and senior citizens.

“The government has brought the country to polarization and division like we haven’t lived in decades,” Mesa said. “On Jan. 26 the country will be more polarized and more divided than ever before.”

Awesome trailer: 2081

Based on the short story Harrison Bergeron by celebrated author Kurt Vonnegut, 2081 depicts a dystopian future in which, thanks to the 212th Amendment to the Constitution and the unceasing vigilance of the United States Handicapper General, everyone is finally equal… The strong wear weights, the beautiful wear masks and the intelligent wear earpieces that fire off loud noises to keep them from taking unfair advantage of their brains. It is a poetic tale of triumph and tragedy about a broken family, a brutal government, and an act of defiance that changes everything.

Click here for website

HRF releases details on case of political persecution in Venezuela

Humberto Quintero: Case Summary (From Caracas Nine Website)

On December 13, 2004, unknown persons captured Rodrigo Granda, international spokesperson for the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) in Venezuela. They took him to Colombia, where he was arrested by the authorities and subsequently imprisoned. The capture of Granda led to a diplomatic crisis between Venezuela and neighboring Colombia. Venezuela’s president, Hugo Chávez, claimed that national sovereignty had been violated.

On the morning of January 12, 2005, Venezuelan National Guard Lieutenant Colonel and Commander of the Anti-Extortion and Kidnapping Unit in the State of Táchira, José Humberto Quintero Aguilar, was arrested without a judicial warrant. He was taken to the headquarters of the Military Intelligence Division (DIM), where he remained incommunicado for 7 days was denied access to legal counsel.

Quintero has told HRF that on his first night at DIM he was handcuffed, blindfolded, and taken by car to an undisclosed location. There he was beaten and tortured until he agreed to provide a video confession stating that he was responsible for Rodrigo Granda’s capture.

Quintero maintains that between asphyxiations he was told to say that United States and Colombian intelligence agencies were involved in the capture of Granda. He was told to say that he had received a cash bribe to kidnap Granda and deliver him to the Colombian authorities. Quintero denies that he captured Granda, but the torture he suffered made him give the unknown officials the answers they wanted. His confession was videotaped and only after its completion was he returned to a cell in DIM headquarters.

His torture continued upon his return to DIM. He was kept in a 7 x 8 foot cell in the basement of the building for seven days. His cell had no illumination except for a one-foot window facing the hallway. Quintero was stripped of all of his clothing except for shorts and sandals and was not allowed to have a watch or to know the time. His meals were provided at random intervals, and DIM agents routinely interrupted his sleep and subjected him to hours of interrogation. On January 19, 2005, he was transferred to Ramo Verde military prison to await trial for abuse of power, high treason, violation of military decorum, and illegitimate deprivation of liberty. In November of 2007, Quintero was convicted to 3 years and 8 months in prison. An appeals court annulled this decision on due process grounds: the court lacked jurisdiction and provided insufficient reasoning for its decision. Quintero remains at Ramo Verde, now undergoing a new trial for the same charges.

Quintero’s torture has resulted in lasting repercussions to his health. He was denied medical care for three weeks after the torture took place and, four months after his arrest, he sustained an internal hematoma (a blood clot in an organ resulting from a broken blood vessel). At least one year after the incident, he was still plagued by severe back pain that prevented him from sleeping. Lumbar and pulmonary resonance tests reveal that Quintero had severe injuries in his thorax.

According to Quintero, DIM agents have threatened to kidnap his family members and hand them over to the FARC.

HRF has verified the damage done to Quintero’s thorax. The Venezuelan government has not disproved these claims, choosing instead to ignore various formal complaints and requests for investigations filed by his attorney, even when Quintero has said that he is willing and able to identify two of the men who tortured him.

Quintero’s allegations of torture merit an inquiry by Venezuelan authorities. HRF takes no position on whether Quintero is guilty or innocent of the charges for which he remains incarcerated. However, evidence points to unmistakable violations of human rights, specifically the rights to due process under the law and to legal counsel, as well as the rights to be free from arbitrary detainment and torture.

Check out the full details at the Caracas nine website

Hugo Chavez Show: Part 8 of 8

Ten Years On, Serious Social Ills Remain
Kidnappings and murder, unequal distribution of oil wealth, food shortages – yet the poor still believe things would be worse without Chávez.

God’s Land: Mennonites and land ownership in Bolivia

Came across this excellent radio documentary which briefly reviews the current hardships Mennonites in Bolivia are experiencing as their way of life intersects with the current Bolivian political reality.

