While Venezuela remains a priority, I did not want to neglect Nicaragua for today.
The CPCs continue to make major news throughout the national territory, as well as abroad. I want to start with the latter first, just because I feel that people should know what is being said about the CPCs in non-Nicaraguan news sources. Cuban source (read: propaganda mouthpiece) Prensa Latina gives an extremely unsophisticated summary of what the CPCs are on the surface, not at all delving into the way in which they will be used by the Executive. Surprise, surprise. It seems like a press communique sent out from the Casa de los Pueblos...
In Nicaraguan media, Jarquin of the MRS --a dissident Sandinista political party-- calls out the CPCs for what they really are: a strategy to overshadow Ortega's failure. As I've said before, the MRS is a force to be reckoned worth, or at least should be recognized as such. Firstly, these guys are organized, they know what they want to do, and they actually have a concrete plan as to how to get from point A to point B. Secondly, one mustn't forget that the MRS are the brains of the FSLN of the 80s; they are not sheeple following a line touted by the government, in fact they couldn't be further from that. They know what to do, how to do it, and are calculating in its executing. From what I have seen, these are the more ideological socialists who won't follow whatever one might want to call the grotesque, perverse monster which Danielito and La Chamuca have created. Thirdly, they seem to understand the concept of party discipline without letting it get to the point of AD and COPEI in Venezuela during the years of partidocracia. This is key, as many of the internal crises currently being suffered by the ALN are not a concern for the MRS, giving the party more control over itself, and also allowing itself to focus on issues rather than wasting time with things which should be non-issues.
The irony and hypocrisy of this desgobierno never cease to amaze me; I have found myself saying "me rio para no llorar" more often than appropriate. First of all, the picture on this link is great. Gustavo Porras seemly to exhibit extraordinary fervidity in favor of the CPCs...but he voted against them! While he says he pushed the wrong button --which is possible-- one would hope that a diputado would be more careful when voting on national issues, particularly ones of such importance. Ok, so quick recap of the CPCs: they were approved and inaugurated, Rosario is running them, they have their own presidential cabinet --meaning they are of extreme importance and have direct access to Ortega--, and will exist with or without a constitutional disposition because they are a reality, according to the Nicaraguan president. Reality is a funny concept. I have had this discussion with many people, particularly my Venezuelan friends. For example, let's take Julia's blog*. She is a friend of mine, part of the student movement of Caracas. Her blog is aptly titled: The end of Venezuela as I know it." She never claims that her reality, her experiences, are those of everyone in Venezuela. Her blog is about her personal experiences, as the word "I" in the title quite clearly indicates. This is a valuable lesson, simple as it might seem, one which Danielito and Rosario should take to heart. If the CPCs are a reality, as Ortega claims, I would pose the question, for whom? Are the CPCs the same reality for people like Eduardo Montealegre and the man who sells mangoes in the market? If so, how? Rosario also says that she was born to exercise power. Wait...I thought the people --vis-a-vis the CPCs-- were to exercise power? So now you're telling me that Rosario is a power-hungry woman who is also quite hypocritical? Man, this politics thing is confusing... Or, Rosario is just a shameless liar. Oh, and in any good speech in which people need to be distracted from the utter failures of the Ortega government, what is to be done? CLEARLY, blame the Empire! Right, Movimiento por Nicaragua, a civil society group composed of --wait for it-- Nicaraguans is now a lackey of the US. Give me a break and start taking care of your own country; these people are trying to alert the population about the dangers of autocracy while educating people about the democratic process, and all these people can do is steal a line from El Macacon de Miraflores. Pathetic. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. (If you can name the movie, I will be extraordinarily impressed.) Members of the Nicaraguan clergy opine, hoping that the CPCs will not cause tension...oops, too late.
Trouble in the RAAN for the F$LN? Looks that way to me. It really must get under Ortega's skin that he is losing control over this region, since it was once considered a stronghold. Selling off rice that should be going to disaster relief in the region will cause this sort of thing... My request remains: Show me the money! Where is it going is anyone's guess? The coffers of the Pacto? A special fund for the wannabe royal couple? Lord knows it's not going to the 80% of the population which still lives on less than $2/day.
I don't agree with him 100% of the time, but when Andrés Oppenheimer speaks, people listen. He was in Managua, talking about the importance of attracting foreign investment. Well, since tourism is plummeting it would be prudent to follow this advice. However, las malas lenguas are telling me that many businesses which used to be there are not staying, and those which had initially thought of going there --particularly those in ecotourism-- are backing out.
More stupidity within the National Assembly: the PC (Conservative Party) wants to form its own bancada. Really? I mean, really? The PC on its own will be negligible, it was definitely on the outs before joining the ALN alliance. If it forms its own bancada, there is no way to guarantee that it will vote against Ortega. Knowing the personalities of the party, I sincerely doubt that they would ever vote for/with him, BUT appearances are often much more powerful than the reasoning behind the implementation or execution of certain actions, which is sad... If the PC breaks off within the National Assembly, the UDF suffers yet another blow and in the public view the opposition to Ortega looks disorganized. Perfect, that's exactly what Nica needs right now... -sarcasm off-
*I am linking her here because while this post is obviously about Nicaragua, everyone needs to be aware of what is going on in Venezuela at this crucial time. I don't recommend her blog because she is my friend; I recommend it because it is an invaluable source of information from a perspective quite different to anything that the MSM could ever hope to offer.
NOTE: Thanks to Fausta for her advice, as I quite shamelessly used the exact suggested title. I promise, I'll think of more creative ones for the days to come, but I went to bed at 4am, and was up at 6.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
Carta de la Ingrid
No voy a traducirla, porque perderia mucho sentido. Al terminar leerla, me eche a sollozar. Pobre Colombia, que sigue padeciendo esta enfermedad, esta plaga de los terroristas FARC... Por favor, les pido a todos que recen por Ingrid, por los otros secuestrados y por Colombia.
Sincerest apologies to those who don't read Spanish, but I don't have time to translate the letter. More importantly, though, much of the meaning would be lost in translation. UPDATE: The BBC has published selections of it here.
De El Tiempo, diario colombiano:
Sincerest apologies to those who don't read Spanish, but I don't have time to translate the letter. More importantly, though, much of the meaning would be lost in translation. UPDATE: The BBC has published selections of it here.
De El Tiempo, diario colombiano:
Diciembre 1 de 2007
'Aquí vivimos muertos', dice Ingrid Betancourt en la carta que le envió a su madre
Ingrid Betancourt, secuestrada por las Farc.Información relacionada"Estoy mal físicamente. No he vuelto a comer, el apetito se me bloqueó, el pelo se me cae en grandes cantidades", dice en otro de los apartes de su misiva, que transcribimos.
"Este es un momento muy duro para mí. Piden pruebas de supervivencia a quemarropa y aquí estoy escribiéndote mi alma tendida sobre este papel. Estoy mal físicamente. No he vuelto a comer, el apetito se me bloqueó, el pelo se me cae en grandes cantidades.
No tengo ganas de nada. Creo que eso es lo único que está bien, no tengo ganas de nada porque aquí en esta selva la única respuesta a todo es 'no'. Es mejor, entonces, no querer nada para quedar libre al menos de deseos. Hace 3 años estoy pidiendo un diccionario enciclopédico para leer algo, aprender algo, mantener la curiosidad intelectual viva. Sigo esperando que al menos por compasión me faciliten uno, pero es mejor no pensar en eso.
De ahí para adelante, cualquier cosa es un milagro, hasta oírte por las mañanas porque el radio que tengo es muy viejo y dañado.
Quiero pedirte mamita linda que le digas a los niños que quiero que me manden tres mensajes semanales (...) Nada trascendental, sino lo que puedan y se les ocurra escribir de afán (...) No necesito nada más, pero necesito estar en contacto con ellos. Es la única información vital, trascendental, imprescindible, lo demás ya no me importa (...).
Como te decía, la vida aquí no es vida, es un desperdicio lúgubre de tiempo. Vivo o sobrevivo en una hamaca tendida entre dos palos, cubierta con un mosquitero y con una carpa encima, que oficia de techo, con lo cual puedo pensar que tengo una casa.
Tengo una repisa donde pongo mi equipo, es decir, el morral con la ropa y la Biblia que es mi único lujo. Todo listo para salir corriendo. Aquí nada es propio, nada dura, la incertidumbre y la precariedad son la única constante. En cualquier momento dan la orden de empacar y duerme uno en cualquier hueco, tendido en cualquier sitio, como cualquier animal (...) Me sudan las manos y se me nubla la mente y termino haciendo las cosas dos veces más despacio que lo normal. Las marchas son un calvario porque mi equipo es muy pesado y no puedo con él (...) Pero todo es estresante, se pierden mis cosas o me las quitan, como el bluyin que Mela (Mélani) me había regalado en Navidad, con el que me cogieron. Lo único que he podido salvar es la chaqueta, ha sido una bendición, porque las noches son heladas y no he tenido más que echarme encima.
Antes disfrutaba cada baño en el río. Como soy la única mujer del grupo, me toca prácticamente vestida: shorts, brasier, camiseta, botas. Antes me gustaba nadar en el río hoy ni siquiera tengo alientos para eso. Estoy débil, friolenta, parezco un gato acercándose al agua. Yo que tanto he adorado el agua, ni me reconozco. (...) Pero desde que separaron los grupos no he tenido ni el interés ni la energía para hacer nada. Hago algo de estiramiento porque el estrés me bloquea el cuello y duele mucho.
Con los ejercicios de estiramiento, el split y demás logro aliviar un poco la tensión en el cuello. (...) Yo trato de guardar silencio, hablo lo menos posible para evitar problemas. La presencia de una mujer en medio de tantos prisioneros que llevan 8 y 10 años cautivos es un problema (...) En las requisas le quitan a uno lo que uno más quiere. Una carta que me llegó tuya me la quitaron después de la última prueba de supervivencia en el 2003. Los dibujos de Natasha y Stanis, las fotos de Mela y Loli, el escapulario de mi papá, un programa de gobierno con 190 puntos, todo me lo quitaron. Cada día me queda menos de mí misma. Algunos detalles ya Pinchao te los contó. Todo es duro.
Es importante que le dedique estas líneas a aquellos seres que son mi oxígeno, mi vida. A quienes me mantienen con la cabeza fuera del agua, no me dejan ahogarme en el olvido, la nada y la desesperanza. Ellos son tu, mis hijos, Astrica y mis chiquitines, Fab, tía Nancy y Juangui.
Todos los días estoy en comunicación con Dios, Jesús y la Virgen (...) Aquí todo tienen dos caras, la alegría viene y luego el dolor.
La felicidad es triste. El amor alivia y abre heridas nuevas... es vivir y morir de nuevo. Durante años no pude pensar en los niños y el dolor de la muerte de mi papá copaba toda la capacidad de aguante. Llorando pensaba en ellos, sentía que me asfixiaba, que no podía respirar. Entre mí me decía: "Fab está ahí, él cuida de todo, no hay que pensarlo ni hay que pensar". Casi me enloquezco con la muerte de mi papá. Nunca supe cómo fue, quiénes estaban, si me dejó un mensaje, una carta, una bendición. Pero lo que ha aliviado mi tormenta es pensar que se fue confiando en Dios y que allá volveré a abrazarlo. De eso estoy segura. Sentirte fuerte ha sido mi fuerza. Yo no vi mensajes sino hasta que me unieron con Lucho, Luis Eladio Pérez, el 22 de agosto del 2003. Fuimos amigos entrañables, nos separamos en agosto. Pero durante ese tiempo él fue mi apoyo, mi escudero, mi hermano (...).
Tengo en mi memoria cada una de las edades (de mis hijos). En cada cumpleaños les canto el Happy Birthday. Solicito que me permitan hacer una torta. Pero desde hace tres años siempre que pido, la respuesta es no. Igual, si traen una galleta o una sopa cualquiera de arroz y fríjol, que es lo usual, con eso hago de cuenta que es una torta y les celebro en mi corazón su cumpleaños.
A mi Melelinga (Melanie); mi sol de primavera, mi princesa de la constelación del cisne, a ella que tanto adoro, quiero decirte que soy la mamá más orgullosa de esta tierra (...) Y si tuviera que morir hoy, me iría satisfecha con la vida dándole gracias a Dios por mis hijos. Estoy feliz con su master en N.Y. Eso es exactamente lo que yo le hubiera aconsejado (...) Pero ojo, es muy importante que haga su DOCTORADO. En el mundo de hoy, hasta para respirar se necesitan credenciales (...) No me voy a cansar en insitirle a Loli (Lorenzo) y Mela que no claudiquen hasta obtener su PhD. Quisiera que Mela me lo prometiera (...).
(Le da muchos consejos a Melanie y concluye) Siempre te he dicho que eres lo mejor, mucho mejor que yo, algo así como la mejor versión de lo que yo quisiera ser. Por eso, con la experiencia que he acumulado en mi vida y en la perspectiva que da del mundo mirarlo desde la distancia, te pido mi vida que te prepares para llegar a la cumbre.
A mi Lorenzo, mi Loli Pop, mi ángel de luz, mi rey de aguas azules, mi chief musician que me canta, y me encata, al dueño de mi corazón, quiero decirle que desde el día en que nació hasta hoy ha sido mi manantial de alegrías. Todo lo que viene de él es bálsamo para mi alma, todo me reconforta, todo me apacigua, todo me da placer y placidez (Asimismo le dedica varios párrafos a su hijo Lorenzo). Al fin pude oírle la voz, un par de veces este año. Me dio temblor de la emoción. Es mi Loli, la voz de mi niño, pero ya hay otro hombre encima de la voz de niño. Una ronquera de hombre-hombre, como la de mi papá. (...) El otro día recorté una foto en la prensa, que llegó de casualidad. Es una propaganda de un perfume de Carolina Herrera '212 Sexy men'. Sale un muchacho joven y pensé: así debe estar mi Lorenzo. Y la guardé
(...) Tienen la vida pendiente, busquen llegar a lo más alto, estudiar es crecer, no solo por lo que se aprende intelectualmente, sino por la experiencia humana, la gente alrededor de uno que lo alimenta emocionalmente para tener cada día mayor control sobre uno mismo, y espiritualmente, para moldear un mayor carácter de servicio a los demás, donde el ego se reduzca a su más mínima expresión y se crezca en humildad y fuerza moral. Una va con otra. Eso es vivir, crecer para servir (...).
A mi Sebastián adorado, mi pequeño príncipe de viajes astrales y ancestrales. ¡Tanto que quiero decirle! Primero, que no quiero irme de este mundo sin que él tenga el conocimiento, la certeza y la confirmación de que no son 2, sino 3 mis hijos del alma (...) Pero con él tendré que desenredar años de silencios que me pesan demasiado desde el cautiverio. Decidí que mi color favorito es el azul de sus ojos (...). Por si acaso no llego a salir de aquí, te lo escribo para que lo guardes en tu alma, mi Babon adorado, y para que entiendas, lo que yo entendí cuando tus hermanos nacieron, y es que siempre te he querido como al hijo que eres y que Dios me dio. Los demás son formalidades.
(Luego le dedica otros párrafos a Fabrice Delloye, el padre de sus hijos) Yo sé que Fab ha sufrido mucho por mí. Pero que su sufrimiento tenga alivio en saber que él ha sido fuente de paz para mí. (...) Dile a Fab que en él me recuesto, sobre sus hombros lloro, en el me apoyo para seguir sonriendo de tristeza, su amor me hace fuerte. Porque está él al frente de las necesidades de mis hijos, puedo terminar de respirar sin que me duela tanto la vida. (...)
A mi Astrica, tantas cosas que no sé por donde empezar. De pronto decirle que su "hojita de vida" me salvó durante el primer año de secuestro, durante el año de duelo de mi papá. (...)
Necesito hablar con ella de todos estos momentos, y abrazarla y llorar hasta que se me agote el pozo de lágrimas que tengo en el cuerpo. En todo lo que hago durante el día está ella como referencia. Siempre pienso, "Esto lo hacía con Astrid cuando éramos chiquitas", o "esto lo hacía Astrid mejor que yo" (...) La he oído varias veces por radio. Siento mucha admiración por su impecable expresión, por la calidad de su reflexión, por el dominio de sus emociones, por la elegancia de sus sentimientos. La oigo y pienso: "Yo quiero ser así" (...). Me imagino cómo gozan con Anastasia y Stanis (sobrinos de Ingrid). Como me ha dolido que me quitaran sus dibujos. El poema de Anastasia decía, "por un golpe de suerte, por un golpe de magia o un golpe de Dios, en tres años o 3 días estarás de vuelta con nosotros". Y el dibujo de Stanis era un rescate con helicóptero, yo dormida en una caleta igualita a las de aquí, y él era mi salvador. (Luego agradece a otros familiares).
Mamita, son tantas las personas a las cuales quiero darles las gracias por acordarse de nosotros, por no habernos abandonado. Durante mucho tiempo hemos sido como los leprosos que afean el baile, los secuestrados no somos un tema "políticamente correcto", suena mejor decir que hay que ser fuertes frente a la guerrilla aún sin sacrificar algunas vidas humanas. Ante eso, el silencio. Solo el tiempo puede abrir las conciencias y elevar los espíritus. Pienso en la grandeza de los Estados Unidos, por ejemplo. Esa grandeza no es el fruto de la riqueza en tierras, materias primas, etc, sino el fruto de la grandeza de alma de los líderes que moldearon la Nación. Cuando Lincoln defendió el derecho a la vida y a la libertad de los esclavos negros de América, también se enfrento con muchos Floridas y Praderas.
Muchos intereses económicos y políticos que consideraban que eran superiores a la vida y a la libertad de un puñado de negros. Pero Lincoln ganó, y quedó impreso en el colectivo de esa nación la prioridad de la vida del ser humano sobre cualquier otro interés.
En Colombia todavía tenemos que pensar de dónde venimos, quiénes somos y a dónde queremos ir. Yo aspiro a que algún día tengamos esa sed de grandeza que hace surgir a los pueblos de la nada hacia el sol. Cuando seamos incondicionales ante la defensa de la vida y de la libertad de los nuestros, es decir, cuando seamos menos individualistas y más solidarios, menos indiferentes y más comprometidos, menos intolerantes y más compasivos. Entonces ese día seremos la nación grande que todos quisiéramos que fuéramos. Esa grandeza está ahí dormidita en los corazones. Pero los corazones se han endurecido y pesan tanto que no permiten sentimientos elevados. Pero hay mucha gente que yo quisiera agradecer porque están contribuyendo a despertar los espíritus y a engrandecer a Colombia. No puedo mencionarlos a todos pero sí a algunos (menciona al ex presidente López "y en general a los ex presidentes liberales", a Hernán Echavarría, a los familiares de los diputados, a Monseñor Castro y al Padre Echeverri).
Mamita, ay vinieron por las cartas. No voy a alcanzar a escribir todo lo que quisiera. A Piedad y a Chávez todo, todo mi afecto y mi admiración. Nuestras vidas están ahí, en el corazón de ellos, que sé que es grande y valeroso. (les dedica de a párrafo de agradecimiento a Chávez, a Álvaro Leyva, a Lucho Garzón y a Gustavo Petro, y luego menciona a periodistas).
Mi corazón también le pertenece a Francia (...) Cuando la noche era la más oscura, Francia fue el faro. Cuando era mal visto pedir nuestra libertad. Francia no se calló. Cuando acusaron a nuestras familias de hacer daño a Colombia, Francia les dio apoyo y consuelo.
No podría creer que es posible algún día libre de aquí, si no conociera la historia de Francia y de su pueblo. Le he pedido a Dios que me cubra de la misma fuerza con la que Francia ha sabido soportar la adversidad para sentirme más digna de ser contada entre sus hijos. Quiero a Francia con el alma, las voces de mi ser buscan nutrirse de los componentes de su carácter nacional, siempre buscando guiarse por principios y no por intereses. Quiero a Francia con mi corazón, porque admiro la capacidad de movilización de un pueblo que como Camus entiende que vivir es comprometerse. (...) Todos estos años han sido terribles, pero no creo que podría seguir aún viva sin el compromiso que nos brindaron a todos los que aquí vivimos muertos.
(...) Sé que lo que estamos viviendo está lleno de incognitas, pero la historia tiene su propios tiempos de maduración, y el presidente Sarkozy está parado en el meridiano de la historia. Con el presidente Chávez, el presidente Bush y la solidaridad de todo el continente podríamos presenciar un milagro.
Durante muchos años he pensado que mientras esté viva, mientras siga respirando, tengo que seguir albergando la esperanza. Ya no tengo las mismas fuerzas, ya me cuesta mucho trabajo seguir creyendo, pero quería que sientan que lo que han hecho por nosotros marca la diferencia. Nos hemos sentido seres humanos (...). Mamita tendría más cosas para decirte. Explicarte que hace tiempo no tengo noticias de Clara y de su bebé (...). Bueno, mamita, Dios nos ayude, nos guíe, nos dé paciencia y nos cubra. Por siempre y para siempre.
Tensions continue to mount in Venezuela
With the referendum tomorrow, voting stations at the DC Embassy opening at 6:30am, there is still an air of tension, what all my contacts down there are calling una tensa calma, a tense calm.
Rumors are flying all about, everything from the ink not really being indelible but able to be removed with chlorine, to the possibility of massive voter fraud via ballot box stuffing, to the credentials needed to be at the tables in the voting centers not being distributed to opposition observers.
But at the end of the day, rumors are just rumors. I would never say to disregard them completely at all; what those who are manning the tables need to do is be conscious of them, and be vigilant. Irregularities should be reported and denounced, by both parties if witnessed. And those working the tables as well as those voting should have a look at the Guide for tomorrow, so as to be well informed.
In today's NYT, Baduel --the retired General who pronounced himself against the reform-- has written an Op-Ed piece. Read the whole thing. While it might seem small, as we are more than accustomed to reading such pieces every day and don't give it a whole lot of thought, he has been declared a traitor by Chavez, while overzealous chavistas are calling for him to face the firing squad.
Yesterday those in favor of the Si, Si, option participated in a rally in Avenida Bolivar, and I'll give it to them: an impressive amount participated! Paying for people to be bussed in does that, though. Be in favor of the reforms or no, one thing to be sure is that --if all indications are correct thus far, as seen here and here-- this will be extremely tight.
As I watched Chavez's speech at the rally last evening, I was still slightly surprised, even though I know I shouldn't have been: his speech had very little --if anything-- to do with the reforms. What did he speak about? Oh, the usual: the Empire is evil and he will stop sending all oil to the US if it does not accept the vote; Globovision was threatened; Fidel was mentioned several times, as was the mention of Cuba and Venezuela being united; if the opposition contests the results, they will be denounced as members of the CIA (which I find absolutely hysterical, because none of my friends and family in the opposition has received a dime from the CIA and they are getting PISSED on Facebook! jaja).
A few things:
1) Looking at all the signs from yesterday's march seen here, one will quickly realize that this situation is more polarized than one might initially think. The signs say more than just Si; rather, Si con Chavez and Vota por Chavez. The dialogue has been so polarized in this campaign that for Chavez, a Si vote is with him and for him, and a No vote is against him. I was discussing this with a friend of mine yesterday, and she expressed her concern for the Venezuelan people --she is from El Salvador-- in the way the people will have to vote. As we all now know, the vote will take place in two blocs --one with the original 33 reforms, plus 13, and the other with 23 more-- and the vote cannot vote article by article. So while not technically "all or nothing" anymore, it still may put many --particularly chavistas-- in a dilemma: what if they like some of the reforms, but don't like others? How are they to vote? If chavista, will they risk going against Chavez by voting "no" because they are not in agreement with some of the proposed reform? Do not fool yourself: the cult of personality surrounding Chavez, as well as politics of fear, are alive and healthy, and because of this, many people will surely vote Si, Si, because they feel so strongly for Chavez and for what he is doing even if they don't agree with any or all of the proposed reforms. When looked at, this really is not a vote for or even against Chavez. If the No wins tomorrow, Chavez will still be president next week. I think a lot of people unfamiliar with the situation are assuming that this is a recall referendum, similar to that of 2004. No, this is not true. It is a consultative referendum (referendo consultivo) as stipulated by Article 71 of the current Venezuelan constitution, asking the people to choose between a Yes option and a No option.
2) I will echo Alberto de la Cruz from Babalu blog and dare Chavez to cut off oil to the US. If he does, then what? He loses 60% of his income from oil revenues. This means several things: he will have to raise prices of oil for Venezuelans, which would be fatal for the internal economy seeing as Venezuela is still largely poor. Also, and perhaps more importantly, it would mean that Chavez would have to either cut back dramatically or eliminate all together many of his social programs, since they are funded by the oil windfall. Want to see a real revolution in Venezuela? That would certainly be the way to do it. Rising expectations in Venezuela could be Chavez's downfall. There is a commercial on Globo in which a woman in making arepas, and she says: "I like the misiones (referring to the social missions which provide subsidized food, medical services, literacy programs, etc), but this reform? No." Taking away this from people who have neither the money nor the means to access this sort of thing might just be the death of the regime of the macacon. Oh yeah, and other communities such as the South Bronx and London who are used to receiving the benefits of Venezuela's oil windfall before many Venezuelans will lose their benefits, too.
3) Dovetailing with my second point, isolating Venezuela internationally can never be a good thing, especially when it so heavily relies on income from its oil exports. Both domestic and international stations were threatened, the latter of having its correspondents thrown out of the country; companies will continue to leave Venezuela, stagnating further any manufacturing infrastructure it may have hoped to achieve; and the row with president Uribe could prove very dangerous for Venezuelans, as there are already massive shortages, and Venezuela gets a good deal of beef from Colombia. Imagine if Uribe were to win a third term? (I am against this.) Venezuela would have less food for seven years, as he is not even halfway through his second term, which will end in 2010... When a leader has threatened or spoken horribly --and often baselessly-- in the past few weeks of Colombia, Spain (he's threatening to nationalize Spanish banks now and telling Spanish companies to leave if the PP --party to which Aznar belongs-- wins the elections), CNN, the US (nothing new there), using sophomoric insults and infantile tactics, in this increasingly globalized world, everyone is watching, and few are impressed. His ridiculous behavior does make for great political cartoons, though; Rayma, per usual, hits the nail on the head. People are starting to boycott CITGO in the US, something which may seem small, but at the very least delivers a message. I don't know if others will do the same outside the US to Venezuelan countries controlled by the state, but because Don Dinero is quite powerful, the little things emanating from abroad may have a more profound within Venezuela than one could imagine.
From The Daily Motion
The marches have had their effect as much as they possibly could have, as TIME, The Times, and The Guardian have shown. We will all be waiting for the results of this; while many will be glued to the TV watching football, I'll be following this as closely as possible.
So as to not end on a totally depressing note, let's round this out with some brilliant political satire!
Rumors are flying all about, everything from the ink not really being indelible but able to be removed with chlorine, to the possibility of massive voter fraud via ballot box stuffing, to the credentials needed to be at the tables in the voting centers not being distributed to opposition observers.
But at the end of the day, rumors are just rumors. I would never say to disregard them completely at all; what those who are manning the tables need to do is be conscious of them, and be vigilant. Irregularities should be reported and denounced, by both parties if witnessed. And those working the tables as well as those voting should have a look at the Guide for tomorrow, so as to be well informed.
In today's NYT, Baduel --the retired General who pronounced himself against the reform-- has written an Op-Ed piece. Read the whole thing. While it might seem small, as we are more than accustomed to reading such pieces every day and don't give it a whole lot of thought, he has been declared a traitor by Chavez, while overzealous chavistas are calling for him to face the firing squad.
Yesterday those in favor of the Si, Si, option participated in a rally in Avenida Bolivar, and I'll give it to them: an impressive amount participated! Paying for people to be bussed in does that, though. Be in favor of the reforms or no, one thing to be sure is that --if all indications are correct thus far, as seen here and here-- this will be extremely tight.
As I watched Chavez's speech at the rally last evening, I was still slightly surprised, even though I know I shouldn't have been: his speech had very little --if anything-- to do with the reforms. What did he speak about? Oh, the usual: the Empire is evil and he will stop sending all oil to the US if it does not accept the vote; Globovision was threatened; Fidel was mentioned several times, as was the mention of Cuba and Venezuela being united; if the opposition contests the results, they will be denounced as members of the CIA (which I find absolutely hysterical, because none of my friends and family in the opposition has received a dime from the CIA and they are getting PISSED on Facebook! jaja).
