instruction
stringlengths 297
382
| input
stringlengths 18
377
| output
stringlengths 585
82.8k
|
|---|---|---|
Write an article about: Peru’s coup-plotting congress has 6% approval, 91% disapproval (but full US backing). Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fujimori, coup, Dina Boluarte, Pedro Castillo, Peru | A polling firm found that Peru’s coup-plotting, right-wing-controlled congress has 6% approval and 91% disapproval. Unelected leader Dina Boluarte has 15% approval and 78% disapproval. But they have the full support of the US, Canada, and foreign mining corporations.
A study by a leading polling firm in Peru found that the country’s coup-plotting congress has an approval rating of just 6%, with a staggering 91% disapproval.
The South American nation’s unelected president, Dina Boluarte, has the approval of just 15% of Peruvians, with 78% disapproval.
In December 2022, Peru’s democratically elected leftist President Pedro Castillo was overthrown in a congressional coup. The military arrested him, and he was sentenced to 18 months in prison, without due process.
The US ambassador in Peru, Lisa Kenna, is a CIA veteran who strongly supported the coup against Castillo, and has collaborated closely with Boluarte.
Boluarte’s heavily militarized regime has violently cracked down on widespread demonstrations, killing more than 60 protesters.
The mainstream think tank the Institute of Peruvian Studies (IEP) has conducted regular opinion surveys. IEP’s March poll showed that the unelected coup regime is extremely unpopular among all parts of society.
In January, February, and March, Peru’s congress had 89%, 90%, and 91% disapproval ratings, respectively.
The IEP study found no differences between urban and rural areas; in every part of the country, on average, at least 90% of Peruvians oppose the congress, while just 6% support it.
Peru’s unicameral congress is notoriously corrupt, and dominated by the country’s right-wing oligarchs. Recent controversies like the 2018 Mamanivideos scandal exposed how common it is for members of congress to accept bribes to vote in a particular way.
Among Peruvians who identify as left wing, only 4% support the congress and 93% oppose it, whereas among right-wingers, 10% support the congress and 88% oppose it.
Peru’s unelected president, Boluarte, faced 76%, 77%, and 78% disapproval in January, February, and March, respectively.
Boluarte has slightly more support among Peruvians in the capital Lima, who tend to be much wealthier. But even in the Lima metropolitan area, she still only has 18% support, with 72% disapproval.
In other cities in Peru, Boluarte has 14% support and 80% disapproval. In rural areas, she has mere 11% support and 81% disapproval.
Interestingly, although some of the very few people who back Boluarte have cynically exploited feminist rhetoric to justify her unelected rule, the same study found that only 11% of women support her, while 79% of women oppose her.
In fact, Boluarte is slightly more popular among men, although just 18% support her, while 76% of men oppose her.
The Institute for Peruvian Studies think tank that conducted this survey is in no way sympathetic to Castillo. In fact, it had been quite antagonistic to him when he was in power.
The Lima-based organization represents the country’s economic elites. Ironically, the IEP is funded by many of the same Western governments and CIA-linked organizations that have supported the coup, including the US Agency for International Development (USAID), Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ), British embassy, World Bank, Open Society Foundations, Ford Foundation, and Rockefeller Foundation, among many others.
But despite the sources of its finances, IEP’s polling could not ignore the reality of Peru, which is that opposition to the unelected coup regime is so widespread it is nearly universal.
At least 14 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have condemned the coup in Peru, expressing support for President Castillo, including some of the most populous countries in the region, such as Mexico, Colombia, and Argentina.
Yet, despite the overwhelming lack of democratic legitimacy for Peru’s coup regime, it has the full backing of the United States and Canada.
A day before Castillo was overthrown, in fact, CIA agent turned US Ambassador Lisa Kenna met with Peru’s defense minister, who ordered the military to disobey Castillo’s orders when the democratically elected president cited article 134 of Peru’s constitution to temporarily dissolve the coup-plotting congress and hold new elections and a constituent assembly.