From the CBC:
Forty years ago, a group of Canadian Mennonites packed up and headed for Bolivia. They went in search of good farm land and isolation. And that’s what they got. But now, their quiet, comfortable existence has been caught up in a fierce political debate.

According to one study, the majority of arable land in Bolivia is concentrated on just 700 farms leaving many of the country’s indigenous people with little or nothing. Evo Morales has vowed to change that. He’s Bolivia’s first indigenous leader and he’s proposing a series of new laws on land ownership as well as a new constitution that Bolivians will vote on in two weeks. And if those laws pass, the Mennonites — and there are nearly ten thousand of them — could see their way of life disappear.

Freelance broadcaster Sarah Richards traveled to eastern Bolivia to visit these reclusive Mennonite communities. And she’s prepared this documentary about their uncertain future. It’s called God’s Land.

Listen to the documentary on the CBC website. Scroll down to Part 2.

Bolivia and Venezuela cut ties with Israel over Gaza conflict

Bolivia and Venezuela have become the first countries in the world to cut diplomatic ties with Israel over the conflict in Gaza.

President Evo Morales made the announcement in a speech to diplomats in the government palace in La Paz. He referred to the Israeli offensive in Gaza as a “genocide”.

Morales is a close ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who expelled Israel’s ambassador to his country on January the 6th, in protest over Gaza.

Caracas accused Israel of what it said were “flagrant violations of international law” and of using “state-sponsored terrorism” against the Palestinians.

Israel maintains the offensive is aimed at ending cross-border rocket attacks by militants in Gaza.

Hugo Chavez sets date for referendum on presidential re-elections

The vote is set for February 15th, and if passed, would allow President Hugo Chavez to run for office again.

The announcement comes a day after MPs backed a constitutional amendment brought by Mr Chavez’s supporters.

A plan to lift term limits was defeated by the Venezuelan people last year. To Mr. Chavez the number one priority continues to be the consolidation of power around him rather than the garnering of support for his vision among all groups of society. He has openly stated that he believes he needs at least another 10 years to implement his socialist revolution.

If the revolution were about the poor in Venezuela, he would be focusing on engaging the opposition and finding ways for everyone to move forward together rather than further dividing the country with his attempts to stay in power indefinitely. Venezuela’s poor continue to be poor, crime levels have not decreased and the promised benefits of the revolution remain unseen. Worst of all, the political intolerance that grows daily in Venezuela may be opening the doors and windows of the country to violence and civil unrest.

Something to think about.

Article on this by the BBC

Dictatorship for Dummies: Venezuelan Edition

I read an article written by Mary Anastasia O’Grady and felt compelled to share it. She points out some of the troubling ways in which Chavez has attempted to consolidate his power by controlling the economy, political institutions and information.

The following are some excerpts from the article:

It is true that popular discontent with chavismo has been rising as oil prices have been falling. The disillusionment is even likely to increase in the months ahead as the economy swoons. But having used the boom years to consolidate power and destroy all institutional checks and balances, Mr. Chávez has little incentive to return the country to political pluralism even if most Venezuelans are sick of his tyranny. If anything, he is apt to become more aggressive and dangerous as the bloom comes off his revolutionary rose in 2009 and he feels more threatened.

Certainly “elections” can’t be expected to matter much. Mr. Chávez now controls the entire electoral process, from voter rolls to tallying totals after the polls have closed. Under enormous public pressure he accepted defeat in his 2007 bid for constitutional reforms designed to make him president for life. But so what? That loss allowed him to maintain the guise of democracy, and now he has decided that there will be another referendum on the same question in February. Presumably Venezuela will repeat this exercise until the right answer is produced.

All police states hold “elections.” But they also specialize in combining the state’s monopoly use of force with a monopoly in economic power and information control. Together these three weapons easily quash dissent. Venezuela is a prime example.

The Venezuelan government is now a military government. Mr. Chávez purged the armed forces leadership in 2002 and replaced fired officers with those loyal to his socialist cause. Like their counterparts in Cuba, these elevated comandantes are well compensated. Lack of transparency makes it impossible to know just how much they get paid for their loyalty, but it is safe to say that they have not been left out of the oil fiesta that compliant chavistas have enjoyed over the past decade. Even if the resource pool shrinks this year, neither their importance nor their rewards are likely to diminish…

She continues:

One measure that Mr. Chávez relies on heavily is control of the narrative. In government schools children are indoctrinated in Bolivarian thought. Meanwhile the state has stripped the media of its independence and now dominates all free television in the country. This allows the government to marinate the poor in Mr. Chávez’s antimarket dogma. His captive audiences are told repeatedly that hardship of every sort — including headline inflation of 31% last year — is the result of profit makers, middlemen and consumerism.