A few things:
1) Looking at all the signs from yesterday's march seen here, one will quickly realize that this situation is more polarized than one might initially think. The signs say more than just Si; rather, Si con Chavez and Vota por Chavez. The dialogue has been so polarized in this campaign that for Chavez, a Si vote is with him and for him, and a No vote is against him. I was discussing this with a friend of mine yesterday, and she expressed her concern for the Venezuelan people --she is from El Salvador-- in the way the people will have to vote. As we all now know, the vote will take place in two blocs --one with the original 33 reforms, plus 13, and the other with 23 more-- and the vote cannot vote article by article. So while not technically "all or nothing" anymore, it still may put many --particularly chavistas-- in a dilemma: what if they like some of the reforms, but don't like others? How are they to vote? If chavista, will they risk going against Chavez by voting "no" because they are not in agreement with some of the proposed reform? Do not fool yourself: the cult of personality surrounding Chavez, as well as politics of fear, are alive and healthy, and because of this, many people will surely vote Si, Si, because they feel so strongly for Chavez and for what he is doing even if they don't agree with any or all of the proposed reforms. When looked at, this really is not a vote for or even against Chavez. If the No wins tomorrow, Chavez will still be president next week. I think a lot of people unfamiliar with the situation are assuming that this is a recall referendum, similar to that of 2004. No, this is not true. It is a consultative referendum (referendo consultivo) as stipulated by Article 71 of the current Venezuelan constitution, asking the people to choose between a Yes option and a No option.
2) I will echo Alberto de la Cruz from Babalu blog and dare Chavez to cut off oil to the US. If he does, then what? He loses 60% of his income from oil revenues. This means several things: he will have to raise prices of oil for Venezuelans, which would be fatal for the internal economy seeing as Venezuela is still largely poor. Also, and perhaps more importantly, it would mean that Chavez would have to either cut back dramatically or eliminate all together many of his social programs, since they are funded by the oil windfall. Want to see a real revolution in Venezuela? That would certainly be the way to do it. Rising expectations in Venezuela could be Chavez's downfall. There is a commercial on Globo in which a woman in making arepas, and she says: "I like the misiones (referring to the social missions which provide subsidized food, medical services, literacy programs, etc), but this reform? No." Taking away this from people who have neither the money nor the means to access this sort of thing might just be the death of the regime of the macacon. Oh yeah, and other communities such as the South Bronx and London who are used to receiving the benefits of Venezuela's oil windfall before many Venezuelans will lose their benefits, too.
3) Dovetailing with my second point, isolating Venezuela internationally can never be a good thing, especially when it so heavily relies on income from its oil exports. Both domestic and international stations were threatened, the latter of having its correspondents thrown out of the country; companies will continue to leave Venezuela, stagnating further any manufacturing infrastructure it may have hoped to achieve; and the row with president Uribe could prove very dangerous for Venezuelans, as there are already massive shortages, and Venezuela gets a good deal of beef from Colombia. Imagine if Uribe were to win a third term? (I am against this.) Venezuela would have less food for seven years, as he is not even halfway through his second term, which will end in 2010... When a leader has threatened or spoken horribly --and often baselessly-- in the past few weeks of Colombia, Spain (he's threatening to nationalize Spanish banks now and telling Spanish companies to leave if the PP --party to which Aznar belongs-- wins the elections), CNN, the US (nothing new there), using sophomoric insults and infantile tactics, in this increasingly globalized world, everyone is watching, and few are impressed. His ridiculous behavior does make for great political cartoons, though; Rayma, per usual, hits the nail on the head. People are starting to boycott CITGO in the US, something which may seem small, but at the very least delivers a message. I don't know if others will do the same outside the US to Venezuelan countries controlled by the state, but because Don Dinero is quite powerful, the little things emanating from abroad may have a more profound within Venezuela than one could imagine.
From The Daily Motion
The marches have had their effect as much as they possibly could have, as TIME, The Times, and The Guardian have shown. We will all be waiting for the results of this; while many will be glued to the TV watching football, I'll be following this as closely as possible.
So as to not end on a totally depressing note, let's round this out with some brilliant political satire!
New video out of the Madre Patria
...once again making fun of the Por que no te callas? incident.
The accent is a horrible impression of the Venezuelan, but I am still amused :D
Since I am not technology savvy at all, click here to watch it.
The accent is a horrible impression of the Venezuelan, but I am still amused :D
Since I am not technology savvy at all, click here to watch it.
Protests against the constitutional reform in Tachira on Nov 30
I totally forgot to post this yesterday!!!
My friend Carlos made it back to San Cristobal from Caracas, and then immediately went to the protests in his city, held on la quinta avenida.
While he sent me the few pics posted here, just go over to this entry and see what he had to say!
NO A LA REFORMA!
ETA kills again, zETAp continues negotiations
Lady Vorzheva sent me her latest entry this morning, and since it's in English with links in Spanish, I would venture to say that most of my readers have no excuse not to go read it! I am not going to bother to summarize it, as it is concise and powerful. Do yourself a favor and go read the whole thing.
Una desgracia total es el desgobierno de Pepito Guichito, sigue con la vaina mientras el pueblo español sufre a manos de los terroristas. Estos cobardes los etarras no son hombres de paz; son igual que los malandros, los terroristas de las FARC.
UPDATE: English-language media still are lacking, as Lady V reports, on mentioning this! However, CNN --useless piece of CRAP that it is-- calls the ETA terrorists "fighters." Fighters? No, they're terrorists, con todas las letras! Seriously, if there is one reason to learn another language, it should be so you don't have to rely on the Communist News Network for all your news...
UPDATE 2: They have changed it to "ETA gunmen" -- slightly better, but still...
This one is just in Spanish, if I have time later, I know she won't mind if I translate it...but to whet your appetites: the ETA terrorists recognized the Civil Guardsmen who were attacked, one of whom was killed.
My translation, which is posted in red italics under the original Spanish version (might as well start learning another language now...):
Una desgracia total es el desgobierno de Pepito Guichito, sigue con la vaina mientras el pueblo español sufre a manos de los terroristas. Estos cobardes los etarras no son hombres de paz; son igual que los malandros, los terroristas de las FARC.
UPDATE: English-language media still are lacking, as Lady V reports, on mentioning this! However, CNN --useless piece of CRAP that it is-- calls the ETA terrorists "fighters." Fighters? No, they're terrorists, con todas las letras! Seriously, if there is one reason to learn another language, it should be so you don't have to rely on the Communist News Network for all your news...
UPDATE 2: They have changed it to "ETA gunmen" -- slightly better, but still...
This one is just in Spanish, if I have time later, I know she won't mind if I translate it...but to whet your appetites: the ETA terrorists recognized the Civil Guardsmen who were attacked, one of whom was killed.
My translation, which is posted in red italics under the original Spanish version (might as well start learning another language now...):
Los "hombres de paz" de ETA matan a un Guardia Civil (III): los terroristas reconocieron a los Guardias
The "men of peace" of ETA kill a Civil Guardsman (III): the terrorists recognized them
Diario Metro informa sobre los dos Guardias Civiles que han sufrido el atentado esta mañana:
Diario Metro gives information about the two Civil Guardsmen who suffered the attack this morning:
El guardia civil fallecido hoy en Capbreton, Raúl Centeno,a había nacido en Madrid el 11 de junio de 1983, se encontraba soltero y había ingresado en el Instituto Armado en octubre de 2003, mientras que el herido crítico, Fernando Trapero, nació el 19 de septiembre de 1984 y había ingreado en el Cuerpo en septiembre de 2004, informaron a Europa Press fuentes de Interior.
Las familias de los dos guardias civiles tiroteados hoy por ETA en el sur de Francia se desplazarán hasta el país vecino esta tarde en un Falcon que el Gobierno pondrá a su disposición y que despegará a primera hora de la tarde de una base militar de la Comunidad de Madrid.
Los dos guardias civiles estaban destinados en la sede central de la Guardia Civil, en la capital de España, donde se ubica la Unidad Central Especial (UCE-1), del Servicio de Información de la Benemérita, encargada de la lucha contra ETA.
The deceased Guardsman from the events today in Capbreton, Raul Centeno, who was born in Madrid on June 11, 1983, single, entered the Instituto Armado in October of 2003, while the Guardman in critical condition, Fernando Trapero, was born on September 19, 1984, and entered into the Core in September 2004, sources from the Ministry of the Interior informed Europa Press.
The families of the two Guardsmen gunned down by ETA in the south of France will head to the neighboring country today in a Falcon the government will leave them at their disposition and will leave from a military base in Madrid.
The Guardsmen were assigned in the central headquarters of the Civil Guard, in the Spanish capital of the Servicio de Informacion de la Benemerita, where the UCE-1 (Special Central Unit), which is in charge of the fight against ETA, is located.
Asimismo, según parece, los terroristas y los agentes tuvieron un encuentro fortuito:
Likewise, it seems that the terrorists and the agents had a "fortuitous" encounter:
Libertad Digital: Rubalcaba dice que el encuentro entre los terroristas y los agentes fue "fortuito"
Libertad Digital: Rubalcaba says that the encounter between the terrorists and the agents was "fortuitous"
El ministro del Interior, Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba, afirmó esta tarde que los dos guardias civiles tiroteados en Capbreton tuvieron un encuentro "fortuito" con los terroristas. "Han entrado en una cafetería, al parecer había tres etarras en la mesa. No sabemos por qué se han debido reconocer y el resultado es que cuando han salido los guardias civiles han salido detrás los tres etarras, dos hombres y una mujer. Ha habido una discusión y ha acabado con un tiroteo ", explicó. Minutos antes de la comparecencia del ministro, fuentes de la lucha antiterrorista habían filtrado ya el intercambio de palabras entre los etarras y los agentes.
Minister of the Interior, Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba, affirmed this afternoon that the two civil Guardsmen shot in Capbreton had a "fortuitous" encounter with the terrorists. "They entered into a cafeteria, and it seems that there were three members of ETA at the table. We don't know why they recognized them, and the result is that when the civil Guardsmen left, they left behind the three members of ETA, two men and a woman. There was a discussion and it ended in a shootout," he explained. Minutes before the appearance of the Minister, sources from the anti-terrorist struggle had already leaked the interchange of words between the ETA terrorists and the agents.
A mí esto me parece muy raro. No sabemos por qué se han debido reconocer. Hombre, los Guardias Civiles a los etarras porque estarán fichados o los tenían vigilados. Lo raro es que los etarras los reconocieran. ¿O no? Y que luego discutieran, después de haber salido del restaurante.
This seems to me quite odd. "We don't know why they would have recognized them." Please, the Civil Guardsmen would recognize the ETA terrorists because they either have a record, or they had been watching them. What strikes me as odd is that the ETA terrorists recognized them. Or no? And that after they would have had a discussion, after having left the restaurant.
(+) Vaya, Aquiles y Pandemonio también consideran raro esto mismo. ¿Tiene ETA un topo en el Ministerio de Interior?
(+) Wow, Aquiles and Pandemonio found it odd, too. Does ETA have a mole in the Ministry of the Interior?
¿Tiene ETA un "topo" en el Ministerio del Interior? ¿O quizás un "colaborador" como el que les avisó de la operación contra la red de información?
Does ETA have a mole in the Ministry of the Interior? Or, perhaps a collaborator like the one who warned them of the operation against the network of information?
[Por cierto, que nadie ha mencionado que el modus operandi ha sido parecido (también por la espalda y también al salir de un edificio, en este caso su Cuartel) al tiroteo a un sargento en San Sebastián, del que no se supo nada porque las causas no estaban claras. A día de hoy, creo que no se ha publicado ni cómo ni quién ni por qué tiroteó al sargento. Si alguien lo sabe, lo deja en comentarios.]
[By the way, the fact that no one has mentioned that the modus operandi has been similar (also in the back and also leaving a building, in this case, barracks) to the shooting of the sergeant in San Sebastian (Pais Vasco - The Basque country), of which no one knew because the causes were not clear. Today, I don't think that neither the how, nor who, nor why has been published. If someone knows, leave it in the comment section.]
Friday, November 30, 2007
Happy Friday
I am just getting ready to leave the office, possibly meet up with some friends, and then will try to enjoy the rest of the evening.
Since I'm 100% positive that the rest of the weekend will be crazy, I figured that I'd at least post something chill... From a group which I really enjoy, Bajo Fondo Tango Club, here is Perfume.
Since I'm 100% positive that the rest of the weekend will be crazy, I figured that I'd at least post something chill... From a group which I really enjoy, Bajo Fondo Tango Club, here is Perfume.
LAC round-up for Nov 30
LATIN AMERICA
Source: The Economist, November 29, 2007
Sad pawn sent to freezer
Nov 29th 2007 | BOGOTÁ AND CARACAS
From The Economist print edition
A jilted mediator unleashes a war of words
| |
|
| |
| Mr Betancourt; still hoping, five years on |
THE decision in August by Álvaro Uribe, Colombia's president, to invite his Venezuelan counterpart, Hugo Chávez, to help broker the release of 45 hostages held by FARC guerrillas for the past five years always looked like a misjudgement. It took only three months for Mr Uribe to have second thoughts. But when he told Mr Chávez that he was cancelling his mediation effort, it unleashed volleys of invective between the two leaders.
After a telltale pause that spoke of premeditation rather than spontaneous frustration, Mr Chávez began by calling Mr Uribe a “liar and cynic” who “does not want peace”, adding that Colombia “deserves a better president”. Mr Uribe in turn accused his neighbour of seeking to “build an empire based on his [oil-rich] budget” and of wanting Colombia to be “a victim of a FARC terrorist government”. That prompted Mr Chávez to dub Mr Uribe “a sad pawn of the empire” (as he likes to call the United States), say that he was putting relations with Colombia “in the freezer” and recall his ambassador in Bogotá. He would have “no type of relationship” with Mr Uribe's government, he vowed.
Mr Uribe may reckon that a few insults are a price worth paying for ending a venture that seemed certain to provide political gains for Mr Chávez and the FARC but looked unlikely to free all the hostages—if any. These include Colombian police and army officers, three American contractors and Ingrid Betancourt, a politician of dual Franco-Colombian nationality. Mr Uribe was under pressure both from Colombians and from Nicolas Sarkozy, France's president, to reach a deal with the FARC that would see its captives swapped for rebel prisoners in Colombia's jails. The FARC are known to view the anti-American Mr Chávez with sympathy. But in turning to him, Mr Uribe also seemed to be showing his pique at the refusal by the Democrats who control the United States Congress to ratify a free-trade agreement with Colombia.
Venezuela's president took to the role of mediator with predictable gusto. He met the hostages' families and invited a FARC leader to his presidential palace. He accepted an invitation from Mr Sarkozy to visit Paris. He wanted to arrange a personal meeting with Manuel Marulanda, the FARC' s veteran leader. He spoke to Colombia's army commander without going through Mr Uribe—something which Colombia's president claimed he had been explicitly asked not to do.
Piedad Cordóba, a leftist Colombian senator who was co-mediator, claimed this week that the initiative had made great progress, that the FARC had backed down on some of its demands and that a prisoner swap would lead to full-blown peace talks. To others it didn't look like it: the FARC failed even to provide proof that the hostages were still alive. Mr Chávez himself said he expected the mediation to take a year.
Relations between Colombia and Venezuela have long mixed closeness with tensions, some of them caused by the spillover from Colombia's armed conflict. Though political opposites, the conservative Mr Uribe and the socialist Mr Chávez share a populist, demagogic streak. They had struck up a surprisingly warm relationship of mutual respect. That will not be easily restored. Rodrigo Pardo, a former Colombian foreign minister who now edits Cambio, a newsmagazine, said he had never witnessed such harsh exchanges between the two countries' leaders, even when a missile-bearing Colombian warship entered waters claimed by both countries in 1987. But he doubts relations will break down completely.
For both countries, the other is too important to ignore. For each, the other is the second-largest trading partner after the United States. Trade between them totalled $4 billion last year and is heading for $5 billion-$6 billion this year. Venezuela takes many of Colombia's manufactured goods. Thanks partly to the inefficiencies generated by Mr Chávez's populist economic policies, Venezuela depends on Colombia for staples such as milk. It even imports natural gas from its neighbour through a pipeline inaugurated by the two presidents this year.
Mr Chávez faces an unexpectedly close battle to win approval for a constitutional referendum on December 2nd that opponents say would turn Venezuela into a socialist autocracy (see article). Many people in Caracas share Mr Uribe's view that Mr Chávez is exploiting the row between the two of them to stir up nationalist feeling. Colombia has said that its ambassador is staying put in Caracas. Once the referendum is out of the way, expect his Venezuelan counterpart to return to his post in Bogotá.
Source: Pablo Bachelet, Miami Herald, November 30, 2007
Latin constitutional changes raise democracy concerns
In a trend that many view with concern, several Latin American and Caribbean countries are pushing or discussing radical changes to their constitutions -- and facing increased tensions as a result.
In Venezuela and Bolivia, tensions over proposed constitutional revisions have led to massive protests against what critics say are unprecedented power grabs by the presidents there. Ecuador and Haiti are also looking for far-reaching changes, and in Trinidad and Tobago, there is talk of changing its presidential system.
Even stable democracies like Chile and Colombia have made recent changes affecting presidential terms -- in Bogotá, to allow presidents to seek immediate reelection, and in Santiago, trimming the term from six to four years.
Some of the changes sought are either minor or stay within the bounds of representational democracy. But in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador, critics say the proposed changes are designed to give presidents far too much power.
''It is a battle between democracy and authoritarianism,'' said Valeria Merino, who until recently headed the Latin American Corp. for Development, an Ecuadorean democracy watchdog organization. ``This has nothing to do with the left or the right . . . but how you exercise power.''
She said she worries, for example, that Ecuador's institutions are too weak to stop left-wing President Rafael Correa from taking on more powers through a recently elected constitutional assembly that began its work Thursday.
NUMEROUS REVISIONS
Few Latin American constitutions have endured the test of time. Argentina's had six major makeovers between 1860 and 1994. Ecuador has had 18 since 1830. Venezuela's last major revision came in 1999 -- and resulted in significant changes that favored President Hugo Chávez, now seeking 69 new major changes up for a referendum on Sunday.
Many Latin American countries wrote new constitutions as they emerged from military dictatorships in the 1970s and '80s, incorporating more protections for individual and economic freedoms.
Then they got busy making changes.
Brazil already has modified its 1988 constitution 14 times, Chile has changed its 1980 constitution seven times, and Colombia has introduced 11 modifications to its 1993 text, according to a database of Latin American constitutions maintained by Georgetown University's Center for Latin American Studies in Washington.
By contrast, the U.S. Constitution has been amended only 27 times in 220 years, the last time in 1971 to lower the voting age from 21 to 18.
Analysts say some of the recent pushes to overhaul constitutions around the hemisphere come from the growing impatience with political systems that many of the region's people perceive as failing to deliver a better life.
''People believe more than ever in democracy, but they want a democracy that resolves their problems,'' Organization of American States head José Miguel Insulza said during an OAS-hosted debate on constitutions Tuesday. ``Behind today's instability lies years of neglect.''
But critics worry that some of the revisions are undermining democratic principles in the name of stability or social justice.
Bolivian left-wing President Evo Morales is pushing changes he says will favor the country's indigenous majority. But Jaime Aparicio, the country's former ambassador to Washington, called it ``a good example of how not to do a constitutional reform.''
He said a preliminary draft approved last week by Bolivia's constitutional assembly, without opposition delegates present, was a ''vague ideological project of state reform that mixes socialism, ethnicity and nationalism'' and allows Morales to be reelected indefinitely.
Morales supporters deny any antidemocratic intentions, but the approval triggered massive weekend protests that left four dead.
HUMAN RIGHTS
To deepen his self-declared ''socialist revolution,'' Venezuela's Chávez is pushing changes that include more rights for minorities and workers as well as unlimited presidential reelections, broad martial law powers and fewer protections for private property.
Gerardo Fernández, with the Caracas-based Universidad Central de Venezuela, called the proposed revisions ''ideological'' and ``a direct and flagrant violation of human rights laws contained in international treaties.''
Venezuelan officials reply that Chávez can hardly be considered antidemocratic given that Venezuelans have gone to the polls 11 times since 1999 and that 64 percent voted to reelect him last year.
In Haiti, President René Préval is arguing that the country's constitution, adopted after the collapse of the 29-year Duvalier family dictatorship, focused too much on checks on power to make sure no new tyranny would arise, but has now become too unwieldy and should be updated.
But some observers say the hemisphere's poorest nation is in no condition to face a constitutional debate, given other urgent problems such as insecurity, lack of infrastructure and jobs.
''We are on a kind of slippery slope right now,'' said Jean-Germain Gros, a University of Missouri at St. Louis political science professor. ``Unless we manage things properly, we can be on the verge of another self-inflicted crisis.''
In Trinidad and Tobago, a constitutional overhaul remains a heated issue even after Prime Minister Patrick Manning failed to win the necessary votes in the Nov. 5 general elections to make the changes he would like to the country's constitution.
Manning has proposed changing the country's largely ceremonial presidency to an executive one, similar to the U.S. model. Opponents argue that the change, outlined in a draft constitution, lacks the necessary checks and balances and could lead to a dictatorship.
Insulza of the OAS worries about the effect of all this on foreign investors who are already leery of the region's difficult political environment.
''We all know that our democracies are seen as democracies, but unstable ones, precarious ones,'' he said. ``In a globalized world, we do not need just democracy, but democracies that guarantee stability.''
BOLIVIA
Source: AFP, El Nuevo Herald, November 30, 2007
Aumenta la polarización de la política en Bolivia
Bolivia, sumida en una creciente polarización política, se prepara para nuevos enfrentamientos a partir del lunes, cuando las regiones contrarias al presidente Evo Morales realicen huelgas de hambre contra su gobierno.
En la jornada del miércoles tanto el gobierno de Morales como la oposición levantaron el tono y redoblaron la apuesta para afirmar su liderazgo. Tras los paros que se realizaron el miércoles en seis de los nueve departamentos bolivianos, Bolivia se daba un respiro ayer.
Del lado oficialista, Morales promulgó una ley que era resistida por las regiones por cuanto les retiraba parte de sus ingresos. De hecho esa ley era uno de los motivos de la protesta del miércoles.
Más tarde el mandatario aprobó una expropiación de 180,000 hectáreas en el sureño departamento de Chuquisaca, en el marco de una ley de tierras que también ha sido resistida por latifundistas de las regiones.
Además, la mayoría oficialista en el Congreso -que alcanzó el quórum apelando a tres congresistas suplentes de la oposición- aprobó también el miércoles que la Asamblea Constituyente, denostada por la oposición, pueda sesionar en cualquier punto del país, una forma de eludir las presiones que le han impedido sesionar en la sureña Sucre en los últimos tres meses.
Estos tres hechos políticos fueron un contraataque contra el paro liderado por la poderosa Santa Cruz, seguido también en Cochabamba, Tarija, Chuquisaca, Beni y Pando, que en total aportan 80 por ciento del PIB del país.
Pero un Morales más conciliador convocó ayer a los gobernadores opositores a su gobierno y a los empresarios a discutir planes de desarrollo en sus regiones como un paso para superar la crisis política.
''Hemos convocado a los prefectos (gobernadores) y al sector productivo empresarial para que de manera conjunta podamos intercambiar políticas y de esta manera aportar para una revolución social'', afirmó en una declaración a la prensa.
Source: Drew Benson, Wall Street Journal, November 30, 2007
INTERVIEW: Ex-Pres Mesa Says Political Extremes Hurt Bolivia
Former Bolivian President Carlos Mesa, who stepped down amid persistent social unrest in 2005, believes the deepening polarization between left- and right-wing extremes will continue to hinder his nation's political reconciliation, but isn't severe enough to lead to a civil war.
"What concerns me is the level of polarization, of black and white, that doesn't seem reasonable nor desirable for a nation that wants to build a new social pact,"
Mesa, who now heads a nonprofit pro-democracy foundation in La Paz, spoke with Dow Jones Newswires by telephone during a visit to New York coordinated by the Bolivian-American Chamber of Commerce.
Social unrest in Bolivia flared up in recent days as President Evo Morales attempted to push through a new constitution that gives the poor, indigenous majority more rights, but which critics said would also consolidate and extend the president's hold on power.
This past weekend, several protesters were killed in clashes outside a military base in the historical capital, Sucre, where Morales supporters gave the Constituent Assembly's preliminary approval of the new document.
On Wednesday, businesses, schools and public transportation shut down across much of Bolivia to protest Morales' reforms. The strikes were strongest in Bolivia's eastern region, where wealthier political leaders want greater local control over massive natural resource wealth.
President Morales has taken his cue from Venezuela's left-wing authoritarian President Hugo Chavez, and Mesa's most pointed criticism focused on the Bolivian for pursuing an overly inflammatory agenda.
"When a president has to have his party members (of the Constituent Assembly), without the opposition, meet in a military base surrounded by soldiers and police, something isn't working," Mesa said.
"The new constitution should be a social pact and a social pact is a search for agreements. Unfortunately, the government isn't looking for agreement - it's looking to impose a vision of the nation that without a doubt responds to an important (indigenous) part of Bolivian society, but doesn't involve all Bolivians," Mesa said.
Following this weekend's approval, there are three more steps to introducing the new constitution. The Constituent Assembly will now approve the document article by article, after which a revised version must be approved in its entirety by the assembly. It will then be put to a nationwide vote.
Morales was elected in December 2005, six months after leading social protests which pushed
Mesa had offered a cleverly worded referendum in which Bolivians ended up voting for exporting the gas, but his moderate position was undermined by tension between the left-wing, led by Morales, and regional leaders seeking more autonomy.
Morales won the elections which followed Mesa's resignation. He moved swiftly to hike taxes on oil and gas production, and transferred ownership of the country's oil reserves to the state. The decision froze all new private-sector investments in the country's massive natural gas reserves.
Mesa said the move has been wrongly labeled as "nationalization" since the oil and gas assets weren't expropriated from the foreign companies which continue to operate in Bolivia. Still, he acknowledged it did put off new investments, as has the increased social unrest.
The intervention in the oil and gas industry also chilled relations with neighboring Brazil, which sank billions of dollars into Bolivian hydrocarbons projects during the previous decade. Brazil's state-run oil company Petrobras (PBR) was forced to sell two refineries to the Bolivian state for a price analysts said was well below market value.
Relations may thaw somewhat on Dec. 12, when Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva is slated to visit Bolivia to meet with Morales, Mesa said. "Undoubtedly, the goal is to improve relations hurt by the so-called nationalization that seriously cooled Petrobras' investment," Mesa said.
As such, an improvement in the hydrocarbons sector, led by Petrobras, "will depend on whether Morales and Lula can reach an agreement," he said.
Bolivia needs new investments, as in recent months it has begun to struggle to meet gas export contracts with Brazil and Argentina.
Petrobras has a long-term contract to import 30 million cubic meters of gas a day from Bolivia, and currently imports about 27 million cubic meters a day. Argentina, meanwhile, holds a contract for up to 7.7 million cubic meters a day that is supposed to increase by another 20 million cubic meters in the coming years. It is unclear how Bolivia will provide the additional gas given that hydrocarbons expansion projects have largely stalled.
Although pessimistic about the current polarization inside Bolivia, Mesa said he doesn't think it will lead to a civil war or to a secession attempt by the wealthier eastern provinces.
Asked if he sees himself running again for the presidency, Mesa was doubtful.
"I'd have to check my level of tolerance for masochism and I'm not sure it's high enough," he said, quickly shifting the conversation back to the current Bolivian situation.
Colombia aseguró que no recibió notificación de Venezuela sobre una ruptura de relaciones, mientras Ecuador intentaba apaciguar la tormenta diplomática entre los dos países desatada después que Bogotá suspendió la mediación del presidente venezolano Hugo Chávez ante la guerrilla.
''Hasta el momento no existe comunicación oficial alguna del gobierno de Venezuela'' sobre una presunta ruptura de las relaciones diplomáticas, dijo el canciller Fernando Araújo en conferencia de prensa ayer en Bogotá.
El ministro salió así al paso del más reciente pronunciamiento de Chávez, quien aseguró el miércoles que mientras Alvaro Uribe ``sea presidente, yo no tendré ningún tipo de relación ni con él ni con el gobierno de Colombia''.