Castillo wanted to organize a democratic process to rewrite Peru’s constitution, which was drafted by the far-right US-backed dictatorship of Alberto Fujimori. The United States had a significant influence on the creation of Peru’s current, Fujimorista constitution, which incorporated neoliberal economic policies into the country’s legal fabric.
Today, US, Canadian, Swiss, and Australia corporations have significant mining interests in Peru, and great influence over the country’s politics.
Since the parliamentary putsch, the US ambassador has met with Peru’s mining and energy ministers to discuss foreign corporate “investments”.
Castillo had proposed increasing taxation on foreign mining corporations, and wanted to use the proceeds to fund healthcare, education, and social programs. Members of the socialist Perú Libre party, with which Castillo had ran for office, had called for nationalizing the country’s substantial mineral reserves.
Peru is the world’s second-biggest producer of copper, representing 10% of global output (exceeded only by neighboring Chile).
The South American nation also has large reserves of gold, zinc, silver, lead, and iron.
Peru is likewise a leading producer of natural gas, and has increasingly exported its energy to Europe, to make up for the drop of Russian gas supplies due to Western sanctions on Moscow.
Peru has large reserves of copper, gold, zinc, silver, lead, iron, and natural gas.
After a coup overthrew left-wing President Pedro Castillo, the US ambassador, CIA veteran Lisa Kenna, met with mining and energy ministers to discuss foreign “investments”https://t.co/rPkQk6lceR
— Geopolitical Economy Report (@GeopoliticaEcon) January 22, 2023
|
Write an article about: La CIA respaldó la fallida invasión a Venezuela en 2020, dice el principal golpista. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | golpe de estado, Juan Guaidó, Leopoldo López, Nicolás Maduro, Operación Gedeón, Venezuela, Voluntad Popular | Un desertor del ejército venezolano que planificó la fallida invasión de mayo de 2020, Clíver Alcalá, dijo que los golpistas estaban en contacto con la CIA y otras agencias del gobierno de EEUU, y tenían su aprobación para tratar de derrocar violentamente al presidente Nicolás Maduro.
(You can read this article in English here.)
Un desertor del ejército venezolano que ayudó a planificar una fallida invasión a Venezuela en mayo de 2020, Clíver Alcalá, dijo que los golpistas estaban en contacto con la CIA y otras agencias del gobierno de Estados Unidos.
Según Alcalá, altos funcionarios estadounidenses aprobaron la operación, que buscaba derrocar violentamente al gobierno chavista del presidente venezolano Nicolás Maduro, quien fue elegido democráticamente.
Los abogados de Alcalá hicieron esta revelación en una presentación judicial ante la corte de EEUU el 28 de enero, informó el Associated Press.
Jordan Goudreau
El 3 y 4 de mayo de 2020, decenas de insurgentes venezolanos de extrema derecha y dos ex comandos de operaciones especiales del Ejército de EEUU intentaron invadir a Venezuela, con planes de secuestrar al presidente Maduro y llevarlo a Estados Unidos.
El complot, conocido como la Operación Gedeón, fue un desastre. Rápidamente fue frustrado por el gobierno venezolano, con la ayuda de pescadores socialistas de la comunidad, y los invasores fueron arrestados.
La invasión había sido organizada por una empresa de mercenarios, con sede en la Florida, llamada Silvercorp USA. Esta empresa fundada por un ex comando de las fuerzas especiales del ejército de EEUU, quien se llama Jordan Goudreau.
En una demanda legal por incumplimiento de contrato, Goudreau dijo que había discutido el plan golpista con dos funcionarios del gobierno de Estados Unidos en un campo de golf en Miami que pertenece al ex presidente Donald Trump, donde se le dio luz verde.
Pero cuando las autoridades venezolanas frustraron la operación, el gobierno de EEUU abandonó inmediatamente a Goudreau y su equipo.
El 26 de marzo de 2020, unas semanas antes de la invasión, el gobierno de EEUU ofreció una serie de recompensas multimillonarias por las cabezas de altos funcionarios actuales y anteriores del gobierno venezolano. Uno de ellos fue el ex general Clíver Alcalá.
Esto sorprendió a Alcalá, porque había sido durante varios años un acérrimo opositor del gobierno venezolano del presidente Maduro.