Full article available here.

Season 8 of the West Wing

Well, not quite. But if it ever was going to happen the credits would look like this:

Yes He Did…

As Obama is preparing to deliver his inauguration speech, it only seemed fitting to post the video that resonated throughout the world during the campaign.

It seemed fitting for the blog today.

Bolivia’s Brand

Starting with the Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada government, Bolivian politics have been evolving through crises. Social movements, autonomy movements, constitutional changes, etc have all met at a crossroads at which it is hard to predict how the future will unfold. As the referendum on the constitution is drawing near, it is inevitable to consider what the morning after will look like. Will the country stand more divided than ever or will it finally be an opportunity for the different political forces to move forward with an agenda that promotes freedom, justice and economic development.

These thoughts came to mind today as the trailer for “Our Brand is Crisis” made its way back to my screen. Much has happened since the film was shot and much will take place in 2009. My hope is that the country is able to move in the right direction. If you have not seen this doc yet, make sure to make some time to check it out.

HB

Live Blog during Obama’s Inauguration

The New York Times is running a live blog during the Obama inauguration. If you don’t have a live stream and are caught without access to a tv, this may be the next best thing. Link is available here.

Obama vs Chavez: So it begins…

(reuters) Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Saturday Barack Obama had the “stench” of his predecessor as U.S. president and was at risk of being killed if he tries to change the American “empire.

Chavez said frayed ties with Washington were unlikely to improve despite the departure of Bush, who the Venezuelan leader has often called the “devil.”

“I hope I am wrong, but I believe Obama brings the same stench, to not say another word,” Chavez said at a political rally on a historic Venezuelan battlefield.

“If Obama as president of the United States does not obey the orders of the empire, they will kill him, like they killed Kennedy, like they killed Martin Luther King, or Lincoln, who freed the blacks and paid with his life.”

Venezuela is a leading supplier of oil to the United States and the two countries once enjoyed close ties.

Relations deteriorated after Chavez first won election in 1998 as he took on U.S. companies as part of his socialist agenda of nationalization of various industries and accused Washington of backing a brief coup against him.

Last year, he expelled the U.S. ambassador from Venezuela.

Chavez’s foreign policy is based on countering U.S. global influence and promoting countries like Russia and China as world leaders. He has close ties to U.S. foes Cuba and Iran.

What Obama said:

In an interview shown in the past week on the Spanish-language network Univision, U.S. President-elect Barack Obama said that Venezuela’s firebrand president, Hugo Chávez, has hindered progress in Latin America, and he expressed concern that Chávez’s leftist government has assisted Colombia’s biggest guerrilla movement, a group the United States considers a terrorist organization.

Obama said his administration is open to starting talks with Chávez to improve relations, which have frayed badly since the Bush administration celebrated Chávez’s brief overthrow at the hands of rebellious military officers in 2002. But in the 13-minute interview aired by Univision, Obama said Chávez had “been a force that has interrupted progress in the region.”

He then raised the issue of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, a 45-year-old rebel group loathed by Colombians for carrying out selective assassinations, attacks on civilian targets and mass kidnappings. Last year, Colombian authorities released internal rebel documents that outlined how Chávez and his close allies had assisted the group in an effort to isolate Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, the Bush administration’s closest ally in Latin America. The Chávez government denies it helps the FARC, as the group is known.

“We need to be firm when we see this news, that Venezuela is exporting terrorist activities or supporting malicious entities like the FARC,” Obama said. “This creates problems that are not acceptable.”

Bolivia: U.S. Diplomat Walks Out on Leader’s Speech

Relations between Bolivia and the United States deteriorated further Thursday when the chargé d’affaires at the American Embassy, Krishna Urs, walked out of a speech in Bolivia’s Congress by President Evo Morales. Mr. Urs said he was protesting assertions by Mr. Morales that the United States had improperly interfered in domestic affairs. A spokesman for Mr. Morales said later that Bolivia was hoping for improved relations with the Obama administration. In September, Mr. Morales expelled the American ambassador.

New York Times. Reported by Simon Romero.

Bolivia set to vote this weekend amidst division

Morales is seen as likely to win the divisive referendum on Sunday, but tensions that have riven the country along geographic, racial and class lines are not expected to go away.

If anything, they may only intensify as the scene would be set for early elections in December.

Already, the country has flirted with unrest bordering on civil war in September, during which 20 indigenous government supporters were killed in a northern state, prompting Morales to slap martial law on the region.

The roots of the conflict have been growing ever since Morales in 2005 became the country’s first indigenous president and set about upending an order inherited from Spanish colonial times and subsequent military regimes that favored Bolivia’s ‘whiter’ citizens.