Los alcances de esta declaración aún son un misterio para los colombianos, aunque gremios económicos pidieron prepararse ante la eventualidad de que Venezuela, el segundo comprador de productos de Colombia después de Estados Unidos, tome medidas contra sus exportaciones, que este año se proyectaban en $4,000 millones .
El ex ministro de Relaciones Exteriores Rodrigo Pardo, quien mantiene una posición independiente frente a Uribe, dijo que no es posible ''leer tan literal a Chávez estos dias previos al referendo'' del domingo en Venezuela, y confió en que no se llegará a una ruptura formal de las relaciones.
Por su parte el presidente Uribe intentó marcar diferencias frente a la beligerancia verbal esgrimida por Chávez, y en una escueta declaración también el miércoles, sin aludir directamente a su homólogo, dijo que ``los Jefes de Estado tienen que pensar no en sus propias rabias, no en sus propias vanidades, sino en la necesidad de respetar primero al pueblo que se representa''.
Ecuador terció ayer en la discrepancia a través de su canciller María Fernanda Espinosa, quien señaló que a su país le ``gustaría muchísimo que existiera un acercamiento entre Uribe y Chávez''.
Ambos jefes de Estado han anunciado su participación hoy en la instalación de la asamblea constituyente de Ecuador, convocada por el presidente Rafael Correa.
La crisis amenaza los esfuerzos de Correa por reintegrar a Venezuela al seno de la Comunidad Andina de Naciones que abandonó alegando que la decisión de Colombia y Perú de negociar tratados de libre comercio con Estados Unidos afectaba sus intereses.
Source: AP, New York Times, November 30, 2007
Colombia Seizes Videotapes of Hostages
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) -- Colombian officials released on Friday newly obtained videos of rebel-held hostages, among them three U.S. defense contractors and a former presidential candidate -- the first images in years providing evidence the captives may be alive.
The tapes were seized in the arrest Thursday evening in Bogota of three suspected urban members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, better known as the FARC, said Luis Carlos Restrepo, the government's peace commissioner.
Also recovered were a series of letters apparently written by the hostages, including what appeared to be the will of U.S. contractor Thomas Howes.
The videos of hostages held by Colombia's leading rebel group were made public immediately after their discovery, Restrepo said. They were apparently written and recorded as recently as late October.
The U.S., French and Colombian governments had demanded the so-called ''proof of life'' during Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez's recent ill-fated mediation effort to obtain the release of 45 high-profile hostages held by the FARC. But the FARC, by all accounts, never delivered the material to him.
The videotapes, which were played at a news conference without sound, showed an extremely gaunt Ingrid Betancourt, a dual French national seized while campaigning for president in 2002, apparently chained and in front of a jungle backdrop.
In the images, Betancourt has long hair and stares blankly at the ground. No images of her have been seen since 2003.
Betancourt has become a cause celebre in France and that country's president called the video ''undeniable'' evidence that Betancourt ''is alive.''
''This encourages us to boost our efforts to win her release,'' President Nicolas Sarkozy said.
''It is a sad image, but she is alive,'' Betancourt's sister, Astrid Betancourt, said on French television broadcaster LCI. ''I am extremely moved to see these images of my sister.''
The Colombian government said that the tapes carried the time stamp for Betancourt of Oct. 24, 2007. The tape of the Americans carried the date of the Jan. 1, 2007. But a kidnapped Colombia soldier, who appeared on the same tape, said the recording was being made on Oct. 23.
Astrid Betancourt said the October dates indicate the rebels had intended to give the footage to Chavez, who was pushing for proof of life at that time.
The Americans -- Howes, Keith Stansell and Marc Gonsalves -- were abducted by the FARC after their surveillance plane went down in a FARC-held southern Colombia jungle in 2003.
In the images, each American briefly stands alone on the screen, also against a jungle backdrop, looking haggard. The rebels had not released any images of them since 2003. The U.S. embassy in Bogota has called the three Americans the longest-held U.S. hostages currently in captivity.
The FARC, which uses kidnapping as a tool to raise money and pressure the government, are offering to release these and other high-profile hostages in exchange for the freeing of hundreds of rebels from Colombian and U.S. prisons. Some hostages have endured a decade in FARC captivity.
Chavez, the Venezuelan leader, is well respected within the FARC and had been involved in trying to mediate a deal between the government and the rebels until last week, when President Alvaro Uribe ended his role, saying Chavez had overstepped his bounds by directly contacting the head of Colombia's army.
That defied a direct order from Uribe, the Colombian president said.
In justifying its decision to end Chavez's role as mediator, the Colombian government said the FARC had failed to respond to the Venezuelan president's entreaties to give evidence the hostages were still alive.
Restrepo said the five tapes also showed images of another 12 Colombians, mainly police and soldiers, and that other documents seized Thursday included a series of letters apparently written by hostages.
One undated letter was from Howes to his wife, and another, dated Nov. 26, 2006, was his will, said the government. Another note was from Gonsalves to the military commander of the FARC, known as ''Mono Jojoy,'' dated Oct. 23, 2007, and Betancourt wrote a letter to her mother, dated Oct. 24, 2007.
The government did not reveal the text.
Chavez's dismissal from the process has led to a diplomatic spat between the two countries, with the Venezuelan leader announcing Wednesday he would have ''no type of relationship'' with the Colombian government as long as Uribe was president.
Families of the kidnapped have demanded that Uribe, whose father was killed by the FARC, invite Chavez back in to the process, saying that his involvement was the best hope in years of freeing their loved ones.
Uribe has advocated military rescues of the kidnapped, something opposed by all the families of the abducted, who fear the hostages will be killed in crossfire. Since taking office in 2002, Uribe's administration has had no face-to-face meetings with the rebels.
Comenzó a sesionar la Constituyente en Ecuador
El presidente Rafael Correa dejó su cargo en manos de la Constituyente que se instaló ayer en Ecuador, en el paso previo a su ratificación en el poder por parte de la mayoría oficialista que reformará la Carta Política y cesará al Congreso de oposición.
Correa puso su mandato a disposición junto con el de su vicepresidente, Lenin Moreno, en una carta enviada a la Constituyente el mismo día en que ésta inició las sesiones en la localidad de Montecristi, ubicada a 250 km al suroeste de Quito.
''Fieles a nuestros principios y a la palabra empeñada al pueblo ecuatoriano, entregamos a esta Asamblea Nacional Constituyente nuestros cargos de presidente y vicepresidente, con el propósito de que esta Asamblea se encuentre libre de decidir sobre el futuro gobernativo de la patria'', señalaron en la misiva.
Controlada por el oficialismo, que cuenta con 80 de los 130 representantes, la Asamblea redactará la nueva Constitución durante los siguientes seis meses y el texto será sometido a referendo en el 2008.
Al tiempo que ratificará a Correa en el poder, la Constituyente declarará en receso indefinido al Parlamento, que adelantó el miércoles su descanso de fin año antes de enfrentar una resolución.
La Asamblea inició su labor con el respaldo de cientos de campesinos que aplaudían en las afueras el cierre del Legislativo. ''Venimos a respaldar a nuestro presidente. ¡Fuera diputados que joden la nación!'', dijo Charles Guevara, mientras arengaba con un machete de madera.
La Constituyente se instaló con 128 asambleístas, con las únicas ausencias de Alvaro Noboa y su esposa Anabella Azín, líderes de una debilitada oposición de derecha que acusa a Correa de querer concentrar todos los poderes.
El jefe de Estado, que planea inaugurar los debates hoy en un acto al que asistirán sus colegas de Venezuela y Colombia -enfrascados en una ácida polémica-, promueve su propia versión del socialismo del siglo XXI planteado por Hugo Chávez.
Con un sólido respaldo popular, Correa alienta varias reformas, incluidas una que apruebe la reelección inmediata por un solo período, para regular la economía y enterrar una crisis política que impidió a sus tres antecesores terminar el mandato en la última década.
''Espero que (la Asamblea) haga esa transformación radical, profunda y rápida de las estructuras políticas, económicas y sociales'', dijo el mandatario al canal estatal, insistiendo en que, si no se hace ahora, ``el próximo cambio va a ser violento porque la gente no aguanta más''.
La sesión inaugural fue dirigida por Alberto Acosta, amigo entrañable de Correa, que fue nombrado presidente del foro por 121 de los asambleístas.
Los debates se iniciaron bajo la expectativa de una resolución contra el Legislativo, en cuya disolución se empeñó el mandatario aduciendo la corrupción y la incompetencia de los diputados.
''Cualquier acción que adopte esta Asamblea antes de ser refrendada en referendo, violaría el marco legal. Nosotros estamos por un cambio, pero en democracia'', dijo Gilmar Gutiérrez, dirigente del Partido Sociedad Patriótica (oposición).
Antes del receso, el Congreso advirtió sobre sanciones internacionales para la dictadura que a su juicio se configuraría si es cesado.
El presidente de Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, instalará hoy los controvertidos Consejos del Poder Ciudadano (CPC) como órganos de consulta del gobierno, amparado en un fallo judicial que invalidó temporalmente la decisión del Congreso de impedir su conformación.
El mandatario se prepara de esta forma a legitimar los Comités como ''verdaderos representantes de la sociedad civil'' ante el gobierno del Frente Sandinista (FSLN, izquierda) desestimando a cualquier otro interlocutor.
''Hay quienes se llenan la boca hablando de la sociedad civil organizada, pero la verdadera sociedad civil es el pueblo organizado en los CPC'', afirmó Ortega, antes cientos de seguidores del Reparto Shick, uno de los barrios más grandes y pobres de la capital.
El gobernante desconoció a ''los demás organismos'' civiles del país como grupos financiados por los ''gringos'', que ``ya sabemos que sirven a los partidos que están al servicio de los grandes poderes y que son enemigos de los pobres''.
Con esta advertencia, Ortega llamó a sus seguidores a convertir a los CPC ''en una fuerza de la sociedad civil'' en defensa de sus reivindicaciones, ''para que les arreglen las calles, se desarrollen programas de viviendas'' y resuelvan sus necesidades, porque ahora ``el que manda es el pueblo''.
El gobierno sandinista se propone con los CPC dar vida a un sistema de ''democracia directa'' semejante a las existentes actualmente en Cuba y Venezuela.
Los CPC serán instalados en un acto público en Managua que presidirá Ortega, como órganos de consulta popular con presencia en todos los barrios y comarcas de los 153 municipios del país.
Venezuela
Are they beginning to lose the faith?
Nov 29th 2007 | CARACAS
From The Economist print edition
Hugo Chávez's attempt to turn his country into a socialist utopia under personal direction is running into trouble
SOME of the proposed articles are “not good”, he admits, though he is vague about the details. But Freddy Medina has no doubt about which way he will vote in December 2nd's referendum on constitutional reform. “I will support my president,” he says. What makes this loyalty to Hugo Chávez remarkable is that Mr Medina, a building worker, is about to be evicted from the three-room home he has spent the past two decades building on a steep hillside in La Pedrera, in the poor suburbs of south-western Caracas, the capital. Years of leaks from poorly maintained water and sewerage systems, combined with recent rains, have triggered landslides that have wrecked several of his neighbours' homes and left his vulnerable. The government has promised to rehouse him, but has not yet done so.
Thanks to the devotion of people like Mr Medina, Mr Chávez has easily won ten national ballots—including two presidential elections and several referendums—since he first arrived in office in 1999. Only last December he won a new six-year term with 63% of the vote. He has showered record oil revenues on social programmes for the poor while gradually turning a liberal democracy into a more authoritarian and less plural regime. But now, in trying to push through the radical rewriting of a constitution that he himself fathered in 1999, he may have gone a step too far.
Mr Chávez's reform proposes radical changes to 69 of the constitution's 350 articles. They put into effect his campaign promise to implement “21st-Century Socialism”. On the one hand, the economy is officially declared to be based on “socialist, anti-imperialist [and] humanist principles”, with protection of private property weakened. On the other, yet more power would be centralised in the presidency.
Mr Chávez would have full control over the Central Bank and its reserves. Elected local government would be undermined: the president would have untrammelled power to appoint the governor of Caracas, to create new federal territories, and to set up and finance a national “Popular Power” based on unelected communal councils. The new draft also weakens some of the “participatory” clauses of the 1999 constitution, raising from 10% to 30% the proportion of voters required to petition for a referendum. And it would abolish presidential term limits, allowing Mr Chávez to run again indefinitely.
Officials claim that the reform will deepen a popular revolution and give Venezuelans more rights. They point to clauses offering a free education, a cut in the working day from eight to six hours, and the extension of social security to informal workers. The government has not revealed the cost of such measures, none of which requires constitutional change.
Opponents see the reform as a big step away from democracy and towards a totalitarian state along Cuban lines. The novelty is that so, too, do some of Mr Chávez's erstwhile supporters. The reform is opening up what may be a lasting fissure in the chavista camp, driving those who see themselves as democratic socialists towards the opposition.
“Many of the articles there flout the essence of democracy,” says Ismael García, leader of Podemos, one of four parties that have formed the governing coalition since 1998 but which has now joined the “No” campaign in the referendum.
Another weighty opponent is General Raul Baduel, who was defence minister until July and whose role in restoring Mr Chávez to the presidential palace after an abortive coup in 2002 made him a hero to chavistas. The proposed reform amounts to “constitutional fraud” and a “coup d'état”, he says. “Democracies should be very careful that there is a division of powers, with counterbalances. This [the reform] would put democratic institutionality at risk.” For its part, the opposition has been revitalised by the emergence of a powerful student movement, untainted by involvement in the 2002 coup or other failures of the past.
Several pollsters who predicted Mr Chávez's election victory last year reckon that the referendum is now too close to call. They find a majority of respondents oppose the reform, but it is not clear how many of them will actually vote. In one of several signs that Mr Chávez is rattled, the government-dominated electoral authority decided to ban the publication of polls in the last week before the vote.
The president is a formidable campaigner and has honed a powerful political machine that can draw on the state's resources: metro stations and government offices are plastered with posters backing the reform. A study by the electoral authority found that government-linked television channels gave those against the reform only 1% of the total time given to those in favour; the remaining commercial channels favoured the No campaign, but by a much smaller margin.
Mr Chávez points out that many of those now passionately defending the 1999 constitution originally opposed it. He remains popular (with 60% of Venezuelans, the polls suggest). He is striving to turn the referendum into a plebiscite on himself. In a play on words, the placards proclaim “SIgue con Chávez” (roughly, “Yes, let's go on with Chávez”). Many shrewd observers in Caracas reckon that all this means that the president may win, though more narrowly than in the past.
But there are signs that the Chávez magic is starting to fade. Inflation is rising, while three years of price controls mean that basic foods such as milk, eggs and flour are often unobtainable. Violent crime is rampant, especially in poorer areas.
The referendum may be decided by how many Venezuelans bother to vote. Those in the opposition who called for abstention in past elections (claiming that the electoral authority was not impartial) have this time called on their supporters to vote, whereas in the chavista camp, there are signs of apathy. How widespread this proves to be may determine whether or not Venezuela remains a democracy.
Source: Casto Ocando, El Nuevo Herald, November 30, 2007
La reforma amenaza la libertad de prensa en Venezuela
El Nuevo Herald/San Cristóbal
Esta ciudad fronteriza de Venezuela, ubicada a escasas millas de Colombia y la primera que ha comenzado a sentir los efectos de la crisis diplomática entre los gobiernos de Hugo Chávez y Alvaro Uribe, es un escenario ilustrativo de la lucha crucial que tiene lugar en el campo de la libertad de expresión, cuya vigencia ha sido cuestionada por organismos internacionales.
''La guerra mediática, alimentada por los enfrentamientos entre partidarios y opositores del presidente Hugo Chávez, ha aumentado a lo largo de la campaña electoral'', indicó el más reciente informe de la organización Reporteros sin Fronteras (RSF), dado a conocer aquí ayer.
Según la agrupación, con sede en París, la reforma constitucional propuesta por Chávez ''amenaza la libertad de prensa'', y su ratificación en la consulta del próximo domingo ``podría significar un giro peligroso para la libertad de prensa''.
''El clima en que se ha desarrollado la campaña electoral y las odiosas agresiones a la prensa, constatadas en ambas partes, en cualquier momento pueden servir de argumento para decretar el estado de excepción ilimitado [artículo 338] y suspender, por ello, algunas garantías constitucionales fundamentales, como el derecho a informar'', detalló el reporte.
El informe reseñó el incidente ocurrido hace una semana en un pequeño estudio de televisión al norte de la ciudad montañosa de San Cristóbal, con un inusitado ataque contra un periodista, transmitido en vivo y en directo.
Durante una rutinaria edición de su programa ''Café con azúcar'', el periodista opositor Gustavo Azócar recibió la visita inesperada de la diputada chavista Iris Varela, quien comenzó a insultarlo y a golpearlo al aire.
La congresista reclamó a Azócar haberla difamado en un libro que el periodista publicó sobre la ''Comandante Fosforito'' --como Varela también es conocida en alusión a su carácter volátil y su verbo incandescente-- que incluía denuncias de presunta corrupción. Durante los minutos que duró la pelea, la diputada lanzó al suelo mesas y micrófonos, golpeó repetidamente al presentador en la cara, y lo amenazó con abrirle un juicio público.
''Creo que fue un ataque premeditado'', dijo Azócar a El Nuevo Herald. ''Esperaban que yo reaccionara violentamente también, para abrirme un juicio y meterme preso'', explicó el periodista, que citó fuentes judiciales que le aseguraron que estaba en marcha un plan para iniciar un juicio en su contra por agresión.
El documento de RSF coincidió con denuncias divulgadas ayer sobre presuntas acciones para obstaculizar el trabajo de algunos periodistas españoles. Alfonso Torán, un reportero de La Sexta Noticia, de España, denunció que tres hoteles donde se hospedaban comunicadores españoles impidieron la transmisión satelital de imágenes, aparentemente por razones de seguridad.
Otra agrupación, el Grupo de Monitoreo de Medios (GMM), una iniciativa de la Universidad de Gotemburgo, Suecia, y la Universidad Católica Andrés Bello (UCAB), de Caracas, cuestionó la alta polarización de la cobertura noticiosa en Venezuela, y criticó tanto a medios de oposición y oficialistas por la abierta parcialización de la cobertura.
Stein Gronsund, el periodista que dirigió un grupo de expertos que analizaron la cobertura noticiosa de 14 medios sobre la reforma constitucional dijo que ''es impresionante la polarización'', y criticó que el canal oficial VTV virtualmente haya ``eliminado a la oposición de su noticiero''.
El gobierno ha negado las acusaciones de que promueve la agresión contra medios no afectos a él, y denunció que RSF mantiene una campaña ''agresiva'' contra la administración de Chávez.
''En las últimas semanas, RSF se ha dedicado a agredir frecuentemente a Venezuela en relación al proceso de reforma constitucional que será aprobado el 2 de diciembre próximo'', aseguró en San Cristóbal el ministro de Información, William Lara.
Lara criticó las declaraciones de la organización sobre el supuesto giro peligroso para la libertad de prensa si se aprueba la reforma.
''Nosotros sabemos las respuestas de esta campaña mediática, y sabemos que está en el Departamento de Estado de los Estados Unidos de Norteamérica'', apuntó.
De acuerdo con los estudios de RSF y el GMM, el comportamiento de los medios audiovisuales ha sido en general ''desequilibrado''. Mientras en un extremo situaron a RCTV Internacional y Globovisión como medios con una difusión mayoritaria de información a favor del NO, también hallaron que el canal oficial VTV y la cadena radial YVKE Mundial extremaron su cobertura a favor del SI.
Los canales privados Venevisión y Televen, aunque ''tomaron claramente partido contra Hugo Chávez al principio de su mandato'', después del golpe de estado del 2002 ''han ido evolucionando hacia una línea progubernamental'', observaron los reportes.
Source: Darcy Crowe, Wall Street Journal, November 30, 2007
Foreign Observers' Absence Adds Tension To Venezuela Vote
CARACAS (Dow Jones)--The lack of prestigious international election observers for Venezuela's Sunday referendum on a sweeping, and controversial, constitutional reform could produce massive protests and political turbulence, whatever the outcome.
Recent surveys indicate the segment of voters who plan to head to the polls and reject President Hugo Chavez's reform package outnumber the percentage supporting it by one to 10 percentage points.
Opposition forces are already admonishing the National Electoral Council, or CNE, whose directors have been appointed by Chavez supporters, that the country faces the prospect of huge protests if the result isn't credible.
Credibility, especially if the outcome is close but goes in favor the reform, will be harder to garner without brand-name international election observers from the European Union, the Organization of American States and The Carter Center, none of which will monitor the balloting.
Instead, some South American countries will send delegations that do not carry the same weight and whose agenda on Sunday will be set by the Venezuelan government.
A CNE spokesperson said the OAS, E.U. and the Carter Center declined to observe the voting because they did not have enough time to prepare since the referendum is being held one month after Venezuela's National Assembly approved the final reform draft.
But a spokesperson for the Carter Center said it wasn't invited to monitor the balloting. Requests for comments from the E.U. and the OAS went unanswered.
Jennifer McCoy, a professor with Georgia State University who previously monitored several elections in Venezuela and the region for the Carter Center, said, "if the results are questioned, and especially if they are close, it will be harder for the international community to interpret what happened without having had a credible international observer mission in place."
Domestically, the stakes for Chavez and his opposition are extremely high.
The constitutional reform would extend the president's term and lift term limits, and further enhance the power of an already muscular executive branch. It would give the president authority to declare states of emergency and suspend some civil liberties. The president would also be able to appoint provincial and municipal leaders. It would create new forms of collective property and facilitate state expropriation of private property. It gives the president direct control over the central bank and foreign reserves.
"If there is transparency, whatever the result, we will recognize it," said Henrique Capriles, an opposition mayor of Baruta municipality in Caracas. But, he warned, "we won't put up with a fraudulent process."
Wall Street has also taken notice of the potential for political upheaval.
Alberto Bernal, an analyst with Bear Stearns, said in a research report that accusations of fraud by the opposition if Chavez wins the referendum by a narrow margin could generate violent confrontations in Venezuela.
The most likely outcome is "that the referendum passes officially, yet the legality of the election is widely questioned," Bernal wrote. "This scenario carries the potential of being negative for the markets, on increased political noise and violence."
Accusations of fraud in Venezuela's polarized political atmosphere have been traditionally commonplace, but a recent string of polls that forecast a rejection of the referendum has rekindled suspicions and intensified the opposition's campaign.
"This is the first time that all the respected (local) polling agencies have coincided in predicting a Chavez defeat," said Anibal Romero, a retired political science professor.
But some, such as Luis Vicente Leon from Datanalisis, have shied away from predicting Sunday's outcome despite conducting surveys that place the "no" vote ahead by 10 percentage points, saying it's still too close to call.
The opposition, though, is focusing more on the survey numbers than the pollsters' caveats about the potential swings that currently undecided voters or those who abstain can create on election day.
The polls show that the Chavez camp could only pull-off a victory "with an electoral swindle," Antonio Ledezma, a leader in the opposition group National Resistance Command, told reporters on Wednesday.
Opposition groups believe they will benefit from traditionally absentee voters, a column usually composed of Chavez detractors but more of whom are expected to vote this time around. They are animated, the thinking goes, by a growing student movement, a powerful retired general once close to Chavez but who adamantly opposes the reforms and other signs of fissures within the government's ranks.
Chavez has predicted a resounding victory for his side, and has denounced the recent surveys, suggesting a majority of the population rejects the reforms as opposition-generated schemes to undermine their passage.
Government officials say the Chavez administration will respect any referendum outcome, but warn that the opposition better do the same.
Complicating things, the electoral apparatus in Venezuela has been a target of intense criticism, with widespread accusations that the leadership of the National Electoral Council is made up by Chavez supporters.
Moreover, under Chavez-led "registration drives" the voting registry has ballooned to more than 16 million registered voters from 12.5 million in 2004. In an embarrassing case, a well-known commander of a Marxist Colombian guerrilla group was registered some years ago to vote after receiving Venezuelan nationality.
The opposition groups so-far have given their approval to the voting system, and a representative from both the Chavez and opposition camps are permitted to be present in each of the more 33,600 voting centers in the country.
McCoy, who will not be monitoring the voting procedures, noted that the electronic machines that the great majority of Venezuelans will use to cast their votes have been highly scrutinized. She described the voting system as "the most automated in the region."
Each machine electronically registers the vote and keeps a paper record. After the ballot boxes close, 54% of the machines are opened up and audited to check that the paper records match the electronic tally.
But Romero, who says he doesn't believe that Chavez has fraudulently won past elections, said that if the vote is narrow, the government "may be tempted to come-up with a victory or increase its victory margin."
"If they want to do something, they can find a way," he said.
Such thinking has been fueled by accusations that neither the tallying was fully transparent nor the audits fully independent in a 2004 referendum on Chavez's presidency, which he won.
Source: Jose de Cordoba, Wall Street Journal, November 30, 2007
In Venezuela, Big Choice for Voters
Chávez Pushes Hard
For Greater Powers,
New Path for Nation
CARACAS, Venezuela -- Venezuelans will vote Sunday on sweeping constitutional changes that would give an enormous boost to President Hugo Chávez's unprecedented powers, while setting up the legal framework to make Venezuela -- the U.S.'s fourth-largest oil supplier -- into a socialist regime along Cuban lines.
The proposed changes would eliminate the central bank's independence, sharply limit the role and definition of private property and emasculate the powers of governors and mayors, allowing Mr. Chávez to literally redraw the political map of Venezuela. Under the new charter, Mr. Chávez could unilaterally set and dispose of the nation's foreign-currency reserves. He would be able to appoint or dismiss vice presidents who would rule over the country's 24 states, which he intends to group into six to eight regions. Perhaps, most important for Mr. Chávez, the changes would allow for his unlimited re-election.
|
|
| AP Photo |
| Tens of thousands of people flooded the streets of the Caracas Thursday to oppose a referendum that would eliminate term limits for Chavez. |
![[Venezuela portests]](file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/KSADLO%7E1/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/msohtml1/01/clip_image006.jpg)
"He becomes a king," said Rafael Simón Jiménez, a former political ally of the president and a past vice president of the country's congress. "What Chávez wants to do is rule the country until the day he dies."
Polls indicate the vote will be close, turning the referendum into a political challenge for Mr. Chávez, who has dominated Venezuelan politics since his election in 1998. In the past decade, Mr. Chávez has twice won re-election, pushed through a constitution in 1999 -- which these changes would scrap -- and has beaten back a recall referendum, all by landslide margins.
Already Mr. Chávez controls the congress, the courts, the electoral commission and most state and city governments. He has nationalized the telephone company and main power company and increased government control over the oil industry.
Mr. Chávez remains popular with many poor Venezuelans, on whom he has spent billions on programs subsidizing food, education and health. They may like some of the proposed changes -- like cutting the workday from eight to six hours and providing pensions for street peddlers and other informal workers -- but many of the same supporters are cool toward Mr. Chávez's plan for turning the country into a socialist regime. "This business which is mine may not end up being mine," said Luis Peña, who runs a mom-and-pop store in a Caracas barrio and has previously supported Mr. Chávez. "We don't want more socialism."
Mr. Chávez, 53 years old, has turned the constitutional referendum into a plebiscite on his rule. "Whoever says he's for Chávez and votes 'no' is a traitor," he told thousands of followers at one recent rally. He has told supporters he would consider stepping down if the constitutional changes lose.
VOTE ON CHAVEZ
• What's Happening: Venezuelans will vote Sunday on constitutional changes that would give President Hugo Chávez unprecedented powers.
• The Background: Mr. Chávez has appealed to the poor by spending billions of dollars of oil income on health and education programs since first being elected in 1998. Polls say the vote is close.
• What Comes Next: A win would set the legal framework allowing Mr. Chávez to turn Venezuela into a Cuban-style state. A loss would be a giant political defeat for Mr. Chávez, who has dominated Venezuelan politics for years.
At home and abroad, Mr. Chávez has had a number of setbacks in recent weeks. On the international front, Spain's King Juan Carlos, in an unprecedented display of royal ire, publicly told the voluble Mr. Chávez to "shut up" at a conference of Latin American heads of state where Mr. Chávez persisted in calling a former Spanish prime minister a "fascist." Days later, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe abruptly ended Mr. Chávez's high-profile role in negotiating the release of hostages held by Colombia's communist guerrillas after the Venezuelan spoke directly with the head of Colombia's military, despite an agreement not to do so.