De hecho, en 2018 Alcalá se había mudado al norte de Colombia, a la ciudad de Barranquilla, cerca de la frontera con Venezuela, donde comenzó a entrenar a militares venezolanos desertores y paramilitares anti-chavistas, haciendo planes para emprender una insurgencia armada contra el gobierno venezolano.
En el norte de Colombia, Alcalá trabajó junto a Goudreau, el mercenario estadounidense que dijo contar con el apoyo de la administración Trump, para crear un ejército guerrillero contra Venezuela.
Estados Unidos había estado apoyando los esfuerzos de Alcalá para tratar de derrocar violentamente a Maduro. Entonces, cuando Washington ofreció la recompensa, Alcalá cumplió y voluntariamente se entregó a las autoridades estadounidenses en Colombia, donde residía. Aceptó ser informante y ser extraditado a Estados Unidos.
Posteriormente, los abogados de Alcalá dejaron claro en sus declaraciones a las autoridades estadounidenses que las operaciones de Alcalá habían sido aprobadas por Washington.
“Los esfuerzos para derrocar al régimen de Maduro han sido bien conocidos por el gobierno de Estados Unidos”, escribieron los abogados de Alcalá en una carta de noviembre de 2021, citada por el Associated Press.
La “oposición de Alcalá al régimen y sus supuestos esfuerzos para derrocarlo fueron reportados a los más altos niveles de la Agencia Central de Inteligencia, el Consejo de Seguridad Nacional y el Departamento del Tesoro”, agregaron sus abogados.
Yacsy Álvarez
Esta no es la primera vez que alguien involucrado en la fallida invasión a Venezuela de 2020 dice que el gobierno de Estados Unidos estuvo involucrado.
Una venezolana de derecha que ayudó a organizar la Operación Gedeón, Yacsy Álvarez, dijo que se reunió con funcionarios del FBI y la DEA en Florida y que las agencias estadounidenses sabían exactamente lo que estaba planeando.
Álvarez trabajó como traductor y asistente de Goudreau, mientras que él y Alcalá entrenaron a militantes anti-venezolanos en Colombia.
Según Álvarez, el gobierno colombiano también apoyó el fallido complot de invasión. El presidente de extrema derecha de Colombia, Iván Duque, y el ex presidente Álvaro Uribe estuvieron involucrados en la operación, ella reveló.
Y la Dirección Nacional de Inteligencia (DNI) de Colombia sabía todo, confesó Álvarez.
Sin embargo, así como Alcalá fue detenido por las autoridades estadounidenses con las que había estado colaborando, Álvarez fue detenido por las autoridades colombianas con las que ella había estado colaborando.
Sus abogados acusaron a las agencias de espionaje de Colombia de hacer una “trampa” para culparla cuando la operación salió mal.
Juan Guaidó y Leopoldo López
El principal líder de la oposición venezolana de extrema derecha, Leopoldo López, también estuvo involucrado en la fallida invasión.
López es visto en Venezuela como el verdadero poder detrás de Juan Guaidó, quien era una figura poco conocida cuando Estados Unidos lo nombró el supuesto “presidente interino” en enero de 2019.
En un artículo de junio de 2020 titulado “Venezuelan Opposition Guru Led Planning to Topple Maduro” (“El gurú de la oposición venezolana lideró la planificación para derrocar a Maduro”), el periódico estadounidense el Wall Street Journal informó que López “estuvo detrás de un esfuerzo de meses para contratar mercenarios para derrocar al presidente Nicolás Maduro” y había “considerado al menos seis propuestas de contratistas de seguridad privada para llevar a cabo incursiones militares para estimular una rebelión en las fuerzas armadas de Venezuela y derrocar” al gobierno chavista.
López, Guaidó y otros miembros de su partido político de extrema derecha, Voluntad Popular, contrataron a Silvercorp USA y trabajaron con Goudreau y Alcalá para planear la invasión.
A pesar de su clara participación en un intento de invasión a su país de origen y su papel protagónico en violentos intentos de golpe de estado, López vive hoy cómodamente en Madrid. Tiene la protección del gobierno español, mientras continúa organizando la oposición extremista venezolana desde el exterior.