The opposition, led by state governors in the country’s more prosperous east, fear that Morales’ march towards a socialist state is taking their nation into the orbit of Venezuela’s anti-US president, Hugo Chavez, and further away from social and economic advancement.

Morales and Chavez expelled the US ambassadors to their countries last September, accusing the administration of former US president George W. Bush of interference. Washington retaliated by sending the Bolivian and Venezuelan envoys home.

The United States “wants to finish with our government,” Morales said Thursday, two days after US President Barack Obama took over from Bush.

His comment, before the Bolivian congress, prompted the abrupt departure of the charge d’affaires of the US embassy, Krishna Urs, who had been in the public watching, according to a local radio station.

The new constitution would also scrap the single-term limit for the president, allowing Morales to stand for re-election. He has proposed early legislative and presidential polls in December if the new referendum passes.

The opposition, though running an energetic campaign against the referendum in recent weeks, remains fragmented.

That, and the fact that the indigenous population making up 60 percent of Bolivia’s 10 million people are fierce in standing up for “their” president, point to a probable victory for Morales.

The Carter Center, the US organization founded by former US president Jimmy Carter, is to send a group of observers to join other international monitors to watch over the referendum.

Morales, meanwhile, launched a new state newspaper, Cambio (“Change” in Spanish) just days before the vote, to counter what he sees as anti-government “lies” in Bolvia’s press.

The government already controls a national television network, 16 local radio stations and a news agency.

Reuters

Interesting Blog post on the referendum

Constitutional Referendum in Bolivia: Will it unite the country?

Unlikely.

This BBC article was able to capture in a decent manner what seems to be occurring in Bolivia.

It is the second time in six months that Bolivia has voted and will probably lead to a new Presidential election in December which promises to deliver a new round of polarized politics in 2009.

According to the early polling numbers, the Yes vote is very likely to win the vote.

However, there is plenty of room for disagreement over the implementation of the new constitution, and disputes between the government and the opposition look set to continue regardless.

Rocky path

Bolivia’s Congress approved holding a referendum only after Mr Morales agreed to make a number of concessions.

Crucially, Mr Morales agreed to restrict his candidature as president to a single five-year term.The election would take place in December 2009.

Under the current 1967 constitution, no president is allowed to have two consecutive terms. This was due to be changed under the original draft text, prompting fears from the opposition that Mr Morales could stay in office until 2019.

Under the new constitution, Catholicism would no longer be the official religion

But in a key concession, the president promised to stand just once more in elections due in December this year if the new constitution is approved.

This means that he is still likely to stay in power until 2014, but he says no longer.

He also made other concessions on autonomy, land reform and Congressional voting procedures.

Nonetheless, in his view, the key changes – extending the rights of Bolivia’s 36 indigenous groups and strengthening state control over the country’s natural resources – remain broadly intact.

When agreement was reached on the concessions back in October, Mr Morales wept in front of a huge crowd of supporters in La Paz’s Central Plaza, where Indians were not allowed to set foot until the 1950s.

“We have made history,” he said. “I can now go to the cemetery a happy man.”

Key provisions

Among the 411 articles of the new constitution, some of the key changes provide for:

• A mixed economy which recognises public, private and communitarian ownership. However, the state will control natural resources such as oil, gas and minerals

• The state as unitary and pluri-national, designed to stress the importance of ethnicity in Bolivia’s make-up. A whole chapter of the draft text is devoted to indigenous rights

• Power will be decentralised, creating four levels of autonomy – departmental, regional, municipal and indigenous

• Indigenous systems of justice will be given the same status as the official existing system. Judges will be elected, and no longer appointed by Congress.

In a further concession, Mr Morales agreed that new limits on land ownership will not be retroactive – a parallel referendum on Sunday will determine whether this limit should be set at 5,000 (12,355 acres) or 10,000 hectares (24,700 acres).

Battles are looming over how [the constitution's] provisions are finally applied John Crabtree Analyst

But even if the vote is in favour of 5,000 hectares – and there are many farms in the east larger than this – landowners will not be affected if they can show that their land is not idle and fulfils a social and economic function.

However, Mr Morales’ opponents say that since it will be up to central government to decide if landowners are complying, the system could be open to abuse.

Another controversial change to the constitution is that Catholicism would no longer be the official state religion – there would be no state religion.

The Church has also criticised the new draft text for not recognising the right to life from conception (possibly opening the way to legalising abortion), although the existing constitution does not either.

Some bishops have joined with the opposition in campaigning against the constitution. One of their slogans says “Choose God, Vote for No”.