In retaliation, Mr. Chávez said he would freeze relations with Spain until the king apologized. After doing the same with Colombia, Mr. Chávez on Wednesday said he wouldn't "have anything to do with [Mr. Uribe] or with the Colombian government." In Bogotá, Colombian Foreign Minister Fernando Araujo was cautious, saying Colombia hadn't received any official word on the state of relations.
On the home front, Mr. Chávez has been bedeviled by the rise of a nationwide student-protest movement that has organized marches of tens of thousands of students, a showing that has invigorated a dispirited opposition. Even as shoppers flock to stores overflowing with imported merchandise, Venezuelans are facing shortages of basic foodstuffs such as milk -- mainly caused by the imposition of price controls, which have nevertheless failed to tame inflation of 17% a year. Many Venezuelans are frustrated as well with Mr. Chávez's failure to deal with the country's high level of violent crime.
Earlier this month, Mr. Chávez was sideswiped by the defection of a prominent comrade in arms, his former defense minister, retired Gen. Raúl Baduel. In news conferences, Mr. Baduel, considered a hero by Chavistas for restoring Mr. Chávez to power after a short-lived coup in 2002, has repeatedly called the proposed reforms a "coup d'etat" and urged the president to withdraw them. "I have a moral duty to defend the constitution now as I did before," said Mr. Baduel in an interview.
In a poll, Datanalisis, an independent polling company that has accurately predicted the results of past elections, gave the "no" vote a lead of two to five percentage points, depending on voter turnout. Datanalisis director Luis Vicente Leon said Mr. Chávez's campaigning, his insistent focus on the souring of relations with neighboring Colombia -- which Mr. Chávez has used to stir nationalist passions -- and his attempt to make the vote a referendum on himself appears to have struck a chord with Venezuelans, reversing what had been a trend to vote against the changes. The ability of the government's political machine to get voters to the polls may give it an edge in Sunday's vote, Mr. Leon said. That edge, however, would be eroded if voter turnout is high.
The Catholic Church, evangelical Christian pastors, many unions and professional associations, and most law-school deans and university rectors have condemned the proposed constitutional changes. They said the referendum is illegal because the only way to make such deep changes is through a constitutional convention.
But Mr. Chávez has put the full weight of the government's political machinery behind the campaign to approve the reforms. The country is plastered with posters urging Venezuelans to vote "yes" on the referendum. Mr. Chavez, who is normally on the air giving speeches and news conferences for about 40 hours a week, has become even more omnipresent than usual on the nation's airwaves. Many Venezuelans fear they will lose government jobs, loans and contracts if they vote against Mr. Chávez, as has happened before.
"I will stay until my skeleton is dry, until my blood stops flowing," said Mr. Chávez, talking of his plans to govern forever if the constitutional reforms permitting his re-election are approved.
Source: Richard Lapper and Benedict Mander, Financial Times, November 30, 2007
Former Chávez ally warns of referendum risk
A former close ally of President Hugo Chávez has given warning that Venezuela faces deepening instability and violence over Sunday’s referendum on constitutional amendments.
A Yes vote would hand the president sweeping new powers and allow him to be re-elected indefinitely.
But Raúl Baduel, the former army chief who is campaigning to reject the proposals, told the FT: “People should not be provoked. It is hard not to think that the level of conflict in Venezuela will increase.”
Mr Baduel, who retired as defence minister in July, stunned Venezuelans this month when he announced his opposition to the president’s plans. He had been one of Mr Chávez’s staunchest supporters and led military mobilisations that brought the nationalist leader back to office after a short-lived coup in 2002.
Mr Baduel said in Caracas that “sectors” of Venezuelan society were “interested in generating violence and creating a climate of insecurity and confusion”.
He gave as an example an incident this week when police tear-gassed students campaigning for a No vote, saying there had been an “inappropriate use of force”.
The incident was one of several involving opposition students, pro-government supporters and security forces. In one clash, a pro-government demonstrator was killed.
Human Rights Watch, the New York-based group, reported a “credible allegation of the kidnapping and torture of two students because of their involvement in anti-government protests”.
There have been signs in recent days that Mr Chávez, who has consistently won elections and referendums since taking office in 1999, may find it tougher than expected to win this one.
The most recent polls show him still in the lead. A survey released this week by the Consultores 30.11 polling organisation showed Mr Chávez ahead by seven points, although other recent polls have shown the opposition in the lead.
“It’s a very volatile situation,” said Luis Vicente León, a pollster at Datanalisis.
The surveys also suggest that interest in the referendum is growing among opposition supporters and that fewer people are planning to abstain. Pollsters see a high abstention rate favouring the government.
The run-up to the vote has been marked by a number of diplomatic rows. In the most recent, Mr Chávez broke off relations with Colombia this week after its president halted the Venezuelan leader’s mediation efforts in a long-running hostage crisis.
Meanwhile, a government minister has alleged that US diplomats are involved in a plan to impede a Chávez victory on Sunday.
Opposition politicians say the president has chosen to pick fights partly to strengthen his nationalist credentials among supporters.
“He is looking for conflict with Colombia,” said Ricardo Gutiérrez, a Socialist deputy and former Chávez ally who helped plan the president’s 2006 election campaign. “He wants the country to line up behind old-fashioned nationalism.”
Mr Baduel, meanwhile, said that approval of the proposed constitutional changes would be tantamount to a coup. “If these wrongly defined ‘reforms’ are approved, they would be altering the principles of our constitution in an unconstitutional way. It is constitutional fraud of the most deceitful and tendentious kind.” He believes that such fundamental changes to the constitution require convening a constituent assembly.
Mr Baduel was especially critical of proposals to increase the president’s control of the military and allow him to institutionalise pro-government militias into a “kind of Praetorian Guard”.
He said senior members of the armed forces shared his belief that the army should remain a professional, apolitical body, as the current constitution requires. “The armed forces believe that we must live in a democracy with division of powers, checks and balances, a plurality of ideas, and the ability to dissent,” he said.
Source: Richard Lapper and Benedict Mander, Financial Times, November 30, 2007
Baduel: Chávez plans ‘put future in doubt’
High above Caracas, the office of former General Raúl Baduel is a bit like a shrine. The visitor is welcomed by the sound of Gregorian chants and the sweet scents of incense.
The deeply religious ex-army chief and former defense minister, who is now one of President Hugo Chávez's most implacable opponents, is surrounded by a clutter of Christian and oriental statuary.
In one corner is a large model of a terracotta warrior. In another a samurai stands guard. Two glass-topped tables display a Koran, a skull cap and an assortment of Taoist artifacts, testament to what Mr Baduel calls his “ecumenical” outlook. When asked whether he has spent time in the East, Mr Baduel says “not in this life.”
His desk contains plastic representations of Saint Michael and Saint George - the patron saints of the Venezuelan paratroop and tank regiments - and a selection of neatly ordered books on eastern philosophy, including the “The Art of War”.
As he picks up Sun Tzu’s military treatise, Mr Baduel explains how it inspired the plan to launch the dawn paratroop raid in April 2002 that brought Mr Chávez back to power following a short-lived military coup.
“We based our plans on the principle that the victor is the party whose heart is in it most,” says Mr Baduel.
The action confirmed the 52-year-old general as a leading figure in the Bolivarian movement and seemed to have cemented his position as one of the president’s most loyal and trusted allies.
But earlier this month, Mr Baduel deserted the president's camp and, in a move that stunned Venezuelans, lambasted Mr Chávez's plans to change the constitution. Mr Baduel says that approval of the proposed constitutional changes would be tantamount to a different kind of “coup”.
”If these wrongly defined ’reforms’ are approved, they would be altering the principles of our constitution in an unconstitutional way,” he says. “It is constitutional fraud of the most deceitful and tendentious kind,” said Mr Baduel, arguing that such fundamental changes to the constitution require calling a constituent assembly.
Among the proposals that most concern him are those that will affect the army, especially amendments that will institutionalize the militia, converting it into what Mr Baduel describes as “a kind of Praetorian guard”. The former general says many of his former colleagues are also worried, and share his conviction that the armed forces must remain professional and apolitical, as required by the current constitution.
“I can affirm that those men are convinced that their mandate is contained in the 1999 constitution,” said Mr Baduel. “I don't pretend to be a spokesman for the armed forces and I have maintained a judicious distance since my retirement. But I can tell you that my opinion coincides with that of sectors of the armed forces. If there is one thing that is really valued by soldiers it is professionalism.”
Mr Baduel accepts that the existing constitution could be improved but belief in its underlying principles is central to his political philosophy. Indeed, it was his desire for a more open and inclusive political system that led Mr Baduel – then a junior officer – to join Mr Chávez in the left-wing military conspiracy that eventually led to an attempted coup d'état in 1992 (although Mr Baduel says that he did not, in the end, take part).
“Our dreams and our desires (when the Bolivarian Revolutionary Movement was formed) are all reflected in this document,” says Mr Baduel. His belief in the constitution did however take him into action ten years later. When a military coup forced Mr Chávez from office in April 2002, Mr Baduel was the general in charge of the parachute regiment in the city of Maracay and threw his weight behind a popular mobilization that quickly led to the president's reinstatement.
Like Mr Chávez, Mr Baduel claims to be a socialist and has had few problems with the economic model adopted by the government. But he says that Venezuela must remain “a democracy with a division of powers, checks and balances.”
By veering away from that model, Mr Chávez has thrown the “future of our country into doubt,” says Mr Baduel. There is no question about Mr Baduel's involvement in the campaign against the referendum but it remains unclear whether this will foreshadow a more long-term involvement in opposition politics. Mr Baduel will not show his hand. “As the master says, the successful general must remain inscrutable and impenetrable.”
Source: Jens Erik Gould, New York Times, November 30, 2007
Venezuela’s Fateful Choice
CARACAS, Venezuela, Nov. 29 — As petrodollars stream into oil-producing countries, Western officials have begun to demand greater accountability for how they are spent. Some countries known for corruption, like Nigeria and Azerbaijan, have heeded the call, increasing their financial transparency, or at least paying lip service to it. But Venezuela under the leadership of President Hugo Chávez appears headed in the opposite direction.
“We see Venezuela on the other side of the road,” said Mercedes de Freitas, executive director of Transparency International here. The group, which tries to combat corruption worldwide, ranks Venezuela as the least transparent country in Latin America and 162 out of 179 nations globally. And that could soon fall even lower.
On Sunday, Venezuelans will vote on constitutional changes that would, among other things, grant Mr. Chávez unparalleled power to run the country’s finances as he sees fit. If the referendum is approved, government accounting is expected to become still harder to fathom, and foreign businesses, many of them already afraid to invest, will find Venezuela even more forbidding.
Already, Mr. Chávez’s government is putting large amounts of oil revenue into development funds and state-owned companies that operate outside the official budget and are not subject to audits or legislative approval. The Fund for National Development, a leading fund of this sort, has received more than $30 billion since 2005 without regularly disclosing its balance, the progress of projects it finances, the whereabouts of billions of dollars it invests in bonds, or how often it receives revenue injections from the state oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela.
Under the proposed changes, Mr. Chávez seeks to formally strip the central bank of its autonomy, giving him the power to dictate monetary policy and the spending of excess foreign-currency reserves. Another measure would eliminate an already neglected rainy-day fund.
Opinion polls released in the last week have found Mr. Chávez’s proposals tied or trailing the opposition position among likely voters, after months of polls showing it likely to pass. In recent weeks, students have rallied in Caracas to protest the changes, and some of those demonstrations have turned violent. On Thursday, tens of thousands of people flooded the streets of the capital in opposition to the referendum proposals.
Venezuela’s foreign minister, Nicolás Maduro, asserted on Wednesday that a United States Embassy official was conspiring to defeat the referendum proposals, and threatened to expel the diplomat. And Mr. Chávez said this week that CNN was trying to instigate his assassination.
Like this sort of political volatility, reduced access to information on public finances is expected to make investing in Venezuela a riskier prospect, said Francisco Rodríguez, who teaches economics and Latin American studies at Wesleyan University.
Investors in Venezuelan bonds already struggle to ascertain what assets back the country’s debt and what resources it could count on in the event of a financial crisis.
Oil profits are the basis of Mr. Chávez’s intended socialist revolution, which aims to help the poor in Venezuela and other countries. Petrodollars finance social benefits including free health care, free education and government-subsidized food, and oil profits permit the vast public spending that has helped create nearly four years of economic growth.
But large chunks of revenue have been managed opaquely — to a degree that it is hard to measure the state’s success in carrying out its social projects or in monitoring corruption.
“It’s not really clear how the money is invested,” said Theresa Paiz-Fredel, a senior director of Fitch Ratings.
The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, a program started by the British government with support from the World Bank, says that a lack of clarity in oil-revenue management can be a sign of the “resource curse,” where natural resources fuel corruption and undermine the rule of law instead of contributing to long-term growth. Venezuela is not one of the 15 signers of the initiative, and some economists say it is laboring under the curse.
They point to corruption charges this year against the state oil company, leveled by a pro-Chávez lawmaker. Officials denied wrongdoing, but eventually conceded that the oil company had too few rigs. Separately, a director of Petróleos de Venezuela resigned after a shadowy incident involving company executives, a charter flight to Buenos Aires with a Venezuelan businessman, and a briefcase with $800,000 in cash.
Facing mounting criticism, Finance Minister Rodrigo Cabezas has released two reports this year disclosing the Fund for National Development’s revenue balance, and he promised in May to conduct a comprehensive audit of all projects the fund financed to give it “more transparency.” But analysts trying to gain access to the data are still frustrated, saying that the reports are neither detailed nor frequent enough.
The New York Times requested interviews to obtain details on the fund from the finance ministry, the central bank, Petróleos de Venezuela and the state-run Banco del Tesoro. After more than two months of efforts, none of those organizations granted an interview or provided any information.
Simón Escalona, vice president of the National Assembly’s finance commission, said he had not “seen any lack of transparency” in the development fund. But, Mr. Escalona was unable to provide updated information on its total assets, bond investments or on transfers from the state oil company to the fund.
Mr. Chávez has long sought control over Venezuela’s foreign reserves. The central bank has already lost much of its independence; a report in March by Barclays Capital said transfers from the bank to the Fund for National Development were determined more by Mr. Chávez than the bank.
Still, the central bankers occasionally criticize government policy, a practice likely to end if the referendum passes, as will most public debate on state spending, Mr. Rodríguez of Wesleyan said. And the unfettered spending of reserves could increase inflation, at 17 percent already the highest in Latin America.
“They will stop being foreign reserves,” Mr. Rodríguez said, and become just “another account.” In October, Fitch Ratings lowered Venezuela’s outlook to negative from stable, saying that inflation and a weakening currency had made it vulnerable to a decrease in oil prices.
Still, oil-producing countries are not generally known for their transparency. Qatar, for instance, does not publish figures for its large investment fund, which is fed by oil revenue, according to Luc Marchand, an analyst at Standard & Poor’s.
But even Russia, despite criticism that the government is weakening institutions, is adopting a system used by Norway that will integrate its main oil fund into the budget and make it easier to track, according to Frank Gill, also of Standard & Poor’s. And authorities in Moscow have strict investment criteria for the oil fund.
Venezuela differs from Russia and many petrostates, including Nigeria, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, in another way. Those countries all run budget surpluses, while Venezuela’s heavy social spending results in a deficit, according to data compiled by Mr. Marchand.
Some economists, like Mark Weisbrot at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, say that social spending, which he puts at 21 percent of the gross domestic product last year, is proof that Mr. Chávez is combating the resource curse. Mr. Weisbrot points to government statistics showing that poverty has fallen to nearly 30 percent from 44 percent since Mr. Chávez was elected nine years ago, and unemployment has dropped to 8 percent from 15 percent.
Mr. Chávez frames his designs on full control of oil revenue as part of a crusade against Washington-based institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, which he says advance American business interests. A deputy finance minister, Rafael Isea, told state television last summer that eliminating the central bank’s autonomy would curb the I.M.F.’s ability to “manage our reserves and influence internal policies.”
The government has nationalized electric and phone companies here that once had American companies as stockholders, has ceased filing financial reports of the state oil company to the Securities and Exchange Commission, and has announced plans to withdraw Venezuela from the I.M.F. and the World Bank. In September, Mr. Chávez ordered the oil company to convert its investment accounts from dollars to euros and Asian currencies.
The march to socialism has not been as smooth as he may have hoped. Officials became aware that plans to leave the I.M.F. could conceivably result in a default of Venezuelan debt. Months after the announcement, the country is still part of the I.M.F.
Students of history warn that the 1970s oil boom also coincided with heavy spending and questionable accountability.
In his book “The Magical State,” Fernando Coronil, a professor of history and anthropology at the University of Michigan, documents how policies intended to spur development in the 1970s loaded Venezuela with debt and helped create financial crisis in the 1980s and ’90s.
“It’s one thing to declare the intent to use these resources for the benefit of the population, it’s another to prove it,” he said, “and in order to do that you have to have checks and balances.”
Source: Simon Romero, New York Times, November 30, 2007
In Chávez Territory, Signs of Dissent
CARACAS, Venezuela, Nov. 29 — Three days before a referendum that would vastly expand the powers of President Hugo Chávez, this city’s streets were packed on Thursday with tens of thousands of opponents to the change. The protests signaled that Venezuelans may be balking at placing so much authority in the hands of one man.
Even some of Mr. Chávez’s most fervent supporters are beginning to show signs of hesitation at backing the constitutional changes he is promoting, which would end term limits for the president and greatly centralize his authority. Other measures would increase social security benefits for the poor and shorten the workday.
New fissures are emerging in what was once a cohesive bloc of supporters, pointing to the toughest test at the polls for Mr. Chávez in his nine-year presidency.
In the slums of the capital, where some of the president’s staunchest backers live amid the cinder-block hovels, debate over the changes has grown more intense in recent days.
“Chávez is delirious if he thinks we’re going to follow him like sheep,” said Ivonne Torrealba, 29, a hairdresser in the gritty Coche district, who has supported Mr. Chávez in every election since his first campaign for president in 1998. “If this government cannot get me milk or asphalt for our roads, how is it going to give my mother a pension?”
Both Mr. Chávez, a self-described socialist who has won elections by wide margins, and his critics say opinion polls show they will prevail, suggesting a highly contentious outcome. But departing from its practice in last year’s presidential election, Venezuela did not invite electoral observers from the Organization of American States and the European Union, opening the government to claims of fraud if he wins.
The intensified polarization has altered this city’s appearance, with graffiti of “Sí” by the president’s supporters competing with “No” scrawled throughout Caracas. A pro-Chávez march is scheduled here for Friday before the frenetic campaigning around the referendum ends. Polling places are to close at 5 p.m. Sunday, with results expected as early as that evening.
“I’m out here because I want my children to live in a country ruled by a president, not a king,” said Alexander Dávila, 42, a bank manager at Thursday’s march carrying a sign reading, “Socialism is the philosophy of failure.”
Violence has already marred the weeks preceding the vote. Two students involved in anti-government protests claimed they had been kidnapped and tortured this week by masked men in Barquisimeto, an interior city. And in Valencia, another city, a supporter of Mr. Chávez was shot dead this week in an exchange of gunfire at a protest site.
Tension has also been heightened by rare criticism of the constitutional overhaul from a breakaway party in Mr. Chávez’s coalition in the National Assembly and former confidants of the president; the government has called this dissent “treason.”
Some of the most stinging criticism lately is from Marisabel Rodríguez, Mr. Chávez’s ex-wife. This week on Caracol Radio of Colombia, she said he had threatened her with death after she publicly criticized the government’s policies. (Mr. Chávez has not publicly responded to her accusation.)
Mr. Chávez and senior officials here have exhibited increasingly erratic behavior. Mr. Chávez has lashed out at leaders in Colombia and Spain and asked for an investigation into whether CNN was seeking to incite an assassination attempt against him.
Reports of such plots are not in short supply here. The main state television network broadcast coverage this week of a memorandum in Spanish that it claimed had been written by the C.I.A. in which destabilization plans against Mr. Chávez were laid out. American involvement in Venezuelan politics remains a particularly delicate issue here, after the Bush administration tacitly supported a coup in 2002 that briefly ousted Mr. Chávez.
“We reject and are disappointed in the Venezuelan government’s allegations that the United States is involved in any type of conspiracy to affect the outcome of the constitutional referendum,” Benjamin Ziff, a spokesman for the United States Embassy here, said in a statement.
A C.I.A. spokesman called the document “a fake,” while analysts, including investigators who had previously uncovered financing of Venezuelan opposition groups by the United States government, expressed doubts about the authenticity of the memo.
“I find the document quite suspect,” said Jeremy Bigwood, an independent researcher in Washington. “There’s not an original version in English, and the timing of its release is strange.”
Even some of Mr. Chávez’s critics have welcomed some of the constitutional proposals, like measures to explicitly prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual or political orientation. Political discrimination has been a contentious issue after Mr. Chávez’s purge of dissident employees from the national oil company and the politicization of the federal bureaucracy.
But the proposal to expand the president’s power to issue emergency decrees has alarmed human rights groups. The new charter would allow the president to suspend some due process rights, like the right to be tried by an independent tribunal. And Mr. Chávez could declare states of emergency for unlimited periods and censor news organizations.
“Proponents of these amendments insist that this government would never violate these basic rights,” said José Miguel Vivanco,
At the home of Ms. Torrealba, the hairdresser, near open sewage alongside a deafening highway in southwestern Caracas, the shifting loyalties of some voters were on full display. In December, she and her siblings awoke with fireworks to celebrate Mr. Chávez’s re-election to a six-year term, with 63 percent of the vote.
But her sister, Yohana Torrealba, 20, said she was alarmed by what she viewed as political intimidation by teachers in Misión Ribas, a social welfare program where she takes remedial high-school-level courses.
“The instructors told us we had to vote in favor and demonstrate on the streets for Chávez,” Yohana Torrealba said. “They want Venezuela to become like Cuba.”
Throughout the slums of Coche, confusion persists about how life could change if the constitutional proposals are approved. Many residents who own their homes, however humble, fear that the government could take control of their property, despite efforts to dispel those fears by Mr. Chávez’s government.
Others wonder what will happen to the mayor and the governor they elected if Mr. Chávez wins the power to pick rulers for new administrative regions he wants to create. Some said they feared that if they voted against the proposals, the government could discriminate against them if their votes were made public.
But Mr. Chávez has an unrivaled political machine, with supporters controlling every major government institution. He also retains the loyalty of many voters in Coche and elsewhere. “It’s a lie that they’re going to take our houses away,” said Yanelcy Maitán, 40. “No one has done more for the poor than Chávez.”
The Last Big Hindrance in Colombia
South American Nation May Be Asking too much of President Uribe
By Marcela Sanchez
Special to washingtonpost.com
Friday, November 30, 2007; 12:00 AM
WASHINGTON -- It seemed a good idea, bringing in the most prominent leftist leader in the Americas, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, to talk to the oldest leftist guerrilla organization in Colombia. Chavez could have a moment in the sun and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe could begin to surmount the last big hurdle to Colombia's peace process -- negotiating the release of hostages and bringing guerrillas of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC, to the table for peace talks. Sadly, incompetence and intransigence got in the way.
In August, Chavez had been asked to convince the FARC to free 45 high profile hostages in exchange for hundreds of FARC members held in Colombian prisons. But the Venezuelan strongman proved a bungling mediator. He sapped government leverage by revealing potential concessions and insisted that Colombia create a demilitarized zone for negotiations even though the Colombian government said such a concession would be a nonstarter.
As Chavez's acts of incompetence mounted, Uribe pulled the plug on negotiations, finding it simply too frustrating working with a shopkeeper who wanted to give away the store. Initially the Venezuelan government's response was polite and restrained, but then Chavez went off. On Sunday, he called Uribe a liar and claimed that Colombia "deserves a better president, one that is dignified."
That "dignified" president would no doubt be someone willing to join what Chavez calls his Bolivarian revolution. During his three months as mediator, he made no secret of his interest to promote the FARC as a legitimate political force in Colombia. Even with the FARC having shown no sign of goodwill concerning the release of the hostages, Chavez was enthusiastically talking about the possibility of the FARC becoming a political party in Colombia.
Uribe could very well have ignored the personal attacks and the political baloney. The 17,000 guerrillas of the FARC are no folk heroes to Colombians. Uribe's unabated popularity, due in large part to his military victories against them, reached 74 percent approval last week after the military killed three top FARC commanders.
But Uribe became enraged, and his outburst gave credence to Chavez's nonsense. In a virulent attack, Uribe accused Chavez of being less interested in Colombia's peace than in trying to make Colombia "a victim of a terrorist government of the FARC." Moreover, Uribe said, "the people of Colombia have every right to ... accept mediation, but not the type of mediation which seeks ... the political enthronement of terrorism."
The episode has had a chilling effect on bilateral relations, with Chavez recalling his ambassador from Bogota Tuesday. More fundamentally, this episode has revealed a greater impediment to peace -- Uribe himself.
Uribe's 2002 campaign slogan was "steady hand, big heart" and it was meant to convey his double-edged approach to peace: He would combat terrorism in Colombia by military means while reintegrating former members of guerrilla and paramilitary groups into Colombian society -- if they abandoned their murderous ways.
He has pursued this strategy to great effect. More than 30,000 right-wing paramilitary troops of the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, or AUC, which is listed as an international terrorist organization by the United States and Europe, have demobilized. Also, during most of his five years in office, Uribe has been exploring a peace deal with the smaller leftist guerrilla movement, the National Liberation Army, or ELN. After several rounds of talks, his government proposed last year the promotion of legal reforms that could allow the ELN's political participation. Meanwhile, according to local officials, the group continues to commit terrorist acts such as the kidnapping of a mayor in a Pacific Coast province last week.
But when it comes to the FARC -- called by Uribe "the most bloodthirsty terrorists in the world" -- it does seem that the Colombian president's heart is not big enough. For the Uribe government, the fact that the FARC was regaining political recognition through "the negotiation of the (hostage) exchange became unacceptable," wrote Colombian security analyst Alfredo Rangel in the newspaper El Tiempo on Sunday. Rangel told me that Uribe may be taking this personally -- his father was assassinated by the FARC during a botched 1983 kidnapping attempt.
Rangel believes that Uribe can change and that with his popularity and his record, he is the ideal person to take that next big stride for peace in Colombia. But I am not so sure. Like many other Colombians, Uribe has his grudges. But those other Colombians are not the ones leading the country. Colombia may be asking too much of one man.
CPCs go through, Ortega usurps power
Ok, he's clearly been taking lessons from Chávez, of that we can all be sure. If Danielito is anything, he is shameless.
I've talked about the CPCs before, and I find the way in which they are being treated is quite intriguing, even for Nicaraguan politics. But, what's going on today?
-deep breath-
Well, the Taiwanese donated 5,300 tons of rice for disaster relief, and how is it being distributed? Well, it's not. It's being sold through ENABAS at "subsidized" prices. The CPCs are facilitating the distribution of this. So, rice that should be free for people who have nothing after the devastating hurricanes and subsequent floods are having to buy the donated rice at 4.5 cordobas per pound in the capital. The justification is --as expected-- complete crap: Nicaraguans of the Caribbean cost are accustomed to Nicaraguan rice, so the Managuans are needing to buy Taiwanese rice at a lower cost. This all begs the question: where are the profits from this going? Oh, F$LN government, you are the beacon of transparency!
As we all know, the CPCs were passed officially into law today, and Danielito --shameless man that he is-- took full advantage prior to its official inauguration to explain what the structure and function of it would be. In this usurpation of power, Ortega:
What else... Stay tuned, I'll do a full round-up for the rest of the day in a separate entry.
I've talked about the CPCs before, and I find the way in which they are being treated is quite intriguing, even for Nicaraguan politics. But, what's going on today?
-deep breath-
Well, the Taiwanese donated 5,300 tons of rice for disaster relief, and how is it being distributed? Well, it's not. It's being sold through ENABAS at "subsidized" prices. The CPCs are facilitating the distribution of this. So, rice that should be free for people who have nothing after the devastating hurricanes and subsequent floods are having to buy the donated rice at 4.5 cordobas per pound in the capital. The justification is --as expected-- complete crap: Nicaraguans of the Caribbean cost are accustomed to Nicaraguan rice, so the Managuans are needing to buy Taiwanese rice at a lower cost. This all begs the question: where are the profits from this going? Oh, F$LN government, you are the beacon of transparency!
 |
 |
|
| From La Prensa |
As we all know, the CPCs were passed officially into law today, and Danielito --shameless man that he is-- took full advantage prior to its official inauguration to explain what the structure and function of it would be. In this usurpation of power, Ortega:
- States that the CPCs will be part of CONPES (Council of Social and Economic Planning), and that La Chamuca aka Rosario will be the executive secretary. Oh, good! Just who needs more power... Provoca vomitar esta vaina...