La administración de Joe Biden, por su parte, ha continuado con la política de Trump de reconocer al golpista Guaidó, que nunca fue elegido, como el supuesto líder de Venezuela – aunque, a partir de enero de 2022, menos de 15 países se niegan a reconocer que Maduro es el verdadero presidente.
|
Write an article about: Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA) supports Peru’s President Castillo against coup, denounces lawfare in Argentina. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | ALBA, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Bolivarian Alliance, Bolivia, Caribbean, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, Cuba, Dominica, Grenada, Latin America, Nicaragua, Pedro Castillo, Peru, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Venezuela | The left-wing Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA) uniting countries in Latin America and the Caribbean met for its 18th anniversary summit, condemning the coup d’etat in Peru against “Constitutional President Pedro Castillo,” denouncing the “unsubstantiated judicial processes (lawfare)” in Argentina against Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), the left-wing economic and political bloc uniting countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, has forcefully opposed the coup d’etat in Peru and expressed its support for the country’s democratically elected President Pedro Castillo.
ALBA member states released a joint declaration stating that they “reject the political trap created by the right-wing forces of that country against the Constitutional President Pedro Castillo, forcing him to take measures that were later used by his adversaries in parliament to oust him from office.”
The alliance condemned the violent “repression by the law enforcement agencies against the Peruvian people who are defending a government democratically elected at the polls.”
ALBA likewise denounced “the politically motivated judicial actions” that led to a judicial coup in Argentina, showing solidarity with former President and current Vice President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.
The alliance said that Kirchner, like Castillo, is victim of “unconventional warfare strategies against democratically elected governments and leaders in the region using the politically motivated and legally unsubstantiated judicial processes (lawfare).”
The members of ALBA include Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and the Caribbean nations Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, and Saint Lucia.
Representatives of ALBA members met in La Habana on December 14 for their 18th anniversary summit.
Attending the conference were Cuba’s President Miguel Díaz-Canel, Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro, Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega, Bolivia’s President Luis Arce, Prime Minister of Dominica Roosevelt Skerrit, Prime Minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Ralph Gonsalves, Prime Minister of Grenada Dickon Mitchell, Foreign Minister of Antigua and Barbuda Everly Chet Greene, and Finance Minister of Saint Lucia Wayne Girard.
Leaders of ALBA member states meet in Cuba on December 14, 2022
They published a joint declaration calling for the “defense of national sovereignty without any foreign interference.”
“We reject the colonialist and interfering postulates of the Monroe Doctrine, used to justify destabilizing and interventionist practices in Latin America and the Caribbean,” the Bolivarian Alliance wrote.
ALBA nations stated:
[We] express our solidarity with the brotherly Peruvian people that has been subjected to a continuous institutional crisis, resulting in a series of events that threaten the stability and the welfare of the majority.
We reject the political trap created by the right-wing forces of that country against the Constitutional President Pedro Castillo, forcing him to take measures that were later used by his adversaries in parliament to oust him from office; we repudiate the repression by the law enforcement agencies against the Peruvian people who are defending a government democratically elected at the polls and we call for dialogue, understanding and maturity of all political, economic, and social actors of the Republic of Peru, as well as we raise our voices to guarantee the fundamental rights of this brother people.
The alliance also declared that it rejects “the destabilizing plans and actions fueled by powerful external factors and national oligarchies that have managed or are attempting to disregard the will of the Latin American and Caribbean peoples, which has been democratically and legitimately expressed at the polls.”
In this vein, ALBA said:
[We] denounce the use of unconventional warfare strategies against democratically elected governments and leaders in the region using the politically motivated and legally unsubstantiated judicial processes (lawfare), to defeat political and ideological opponents while condemning manipulation for political and destabilizing purposes of human rights, the disinformation and propaganda campaigns; the malicious use of the information and communication technologies; and cyber attacks, among other methods undermining the sovereignty and will of the peoples.
In this regard, we express our firmest rejection of the politically motivated judicial actions against our fellow Vice President of Argentina, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, a key leader of the integration processes in Latin America and the Caribbean.