Conflict remains

Most analysts say that despite making a number of concessions, Mr Morales remains in a strong position.

They point out that the opposition is split between more moderate members of the Congress and the more confrontational governors of the four, mainly eastern, departments known as the media luna, or half-crescent.

“The balance of power shifted,” says George Gray Molina, a research fellow at Oxford University in the UK.

Protests against the government have sometimes turned violent

“Evo has already won the referendum vote. The opposition will probably retrench for a while with an eye on providing a unitary candidate for the December [presidential] elections,” he says.

However, there is plenty of room for continuing opposition from the four media luna departments, which tend to be wealthier and more ethnically mixed than the mainly indigenous departments of the western highlands. They want more autonomy from the central state.

They also contain most of Bolivia’s natural gas production and agribusiness, such as soya.

There are two main issues over which opposition civic organisations can continue to fight.

The first is whether their departments will have priority over the other three levels of autonomous organisation envisaged in the new constitution.

Another is how the taxes on gas exports will be divided up between the state and the four levels of autonomous organisations.

“The civic groups in Santa Cruz and Tarija, in particular, will continue to demand a bigger share of the proceeds of gas exports,” says John Crabtree, an analyst at the Oxford Centre for Latin American Studies in the UK.

“While the new constitution may now be legally enacted,” he says, “battles are looming over how its provisions are finally applied.”

Chavez: Presidency for Life

Interesting article reposted from The Huffington Post.

By Francisco Toro

Why Chavez Wants To Be President for Life

Read More: Chavez, Chavez Referendum, Hugo Chavez, Opposition To Chavez, Support For Chavez, Venezuela, Venezuela United States Relations, World News

Hugo Chavez, Venezuela’s narcissist-Leninist president, surprised precisely no one last week when he coyly gave his supporters “permission” to petition for a referendum to abolish presidential term limits. It didn’t exactly come as a shock: Chavez has never really hidden his determination to exit the presidential palace horizontally.

This indefinite re-election proposal is actually a bit of a mulligan for Chavez. A year ago, Venezuelans narrowly rejected the idea in a referendum, setting a theoretical end-date for the Chavez era in January, 2013. By then, the man will have been president for 14 years: not nearly long enough to crush capitalism and save humanity, apparently.

Will Venezuelans vote the way they’re told the second time around? It’s not at all clear. Chavez remains genuinely popular: his folksy charm and generous social spending initiatives have earned him a him deep reservoir of good will among a broad swathe of Venezuelan society.

But Venezuelans’ attitudes towards our leader are more nuanced than is typically realized. Chavismo is more a continuum than a monolith, ranging from a broad center that likes the guy personally even if they’re not so crazy about his ideology all the way to a hard core of socialist ideologues who hit the kool-aid pretty hard.

That range shows up clearly in polling. In a recent survey, Datanalisis, a local pollster, found that 58% of Venezuelans like Chavez, but only 31% express confidence in his ability to solve the country’s problems. Majorities dislike his endless televised rants, question key parts of his socialist ideology, reject the Cuban model of society and criticize his government’s performance on all kinds of bread-and-butter issues…but they still like the man personally! What the data show is something Chavez himself has never quite grasped: that most Venezuelans like him despite his hyper-radical ideology, not because of it.

Who are these elusive moderates? They’re pocket-book voters, working class folks who appreciate the way Chavez has re-oriented the government’s priorities and centered them on the problems of the poor. They know for sure that they prefer his brand of leadership, warts and all, to the kind of catatonic gerontokleptocracy that preceded it. But ask them if they want this enormously volatile and endlessly pugnacious leader to, potentially, run the country for life, and a lot of them get a serious case of the heebie-jeebies.

Chavez’s electoral fortunes have always hinged on his standing with these folks. If he lost the 2007 referendum on lifting term-limits, it’s because his moderate supporters largely sat out a vote they saw as being more about solving his problems than theirs.

So Chavez needs them, but weirdly, he talks to their concerns less and less these days. Instead, he’s devoting ever more of his time to the kind of superfly TNT rhetoric that made him famous worldwide, but that only the kool-aid brigade really goes for back home.

Here I’m forced to say a few words about Chavez’s rhetoric, because nothing in most Americans’ life experience quite prepares them for the majestic, terrifying, otherworldly spectacle of Hugo Chavez in full rant mode.

The world Chavez paints with words is a world painted in black and white: an endless, epic struggle between the forces of absolute good and pure evil, with Chavez playing quarterback for the Good team. It’s a world where anyone who questions him, even in the slightest and for any reason at all, is instantly identified as an agent of evil: a fascist running dog of American imperialism and, more than likely, a traitor on the CIA’s payroll. Chavez’s basic M.O. is to take the “with-us-or-against-us, dissent = treason” tropes of the post 9-11 Bush administration and crank ‘em up to eleven.