- CONPES will need more than 56 votes in the National Assembly to be repealed. After discussing this with friends, it was determined that 56 will be needed instead of the normal 47 because CONPES was approved with 56 votes, this initiative will need to be destroyed with more than 56 votes.
- His rationalization for all of this? The current constitution, which was approved in 1987, allows the president to rule by decree, as well as approve taxes, the national budget, among other things. Danielito completely neglects the fact that the 1995 reforms gave this power to the National Assembly in the attempts to decentralize the government.
What else... Stay tuned, I'll do a full round-up for the rest of the day in a separate entry.
Some more pics from Caracas
Carlos just got back to Táchira, and will be participating in the march to close the "No" campaign in his city, San Cristóbal.
More wonders of the robolución bolibanana...
More wonders of the robolución bolibanana...
Closing of Sí, Sí campaign in Caracas
All right, today we'll see if the chavistas can match what the opposition did yesterday, filling Avenida Bolívar.
Am watching Globo right now, and they are transmitting images of dozens of buses from all over the country, which are parked in the area closest to PdVSA (Los Caobos and Paseo Colón, near Avenida Bolívar). Oops. See the photos from Kitii. I feel like Tibu might show up later with some good ones, so keep checking this forum.
Movilnet looks to be working this morning...and the chavistas are trickling in.
Accessed 10:07am EST (11:07 Caracas time)
Tráfico Móvil | Caracas
Accessed 10:36am EST (11:36am Caracas time)
Accessed 11:32am EST (12:32pm Caracas time)
(Hmm...not a lot of difference between the last two, even though an hour has lapsed.)
Accessed 1:34pm EST (2:34pm Caracas time)
This immediately preceding image has me somewhat confused, because while Av. Bolívar looks to be filling up, the images on Globo --which were courtesy of VTV-- showed it fuller than this. So, either VTV is showing a different area completely --which is possible, since I am not familiar with Caracas-- or the traffic cam is off --which I suppose is also possible, since yesterday it just shut down right around 3:30pm EST--.
Daniel, as usual, points out some things which I would have never picked up, though I am slightly pleased to report that I did notice that Bolívar's image is back today for the chavista march.
Accessed 2:05pm EST (3:05pm Caracas time)
Just saw an aerial shot, in which they panned Av. Bolívar --this is in contrast to the previous shot to which I made reference in the previous update-- and while there are still a good numbers of supporters for the Sí, Sí, it is a small fraction of those who participated in the No campaign yesterday. The avenue is porous, though I suppose I'll give it til around 3:30pm EST in order to make a full evaluation. I saw 3:30pm EST because that is the last time which I saw images on the Movilnet site yesterday, before it shut down.
Accessed 4:03pm EST (5:03pm Caracas time)
The chavistas didn't have too poor a showing...that's what happens when people are paid to go and bussed in from all over the country, and the government pays for the buses to get them there, no?
So, how many people were there today? Mayor Barreto says half a million chavistas, compared to the opposition's 50,000. But wait...yesterday Diosdado Cabello said that there were only 500 or so. Well, I guess Barreto is a bit less of a liar than Cabello, but... This tells me a few things: either one or the other --I would say both, actually-- are completely incompetent and very bad at math, as 50,000 is one-hundred times as many as 500, or chavismo's communication system is that bad that these people cannot even get their numbers straight to lie through their teeth to the public. Either way, this scenario tells me that neither should be in public office. I'm not going to go through and post --again-- a ton of pictures from yesterday's and today's marches. Just look at any online paper, any Venezuelan civilian media or fora, and you'll see the photos for yourself. Don't be a borrego and accept what is said just because someone in power has said it; that makes you no better than them.
Accessed 5:53pm EST (6:53pm Caracas time)
Chávez is currently speaking about how amazing he is, and how everyone wanted him to participate as the mediator in the humanitarian exchange, and how Uribe got orders directly from the US government and the oligarchy of Bogotá to "brutally end" his role. (I ask: if he is going to play the martyr, and is oh-so-dedicated to this cause, why has he been the protagonist in souring the relationship, calling Uribe an incapable president? I guess he doesn't quite realize that not every government is like his, meddling in elections --yes, he did that in Bolivia-- to install those he wishes to see in power. Also, I further my question: if he was truly dedicated to peace in Colombia as he claims to be, why isn't he in Ecuador trying to patch things up with Uribe? Because the French already said they don't want him back on the case, as it were?) On Globo's broadcast, the crowd seems to be thinning out...
UPDATE: Please note that the above pics are NOT representative of the day, for whatever reason, they have been changed to reflect current (4:29pm EST, 1 Dec 07) conditions.
Am watching Globo right now, and they are transmitting images of dozens of buses from all over the country, which are parked in the area closest to PdVSA (Los Caobos and Paseo Colón, near Avenida Bolívar). Oops. See the photos from Kitii. I feel like Tibu might show up later with some good ones, so keep checking this forum.
Movilnet looks to be working this morning...and the chavistas are trickling in.
Accessed 10:07am EST (11:07 Caracas time)
Tráfico Móvil | Caracas
 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Accessed 10:36am EST (11:36am Caracas time)
 | |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 11:33:26 AM | Actualizar Imagen |
 | |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 11:33:40 AM | Actualizar Imagen |
Accessed 11:32am EST (12:32pm Caracas time)
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 12:03:34 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 12:24:19 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
Accessed 1:34pm EST (2:34pm Caracas time)
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 02:33:37 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 02:14:15 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
This immediately preceding image has me somewhat confused, because while Av. Bolívar looks to be filling up, the images on Globo --which were courtesy of VTV-- showed it fuller than this. So, either VTV is showing a different area completely --which is possible, since I am not familiar with Caracas-- or the traffic cam is off --which I suppose is also possible, since yesterday it just shut down right around 3:30pm EST--.
Daniel, as usual, points out some things which I would have never picked up, though I am slightly pleased to report that I did notice that Bolívar's image is back today for the chavista march.
Accessed 2:05pm EST (3:05pm Caracas time)
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 02:54:11 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 02:54:13 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
Just saw an aerial shot, in which they panned Av. Bolívar --this is in contrast to the previous shot to which I made reference in the previous update-- and while there are still a good numbers of supporters for the Sí, Sí, it is a small fraction of those who participated in the No campaign yesterday. The avenue is porous, though I suppose I'll give it til around 3:30pm EST in order to make a full evaluation. I saw 3:30pm EST because that is the last time which I saw images on the Movilnet site yesterday, before it shut down.
Accessed 4:03pm EST (5:03pm Caracas time)
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 04:34:01 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 04:04:05 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
The chavistas didn't have too poor a showing...that's what happens when people are paid to go and bussed in from all over the country, and the government pays for the buses to get them there, no?
So, how many people were there today? Mayor Barreto says half a million chavistas, compared to the opposition's 50,000. But wait...yesterday Diosdado Cabello said that there were only 500 or so. Well, I guess Barreto is a bit less of a liar than Cabello, but... This tells me a few things: either one or the other --I would say both, actually-- are completely incompetent and very bad at math, as 50,000 is one-hundred times as many as 500, or chavismo's communication system is that bad that these people cannot even get their numbers straight to lie through their teeth to the public. Either way, this scenario tells me that neither should be in public office. I'm not going to go through and post --again-- a ton of pictures from yesterday's and today's marches. Just look at any online paper, any Venezuelan civilian media or fora, and you'll see the photos for yourself. Don't be a borrego and accept what is said just because someone in power has said it; that makes you no better than them.
Accessed 5:53pm EST (6:53pm Caracas time)
Chávez is currently speaking about how amazing he is, and how everyone wanted him to participate as the mediator in the humanitarian exchange, and how Uribe got orders directly from the US government and the oligarchy of Bogotá to "brutally end" his role. (I ask: if he is going to play the martyr, and is oh-so-dedicated to this cause, why has he been the protagonist in souring the relationship, calling Uribe an incapable president? I guess he doesn't quite realize that not every government is like his, meddling in elections --yes, he did that in Bolivia-- to install those he wishes to see in power. Also, I further my question: if he was truly dedicated to peace in Colombia as he claims to be, why isn't he in Ecuador trying to patch things up with Uribe? Because the French already said they don't want him back on the case, as it were?) On Globo's broadcast, the crowd seems to be thinning out...
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 30/11/2007 06:34:11 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
UPDATE: Please note that the above pics are NOT representative of the day, for whatever reason, they have been changed to reflect current (4:29pm EST, 1 Dec 07) conditions.
Proof of FARC captives' survival
Am currently watching RCN via Globo, and proof of the survival of Betancourt, along with the three Americans, among others, has been revealed by Luis Carlos Restrepo (from la Alta Comision para la Paz). If I heard correctly, the most recent proof is from 24 Oct 2007. (Here and here from the Colombian press.)
There are photos, 5 videos (4 from 23 Oct; 1 from 24 Oct), and 7 letters, as offered by the FARC.
In one of the videos, Betancourt makes a statement, as do the Americans. The video of the three Americans was recorded around the first of January 2007, according to reports. I don't even know how to react upon seeing these, I am quite literally in shock, I can't imagine what those who are close to the case are feeling. I echo the sentiment of the Colombian government: son imagenes dolorosas e impactantes.
In the videos, there are also Colombian politicians and members of the Armed Forces.
All proof will be under the custody of the Fiscalia. They will be sent to the governments of the US and France.
Will they be released? If so, when? Because of the sensitive nature of this, the Colombian government is being quite quiet as to the way in which it divulges information regarding the next steps for this.
Developing...
UPDATE: Back in the office, and of course I turn on Globo to see an RCN report. The Colombian government officials are seeming a bit more aggressive in wanting to press the FARC for the immediate release of the hostages. Betancourt's ex-husband is demanding more than just proof of life. This is key, since the video is virtually a still frame -- though certainly haunting. Speaking of the video...
Here is the video.
Vidéo Betancourt
Uploaded by 20Minutes
UPDATE: The Venezuelan media opine, and --surprise, surprise-- the plot thickens. (Video included.) "Información de inteligencia indica que el destinatario de estas pruebas era Hugo Chávez y que iba a recibir la encomienda antes del domingo." ("Intelligence information indicates that the proof of life were to be given to Hugo Chávez, and that he was to receive them prior to Sunday's vote." My translation.) From the Venezuelan daily El Nacional, Betancourt's mother Yolanda Pulecio says the proof was to be delivered to Colombian senator Piedad Córdoba.
I gave it a quick thought, and much as Chávez has repeatedly said that Uribe does not want peace for his country (because Chávez was pulled off mediator duty), his lack of action in light of the proof of life of Betancourt and others tells me that he doesn't care about the Colombian people either. If he did, he would be on the phone with one of his many contacts in the FARC, trying to work this through. That, however, would require that Chávez understand the concept of diplomacy. In fact, his trip to Ecuador would have given him the perfect opportunity discuss and renegotiate the terms of his role within the humanitarian exchange, and save a bit of face. But...he canceled his trip. Nice. Also, it seems that the French government might be a bit more disenchanted than they have previously let on, as they consider Chávez's role to be "of the past" in this matter.
UPDATE: Ingrid was tortured Perros desgraciados, ustedes son hijueputas malpas CON TODAS LAS LETRAS, dejen de alborotarnos al pueblo colombiano, dejennos en PAZ.
There are photos, 5 videos (4 from 23 Oct; 1 from 24 Oct), and 7 letters, as offered by the FARC.
In one of the videos, Betancourt makes a statement, as do the Americans. The video of the three Americans was recorded around the first of January 2007, according to reports. I don't even know how to react upon seeing these, I am quite literally in shock, I can't imagine what those who are close to the case are feeling. I echo the sentiment of the Colombian government: son imagenes dolorosas e impactantes.
In the videos, there are also Colombian politicians and members of the Armed Forces.
All proof will be under the custody of the Fiscalia. They will be sent to the governments of the US and France.
Will they be released? If so, when? Because of the sensitive nature of this, the Colombian government is being quite quiet as to the way in which it divulges information regarding the next steps for this.
Developing...
UPDATE: Back in the office, and of course I turn on Globo to see an RCN report. The Colombian government officials are seeming a bit more aggressive in wanting to press the FARC for the immediate release of the hostages. Betancourt's ex-husband is demanding more than just proof of life. This is key, since the video is virtually a still frame -- though certainly haunting. Speaking of the video...
Here is the video.
Vidéo Betancourt
Uploaded by 20Minutes
UPDATE: The Venezuelan media opine, and --surprise, surprise-- the plot thickens. (Video included.) "Información de inteligencia indica que el destinatario de estas pruebas era Hugo Chávez y que iba a recibir la encomienda antes del domingo." ("Intelligence information indicates that the proof of life were to be given to Hugo Chávez, and that he was to receive them prior to Sunday's vote." My translation.) From the Venezuelan daily El Nacional, Betancourt's mother Yolanda Pulecio says the proof was to be delivered to Colombian senator Piedad Córdoba.
I gave it a quick thought, and much as Chávez has repeatedly said that Uribe does not want peace for his country (because Chávez was pulled off mediator duty), his lack of action in light of the proof of life of Betancourt and others tells me that he doesn't care about the Colombian people either. If he did, he would be on the phone with one of his many contacts in the FARC, trying to work this through. That, however, would require that Chávez understand the concept of diplomacy. In fact, his trip to Ecuador would have given him the perfect opportunity discuss and renegotiate the terms of his role within the humanitarian exchange, and save a bit of face. But...he canceled his trip. Nice. Also, it seems that the French government might be a bit more disenchanted than they have previously let on, as they consider Chávez's role to be "of the past" in this matter.
UPDATE: Ingrid was tortured Perros desgraciados, ustedes son hijueputas malpas CON TODAS LAS LETRAS, dejen de alborotarnos al pueblo colombiano, dejennos en PAZ.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Nica news for Nov 29
I'll admit it: I didn't follow Nicaragua nearly as closely as I should have today, given the opposition march which took place in Caracas today.
However, just because of this doesn't mean that the rest of Latin America stopped.
So, what went down in Nica today?
From La Prensa
Well, we have Danielito and La Chamuca still trying to establish their authoritarian monarchy any way they can, for one.
Pacto politics --along with self-centered tontos utiles (read: la Chinita Jamileth Bonilla)-- has created an interesting situation within the National Assembly. After she left the ALN bancada she, along with three other dissenting ALNers, created a separate bancada called Bancada por la unidad. Hmm, Bancada por la unidad which splits from the Unidad de Fuerzas Democraticas. I guess I'm not quite accustomed to Nicaraguan humor as yet. The good news, if we can call it that, is that they're against the F$LN-proposed reforms, as well as the CPCs. I have my doubts about this, as Jamileth is a snake, a hardline PLCer, Aleman camp. While I can see them legitimately being against the CPCs, I think the issue of the constitutional reform is a bit muddier, as Aleman has a lot to gain from this.
Populism really disgusts me. It's a cowardly tool used to build up support with only promises; delivery on said promises is optional, and often not fulfilled. It also is based purely on emotion, and not on reason. I think that's what bugs me the most. So, who is the populist of the day? La Chamuca! Tomorrow, 30 Nov, not only will the CPCs be implemented --despite 52 deputies objecting-- but also the Presidential Palace will be renamed Casa de los Pueblos. There it is again, that pesky word pueblo. I am not going to go through this again here, as I already discussed here the implications of using a word such as pueblo for this sort of purpose. While some might say, "What's in a name?" I would argue that in this case, it is more than just a name, it is a way of institutionalizing Ortega's policies in preferring certain sectors of Nicaraguan society. On a practical level, what does the renaming of this accomplish? Will the Nicaraguan people --or I guess according to this, peoples-- be better off because of this? For the pareja presidente, what does this mean? To them, who is the pueblo?
Quickly back to the CPCs: it seems that the National Police will be overseeing them.
The UDF certainly aren't helping themselves...more infighting, great. The ALN should learn from its many past mistakes with this (Montealegre - Nu~ez, Sr.), and how they have damaged both capacity and credibility. Oh, and it seems like they --once again-- forgot to court the Evangelical Christians. Those who believe in liberation theology will be harder to convince, but if the UDF put in no effort, and Ortega at least gives them lip service, another opportunity to woo a key voting sector will have been lost.
In other news, Nicaragua made some big news: TIME covered F$LN hopeful Alexis Arguello's bid for the mayorship of Managua. I'll be honest, I always have my reservations when reading this kind of article. While I do have a subscription to TIME, I would hardly qualify it as the "be all and end all," as it were, when they discuss most issues, particularly international issues. What really bugs me about this issue is that it doesn't get at all into the actual politics of the mayoral campaign; in fact, the reader really learns about his previous boxing career and gets a glance into his personal life. Quite unfortunate indeed; this is neither the time nor the place for an A&E biography, it should deal with the politics behind Arguello's move to be the most powerful mayor in the Nicaraguan territory, and the complexities and challenges it poses for the F$LN. Grossly oversimplified and not even close to satisfying. If I am to be grateful for one thing this article does, it at least reminds the readers that the F$LN is back in power in Nicaragua.
More lies from the F$LN: I heard a talk with a very powerful Nica who touted the way in which Danielito is promoting tourism in the country. When she said that, I had to contain my laughter, as just the day before I had a lengthy meeting with a representative from Managua's nicest hotel, who regaled me with several stories of how many international corporations are leaving the country, business groups are getting scared because the business climate is stagnant at best thus making them have reservations in holding conferences in said hotel, etc. So, what do we read today? Quite simply that tourism is down, and it doesn't look to have an upturn by the end of the year.
However, just because of this doesn't mean that the rest of Latin America stopped.
So, what went down in Nica today?
 |
|
|
|
Well, we have Danielito and La Chamuca still trying to establish their authoritarian monarchy any way they can, for one.
Pacto politics --along with self-centered tontos utiles (read: la Chinita Jamileth Bonilla)-- has created an interesting situation within the National Assembly. After she left the ALN bancada she, along with three other dissenting ALNers, created a separate bancada called Bancada por la unidad. Hmm, Bancada por la unidad which splits from the Unidad de Fuerzas Democraticas. I guess I'm not quite accustomed to Nicaraguan humor as yet. The good news, if we can call it that, is that they're against the F$LN-proposed reforms, as well as the CPCs. I have my doubts about this, as Jamileth is a snake, a hardline PLCer, Aleman camp. While I can see them legitimately being against the CPCs, I think the issue of the constitutional reform is a bit muddier, as Aleman has a lot to gain from this.
Populism really disgusts me. It's a cowardly tool used to build up support with only promises; delivery on said promises is optional, and often not fulfilled. It also is based purely on emotion, and not on reason. I think that's what bugs me the most. So, who is the populist of the day? La Chamuca! Tomorrow, 30 Nov, not only will the CPCs be implemented --despite 52 deputies objecting-- but also the Presidential Palace will be renamed Casa de los Pueblos. There it is again, that pesky word pueblo. I am not going to go through this again here, as I already discussed here the implications of using a word such as pueblo for this sort of purpose. While some might say, "What's in a name?" I would argue that in this case, it is more than just a name, it is a way of institutionalizing Ortega's policies in preferring certain sectors of Nicaraguan society. On a practical level, what does the renaming of this accomplish? Will the Nicaraguan people --or I guess according to this, peoples-- be better off because of this? For the pareja presidente, what does this mean? To them, who is the pueblo?
Quickly back to the CPCs: it seems that the National Police will be overseeing them.
The UDF certainly aren't helping themselves...more infighting, great. The ALN should learn from its many past mistakes with this (Montealegre - Nu~ez, Sr.), and how they have damaged both capacity and credibility. Oh, and it seems like they --once again-- forgot to court the Evangelical Christians. Those who believe in liberation theology will be harder to convince, but if the UDF put in no effort, and Ortega at least gives them lip service, another opportunity to woo a key voting sector will have been lost.
In other news, Nicaragua made some big news: TIME covered F$LN hopeful Alexis Arguello's bid for the mayorship of Managua. I'll be honest, I always have my reservations when reading this kind of article. While I do have a subscription to TIME, I would hardly qualify it as the "be all and end all," as it were, when they discuss most issues, particularly international issues. What really bugs me about this issue is that it doesn't get at all into the actual politics of the mayoral campaign; in fact, the reader really learns about his previous boxing career and gets a glance into his personal life. Quite unfortunate indeed; this is neither the time nor the place for an A&E biography, it should deal with the politics behind Arguello's move to be the most powerful mayor in the Nicaraguan territory, and the complexities and challenges it poses for the F$LN. Grossly oversimplified and not even close to satisfying. If I am to be grateful for one thing this article does, it at least reminds the readers that the F$LN is back in power in Nicaragua.
More lies from the F$LN: I heard a talk with a very powerful Nica who touted the way in which Danielito is promoting tourism in the country. When she said that, I had to contain my laughter, as just the day before I had a lengthy meeting with a representative from Managua's nicest hotel, who regaled me with several stories of how many international corporations are leaving the country, business groups are getting scared because the business climate is stagnant at best thus making them have reservations in holding conferences in said hotel, etc. So, what do we read today? Quite simply that tourism is down, and it doesn't look to have an upturn by the end of the year.
More pics from Caracas
These come from Julia. Go read her blog; I promise, you'll be better off for having done so.
Oh, and before I forget: I neglected to mention this in earlier posts, but Julia reminded me during our brief conversation tonight, that this was the first time in five years that the opposition went to protest in Avenida Bolivar.
Students are leaving the UCAB (Universidad Catolica Andres Bello) to protest
En route to Avenida Bolivar
Oh, and before I forget: I neglected to mention this in earlier posts, but Julia reminded me during our brief conversation tonight, that this was the first time in five years that the opposition went to protest in Avenida Bolivar.
Students are leaving the UCAB (Universidad Catolica Andres Bello) to protest
En route to Avenida Bolivar
A beautiful day to protest
 |  | |
| |
Jose Miguel Gomez/Reuters Demonstrators at a rally in Caracas against Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez's proposed constitutional changes. |
Simon Romero of The New York Times gives his impressions
Unfortunately, useful idiots like Miranda state governor Diosdado Cabello says that there were only 500 or so people at the protest around 5:39pm, Caracas time. He further asserts that this was a trick performed by Globovision... Really? I mean, really? Even The New York Times, hardly a conservative paper, showed pictures from today's massive rally --see above-- showing the number of people overflowing Av. Bolivar. What does this say to me? Chavistas are scared; they are so scared that they will say the most fantastic things in the hopes of saving face, no matter how stupid they sound in the process. The likelihood that everyone in Caracas, as well as all the international media, coordinated their Photoshop efforts to make this closing session look not only huge, but also identical, is just about the same as Bush sending a black cloud to get Chavez --and only Chavez, no one else in Venezuela-- sick from bronchitis...
Is that so, Diosdado?
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 29/11/2007 04:02:20 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
This photo was taken from the Movilnet site, which is part of the government's site. Conveniently, as I mentioned in this post earlier today, at 3:26pm EST (4:26pm Caracas time) the site was down, giving the "404 Not found" error message. I think it would be extremely difficult for all these people to leave Av. Bolivar in only an hour's time. Also, my good friend Carlos was there, and when I spoke with him at 5pm EST, he told me that the streets were still filled when he left; hopefully when he gets back to San Cristobal he'll be able to post some picture.
For a few videos from today, see here and here. Miguel is posting about his experience today, and will surely post more pictures later, so be sure to check back!
The Miami Herald has a video and photo gallery, which has been posted here at Noticias24
Another one bites the dust
Baduel, Ismael (along with the rest of PODEMOS), and Marisabel have rejected the constitutional reform. The opposition forces, headed by Venezuelan students, closed their campaign today in Caracas by filling Avenida Bolívar, categorically rejecting the reform.
Now, yet another member of the PSUV has said he will not support it.
Freddy Carrero, a mayor in Táchira state (of municipality Samuel Darío Maldonado, La Tendida), has publicly stated that he will not be supporting the constitutional reform.
This declaration follows the Comando Nacional de Resistencia's move away from abstention just yesterday (28 Nov), to now calling for all to vote for the "No" option in Sunday's referendum.
Tick, tock...
Now, yet another member of the PSUV has said he will not support it.
Freddy Carrero, a mayor in Táchira state (of municipality Samuel Darío Maldonado, La Tendida), has publicly stated that he will not be supporting the constitutional reform.
This declaration follows the Comando Nacional de Resistencia's move away from abstention just yesterday (28 Nov), to now calling for all to vote for the "No" option in Sunday's referendum.
Tick, tock...
Avenida Bolívar in Caracas
Today is the closing of the opposition forces' "No" campaign, with those opposing the constitutional reform congregating on Av. Bolívar in Caracas.
According to the government's traffic camera, at 2:52pm Caracas time (1:52pm EST) this is what it looks like:
For more info, see Daniel's blog, as Miguel is sending real-time info from Caracas.
UPDATE (2:37pm EST)
UPDATE (2:59pm EST)
UPDATE (3:10pm EST)
I just got a text message from a friend of mine who is in Caracas at the "Grito del 'No'" and he reports that the energy in the crowd is ridiculous. A que la llenamos, vamos! Dale duro, chamos! Que viva la democracia!
UPDATE (3:26pm EST)
I can no longer get to the movilnet site, this is the message I get:
UPDATE (6:00pm EST)
Some aerial shots of today's march, from Noticias24; more here
According to the government's traffic camera, at 2:52pm Caracas time (1:52pm EST) this is what it looks like:
| Tráfico Móvil | Caracas | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
For more info, see Daniel's blog, as Miguel is sending real-time info from Caracas.
UPDATE (2:37pm EST)
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 29/11/2007 03:32:37 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 29/11/2007 03:32:27 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
UPDATE (2:59pm EST)
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 29/11/2007 03:52:00 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
 | |
| 29/11/2007 03:42:17 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
UPDATE (3:10pm EST)
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Museo de los Niños. | |
 | |
| 29/11/2007 04:02:37 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
| |
| Ubicación: Avenida Bolívar. | |
| Punto de referencia: Torres del Silencio. | |
| | |
| 29/11/2007 04:02:20 PM | Actualizar Imagen |
I just got a text message from a friend of mine who is in Caracas at the "Grito del 'No'" and he reports that the energy in the crowd is ridiculous. A que la llenamos, vamos! Dale duro, chamos! Que viva la democracia!
UPDATE (3:26pm EST)
I can no longer get to the movilnet site, this is the message I get:
404 Not Found
Resource /turutaweb/Controller not found on this serverUPDATE (6:00pm EST)
Some aerial shots of today's march, from Noticias24; more here
More crap from the desgobierno bolibanano's CNE
Am watching Globo at work, and Tibisay Lucena, the tonta útil that she is, says that the backings for the "No" need to be removed because they have the tricolor of the Venezuelan flag. Mayor información aquí.
Ok, fine. What about all the pro-government programs/signs/institutions? Will La Hojilla have to change their background? What about the CNE logo?
More importantly, who is to say who has the right to use --or not to use-- the tricolor? Are the opposition not Venezuelan enough? Are the oficialistas more Venezuelan, and therefore can use the tricolor?
Seriously, the robolución bolibanana gets crazier and more absurd every day.
Ok, fine. What about all the pro-government programs/signs/institutions? Will La Hojilla have to change their background? What about the CNE logo?
More importantly, who is to say who has the right to use --or not to use-- the tricolor? Are the opposition not Venezuelan enough? Are the oficialistas more Venezuelan, and therefore can use the tricolor?
Seriously, the robolución bolibanana gets crazier and more absurd every day.