It’s only when you get a feel for this deranged little morality-play-cum-ideology that chavistas’ single-minded obsession with lifting the president’s term limit starts to make sense. To the radical chavista mindset, Hugo Chavez is no ordinary leader. More than a politician, he’s a mystical figure. More than representing the people, he embodies the people. As an old chavista slogan – splashed on hundreds of billboards and painted on hundreds of walls – once put it: Chavez es el pueblo. He is the people.

It’s the feel for this kind of chavista fanaticism that I always find hardest to convey to my leftie friends back in the U.S. Understandably, a lot of them have a hard time grasping what my big beef is with the guy. He’s clearly popular, and he keeps winning elections. What could possibly be so undemocratic about that?

The only way I can really answer that question inevitably sounds like a bit of an evasion: if I could get you to spend half an hour watching Venezuelan state TV, soaking in the weird, sect-like vibe chavismo gives off these days, you wouldn’t need any more convincing. It takes immersing yourself in the messianic maelstrom of chavista discourse to quite grasp how a country can retain all the institutional trappings of democracy even as its contents are gradually stripped out and replaced with a good, old fashioned cult of personality.

To call what’s emerging in Venezuela a “dictatorship” would be to miss the mark just as widely as to call it a “democracy”. What we’re seeing is something different, something that doesn’t have a name yet: a place where the leader’s megalomania and his followers’ atavistic drive to submit to him meld together to create not the usual murderous totalitarianism, but instead a tsunami of histrionics, a never-ending pantomime put on for the benefit of a political sect masquerading as a revolutionary movement taking cover behind a parapet of democracy.

Of course these guys are pushing for open ended re-election: they’ve crafted a worldview that only makes sense so long as Hugo Chavez holds on to power. Our only hope now is that enough Venezuelans – and enough moderate chavistas – still have enough common sense to realize that if we lift the end-date on this mad experiment, we really will go collectively insane.

Bolivia: Vote NO or God will be angry…

Christianity is about to be destroyed in Bolivia… or so would some of the media spots make you believe. Advertisements condemning homosexuality and protecting the church from the new unholy constitution have sprung up everywhere. As a fervent defender of democracy and fair government, I find these scare tactics offensive and disappointing.

There are a number of reasons to vote NO, but scaring people based on religious affiliation should not be one of them. Specially when leaders use gay citizens as targets. How are Bolivian gays going to feel comfortable in a society that openly uses their life as a political target. Absolutely ridiculous.

The opposition should be defending every citizen’s freedom of religion rather than focusing on the defense of Christianity. This is a lost opportunity to take the high road, the correct road.

Why not oppose Morales based on the divisive nature of his politics. Why not oppose the new constitution because of its poor structure and wacky writing? Why not oppose the new constitution based on the elevation of communal justice to a dangerous place in Bolivian society? Why not oppose the constitution based on the dangerous precedent this government has set for freedom of the press and freedom of expression? Why not vote NO because this government has lost the trust of a significant portion of Bolivian’s due to its constant hypocrisy and underhanded politics?

Mixing religion and politics never leads to a safe and harmonious ending point.

Perhaps it is time to stop and think “What Would Jesus Do?”. Guarantee it is not what is happening on the ground today.

This is a video that shows some of what is going on in Bolivia. God Bless.

Bolivia Breathes Change

Morales votes in favour of the constitution in La Paz

Tomorrow will be a new day in Bolivia. Either the text for the new constitution will have been approved or the last two years of Morales’ efforts to change the constitution will hit the hardest wall possible, that of losing a popular plebiscite.

Polls indicate that the text is likely to be approved.
If so, the next year will be filled with more campaigning as Morales prepares for a presidential election in December. Bolivia is divided and the referendum is not expected to change that. Support for Morales in the east will continue to be low and his support in the west is likely to remain high.

All, this is to say that 2009 will be filled with blogging content for Liberalitas.

Ruben Costas (Governor of Santa Cruz) votes against the constitution.

Video from Spanish News outlet on the referendum (Spanish only):

Exit Polls: Constitution Passes

LA PAZ, Bolivia (AP) — Exit polls show Bolivian voters backing President Evo Morales’ proposed constitution granting greater power to the country’s indigenous majority.

Surveys conducted by two Bolivian television stations put support for the new charter at 60 percent or slightly higher.

An unofficial quick count of actual votes conducted by a private polling firm shows the new constitution winning by 50.5 percent to 49.5 percent, with just over 60 percent of votes counted. But ballots from heavily pro-Morales rural areas had yet to be counted.

Early returns from Sunday’s referendum also show that a wide margin of voters favor placing a limit on landownership at 5,000 hectares (12,400 acres), rather than 10,000 hectares 24,700 acres.

New Constitution Passes in Bolivia: Election results show a divided country

Bolivia will see a new day on January 27, 2009. A day in which a process of more than 2 years comes to an end with a brand new consitution. Now begin the serious challenges; eradicating poverty, increasing investment in national industries, creating jobs and strenghtneing democracy and human rights.

Coverage from BBC, New York Times, and CBC:

Bolivians Back “New” Constitution – BBC

Bolivia’s New Constitution – NYT

Bolivians back new, pro indigenous constitution – CBC

Expect more coverage to appear once the final count of ballots has taken place.

Liberalitas Notes:

1. The political divide in the country remains very clear. The constitution passed in four provinces and was defeated in four provinces. In all cases by large margins. The province of Chuquisaca remained too close to call at this time. Support for the constitution in La Paz and Oruro surpassed the 70 percent mark. In Beni and Santa Cruz the rejection to the constitution was higher than 60 percent. The graph shows the provinces that voted against the constitution and those that voted for it (Dark red was against). Chuquisaca, which has not been called yet, is province number 2.

2. Bolivians of all colours, ethnic groups, regions, departments, and political parties welcome change and want it. They just don’t seem to like Morales’ approach to politics. Support for a parallel question asking Bolivians if they supported a limit on the amount of land one can own was high in every single province of the country. the same departments that voted against the constitution in high margins, supported the land ownership limits, possibly indicating that the policies are not what is driving the east away from Morales but the politics.

3. Unless Bolivian political leaders are able to deliver a new national pact and move forward together, the country can be headed into further political problems and a weakening of Bolivian democracy. The election set for December is the next stage for the political divide in the country to surface. The question is whether or not anything will change in the nation’s voting patterns in only 12 months.

4. Support for Morales decreased throughout the country and Morales has lost the Urban vote (more on this on a separate blog posts).
Embedded video from CNN Video

Update on Bolivia Referendum

AT about 73% of polls reporting the result is approximately 60% in favour and 40% against the new constitutional text. There have been some reports made by international observers regarding irregularities in mostly rural polls. Apparently, the right to a private vote was not fully respected. Not quite sure what that means yet, but will try to find out some more information.

The Che Guevara Debates begin as movie is set to be launched

As the Soderberg film approaches its release date, accounts of Ernesto Guevara’s life and legacy will be discussed and debated throughout the Americas . Terrorist, freedom fighter, criminal or lover… the versions promise to be varied and passionate. This is surely only the beginning of many, many comments on the blogosphere.

From the Moving Picture Institute’s website:

MPI is pleased to offer an alternative account of Che’s place in Cuba’s troubled history, in the form of a Moving Minutes clip from Cuban-born actor and director Andy Garcia. Garcia lived through the Cuban Revolution—and in “Saxophones!”, a segment from his 2005 film The Lost City, he movingly evokes the betrayal of liberty committed by a dictatorship that, fifty years on, still has Cuba in a violent and repressive stranglehold.

Strange Soccer Goal

Posted without comment.

Chavez: “Holiday to honour me”

Schools turned pupils away, civil servants stayed home and banks shut their doors after President Hugo Chávez, taking Venezuela by surprise, declared Monday a national holiday. He announced the holiday on Sunday to commemorate his rise to power 10 years ago and the start of his Bolivarian Revolution. “Be alert, for the sword of Bolívar strides through Latin America,” he said at a ceremony on Monday, at the tomb of the liberation hero Simón Bolívar.

Businesses and schools were closed after they scrambled on Sunday to tell their employees and students to stay at home. Mr. Chavez’s decree, and threats to fine companies failing to comply, showed the sometimes arbitrary leadership of Mr. Chavez as well as his political astuteness to understand the move would be popular with Venezuelan workers.

wow. nuff said.

Some Political Analysis as referendum approaches in Venezuela

Excerpts from article by Anastasia O’Grady

When Venezuelans cast their votes on Feb. 15 they will be answering just one question: Do you approve of changing five articles in the constitution so as to allow for the indefinite re-election of the president, legislators, governors and mayors?

The referendum question did not originally include legislators, governors and mayors. But when an earlier proposal asked for indefinite re-election only for the president, it met with widespread skepticism. So Mr. Chávez decided to widen the field in the hope of picking up support. Even so, everyone knows this is a referendum on the president.