LAC news round-up for Nov 29
LATIN AMERICA -- REGIONAL
Source: Manuel Roig-Franzia, Washington Post, November 29, 2007
Seis regiones bolivianas en huelga contra Evo Morales
La Constituyente en pugna con el Congreso ecuatoriano
MONTECRISTI, Ecuador
Mexico Tries to Show Resolve With Big Drug Seizure
Para Baduel la reforma no es bolivariana
Venezuela threatens to expel U.S. official
Church refuses to back down from Chávez's verbal attacks
Continental shift
Chavez Seeks Expanded Power in Charter
Chávez Says He’ll Cut Ties With Colombia and Its Leader
Vote may turn Venezuela into `elected dictatorship'
Source: Manuel Roig-Franzia, Washington Post, November 29, 2007
Central Americans See Peril in Bush's Anti-Drug Priorities
MEXICO CITY, Nov. 28 -- The funding imbalance in the Bush administration's new anti-drug plan, which would send 10 times as much aid to Mexico as to all seven Central American nations combined, is generating anxiety in Central America.
A packet of six documents obtained by The Washington Post shows that no Central American nation would receive more than $10 million and most would get less than $3 million, in contrast to $500 million proposed for Mexico. Central American political leaders and activists expressed concerns that if most of the money goes to Mexico, drug cartels will shift their operations to countries such as Guatemala and El Salvador.
Materials being presented by the Bush administration to Congress describe the Central American isthmus as "the primary transit point for people, drugs and arms destined for the United States." But several Central American activists and officials said in interviews Wednesday that the $50 million Bush proposal for the seven countries is insufficient given the region's role in drug trafficking.
"It's clear -- it's obvious -- that in economic terms Central America is not a priority for the United States," said Jeannette Aguilar, an analyst at the University of Central America in San Salvador. "This is a regional problem that needs a regional solution."
President Bush announced the aid package Oct. 22 after a series of meetings with Mexican President Felipe Calder¿n. The total $550 million package is included in a supplemental war funding bill being considered by Congress. State Department officials have said they will seek an additional $900 million for Central America and Mexico in the next two years.
State Department spokesman Rob McInturff said the aid plan is still being developed and is likely to be adjusted by Congress. "We want to look at the narco-trafficking problem holistically in a way that includes Mexico and Central America," he said. "This is a good starting point."
The proposal is the largest international anti-drug effort by the United States since the launch seven years ago of a program to fight drug trafficking and Marxist rebels in Colombia, at an annual cost of about $600 million.
Calder¿n sought the aid package because of escalating violence between drug cartels, blamed for more than 4,000 deaths in the past 18 months. Analysts and Mexican law enforcement officials say rival cartels are trying to capitalize on power vacuums left by the arrest of several drug kingpins.
Central American nations banded together to seek help in combating drug cartels and street gangs seen as largely responsible for the astoundingly high homicide rates in the region. In 2005, for instance, the murder rate in El Salvador was 56 per 100,000 people -- six times the world average, according to the Congressional Research Service.
Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), ranking minority member of the Foreign Relations Committee, called for a significant increase in aid to the Central American nations at a recent hearing. "Central American officials feel that they will not be able to confront threats effectively without more assistance," Lugar said. "They fear that gang members and drug traffickers will flee Mexico for Central America, where it will be easier to operate."
In Guatemala, drug traffickers were suspected in the killings of dozens of local candidates and political workers before the first round of presidential voting in September, and are widely believed to have infiltrated most government institutions in the country.
"Guatemala is the country most at risk when the Mexican cartels look for new territory," said Diego de Le¿n, a political analyst at the Myrna Mack Foundation, a human rights organization based in Guatemala City. "What could happen is that the problem just spreads out, and we're the closest."
Guatemala would be the largest Central American beneficiary of aid in the plan, receiving $9.2 million, followed by Honduras, with $7.4 million, and El Salvador, at $4.9 million, according to the documents. Costa Rica would receive $2.7 million, primarily to improve maritime interdiction efforts, and Panama $2.3 million, mostly for vetting special police units. Nearly $6 million is set aside for regional projects and $14.8 million has yet to be designated.
One of the surprises for Central American officials was the aid planned for Nicaragua. It would get $1.9 million for projects including the vetting of special forces and fingerprinting networks -- less than any country except tiny Belize, which is slated for $740,000.
Nicaraguans were "bizarrely puzzled" when the package was unveiled, a Nicaraguan official said in an interview. "We're not going to turn down free money, but it's not much," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Nicaragua has recently been praised by international watchdog groups for an aggressive crackdown on drug trafficking that has included high-profile arrests and large seizures. "We felt we were being punished for our success," the official said, adding that Nicaragua has asked for double the amount outlined in the administration proposal.
In Washington, some lawmakers contend the Bush administration is punishing Nicaragua because President Daniel Ortega is a frequent critic of the United States. Ortega led the Sandinista government that ruled Nicaragua and was the target of U.S.-backed rebel forces known as the contras in the 1980s.
"Guatemala and El Salvador have been good friends and Nicaragua under Ortega has not, and the money breakdown in the request shows it," a senior staff member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said.
The Central American aid package seeks to modernize law enforcement with a variety of high-tech equipment for fingerprint databases and Internet-based investigation networks, according to details of the plan. The proposal also would create an Internet-based system designed to speed repatriation of Salvadorans, Guatemalans and Hondurans held in U.S. detention centers by the Department of Homeland Security, according to the documents.
Under the proposal, all the Central American countries would receive money to send officers to the International Law Enforcement Academy in El Salvador for classes in port and aviation security and interdiction of smuggled firearms. Also, an Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms special agent would be based in Central America to help with firearms interdiction and gang prevention efforts, as well as to coordinate training.
A $2 million program would create an Internet-based system to alert Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador when their citizens held at U.S. detention centers are scheduled for repatriation. The system would link to an existing program that allows the home countries to issue travel documents via the Internet, cutting the time its citizens are in U.S. custody. While not specifically related to drug trafficking, the program is being pitched by the Bush administration as a crime prevention tool because it would be linked to the FBI's criminal fingerprint database, according to one of the documents.
Source: AP, New York Times, November 29, 2007
Mercosur and Israel to Clinch Trade Pact
GENEVA (AP) -- Mercosur, South America's four-nation trading bloc, is poised to clinch a historic free-trade pact with Israel, officials said Wednesday.
The deal is expected yet this week and would be the first free-trade agreement for Mercosur, a market of nearly 250 million people covering most of South America.
''The idea is to finish all the details and wrap up the whole thing tomorrow (Thursday),'' said Itzhak Levanon, Israel's ambassador to international organizations in Geneva. ''It is something very important because it will be the first trade agreement for Israel in South America.''
Israel already has a number of trade agreements, including with the United States, European Union, Canada and Mexico.
But Mercosur -- comprised of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay -- has struggled in attempts to reach a deal with the 27-nation European Union because of disagreements over how much to open up Europe's protected farm markets.
Trade flows between Israel and South America are relatively small. The package is expected to facilitate freer movement of some goods traded back and forth, but is not expected to usher in dramatic commercial expansion.
The talks in Geneva this week -- the eighth round between Israel and Mercosur -- built on previous discussions in Brazil, Israel and Uruguay, said Levanon, who represents the Jewish state at the World Trade Organization.
Countries are increasingly seeking bilateral or regional trade deals, which are seen as the best option for export-driven growth in the absence of a new global pact among the 151 members of the WTO.
The United States has been the most active on the bilateral front, racking up over a dozen agreements since the WTO's current round of trade talks began in 2001, mostly with smaller countries. The agreements have caused concern among other governments -- including those in Mercosur -- and at the WTO that the U.S. was distracted from the multilateral talks, where the potential benefits of a deal are much greater, especially for poorer nations.
BOLIVIA
Source: AP, El Nuevo Herald, November 29, 2007
Seis regiones bolivianas en huelga contra Evo Morales
Seis de los nueve departamentos de Bolivia cumplían un paro el miércoles contra el gobierno del presidente Evo Morales, al que sus dirigentes acusan de violar las leyes y los derechos humanos en el supuesto afán de concentrar poder y prorrogarse.
La protesta derivó en violencia en Cobija, capital del departamento amazónico de Pando en el noroeste donde opositores al gobierno quemaron la vivienda del senador Abraham Cuéllar al que acusaron de traidor.
El paro se cumple en las capitales departamentales de Santa Cruz, Cochabamba, Tarija, Beni, Pando y Chuquisaca, según coincidentes informes de dirigentes cívicos y las prefecturas de esas regiones.
Morales, ante cientos de seguidores, afirmó que ``el paro es contra la Renta Dignidad (un bono para los ancianos), contra la nacionalización de los hidrocarburos, contra otros cambios y para defender el modelo neoliberal que tanto daño ha hecho''.
En Cochabamba, seguidores del gobierno se enfrentaron a opositores y en Santa Cruz grupos de protesta agredieron a comerciantes que mantenían abiertos algunos mercados.
Las protestas se caldearon con la aprobación por parte del oficialismo y legisladores suplentes (entre ellos Cuéllar)de una ley en el Congreso que quita recursos a los gobiernos departamentales para pagar una renta a los ancianos. Morales promulgó la norma el miércoles.
Los gobernadores y dirigentes cívicos de las regiones que convocaron al paro, coincidieron en que la protesta es ``contundente''.
La oposición sostiene que un cerco de cientos de seguidores de Morales les impidió ingresar el martes al Congreso para participar en la reunión, supuestamente por instrucciones del propio gobierno. El bloque opositor había aprobado en el Senado otra ley que en vez de restar recursos a las prefecturas para la renta, los tomaba del gobierno.
Morales había encabezado el lunes la llegada de una marcha de ocho días de campesinos cocaleros y de otros sectores, afines al Movimiento al Socialismo en el gobierno, en demanda de la aprobación de una norma que quitara los recursos a las prefecturas, no del gobierno, y en apoyo al proyecto de constitución aprobado por el oficialismo el sábado, en un liceo militar en las afueras de Sucre.
Source: Jeanneth Valdivieso, (AP) New York Times, November 29, 2007
La Constituyente en pugna con el Congreso ecuatoriano
MONTECRISTI, Ecuador
La Asamblea Constituyente se instala hoy con una mayoría oficialista, una pugna anticipada con el Congreso y la decisión del presidente Rafael Correa de poner su cargo a disponibilidad de los asambleístas.
En rueda de prensa, Correa dijo ayer que ''la renuncia la voy a presentar el día 30 de noviembre... presentaré la disponibilidad del cargo para que la Asamblea tenga las manos libres de mandarme a la casa, encargarme, el poder, hacer lo que ellos quieran, en reconocimiento de los plenos poderes'', afirmó.
El que se perfila como presidente de la Asamblea, Alberto Acosta, de Alianza País, el partido en el gobierno, ha dicho que no se aceptará la dimisión de Correa.
El presidente del Tribunal Electoral, Jorge Acosta y el contralor Carlos Pólit, anunciaron que harán lo mismo, mientras que los jueces de la Corte Suprema señalaron que se mantendrán en sus cargos.
El Congreso, con mayoría opositora, se niega a aceptar que esos plenos poderes puedan terminar con su trabajo, en lo que se vislumbra como una pugna por resolverse.
Acosta, dijo a la AP que ``la Asamblea tiene los plenos poderes. Ningún poder constituido puede ponerle límites o condiciones al poder constituyente''.
''Hagan lo que quieran señores diputados, su tiempo ha terminado'', afirmó.
El presidente del Congreso Jorge Cevallos expresó que ``si mañana se consuma ese hecho que sería un mal precedente para la democracia no solo de Ecuador sino del mundo, llamaré a los 100 legisladores para ver qué vamos a hacer, en defensa de la institucionalidad, no de los cargos ni del sueldo, eso nos tiene sin cuidado''.
En una sesión ordinaria, con 62 votos, los diputados decidieron tomar un receso legislativo, al que tienen derecho anualmente, entre el 29 de noviembre y el 3 de enero.
El segundo vicepresidente del Congreso, Carlos González, al anunciar la decisión de los legisladores, argumentó que ``es un receso como todos los años, está declarado hasta el 3 de enero, cuando tendremos que reintegrarnos''.
La Asamblea integrada por 130 miembros, 80 de ellos oficialistas, se instalará hoy con la misión de redactar la vigésima Constitución del país (la última está vigente desde 1998) y reestructurar el marco institucional del estado.
Source: James McKinley Jr., New York Times, November 29, 2007
Mexico Tries to Show Resolve With Big Drug Seizure
MANZANILLO, Mexico, Nov. 28 — Mexico tried to send a pointed message to the world on Wednesday that it took its fight against drug trafficking seriously. Officials burned one of the largest shipments of narcotics ever seized, sending about 23 tons of cocaine into the tropical sky in a black plume.
The shipment, seized on Oct. 31 in this sleepy Pacific port, was destroyed as the United States Congress considered a plan to give Mexico $1 billion in aid over the next two years to help curb drug trafficking.
The measure is part of an accord between the countries under which the Bush administration promises to increase efforts to stop the flow of arms and cash southward.
“Mexico is doing its part,” the attorney general, Eduardo Medina Mora, said as the contraband blazed. “We have put in all the resources within reach of the Mexican state. We have lost comrades. We have made an enormous effort, and the Mexican part of this is certain. Now we need the United States to keep its promise.”
Since being sworn in almost a year ago, President Felipe Calderón has taken a hard line against traffickers. Mexico has extradited more than 20 ranking cartel members to the United States to stand trial and has sent more than 10,000 troops and federal agents to areas that drug gangs once controlled.
Law enforcement has also stepped up seizures at ports like Manzanillo. The cocaine powder, with a street value of $2.7 billion, United States law enforcement estimated, was found in containers on a ship that arrived in late October from Colombia. The seizure was made three weeks after agents seized 11 tons in Tamaulipas. All told, the government says it has seized about 45 tons of cocaine this year.
One reason is that the United States and Mexico are sharing more intelligence on drug shipments than in the past. The chief of operations for the Drug Enforcement Administration, Michael A. Braun, said American agents had a role in finding the shipment here, the largest on record in the Americas.
“We developed the intelligence that led to this seizure,” Mr. Braun said by telephone from Washington. “We are sharing information like we never have before.”
Advocates for better enforcement say the size of the shipment demonstrates that Mexican and Colombian traffickers have had extensive networks of corrupt officials. The major cartels are so confident of their ability to bribe officials that they are willing to risk shipping huge quantities of cocaine in a boatload.
“What worries us as a society is that even if this year nearly 50 tons of cocaine have been seized, most of the traffic of narcotics is not detected, so the perception of impunity and corruption continues to be very high,” said María Elena Morera, president of Mexico United Against Crime, an advocacy group.
It is a measure of the distrust of the authorities that military officials let Ms. Morera and students test random packages of the cocaine with a chemical kit before the burning to assure that it was indeed the narcotic.
The incineration was carried out with pomp and ceremony at the Sixth Naval Base with the port cranes in the distance. Thousands of small bricklike packages wrapped in plastic and packing tape were piled on a platform. Officials and military officers gave speeches while platoons of marines stood at attention in the scorching sun.
Around the perimeter, sentinels with automatic rifles stood guard every 10 yards. As drugs were set afire and smoke climbed, the officials and soldiers sang the national anthem.
Mr. Calderón’s push against traffickers has had an enormous cost. The crackdown has unleashed an underworld war that has claimed more than 2,000 lives this year, among them more than 120 police officers, including high-ranking officers.
American officials have praised the efforts. The prices of cocaine and methamphetamine have spiked sharply in American cities, and American drug enforcement officials say the sustained Mexican campaign has been a major factor.
“It’s a campaign, not a surge operation,” Mr. Braun said. “This administration is in it for the long haul.”
On Oct. 31, customs officials found the shipment on the Esmeralda, registered to Hong Kong. It had docked here after taking on cargo in Buenaventura, Colombia. As they searched the containers, the officials found more and more packages of cocaine in its purest form.
Later, the officials said they had evidence that the shipment belonged to traffickers in a cartel controlled by Joaquín Guzmán, one of Mexico’s most wanted criminals. Mr. Guzmán, called El Chapo, or Shorty, is one of a group of traffickers from Sinaloa known as the Federation. They control the border crossings near Ciudad Juárez.
Source: Juan Forero,
Old Allies Abandon Chávez as Constitution Vote Nears
By Juan Forero
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, November 29, 2007; A01
CUMANA, Venezuela -- Few associates had been as loyal to President Hugo Chávez as the governor of the coastal state of Sucre, Ramón Martínez. And few are now more determined to defeat Chávez as he campaigns for constitutional changes that, if approved by voters on Sunday, could extend his presidency for life.
Chávez, 53 and in his ninth tumultuous year in office, was until recently predicted to win a referendum that would permit him to run for 8office indefinitely, appoint governors to federal districts he would create, and control the purse strings of one of the world's major oil-producing countries.
But MartÃnezand a handful of others who once were prominent pillars in the Chávez machine, have defected, saying approval of 69 constitutional changes would effectively turn Venezuela into a dictatorship run at the whim of one man. They have been derided by Chávez as traitors, but their unimpeachable leftist credentials have given momentum to a movement that pollsters say may deliver Chávez his first electoral defeat.
"The proposal would signify a coup d'etat," said MartÃnez, 58, whose dapper appearance belies his history as a guerrilla and Communist Party member. "Here the power is going to be concentrated in one person. That's very grave."
Pollsters in Caracas say Venezuelans increasingly agree -- even those who continue to support the president but say the proposed overhaul of an eight-year-old constitution goes too far.
Datanalisis , a respected Caracas polling firm that earlier this month was predicting a Chávez win, said that 48 percent of respondents in an opinion survey last week said they would vote "no" to the constitutional amendments, compared with 39 percent who expressed support, polling director Luis Vicente León said.
"In those three weeks, what's happened is, the people have been sensitized," León said. "What happened is, he presented a reform the people don't like."
Datanalisis accurately predicted Chávez victories in past elections, including last year's presidential election, in which he won a second six-year term by an overwhelming margin. León said the president's vigorous campaigning in these last few days is closing the gap. "It all depends on the capacity to mobilize," he said, "and we know who has that capacity."
The government has embarked on an all-out crusade, including a barrage of television ads and political rallies, with Chávez giving three or more speeches each day. When the day is done, Chávez appears on Mario Silva's "The Razor Blade," a talk show on government television, where he expounds well into the night. His face stares down from billboards and placards with the word "Sí," adorning balconies and windows.
Darleny Córdoba, 24, recently received, along with a group of friends, about $12,000 in government aid to start up a restaurant. She was bused recently from Cumana to Caracas for a rally. She says she's voting for the president.
"I think the reforms are good," she said. "I find nothing wrong with them. The articles they're putting in will be better than before."
The president has characterized the referendum as a plebiscite on his rule, telling a packed arena recently that anyone who says he supports Chávez but votes "no" is a "true traitor."
Chávez also warns that the opponents of the reforms who have been protesting in the streets are collaborating with the Bush administration to assassinate him, a frequent accusation in this politically charged country.
He says the constitutional amendments will give more power to the people through newly empowered community councils and cut bureaucracy from provincial governments, freeing up money for social programs. Chávez denies that he desires more power.
"I don't want to accumulate power. For what?" he said in a speech this week to pro-government businessmen. "I'm an anti-power subversive, for those who haven't noticed."
Prominent Chávez backers who have publicly broken with him have said the proposals are all about amassing power in the presidency, which already controls the National Assembly, the courts and most state and local governments. "The proposal is illegal," a former wife of the president, Marisabel Rodríguez, said in a public statement this week.
In interviews, three former key allies of the president said they remain true to their leftist values but felt it was time to break with Chávez because of what they characterized as his lack of tolerance and his drive for more power.
"We've all been revolutionaries and we have believed in socialism all our lives, but socialism within democracy," said Ismael García, secretary general of Podemos, a party that broke with Chávez. "We have to ask him, how do you feel abandoning a constitution that says Venezuela is a state of laws, of justice for all, that it's federal, decentralized, plural and diverse?"
The biggest blow to Chávez came when retired Gen. Raúl Baduel, 52, turned against him this month.
Chávez, Baduel and two other young army officers formed a clandestine anti-government group 25 years ago that eventually spawned the movement that ushered Chávez into power. Later, as an army commander, Baduel remained loyal to Chávez during a brief 2002 coup that had tacit support from the Bush administration.
Baduel said he remained loyal to Chávez because the coup was unconstitutional, and that he has now broken with the president for the same reason. He says a new constitution can be drafted by only an elected constituent assembly.
"The proposal, in addition to taking power from the people, is taking the country to disaster," said Baduel. "We're giving discretionary power to one person to take transcendental decisions about the direction our country should take."
Baduel said he carefully pondered whether to publicly oppose the proposed changes.
He said his conscience finally prompted him to act. "We need to be careful to distance ourselves from the Marxist orthodoxy that considers that democracy and its separation of powers is just an instrument of bourgeoisie domination," Baduel said.
Pollsters and political analysts say that the emergence of prominent Chavistas opposed to the changes has animated voters who until recently had planned to abstain. In October, said León, of Datanalisis, abstention was expected to reach 60 percent. Now, it's predicted to be 40 percent.
That's important for the opposition because to win on Sunday, its leaders must prod voters to polling stations in high numbers.
"Sunday is going to hinge on turnout," said Mark Feierstein , vice president of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, a Washington polling firm that has worked in Venezuela. "The government has a great machine, and he can turn out his people, and his people are enthusiastic. And the question is whether the opposition can turn out."
Here in Sucre state, Gov. MartÃnez has pledged to ensure that "no" voters come out in force.
MartÃnez would have a lot to lose, he acknowledges, if the "yes" vote wins. It would give Chávez powers to create special federal territories, to be governed by appointed vice presidents.
"He now says he's the one who transfers the power, that it's not the people who transfer the power to him," said MartÃnez. "We talk of constructing a society from the bottom up, but he wants it top down."
Source: Rafael Noboa (AFP), El Nuevo Herald, November 29, 2007
Para Baduel la reforma no es bolivariana
El ex ministro de Defensa venezolano, general (r) Raúl Baduel, que se opone a la reforma constitucional del presidente Hugo Chávez, dijo que ésta implica un ''cambio profundo de posición'' respecto al movimiento bolivariano que iniciaron juntos en el Ejército en 1983.
''Ese sueño, ese anhelo que nos forjamos, está en esta Constitución'', dijo esgrimiendo el librito azul de la Carta Magna de 1999, en una entrevista con la AFP en una pequeña oficina, rodeado de imágenes cristianas, una estatuilla de un samurai y una gran réplica de un soldado de arcilla chino.
''Cuando vemos ahora que se plantea un modelo diferentísimo de país, un cambio drástico en el rumbo, que da al traste con este texto constitucional, se está materializando un cambio profundo de posición'', añadió el general, que dejó el Ministerio de Defensa en julio pasado.
La Fuerza Armada Nacional (FAN) está ''consustanciada'' con la Constitución de 1999, elaborada por una Asamblea Constituyente, subrayó. La FAN ''está consustanciada con el mandato que el pueblo venezolano dió a la institución armada y que está recogido en el texto constitucional'', dijo.
Baduel sorprendió al país cuando el 5 de noviembre condenó la reforma como un nuevo ``golpe de Estado''.
El general negó que la FAN deba enfrentar el 'golpe' nuevamente, ni asegurar el cumplimiento de la voluntad que el pueblo exprese el domingo, porque no hay que ''asignarle un rol de árbitro de la contienda política'' en aras de la ``salud de la democracia''.
Corresponde al pueblo asegurar el respeto de su voluntad ''en el marco del civismo y de la convivencia pacífica, de acuerdo con el artículo 350 de la Constitución'', afirmó.
El artículo 350 dice que el pueblo ``desconocerá cualquier régimen, legislación o autoridad que contraríe los valores, principios y garantías democráticos o menoscabe los derechos humanos''.
Baduel tomó distancia del proyecto de Chávez al entregar su cargo, el 18 de julio, cuando afirmó que el socialismo venezolano ''debe ser profundamente democrático'' y llamó a apartarse ``de la ortodoxia marxista que considera que la democracia con división de poderes es solamente un instrumento de dominación burguesa''.
Tras su declaración contra la reforma, Chávez lo calificó de ''traidor''. Posteriormente dijo que Baduel ''pasó a la reserva'' de la conspiración poco antes del golpe fracasado que protagonizó en 1992 y salió cuando él ganó la presidencia en 1998.
El general rechazó lo que calificó de ''insinuación de oportunismo'' y explicó que no participó en el golpe porque ``la acción militar no era el planteamiento primero''.
''Cuando fundamos el movimiento se denominó Ejército Bolivariano Revolucionario 2000 porque pensábamos que el horizonte temporal debía ser a largo plazo para ir cimentando en el seno de la FAN una base sólida de civismo'', dijo.
Baduel se define como ''progresista'' y partidario de un ``nacionalismo bien entendido''.
El calificativo de ''traidor'' que utilizó Chávez contra Baduel no es compartido por otro de los oficiales bolivarianos, Francisco Arias Cárdenas.
''Ese calificativo aplicado a una persona como Baduel no me atrevo a lanzarlo'', dijo Arias Cárdenas, que en el 2000 rompió con Chávez y fue candidato presidencial de la oposición.
Source: Edison Lopez,
Venezuela threatens to expel U.S. official
Venezuela threatened Wednesday to expel a U.S. Embassy official for allegedly conspiring to defeat a referendum championed by President Hugo Chavez, accusing the diplomat of plotting to sway public opinion.
The allegation comes ahead of a fiercely contested referendum on reforms that would allow Chavez indefinite re-election and help him establish a socialist state in Venezuela. Sunday's vote has generated large pro- and anti-Chavez rallies and Chavez kept the rhetoric high on Wednesday by repeating his charge that Washington is plotting to kill him.
In Caracas, Foreign Minister Nicolas Maduro showed state television a document that he claimed was written by the unnamed embassy official and was to have been sent to the CIA as part of a plan to help ensure that Venezuelans vote against the proposed constitutional overhaul.
"It's a script from the CIA to try to generate a block of opinion among Venezuelans that would give a sure victory to the 'No' vote," said Maduro. "We will investigate and if it's that way, we'll remove this person from here as a persona non grata."
He did not provide more details of the alleged plot.
A spokesman for the U.S. embassy, who declined to be named because he was not authorized to speak on the matter, said he was unaware of the document.
In Washington, State Department spokesman Rob McInturff said officials there were looking into the reports.
Chavez, an ally of Cuban leader Fidel Castro, has had a friction-filled relationship with Washington. The Venezuelan leader accuses the U.S. of supporting a 2002 coup that ousted him from office for two days, while U.S. officials call Chavez threat to the region's stability.
In February 2006, Venezuela expelled naval attache John Correa for allegedly passing secret information from Venezuelan military officers to the Pentagon.
On Tuesday, Chavez accused the CNN news network of "inciting" an assassination attempt against him. On Wednesday, Chavez said Washington is also seeking to kill him - a claim he has made in the past.
"Before the world, I accuse the imperialist government of the United States of promoting my assassination," Chavez told supporters in the southwestern city of Merida. "If anything should happen to me, the president of the United States will be responsible for my death."
U.S. officials have in the past denied they are plotting to assassinate Chavez.
In Sunday's referendum, Venezuelans will vote on proposed changes to 69 amendments of the nation's 1999 constitution. If approved, the revisions would allow Chavez indefinite re-election, create forms of communal property and further his plans to establish socialism in Venezuela.
On Wednesday, hundreds of stone-throwing students clashed with police and the Venezuelan National Guard in a protest against the constitutional overhaul. Security forces responded with water cannons and tear gas.
At least 600 students from the private Metropolitan University took part in disturbances that lasted more than four hours.
"We're doing this because we're sick of Chavez, sick of his government, sick of the way he governs," said Roberto, who covered his face, leaving only his eyes visible. He gave only his first name because he feared reprisals from the security forces.
On Monday, a man was shot to death after he tried to cross a protest, near the city of Valencia. Chavez blamed violent elements within the opposition for the killing.
Source: Casto Ocando, New York Times, November 29, 2007
Church refuses to back down from Chávez's verbal attacks
Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez's habit of verbally attacking his enemies appears to have backfired in his dealings with one of the country's most prestigious institutions -- a Catholic Church critical of the president.
Even as he clashed in recent days with King Juan Carlos of Spain and President Alvaro Uribe from neighboring Colombia, the populist Chávez and top government officials were unleashing the worst crisis in church-state relations in decades.
Chávez threatened reprisals -- and even prison -- against Cardinal Jorge Urosa Savino as church officials publicly criticized constitutional revisions proposed by the president -- and to be approved or rejected in a Sunday referendum -- as ``morally unacceptable.''
In a speech televised to this predominantly Catholic country, Chávez branded Urosa Savino as ''a thug,'' ''stupid,'' ''mentally retarded,'' ''sycophant'' and defender of ``dark interests.''
But rather than shying away from confrontation with a popular and powerful president, the church fired back.
''Let them jail the cardinal and we'll see what happens in this country. . . . They are not going to shut us up with actions of that type,'' Msgr. Ovidio Pérez Morales, president of the Venezuelan Episcopal Conference, said this week. The group is made up of the country's bishops.
BISHOPS HOLD STRONG
The bishops have taken a stronger tone in their criticism of the government in recent days, leaving aside the prudence that characterized the church's public pronouncements for decades.
Msgr. Roberto Luckert, first vice president of the conference, charged Wednesday that the Chávez government is populated by ''a number of bums and corrupt persons'' and that corruption in the Chávez government is a ``rottenness that stinks not only in the country but at the international level.''
And after Jorge Rodríguez, the Venezuelan vice president and a trained psychiatrist, blamed the church Tuesday for the death of a 19-year-old worker during a street protest, Luckert replied: ``He who works with crazy people; something of those crazy people sticks to him.''
''We bishops must respond to the president's gross manner,'' Luckert told El Nuevo Herald.
Urosa Savino got backing from his colleagues in the College of Cardinals, especially Honduras' Oscar Rodríguez Maradiaga, who on Saturday complained that the Venezuelan church was in danger.
''It would not be unusual that a religious persecution would be launched under any pretext, because totalitarian systems start in that manner,'' declared Rodríguez Maradiaga, one of the most influential cardinals in Latin America.
Analysts say such a frontal clash with the Catholic hierarchy could do Chávez more damage than good among followers of his ''21st century socialism,'' which promises to improve the lot of the country's poor.
''Experience in Venezuela has shown that one never wins confronting the church,'' said political analyst Manuel Felípe Sierra. ``One thing is to confront the spokesmen for the church and another is to confront the church as an institution with great prestige.''
SWITCHED SIDES
Chávez's belligerence already has cost him the support of some within the church.
''We don't want violence, blood . . . but if the Chávez government is going to force us into street confrontations, we will be there,'' said the Rev. José Palmar, once an enthusiastic Chávez sympathizer but who in his weekly newspaper column has become a sharp critic of government corruption.
Criticism also has come from traditionally liberal church figures such as theologian Pedro Trigo and well-regarded centers of Catholic studies such as the Gumilla Center and the Andrés Bello Catholic University, which have worked for decades in poor neighborhoods -- the strongest base of Chávez support.
''The church is . . . pretty well united around its bishops,'' said the Rev. Arturo Peraza, a Jesuit who directs SIC magazine, the most influential of the country's Catholic publications.
The main criticism of Catholic sectors that are close to Chávez's pro-poor ideology, he added, is of the government's ``lack of capacity to respect others and the political dissidence.''
They also complain about a sharp spike in crime and insecurity under Chávez, he said, and the continuing shortage of housing and public-health services for the poor while Chávez has spent heavily on oil resources during almost a decade in power.
Few believe the Chávez confrontation with the church leaders will develop beyond a war of words.
''Since he's a demagogue, he always tends to talk too much,'' Palmar said. ``If it jails the cardinal, it would be showing itself to be a fascist and communist government.''
Source: Richard Lapper, Financial Times, November 29, 2007
Chávez moves to consolidate power
“We have to accelerate the rhythm of the revolution,” says President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, holding up a copy of a little red book to an audience of well-heeled supporters who have gathered in a Caracas hotel.
The book lists a series of constitutional changes that would allow Mr Chávez to centralise power, seek indefinite re-election and move more quickly towards his promised land of “21st-century socialism”.
If approved by voters in a referendum on Sunday, it will have a huge influence on Venezuela’s future.
It also appears to be part of a wider change that increases Mr Chávez’s influence in Latin America.
On Thursday, members of a new Ecuadorean constitutional assembly dominated by President Rafael Correa will meet to elect officers ahead of next week’s official opening of the assembly. President Evo Morales of Bolivia is still aiming to complete the preparation of a new constitution by December 14, despite growing protests including a general strike that began on Wednesday in six opposition-dominated departments of the country.
Continental shift
VENEZUELA
Referendum date: Dec 2
Key provisions:
●Indefinite re-election of president and enhanced presidential powers
●Elimination of central bank autonomy
● Shorter working day
● Expanded social security
●Weakening of private property rights
●Increased role for the military in civil society
BOLIVIA
Referendum date
Final draft to be prepared by Dec 14
Key provisions
●Lifting of the ban on presidential re-election and greater state rule in the economy
●Enhanced recognition of indigenous rights and institutionalisation of indigenous autonomy
●Enmeshing of some elements of indigenous law with western law
ECUADOR
Referendum date
Drafting assembly meets to elect officers on Thursday
Key provisions
●Yet to be decided, although President Rafael Correa has indicated he wants the state to play a larger role in the economy
These developments take a big chunk of the region into new political territory, modifying in potentially important ways the US or European liberal model of democracy that has, if anything, become stronger in countries such as Brazil, Mexico and Chile in recent years.
Analysts worry in particular that the new centralisation planned by the powerful oil-rich Venezuelan leader will set a new template for his allies, weakening in these countries the checks and balances that have historically been an important part of Latin American development.
As Michael Shifter, of the Washington-based policy forum Inter-American Dialogue, says: “This is a new species in embryonic form, not just changes at the edges.”
Nonetheless, there is a genuine need of reform. In many ways, the proposed changes in Ecuador and Bolivia appear part of a wider process designed to modernise political systems and allow greater participation by socially marginal groups excluded from often-corrupt traditional parties.
During the 1980s and 1990s countries such as Brazil and Colombia, as well as Mr Chávez’s Venezuela, modernised their constitutions partly for the same reason.
The election of Mr Morales in December 2005 and Mr Correa in November 2006 has given greater impetus to this trend, because underprivileged indigenous groups, which form a majority of the population in Bolivia and a significant minority in Ecuador, gave powerful backing to both leaders.
“This all reflects the stirrings and awakenings of new groups that were outside the political system,” says Mr Shifter. “Constitutional change is a proxy for underlying social change.”
Jim Shultz, the head of the Democracy Center, a non-governmental organisation based in the Bolivian city of Cochabamba, goes further. He says changes in the country as the result of the rise of Quechua, Aymara and other indigenous groups are as important in their own way as the end of apartheid in South Africa or even the collapse of communist rule and subsequent break-up of Yugoslavia.
Economics has also helped reinforce this trend. The commodity boom means Mr Morales, who has huge gas reserves, and Mr Correa, who has oil, have not been so hemmed in by financial pressures as their more economically orthodox predecessors.
Money has been available to pursue populist economic policies, providing a cushion for political experimentation and keeping the popularity of all three leaders at relatively high levels. Recent figures from Santiago-based Latinobarómetro showed the three countries to be among the region’s five most popular governments, with Ecuador’s the most popular of all.
All this suggests change ought to be relatively peaceful. But there are reasons for scepticism. The debate on Bolivia’s new constitution has led to huge tensions between regions. Since the Bolivian constituent assembly first met in July, these divides – especially those between the richer, less-populated, mainly mixed-race lowlands and the mainly indigenous western highlands – have been the backcloth for constant instability.
This month the situation degenerated into violence, with at least four people killed and hundreds injured during protests over the weekend.
Ecuador too may not be immune from this danger. Like Bolivia, it is sharply divided between its indigenous highlands population and mestizo lowland business interests, this time concentrated in the powerful coastal city of Guayaquil.
Even in an ethnically more homogenous society such as Venezuela, the far-reaching character of many of the changes introduced alongside the new constitution after Mr Chávez first came to office has increased political polarisation.
The new proposals – which reverse some of the decentralisation introduced in earlier reforms and make community organisation directly dependent on the executive – could lead to further division.
Ricardo Gutiérrez, a socialist politician who joined a steady stream of defectors from the Chávez camp after the constitutional changes were announced, agrees. Mr Chávez ”still has to stand for election [at the moment]”, he says. “But can you imagine anyone with all this concentration of power losing an election?”
Source: AP, New York Times, November 29, 2007
Chavez Seeks Expanded Power in Charter
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) -- Hugo Chavez could have a shot at becoming president for life if voters approve a sweeping overhaul of the constitution Sunday that would give him unchecked power to reshape Venezuela's government, economy and society.
Some polls show Chavez faces considerable resistance in the referendum. His primary impediment seems to be voters like Vanessa Meneses, a 27-year-old single mother who has backed Chavez in past elections but now fears he could become another Fidel Castro.
''Supposedly he wants to make Venezuela like Cuba and stay in power forever. It's scary,'' Meneses said. ''He wants to be the only one like in Cuba, and I don't like it.''
Venezuelans across the political spectrum see the vote as a turning point for their country -- and perhaps a point of no return. The changes to 69 of the constitution's 350 articles would enshrine a socialist economic system, create new classes of property to be managed collectively and let Chavez stand for re-election in 2012 and beyond.
Chavez has sold these changes by capitalizing on his personal popularity -- he is seen by many Venezuelans as their savior, spreading more oil wealth among the poor than any leader in memory.
A ''yes'' vote keeps him on as captain of a ship that otherwise ''could sink,'' he warns. His image is everywhere -- even the Caracas subway plays a rap-style campaign jingle for Chavez.
The former lieutenant colonel, now 53, insists he will stay in power for as long as his people want him to -- perhaps into the 2030s, or for life.
''If you wish -- and if you approve the referendum -- I will stay as long as God wills! Until the last bone of my skeleton dries up! Until the last bit of my body dries up!'' he shouted to the applause of thousands.
Opponents -- including Roman Catholic leaders, press freedom groups, human rights groups and prominent business leaders -- fear the reforms will remove some of the last checks on Chavez's power.
Students are proving to be a particular challenge, leading street protests and occasionally clashing with police and Chavista groups. One man was shot dead Monday while trying to get through a road blocked by protesters. A large opposition march is planned for Thursday, along with pro-Chavez rallies.
The amendments would remove term limits, extend presidential terms from six to seven years, grant Chavez direct control over the Central Bank and monetary policy, allow his government to detain citizens without charge during a state of emergency, and let the state occupy private properties it wants to expropriate.
He also would be empowered to redraw the country's political map and handpick provincial and municipal leaders -- a change opponents fear will push aside any elected officials who aren't his allies.
''The only certain thing that emerges is a total concentration of political power in Chavez's fist,'' opposition politician Teodoro Petkoff wrote in his newspaper Tal Cual. He calls the changes a ''Plan for Venezuela's Destruction.'' Other opponents have taken out newspaper ads urging voters to ''defend democracy.''
Yet many Chavistas see real benefits in these and other amendments -- such as shortening the workday from eight hours to six, creating a social security fund for millions of informal laborers and promoting communal councils where residents decide how to spend government funds in their neighborhoods.
''It's power for the people. It's not power for me,'' says Chavez -- a theme also promoted by his leftist allies trying to rewrite the constitutions of Bolivia and Ecuador. Smiling in a TV campaign commercial, Chavez tells viewers: ''I want you to be the center of power.''
Many voters confess they don't understand all the changes, but will vote based on how they feel about Chavez.
''I think people want him to stay on until he has consolidated our process, and may God give our Comandante a long life,'' said Gladis Gonzalez, 50 and studying law at a
Others say they'll vote ''yes'' because the new constitution guarantees that oil-funded ''missions'' will keep offering free health care and education.
But shopkeeper Maria Teresa Gonzalez said she has lost faith in Chavez after seeing rampant murders in her part of Caracas, and shortages of milk and other goods. If he were successful, ''things would have changed and gotten better. And they're getting worse.''
If approved, the revisions would create an unprecedented ''centralization of power'' in the president's hands, said Jose Vicente Haro, a constitutional law professor at
Chavez, first elected in 1998, already obtained total control of the National Assembly when opponents boycotted the 2005 elections, and lawmakers gave him special powers to enact some laws by decree through next June.
This constitution would go much farther, Haro said. One of the most profound changes would come in a little-noticed ''transitory'' clause appended at the end, which Haro believes would let Chavez enact laws by decree for an unlimited period -- possibly for years -- to hasten a ''transition to the Socialist Economic Model.''
Chavez himself has said more than 100 new laws would be required if the referendum passes -- and that he will waste no time in making that happen.
The opposition is urging voters to turn out in large numbers on Sunday, hoping Chavez may be vulnerable after some prominent defections from Chavez's movement, including former Defense Minister Gen. Raul Baduel and lawmakers of the small left-leaning party Podemos. Even Chavez's ex-wife Marisabel Rodriguez has urged Venezuelans to vote ''no,'' saying the changes would be like a ''leap into the dark.''
The government cites polls suggesting Chavez has an advantage, while the Caracas polling firm Datanalisis -- in a nationwide survey this month -- found 49 percent of likely voters opposed Chavez's reforms and 39 percent were in favor.
While the pollster has predicted some of Chavez's past victories, its results haven't always been on-target. A poll released by the firm in June 2004 found that 57 percent of Venezuelans would vote to recall Chavez, but the president handily won the vote two months later.
Chavez predicts a ''knockout'' but acknowledges it might be a smaller margin than his re-election last December, when he won 63 percent of the vote.
Source: Simon Romero, New York Times, Novmeber 29, 2007
Chávez Says He’ll Cut Ties With Colombia and Its Leader
CARACAS, Venezuela, Nov. 28 — President Hugo Chávez said on Wednesday that he would sever ties with Colombia’s government and its president, Álvaro Uribe, in an escalation of a dispute after Mr. Uribe’s withdrawal of support last week for Mr. Chávez’s mediating role with Colombian guerrillas.
Mr. Chávez did not specify how this move would affect diplomatic relations or trade with Colombia, valued at more than $4 billion annually. His comments came after Mr. Uribe, the Bush administration’s top ally in the region, accused Mr. Chávez over the weekend of seeking to influence domestic politics in Colombia.
“While President Uribe is president of Colombia, I will have no type of relationship with him or with the government of Colombia,” Mr. Chávez said in a visit to Táchira, a state in southwestern Venezuela that borders Colombia.
Mr. Chávez’s public comments have turned increasingly erratic ahead of a referendum on Sunday over his proposal for sweeping constitutional changes that would abolish term limits for the presidency and centralize greater authority in the president’s hands. Rare fissures within Mr. Chávez’s support base have made the outcome of the vote hard to predict.
Mr. Chávez also said Wednesday that he had doubts about the authenticity of the remains of Simón Bolívar, the South American liberation hero, transferred here from Colombia in 1842. “Are those really Bolívar’s remains in the National Pantheon?” Mr. Chávez said. “We’re going to verify this.”
Colombia’s government did not respond Wednesday to Mr. Chávez’s comments. Political analysts and former diplomats in both countries said they doubted the move would significantly affect trade, with Venezuela’s relying on Colombia for much of its imports of basic foods at a time of shortages of milk, sugar, eggs and chicken.
“In diplomatic language no one knows what this means,” said Luis Guillermo Giraldo, a former Colombian ambassador to Venezuela. “Venezuela’s vulnerability is the contraband this could generate from Colombia to Venezuela,” he said. The countries share a 1,400-mile border already rife with drug trafficking, guerrilla activity and smuggling.
Mr. Uribe is not the only target of Mr. Chávez’s ire this week. Mr. Chávez also lashed out Tuesday night against CNN, calling for an investigation of the network after its Spanish-language channel ran an image of him with a caption reading, “Who killed him?” Mr. Chávez said CNN might have been seeking to incite an assassination attempt against him.
CNN apologized on Wednesday, explaining that the caption was meant for a segment about Sean Taylor, the Washington Redskins football star who was shot dead this week in Florida.
Source: Andres Oppenheimer,
Vote may turn Venezuela into `elected dictatorship'
BY ANDRES OPPENHEIMER
Will Venezuela still be considered a democracy if it approves a referendum Sunday that would give President Hugo Chávez near unlimited powers? Will Chávez still qualify as an ''elected'' leader?
I asked these questions earlier this week to Tom Shannon, the State Department's top official in charge of Latin American affairs. I was curious about his response, because when I asked him a few weeks ago whether Venezuela can still be considered a democracy, he answered ``Yes.''
According to Venezuelan opposition leaders and pro-democracy activists, Venezuela would become a Cuban-styled communist dictatorship, with only cosmetic democratic institutions, if a Chávez-proposed constitutional reform is approved in Sunday's referendum. If the 69 constitutional amendments are passed, Venezuela will have voted itself out of a democracy, they say.
''The proposed constitution redefines the country as a socialist state,'' said Ana Julia Jatar, a fellow at Harvard University's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy. ``That, by itself, means that there is no space for other ideologies.''
Among other proposed changes:
• The reform would abolish the Central Bank's independence, in effect leaving Chávez with control of the legislative and judicial powers, the Central Bank, the military, the electoral tribunal and much of the media.
• Chávez would be allowed to create ''Strategic Defense Regions,'' or new provinces, through which he could bypass elected opposition governors.
• It would allow Chávez to decree states of emergency in which he would be able to suspend freedoms of expression and arrest people without charges.
• It would extend presidential terms to seven years, and would eliminate constitutional provisions that prohibited Chávez from being reelected indefinitely.
• It would define elections as aimed at ``the construction of socialism.''
Former Defense Minister Raúl Isaías Baduel, until four months ago Chávez's most trusted general, has called the proposed changes ''a coup d'etat'' to give Chávez unlimited powers.
And pollsters, who in the past accurately predicted Chávez's wins, say that many pro-Chávez Venezuelans are likely to vote against the constitutional reforms, triggering speculation that Chávez will postpone the vote or step up intimidation of voters.
In response to my question on whether he will still consider Venezuela to be a democracy if the constitutional changes are passed, Shannon -- the ultimate diplomat -- said he does not like to answer hypothetical questions. When told that there is nothing hypothetical about proposed constitutional reforms that have been published by the Venezuelan government, he said: ``We have our own opinions and concerns about these proposed constitutional reforms, and they are not unique: They are shared by many other democrats in the region who have expressed worries about the centralization of powers.''
Shannon added, ``But at the same time, it's wrong to anticipate Sunday's vote. This is a decision that has to be made by the people of Venezuela based on their criteria and interests.''
My opinion: If you believe that democracy means just holding elections, Venezuela will still be a democracy if the proposed constitutional changes are adopted, even if Chávez ''wins'' through massive use of government resources, voter intimidation, a government-controlled election tribunal and official hurdles that effectively forced Organization of American States and European Union observers to decline monitoring Sunday's vote.
By that token, Fidel Castro's Cuba holds elections as well and calls itself a democratic country, as did Benito Mussolini's Italy and so many other dictatorships.
But if you believe, as I do, that a democracy entails a separation of powers, and tolerance for peaceful opposition parties, the proposed constitution's very definition of Venezuela as a ''socialist'' country will preclude the Venezuelan people from deciding their political fate in future elections.
For the record, I don't have anything against the word ''socialism'': Spain, Chile and several other countries have socialist governments that are often excellent, but their constitutions allow their citizens to decide the political color of their leaders in free elections.
And while other countries, such as India, retain references to socialism in their constitutions, their leaders -- unlike Chávez -- don't hold Cuba's dictatorship as their model society.
If the proposed constitutional reforms are adopted, Venezuela should be called a ''cosmetic democracy'' or 'elected dictatorship' -- but not a democracy.
Quick comments on the Alleged CIA memo
So, we've all heard it by now: a memo detailing Operación Tenaza, as reported by the ever-reliable (read: propaganda mouthpiece) aporrea.org was intercepted between the CIA and US Embassy officials regarding destabilization efforts in this Sunday's referendum.
I felt obligated to throw out some very brief observations which the izmierda conveniently overlooks.
1) Since when did the US Embassy and the CIA begin sending communiqués in Spanish? Have the useful idiots who refuse to learn English in this country penetrated the system completely? That in itself would be scary, but I digress.
2) How was this communiqué intercepted? Who is/are the source(s) for this article, that is to say, who procured it? No details have been provided.
3) Why has Eva Golinger only summarized parts of the article? And why will the English version not be published as yet, as it needs to be verified? What a ridiculous reason! If they were really concerned about verifying the veracity of this, they wouldn't have published the communiqué in Spanish.
Once again, yet another distraction tactic. Some Venezuelans agree with me.
I felt obligated to throw out some very brief observations which the izmierda conveniently overlooks.
1) Since when did the US Embassy and the CIA begin sending communiqués in Spanish? Have the useful idiots who refuse to learn English in this country penetrated the system completely? That in itself would be scary, but I digress.
2) How was this communiqué intercepted? Who is/are the source(s) for this article, that is to say, who procured it? No details have been provided.
3) Why has Eva Golinger only summarized parts of the article? And why will the English version not be published as yet, as it needs to be verified? What a ridiculous reason! If they were really concerned about verifying the veracity of this, they wouldn't have published the communiqué in Spanish.
Once again, yet another distraction tactic. Some Venezuelans agree with me.
Op-Ed from The NYT worth reading
November 29, 2007
Op-Ed Columnist
Shutting Up Venezuela’s Chávez
By ROGER COHEN
CARACAS, Venezuela
It was a fascist general in 1930s Spain who coined the phrase “Viva la muerte!” or “Long live death!” Essentially meaningless, the words captured the cult of soil, blood and savagery that coursed through European Fascism, in its Francoist (franquista) and other forms.
President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela hates fascists; they are central to his repertoire of insults. But he has not hesitated to deploy the imagery of death to bolster his leftist brand of petro-authoritarianism, now operating under the ludicrous banner of “Fatherland, Socialism or Death!”
The slogan looks almost quaint in its anachronism. Chávez would no doubt claim Cuban revolutionary, rather than Spanish fascist, roots for it (Fidel Castro also invoked fatherland and finality). The bottom line is this: Latin America’s oil-gilded caudillo is getting serious about ruling for life, just like Franco and Castro.
I might add Vladimir Putin to that list. Like the Russian leader, Chávez has already used gushing oil revenue, a pliant judiciary, subservient institutions and the galvanizing appeal of vitriolic anti-Americanism to concoct a 21st-century, gulag-free authoritarianism. But even Putin has not contemplated going as far as Chávez now intends to take his “Bolivarian revolution.”
Venezuelans will vote Sunday in a referendum that would remove all limits on presidential re-election, grant Chávez direct control over foreign currency reserves, allow him to censor the media under a state of emergency declarable at his discretion, expand his powers to expropriate private property and create the second formally socialist nation in the Americas alongside Fidel’s.
“The measures amount to a constitutional coup,” said Teodoro Petkoff, who edits an opposition newspaper. Certainly, they would prod Venezuela from an oppressive rule comparable to Mexico’s under its once impregnable Institutional Revolutionary Party toward the dictatorial absolutism of Cuba.
Unlike other votes during Chávez’s nine-year presidency, and unlike the assured victory of Putin’s United Russia Party in voting the same day, the referendum is not a foregone conclusion.
Overcoming inertia, opponents led by students have energized a “No” campaign. A general once close to Chávez has denounced a looming coup d’état. Polls suggest a close outcome.
But awash in petrodollars — oil accounts for about 90 percent of Venezuelan exports — Chávez commands formidable resources. They are centered in the armed forces; a huge nomenklatura scattered across the bureaucracy and newly nationalized industries; the so-called Boliburgesía (Bolivarian bourgeoisie) of traders grown rich working the angles of a corrupt system; and the poor whom Chávez has helped and manipulated.
Certainly, the oil money Chávez has plowed into poor neighborhoods (at the expense of an oil industry suffering chronic underinvestment) has reduced poverty. The United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America said last year that the extreme poverty rate had fallen to 9.9 percent from 15.9 percent.
But more than spreading socialist ideals, Chávez has spread a form of crony capitalism, dedicated to his greater glory, that has imbued the economy with all the resilience of a house of cards.
Foreign investment has plunged, scared off by nationalizations. A huge disparity between the official and black-market exchange rates has encouraged get-rich-quick schemes for favored “Chavistas” while erecting endless barriers to trade. Price controls on staples have made eggs unavailable. This week, you can’t find chickens. Chávez’s socialism delivers subsidized gasoline and glittering malls but no milk.
Latin America has been here before, with the disastrous import-substitution and highly regulated models of the 1960s and ’70s. Most of the region has moved on, but not Chávez, who trumpets “growth from within,” whatever that is. The World Bank’s recently released “Doing Business 2008,” a ranking of the ease of conducting commerce, places Venezuela 172nd out of 178 countries.
Despite this, the country does huge business with the United States, as its fourth-largest crude oil supplier and a big importer. Chávez’s “socialism” and his chumminess with Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad do not extend to cutting off the “imperialist empire.” Chávez is too shrewd to sever his lifeline.
A possible conclusion would be that he’s harmless — a wily barracks-bred buffoon whose leftist rhetoric is just a veneer for a petrodollar power play. Perhaps that’s why the United States — and Latin American nations — have been so muted, or silent, before Chávez’s attempted “constitutional coup.” Oil speaks.
But Chávez’s grab for socialist-emperor status is grotesque and dangerous — as Fascism was — a terrible example for a region that has been consolidating democracy. King Juan Carlos of Spain got it right when he recently interrupted Chávez’s trademark verbal diarrhea with a brusque: “Why don’t you just shut up?”
Venezuelans should watch that regal routine on YouTube — it’s even been set to music — and follow suit on Sunday.
Op-Ed Columnist
Shutting Up Venezuela’s Chávez
By ROGER COHEN
CARACAS, Venezuela
It was a fascist general in 1930s Spain who coined the phrase “Viva la muerte!” or “Long live death!” Essentially meaningless, the words captured the cult of soil, blood and savagery that coursed through European Fascism, in its Francoist (franquista) and other forms.
President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela hates fascists; they are central to his repertoire of insults. But he has not hesitated to deploy the imagery of death to bolster his leftist brand of petro-authoritarianism, now operating under the ludicrous banner of “Fatherland, Socialism or Death!”
The slogan looks almost quaint in its anachronism. Chávez would no doubt claim Cuban revolutionary, rather than Spanish fascist, roots for it (Fidel Castro also invoked fatherland and finality). The bottom line is this: Latin America’s oil-gilded caudillo is getting serious about ruling for life, just like Franco and Castro.
I might add Vladimir Putin to that list. Like the Russian leader, Chávez has already used gushing oil revenue, a pliant judiciary, subservient institutions and the galvanizing appeal of vitriolic anti-Americanism to concoct a 21st-century, gulag-free authoritarianism. But even Putin has not contemplated going as far as Chávez now intends to take his “Bolivarian revolution.”
Venezuelans will vote Sunday in a referendum that would remove all limits on presidential re-election, grant Chávez direct control over foreign currency reserves, allow him to censor the media under a state of emergency declarable at his discretion, expand his powers to expropriate private property and create the second formally socialist nation in the Americas alongside Fidel’s.
“The measures amount to a constitutional coup,” said Teodoro Petkoff, who edits an opposition newspaper. Certainly, they would prod Venezuela from an oppressive rule comparable to Mexico’s under its once impregnable Institutional Revolutionary Party toward the dictatorial absolutism of Cuba.
Unlike other votes during Chávez’s nine-year presidency, and unlike the assured victory of Putin’s United Russia Party in voting the same day, the referendum is not a foregone conclusion.
Overcoming inertia, opponents led by students have energized a “No” campaign. A general once close to Chávez has denounced a looming coup d’état. Polls suggest a close outcome.
But awash in petrodollars — oil accounts for about 90 percent of Venezuelan exports — Chávez commands formidable resources. They are centered in the armed forces; a huge nomenklatura scattered across the bureaucracy and newly nationalized industries; the so-called Boliburgesía (Bolivarian bourgeoisie) of traders grown rich working the angles of a corrupt system; and the poor whom Chávez has helped and manipulated.
Certainly, the oil money Chávez has plowed into poor neighborhoods (at the expense of an oil industry suffering chronic underinvestment) has reduced poverty. The United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America said last year that the extreme poverty rate had fallen to 9.9 percent from 15.9 percent.
But more than spreading socialist ideals, Chávez has spread a form of crony capitalism, dedicated to his greater glory, that has imbued the economy with all the resilience of a house of cards.
Foreign investment has plunged, scared off by nationalizations. A huge disparity between the official and black-market exchange rates has encouraged get-rich-quick schemes for favored “Chavistas” while erecting endless barriers to trade. Price controls on staples have made eggs unavailable. This week, you can’t find chickens. Chávez’s socialism delivers subsidized gasoline and glittering malls but no milk.