In the past month, Chávez enforcers have been attacking student groups that are trying to rally Venezuelans to vote “no.” Tear gas and rubber bullets have produced both physical injuries and rising fears of violence around the country. This could affect voter turnout. It also raises doubts about whether enough opposition observers can be mobilized to guard the vote on election night. If not, and Mr. Chávez “wins,” things are likely to get a whole lot scarier.

Full article

The United States and Bolivia

Published by the Huffington Post on Feb 25

With the Obama administration’s policy towards Venezuela pretty much decided, and the embargo on Cuba considered untouchable because no one is willing to risk losing support among Cuban Americans in the swing state of Florida, that leaves Bolivia as a left government in the region where the hostility of the Bush administration could be quickly reversed. However there are a number of outstanding issues between the two countries. The United States and Bolivia currently do not have ambassadors. Bolivia expelled the U.S. ambassador on September 10, on the grounds that he (and Washington) were intervening in Bolivia’s internal affairs. Among other offenses, the U.S. embassy was caught trying to use Peace Corps volunteers and a Fulbright scholar for spying; U.S. ambassador Phillip Goldberg had met privately with opposition leaders at a time when elements of the opposition were engaged in destabilizing violence; and the U.S. seemed to lend tacit support to the Bolivian opposition by not condemning this violence or even offering condolences when dozens of government supporters were massacred in Pando on September 11. The Bush administration responded to the expulsion of the U.S. ambassador by expelling Bolivian ambassador Gustavo Guzmán. But there are also other important issues for Bolivia. On September 26, the Bush administration suspended Bolivia’s trade preferences under the ATPDEA (Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act). The official reason was that Bolivia had not been co-operating sufficiently in the war on drugs. But according to the UN’s 2008 report, Bolivia’s coca cultivation had increased by just 5%, compared to a 27% increase in Colombia, the biggest beneficiary of U.S aid in the region. The Bolivians are eager to begin a new chapter of improved relations with Washington. To demonstrate this willingness, the Bolivian government refrained from filing a complaint at the World Trade Organization (WTO) against the United States for the suspension of its trade preferences. Their legal case is quite solid; under WTO rules, countries are allowed to establish rules for preferential access to their markets, but the rules must be applied equally to all countries receiving the preferences. But before filing a complaint at the WTO, Bolivia wanted to see if the new administration is interested in improving relations. Then there is another holdover from the Bush administration: Bolivia’s new constitution declares that health care (along with water and other necessities) is a human right and cannot be privatized. In keeping with their constitutional law, Bolivia asked the WTO for permission to withdraw the previous government’s commitment to open up its hospitals and health care sector to foreign corporations. According to the WTO’s procedural rules, if there are no objections to such a request within 45 days, it is approved. The European Union, home to some of the big health care corporations that might have an interest in the issue, responded that it had no objections. On January 5, the last day of the waiting period, the Bush administration objected. The Obama team has not yet decided whether it will rescind the Bush administration’s objection to Bolivia’s WTO request. Presumably they will; if not, it would be an unmistakable signal of continued hostility. Far from being an arcane detail of constitutional or international law, it has real meaning to millions of Bolivians: the struggle against water privatization was a significant part of the movement that brought Evo Morales to power. This is the political origin of the constitutional provisions establishing these essentials as human rights that cannot be infringed upon by private interests: many poor Bolivians had found themselves unable to afford water after it was privatized and user fees tripled. Bolivia has also kicked out the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, and it does not look like they are coming back. To the Bolivians, the U.S. is using the “war on drugs” throughout Latin America mainly as an excuse to get boots on the ground, and establish ties with local military and police forces. They see the whole process as destabilizing and a threat to their sovereignty and democracy. Despite all of these differences, it is still possible that Washington might choose to normalize relations with Bolivia. There are apparently some divisions within the administration over tactics. The “doves” apparently include Thomas Shannon, the current top State Department official for the Western Hemisphere, and a holdover from the Bush administration. These officials can see that there is a public relations problem in abusing Bolivia, the poorest country in South America and more importantly one led by the country’s first indigenous president, Evo Morales. To most of the world, he is the Nelson Mandela of Bolivia, with his government bringing an end to centuries of apartheid-like exclusion of the country’s indigenous majority. For the “doves” in the new administration, it would be better to avoid a public fight with Bolivia, so as not to distract from the guy who is sitting on what may be the largest petroleum reserves in the world – in Venezuela – and whom they have already successfully vilified in the media. On the other hand, there are hard liners who feel the need to “lay down the law” with Bolivia. We will soon know who has prevailed.