Latin America has been here before, with the disastrous import-substitution and highly regulated models of the 1960s and ’70s. Most of the region has moved on, but not Chávez, who trumpets “growth from within,” whatever that is. The World Bank’s recently released “Doing Business 2008,” a ranking of the ease of conducting commerce, places Venezuela 172nd out of 178 countries.
Despite this, the country does huge business with the United States, as its fourth-largest crude oil supplier and a big importer. Chávez’s “socialism” and his chumminess with Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad do not extend to cutting off the “imperialist empire.” Chávez is too shrewd to sever his lifeline.
A possible conclusion would be that he’s harmless — a wily barracks-bred buffoon whose leftist rhetoric is just a veneer for a petrodollar power play. Perhaps that’s why the United States — and Latin American nations — have been so muted, or silent, before Chávez’s attempted “constitutional coup.” Oil speaks.
But Chávez’s grab for socialist-emperor status is grotesque and dangerous — as Fascism was — a terrible example for a region that has been consolidating democracy. King Juan Carlos of Spain got it right when he recently interrupted Chávez’s trademark verbal diarrhea with a brusque: “Why don’t you just shut up?”
Venezuelans should watch that regal routine on YouTube — it’s even been set to music — and follow suit on Sunday.
Globovisión
When I got home from work at a somewhat reasonable hour last evening, I made some dinner and went to do some work, while "watching" Globovisión in the background. However, it was not working. So, for those of you who normally find it using the link I've previously cited, keep trying --I don't know what's going on with it-- but here is another site which might prove to be helpful.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
LAC round-up for Nov 28
Per as of late, Venezuela is leading the LAC news...
LATIN AMERICA -- REGIONAL
LATIN AMERICA -- REGIONAL
Source: Tyler Bridges, Miami Herald, November 28, 2007
Recall of ambassador a sign of rising tension
Venezuela ratcheted up a diplomatic row with neighboring Colombia on Tuesday when President Hugo Chávez called home his ambassador to Bogotá for an ''exhaustive evaluation'' of bilateral relations.
With the move, Chávez appeared to have rejected cautions against allowing an exchange of insults between him and Colombian President Alvaro Uribe on Sunday to threaten the close political and economic ties between the two countries.
The Colombian government said it would not reply by recalling its ambassador in Caracas -- a diplomatic maneuver that shows displeasure but stops short of a break in formal relations.
''Uribe wants this to blow over,'' said Elsa Cardozo, a professor of international relations at Venezuela's Metropolitan University.
Myles Frechette, who served as U.S. ambassador to Colombia in the 1990s and as a lower-level diplomat to Venezuela in the 1970s, said Chávez undoubtedly acted out of personal pique and with an eye toward a crucial vote Sunday on constitutional reforms.
Frechette said Chávez had been burnishing his tattered reputation abroad through his efforts to win the release of 46 high-profile American and Colombian hostages held for years by that country's leftist FARC guerrillas. Uribe angered Chávez last week by canceling the Venezuelan president's efforts to mediate a prisoner swap with the rebels.
''Chávez's pride was hurt a lot,'' Frechette said, especially after Spanish King Juan Carlos had already told him to shut up two weeks earlier at a regional summit. ``Chávez is also concerned about his image before Venezuelans and how this might hurt his chances of winning the referendum.''
Some polls show Chávez losing the vote Sunday by 10 points, but analysts are not counting him out, given his enormous charisma and uncanny ability to win vote after vote in Venezuela.
Chávez and his political allies in the national assembly are proposing 69 amendments to the country's Constitution that would -- among other changes -- allow him to seek reelection indefinitely, give the government the right to suspend some civil liberties during emergencies, shorten the formal workweek and provide retirement pensions to the one-half of the labor force that works off the books.
Chávez said Sunday that he was putting relations with Colombia ''in the freezer'' and said he had lost faith in Uribe's ability to lead that country. Uribe responded that Chávez had used his mediation role with the FARC to try to expand his influence in Colombia, and said he had been meddling in too many other countries for too long.
Until then, the two leaders had maintained relatively good working relations for more than two years, even though Chávez is a leftist and Washington's biggest headache in Latin America while Uribe is a conservative and perhaps President Bush's biggest ally in the region.
Analysts had been wondering since Sunday whether either president would seek to exacerbate the crisis.
Chávez took the bait. The Venezuelan foreign ministry issued a statement Tuesday, saying it had called home its ambassador to Colombia ``with the aim of overseeing an exhaustive evaluation of bilateral relations.''
Colombian Foreign Minister Fernando Araujo sought to sidestep the battle, saying, ``The enemy of the Colombian people is the FARC.''
Colombia is not likely to recall its ambassador to Venezuela, said Patrick Esteruelas, who tracks Colombia and Venezuela for the Eurasia Group, which analyzes political risk for private clients.
''Ultimately, I think this will be the extent of it,'' Esteruelas said. ``Both countries are heavily dependent on each other, although Colombia has the most to lose.''
Esteruelas said Colombian exports to Venezuela increased by 77 percent during the first eight months of 2007 compared to a similar period in 2006. Colombia had a $1.7 billion trade surplus with Venezuela during that period, thanks to exports of textiles, automobiles and basic foodstuffs to Venezuela.
For its part, Venezuela has come to depend on Colombian chicken, meat, eggs and sugar to offset shortages of Venezuelan-produced goods.
The two countries briefly suspended commercial ties in 2005 after agents working for Colombia snatched a senior FARC leader, Rodrigo Granda, from Caracas and imprisoned him in Colombia. Chávez protested by blocking Colombian goods from entering Venezuela.
''The two countries have less of a reason to suspend commercial ties now,'' Esteruelas said.
Source: AP, New York Times, November 28, 2007
Latin Constitution Changes Stoke Debate
QUITO, Ecuador (AP) -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and two of his regional proteges are rewriting their nations' constitutions, following a Latin American tradition of using the fundamental charter to attempt radical breaks from past regimes.
Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia are promoting constitutional reforms as ways to root out corruption, redistribute wealth to the poor, and in the case of Bolivia, reverse centuries of discrimination against an Indian majority.
But opponents call them bald-faced power grabs by leftist presidents seeking to crown themselves with limitless authority.
''The impression is that little emperors are being formed in the Andes with excessive power in the executive branch,'' said Luis Verdesoto, a political scientist in Quito.
A special assembly convenes Thursday to draft a new Ecuadorean constitution, the country's 20th since declaring independence from Spain 195 years ago. President Rafael Correa has promised a document that will wrest power from the country's traditional political parties, which many Ecuadoreans blame for their chronically unstable nation's ills.
In Bolivia, a rump constitutional assembly -- all but three opposition delegates boycotted the vote -- approved a framework for a new constitution over the weekend. It would allow the president unlimited re-election and gives central authorities greater control over spending at the expense of state governments.
And on Sunday, Venezuelans vote on 69 amendments that will give Chavez even more power to remake the oil-rich nation into a socialist state. If approved, Chavez, 53, would be able run for re-election indefinitely, and presidential recalls will be more difficult.
Chavez also would be able to redraw political districts, and declare indefinite states of emergency during which he can suspend certain civil liberties and censor the media.
While opponents have taken to the streets, the promised changes also have generated huge expectations as the presidents promise to use expanded powers to improve the lot of the long-neglected poor.
Including people who haven't benefited from Latin America's shift from right-wing dictatorships to democracies is a constant theme for Chavez, Correa and Bolivian President Evo Morales.
But these new constitutions risk ''personalizing too much power, which instead of consolidating democracy, weakens it,'' said Marta Lagos, who directs Corporacion Latinobarometro, a Chile-based regional polling organization.
Chavez has certainly personalized Sunday's referendum, making it an us-against-them proposition.
''He who says he supports Chavez but votes 'no' is a traitor, a true traitor,'' he said in a campaign appearance. ''He's against me, against the revolution and against the people.''
Chavez has no guarantee of victory on Sunday -- a poll published last week showed 49 percent of likely voters opposed Venezuela's constitutional reforms, ahead of the 39 percent who favored the changes. The polling firm Datanalisis surveyed 1,854 Venezuelans and the poll had a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points. The government has cited other polls showing Chavez in the lead.
The latest developments in Bolivia also could backfire on Morales. The constitutional assembly had to convene in a military garrison amid riots by opponents who say the new charter will benefit indigenous groups at the expense of regions led by his opponents. Many fear a new constitution approved by the indigenous majority will tear the divided nation apart.
Unlike Morales, Ecuador's Correa will have an ample majority -- 80 of the 130 seats -- in the country's constitutional assembly.
The assembly convening Thursday will meet for six months, a period that can be extended by two months. The final text needs approval in a national referendum.
Correa, 44, is Ecuador's eighth president in a decade. He says the new charter will make politicians more accountable, including allowing the recall of elected officials, and will expand government control over Ecuador's free-market economy.
His opponents say his true intention is to concentrate power in the presidency. But 82 percent of the voters, disgusted with deeply rooted corruption and greed among the political elite, supported Correa's call for the assembly.
In its first act, the assembly is expected to order the opposition-dominated Congress into recess and replace it with a commission that will legislate until a new charter is approved and general elections called. ''Congress is closed only in a dictatorship,'' bemoaned opposition congressman Carlos Gonzalez.
Source: Andres Schipani, Financial Times, November 28, 2007
Bolivian opposition calls general strike
Opposition leaders in six of Bolivia’s nine provinces have called a general strike for Wednesday in protest against a draft constitution approved by supporters of Evo Morales, president.
Violent protests, leading to at least four deaths and hundreds of injuries, erupted over the weekend as the charter’s approval fuelled demands for autonomy in opposition strongholds.
In Sucre and Santa Cruz, protesters stormed government buildings, police stations and a prison.
On Tuesday a radio and television station in La Paz, the capital, was attacked.
The draft constitution, which must now be put to a referendum, was approved by members of Mr Morales’s political movement at a special assembly meeting in a military compound in Sucre. Most opposition members boycotted the vote.
Mr Morales, Bolivia’s first indigenous president, has promised to increase state control over the economy and empower the poor, indigenous majority – policies reflected in the draft constitution.
But the issue has deepened divisions between the mainly indigenous west and the wealthier, mostly European east.
The president’s conservative rivals want greater autonomy for wealthy regions and the relocation of government and Congress from La Paz to Sucre. Raul Prada Alcoreza, a member of Mr Morales’s political group, gave warning that a failure to solve the crisis might lead to “the brink of a civil war”.
Jim Shultz of the Democracy Centre, a think-tank based in Cochabamba, said: “Now we have a stark political line – a class line – and the possibility of conflict is very strong. But one of the reasons we have reached this point of conflict lies in the opposition.”
Manfred Reyes Villa, the prefect of Cochabamba, has called for a rival referendum to overturn the draft constitution and force Mr Morales to quit. He is reported to have won the support of prefects from six provinces.
Gabriel Dabdoub, president of the Santa Cruz chamber of commerce, said the draft constitution “does not represent the country, nor democracy”.
Mr Morales called for calm, saying: “Occupying state offices isn’t democracy; civil disobedience isn’t democracy. We hope the Bolivian people will identify these traitors – the people who are against the nation and want to damage this process of change.”
Mr Morales is an ally of Hugo Chávez, Venezuela’s president, who has blamed the violence on Bolivia’s wealthy.
Source: Jude Webber, New York Times, November 28, 2007
Chile’s thriving economy strengthens OECD case
Chile has a thriving and well-managed economy but income levels are only 40 per cent of the western average, according to a report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development that is likely to reinforce Chile’s case for joining the 30-nation group.
“Our general assessment is rather positive,” said Luiz de Mello, co-author of a new study on the country prepared by the Paris-based club, which promotes market growth and economic development.
However, he noted that income per capita, measured in terms of purchasing power parity, was only 40 per cent of the OECD average “so there’s still a long way to go”.
The OECD in May invited Chile to begin negotiations on becoming a member, a process expected to take at least two years and separate from Monday’s report.
The OECD report praised Chile’s strong economic growth – expected to be about 6 per cent next year – prudent fiscal policies and low, albeit rising, inflation. It also approved of the way it has been saving windfall copper revenue generated by record prices.
It highlighted important reforms to the pension system that the government of Michelle Bachelet, the president, has undertaken. However, Mr de Mello said: “We have identified the overarching challenge [facing Chile] as the need to sustain growth to reduce the income gap . . . They are on a par with good emerging market nations but should really be looking at raising the bar.”
Andrés Velasco, the country’s finance minister, said the recommendations were in line with government objectives.
“We said [in the 2008 budget] that Chile had $13,000 (€8,767, £6,304) in per capita income in purchasing power parity terms and by 2020 we needed to have $20,000, which is equivalent to the lower tier of OECD countries, like those in southern Europe,” he said.
Mr de Mello said Chile needed to make social spending more efficient and channel education spending to schools catering for disadvantaged children in order to help close the gap with other OECD nations.
The report noted that a fifth of people over 15 who work more than 20 hours a week are in the informal economy. It was vital to change that to boost productivity and thus keep Chile growing sustainably.
Chile should also make labour rules more flexible and provide access to affordable child care to boost the number of women in the workforce from about 42 per cent now.
Source: AP, El Nuevo Herald, November 28, 2007
Dura crítica de las FARC por decisión de Uribe
Las guerrillas Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC) afirmaron que la frustrada negociación del presidente de Venezuela Hugo Chávez era la ''única esperanza'' para lograr el canje de secuestrados en manos de los rebeldes por guerrilleros en prisión.
''Miserable, muy miserable la actitud de Uribe al suspender la mediación humanitaria del presidente Hugo Chávez y la senadora Piedad Córdoba, cuando era la única esperanza para lograr el canje de prisioneros en Colombia'', dijo en un comunicado divulgado el martes Luciano Marín Arango, alias Iván Márquez y miembro de la dirección de las FARC.
''Sin descartar eventualidades, no es promisorio el horizonte futuro'', señaló Márquez en el comunicado divulgado por la página de internet del grupo. Márquez se reunió con Chávez y Córdoba en Caracas para una primera discusión sobre el intercambio.
Aunque el jefe rebelde dijo que esa mediación de Chávez era la ''única esperanza'' para el canje, al final de su nota de página y media y en un enigmático comentario, hizo un llamado a persistir en el intercambio y no permitir que ''se apague la luz'' del canje.
''A los familiares y allegados de los prisioneros de las partes contendientes, nuestro llamado a persistir. Que no se apague la luz del canje. Encontraremos una salida'', expresó Márquez su mensaje, fechado en las ''Montañas de Colombia'' el 23 de noviembre, o un día después que Bogotá anunció el fin de las gestiones de Chávez.
Tanto por la decisión de Uribe --argumentando que Chávez desoyó sus pedidos de no entrar en contacto directo con mandos militares colombianos porque era ``inconveniente''-- como por las frases del jefe rebelde en su comunicado, el asunto del intercambio parece alejarse para por lo menos 46 secuestrados en manos de las FARC, algunos de ellos con hasta 10 años de cautiverio, como para cientos de insurgentes en las cárceles colombianas.
Márquez no se ahorró adjetivos para describir la decisión del mandatario colombiano, a quien calificó de desde ''grosero desaire contra un presidente amigo'' hasta ''enemigo público número uno del canje humanitario'', así como para el Comisionado de Paz colombiano, Luis Carlos Restrepo.
''Ignoramos qué le hizo creer a Uribe que sería más eficaz el sinuoso como intrigante comisionado Restrepo que una intermediación con toda la solvencia moral y el prestigio que caracterizan al presidente Chávez y a la senadora Córdoba'', agregó.
El cierre de las negociaciones del venezolano además desembocó el fin de semana en la más grave crisis diplomáticas entre Bogotá y Caracas en tiempos recientes con ambos presidentes lanzándose duros ataques.
Source: AP, Miami Herald, November 28, 2007
Cuba makes an economic ascent
(AP) -- Cuba's economy should grow by 10 percent in 2007, the third straight year of double-digit expansion, despite slips in the tourism sector, according to Economy Minister José Luis Rodríguez.
Speaking at a meeting of economists, Rodríguez said gross domestic product on the communist-run island would rise by 10 percent this year, reiterating a prediction he made in February.
The event Monday was closed to international media, but Rodríguez's comments were reported Tuesday by the official National Information Agency.
The report provided few details about what is fueling growth, citing only general increases in industrial and agricultural production.
Cuba includes state spending on social and healthcare programs when calculating its growth rates, a methodology that makes its figures difficult to compare with those of other countries.
Although some economists question Cuba's reported economic growth, Cuba has managed to transform its economy since the collapse of the Soviet Union, once its chief supporter and trade partner, at the start of the 1990s.
Aided by high prices for the copper, nickel and cobalt its mines produce, the island's government reported economic growth of 12.5 percent in 2006 and 11 percent in 2005.
Sugar has been a traditional agricultural mainstay for Cuba but international prices are being dampened by a global surplus. Sugar prices on ICE Futures U.S. -- formerly known as the New York Board of Trade -- fell to a seven-week low Tuesday on speculation that the surplus will widen as output increases from India, the second-largest producer after Brazil.
The surplus may extend into 2009, the London-based International Sugar Organization said earlier this month. Excess supplies may be 7 million tons in 2009 should global production stay at about 170 million tons, the group said.
Tourism remains Cuba's chief source of revenue, but the number of overseas visitors declined through June of this year as compared to 2006 -- a year that saw a slight slip from the 2.2 million visitors in 2005.
Earlier this year, Cuba also said it had lost $16.89 million and 12,300 cruise passengers since the end of 2006 because of the sale of Spanish Pullmantur cruise line to Royal Caribbean.
Miami-based Royal Caribbean purchased Madrid-based Pullmantur for $899 million last November.
Afterward, Cuba said, U.S. laws forced Royal to redeploy Pullmantur's Holiday Dream from Cuba to other ports of call.
Venezuela, meanwhile, provides nearly 100,000 daily barrels of oil to the island in exchange for Cuban social services, but Rodríguez said his country still feels the pinch of rising oil prices on world markets.
''We will have to confront complex situations like ever higher prices for oil, which require a strict policy to save fuel,'' Rodríguez was quoted as saying.
He also promised increased state spending on the energy sector.
Source: AP, New York Times, November 28, 2007
Activists Seek Independent Cuba Colleges
HAVANA (AP) -- A group of Cuban students and young professionals said Tuesday it has collected 5,000 signatures petitioning the government to allow universities that would operate independently of the state while encouraging freedom of speech.
Supporters of the University Students Without Borders Project want Cuba's communist government to tolerate autonomous colleges and also reopen Havana's Catholic University of Santo Tomas de Villanueva, which authorities shuttered in 1961, two years after Fidel Castro's revolution toppled dictator Fulgencio Batista.
''We are promoting a culture of free thinking despite the repression and fear hanging over us,'' said Nestor Rodriguez, who helped organize the petition drive with his brother Rolando.
The small group began seeking signatures in August 2006 and hopes to collect the 10,000 necessary to formally present its cause to Cuban lawmakers.
The brothers showed off a white cardboard box full of signatures before about 30 supporters who wore matching white T-shirts and were crammed into an apartment on a central Havana alley.
The brothers said they do not plan to present the petition to the government yet for fear that its signatories could be expelled from state-run universities. More than 2,000 of those who signed were college students, and the rest were university faculty members or professionals with college degrees, they said.
Their group said it presented a plan to reopen Santo Tomas de Villanueva to Roman Catholic officials last year, but had yet to receive a formal response. A church official said Tuesday he had not heard of the proposal.
Cuba had 650,000 registered university students for the 2006-2007 academic year, according to the National Office of Statistics.
Source: AFP, El Nuevo Herald, November 28, 2007
Ortega amenaza con gobernar por decreto
El presidente de Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, amenazó con gobernar por decreto, al estilo de su homólogo venezolano Hugo Chávez, si la oposición del parlamento continúa paralizando sus proyectos de ley en protesta por la decisión del Ejecutivo de imponer los derogados Consejos del Poder Ciudadano (CPC).
Si el parlamento no legisla ''me obligarían a mí a gobernar por decreto'', advirtió Ortega en rueda de prensa con medios oficialistas.
El mandatario selló su posición frente al conflicto que lo enfrenta desde hace una semana con el parlamento, dominado por una mayoría de diputados liberales y disidentes sandinistas de oposición, que decidieron paralizar las sesiones ante la insistencia del gobierno de institucionalizar los CPC.
''Ortega lo que está confesando es que su proyecto de régimen parlamentarista (para gobernar por consenso) es pura mentira y que lo que quiere es gobernar por decreto como lo hace Hugo Chávez'', denunció el diputado opositor Pedro Chamorro, hijo de la ex presidenta Violeta Barrios de Chamorro (1990-97).
La amenaza de Ortega --quien asumió la presidencia en enero pasado-- levantó fuertes críticas en sectores de oposición y civiles, que temen el establecimiento de un gobierno ''dictatorial'', al estilo del que ejerció durante la revolución sandinista (1979-1990).
''Que no crea Daniel Ortega que la Asamblea Nacional (parlamento) se va a quedar cruzada de brazos con esta amenaza chantajista'', afirmó el vicepresidente del Congreso, el liberal Wilfredo Navarro.
El presidente de la Corte Suprema de Justicia (CSJ), el liberal Manuel Martínez, llamó a Ortega a respetar el Estado de derecho y le advirtió que ponerse al margen de la ley ''podría provocar una revuelta'' política y social.
''Cuando se producen actitudes dictatoriales el pueblo reacciona'', observó el presidente de la CSJ.
La crisis institucional inició el pasado 20 de noviembre cuando los legisladores de la oposición derogaron con mayoría de votos la ley que permitía a Ortega formar los CPC para dar impulso a un modelo de ''democracia directa'' similar a las existentes en Cuba y Venezuela, por considerarlos un proyecto político ajeno al quehacer institucional del gobierno.
La Sala Civil II del Tribunal de Apelaciones de Managua (TAM), dirigida por una mayoría de jueces sandinistas, ordenó ese mismo día, una hora después de la votación, suspender la publicación de la ley, tras admitir en tiempo récord un recurso de amparo promovido por dirigentes de los CPC.
Los CPC son comité populares que el gobierno organizó en los últimos meses en todo el país con miembros del Frente Sandinista (FSLN, izquierda) para hacer consultas y canalizar ayudas a sus seguidores.
El jefe del Ejército, general Omar Halleslevens, por su parte, desestimó rumores de que el gobierno estaría usando la fuerza militar para imponer sus decisiones y tomó distancia de la crisis entre los poderes del Estado.
''Creo que los ejércitos no sólo de América Latina, sino a nivel mundial hoy por hoy están llamados a no meterse en las crisis que generalmente enfrentan las instituciones o situaciones que puedan presentarse entre elementos de un estado'', aseguró el jefe militar.
Source: AP , El Nuevo Herald, November 28, 2007
Jefe de Sendero muerto durante combate en Perú
Un enfrentamiento entre rebeldes de Sendero Luminoso y la policía ayer en la madrugada en la selva dejó un mando subversivo muerto y ocho capturados, informó el ministro del Interior Luis Alva.
El ministro dijo que la operación policial ''Volcán'' tuvo como resultado un combate con un grupo de Sendero Luminoso en Aucayacu, en la selva del Huallaga, en el que falleció Epifanio Espíritu Acosta, alías ''JL'', quien era el comando más importante del cabecilla conocido como ``Camarada Artemio'',
Artemio es uno de los últimos líderes senderistas en actividad y comanda una columna rebelde en la selva del valle del Huallaga.
Alva precisó también que fueron capturados ocho subversivos, entre ellos una mujer, y que se incautaron fusiles de largo alcance y armas cortas.
''Ha sido un operativo exitoso'', declaró Alva a la emisora Radioprogramas, al indicar que no hubo bajas ni heridos entre la policía.
''Estamos muy cerca de Artemio, estamos avanzando'', afirmó.
Según las autoridades, existen actualmente dos grupos remanentes de Sendero Luminoso, uno comandado por Artemio en el Huallaga, en la selva central, y otro dirigido por el ''Camarada Alipio'' en el valle del Río Apurímac-Ene, en el sudeste del país.
Sendero Luminoso, que asoló Perú con una escalada de violencia terrorista entre 1980 y principios de los 90, quedó neutralizado en 1992 con la captura de su cabecilla y fundador Abimael Guzmán, quien cumple cadena perpetua.
Las bandas remanentes de Sendero Luminoso actualmente brindan protección a los narcotraficantes a cambio de dinero, alianza que el gobierno y especialistas denominan narcoterrorismo, según los informes oficiales.
El 1 y el 13 de noviembre pasado, la policía soportó dos duros golpes en la zona del valle del río Apurímac-Ene, que fueron atribuidos por el gobierno a ``narcoterroristas''.
En el primer caso una comisaría del pueblo de Ocobamba fue atacada con el resultado de un policía muerto y tres heridos. Dos semanas más tarde, cuatro policías murieron en una emboscada.
Source: Nina Negron (AFP), El Nuevo Herald, November 28, 2007
El peso del Estado a favor de la reforma chavista
El gobierno del presidente venezolano Hugo Chávez ha puesto todo el peso del Estado en la campaña del referéndum sobre una reforma constitucional de corte socialista previsto este domingo, cuyo resultado sería muy ajustado según las últimas encuestas.
El presidente Hugo Chávez, proponente de la reforma constitucional, es el mayor propagandista del Sí, con un promedio de tres apariciones públicas por día y horas de discurso, retransmitidas por todas las televisoras y radios estatales, desde el miércoles pasado.
El oficialista Comando Zamora, que lleva la campaña del Bloque del Sí, está dirigido por el vicepresidente Jorge Rodríguez, lo integran también el ministro de Telecomunicaciones Jesse Chacón, la presidenta de la Asamblea Nacional Cilia Flores, el gobernador del estado Miranda, Diosdado Cabello, el director del canal multiestatal Telesur Andrés Izarra, entre otros funcionarios.
Las calles de Venezuela están copadas con propaganda por el Sí, mientras que los afiches del No se limitan a los raros municipios opositores, y los estudiantes realizan pintadas en paredes y carros.
En el metro de Caracas, que transporta alrededor de un millón de personas diariamente, los altoparlantes divulgan 'jingles' a favor del Sí.
El propio Chávez sostuvo esta semana que la campaña electoral debía ser intensificada, con el argumento de que ``es muy corta, y un día debe valer por una semana''.
El gobierno denuncia una conspiración en su contra y un riesgo de magnicidio, todo orquestado por el imperialismo para sabotear la reforma.
El ex ministro de Defensa y cofundador con Chávez del movimiento bolivariano en el Ejército, Raúl Baduel, que llamó a votar por el ''No'', alertó de que se está propiciando un clima de conflictividad, con el fin de generar violencia e inestabilidad en el país, según un comunicado de su asesoría de prensa.
La campaña electoral comenzó oficialmente el 3 de noviembre, luego de que la Asamblea Nacional sancionó la propuesta de reforma y el Consejo Nacional Electoral convocó al referéndum en un lapso de 30 días.
Aunque originalmente el Consejo Nacional Electoral propuso organizar debates televisados entre los bloques del Sí y del No, posteriormente desistió debido a que los representantes del comando oficialista no acudieron a las reuniones de coordinación.
De hecho, la campaña oficialista se ha centrado en los últimos días en la figura carismática de Chávez, quien sostuvo que quien vote ''No'' es un ''traidor'' y ha pedido el Sí como un acto de ''lealtad'', dejando de lado la explicación o discusión sobre los cambios a 69 de los 350 artículos de la Constitución.
La reforma constitucional incluye la reelección presidencial ilimitada, mayores atribuciones al Poder Ejecutivo, la creación de un Poder Popular, así como la definición de diversas formas de propiedad, entre ellas la social.
En un acto ayer ante cientos de mujeres en Caracas, Chávez sostuvo que la reelección ilimitada, uno de los puntos que mayores reservas genera, de acuerdo con las encuestas de opinión, ha sido planteada porque ``soy incorruptible e inchantajeable''.
El mandatario aseveró que necesita estar en la presidencia ``más allá del 2020 para conducir a Venezuela hacia un futuro grande''.
En la acera de enfrente, llamando a votar No, se encuentra una variada lista de agrupaciones políticas, el movimiento estudiantil, y sectores disidentes del chavismo.
Entre los disidentes del chavismo destacan además el partido Podemos, que con siete diputados en la Asamblea Constitucional, se opuso a la aprobación de la reforma constitucional y la ex esposa de Chávez, María Isabel Rodríguez.