ALBA also called for Caribbean nations to receive “reparations for the damages caused by native genocide, colonialism and slavery.”
In the joint statement, the Bolivarian Alliance urged “to increase international solidarity with the brotherly people of the Republic of Haiti.”
And the alliance praised the peace talks being held between Colombia and the armed socialist militia the ELN.
The ALBA was founded in 2004 by Cuba and Venezuela, under the leadership of Presidents Fidel Castro and Hugo Chávez.
|
Write an article about: West votes against democracy, human rights, cultural diversity at UN; promotes mercenaries, sanctions. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | democracy, General Assembly, human rights, mercenaries, sanctions, unilateral coercive measures, United Nations | The West voted against the rest of the world on United Nations General Assembly resolutions, opposing democracy, human rights, and cultural diversity, while supporting mercenaries and unilateral coercive measures (sanctions).
Western governments frequently claim that their foreign and domestic policies are motivated by “human rights” and “democracy”. They often even lecture their adversaries for purportedly failing to respect these concerns.
But on the international stage, Western capitals have shown their commitments to be merely rhetorical, as they have consistently voted against these noble causes and refused to support measures that would tangibly protect them, in flagrant violation of the will of the vast majority of the international community.
These stark double standards were on display on November 7 in the meeting of the United Nations General Assembly’s Third Committee, which is devoted to social, humanitarian, and cultural issues.
In this three-hour session, the West opposed draft resolutions that called for promoting democracy, human rights, and cultural diversity, while simultaneously supporting the use of mercenaries and the application of unilateral coercive measures, commonly known as sanctions.
The extended West voted against the rest of the world on these issues. Its positions were virtually uniform as a bloc, led by the United States, including Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea, and Japan.
In fact, the chair of the General Assembly’s Third Committee is Austria’s representative to the United Nations, Alexander Marschik, and even he could not help but laugh in the session at the constant protestations of the US representative, who dominated the debate, speaking out against nearly every resolution to explain why the world should join with Washington in voting against it. (Marschik could not contain his laughter despite the fact that his own country, Austria, voted along with the US on each resolution.)
Geopolitical Economy Report has created maps that illustrate the clear political divide between the West and the rest.
In the November 7 session, nations debated a draft that condemned unilateral coercive measures, or sanctions, for violating the human rights of civilians in targeted countries.
The resolution passed with 128 votes in favor and 54 against, and no abstentions.
The General Assembly’s Third Committee likewise considered a measure that called for the “promotion of a democratic and equitable international order”.
The resolution passed with 123 votes in favor and 54 against, plus 7 abstentions (from Armenia, Chile, Costa Rica, Liberia, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay).
Another resolution sought to promote “human rights and cultural diversity”.
The measure passed with 130 votes in favor and 54 against, and no abstentions.
The Third Committee deliberated a draft that called for the “promotion of equitable geographical distribution in the membership of the human rights treaty bodies”.
The resolution passed with 128 votes in favor and 52 against, and no abstentions.
Another measure condemned the “use of mercenaries as a means of violating human rights and impeding the exercise of the right of peoples to self-determination”.
The resolution passed with 126 votes in favor and 52 against, plus 6 abstentions (from Kiribati, Liberia, Palau, Mexico, Tonga and Switzerland).
The United Nations published a full video of the Third Committee’s session on November 7, in the 48th plenary meeting of the General Assembly’s 78th session.
|
Write an article about: At UN, Bolivia presents revolutionary 14-point socialist program to transform world. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Bolivia, capitalism, imperialism, Luis Arce, socialism, UN, United Nations | Bolivia’s leftist President Luis Arce used his platform at the United Nations General Assembly to propose a revolutionary 14-point program to transform the world.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
Bolivia’s President Luis Arce used his platform at the United Nations General Assembly to propose a revolutionary 14-point socialist program to transform the world.
“Today we find ourselves facing a wide-ranging, systemic capitalist crisis that increasingly endangers the life of humanity and the planet,” he warned.
Arce continued: “We should not only reflect on the economic, social, food, climate, energy, water, and trade crises, but also identify with clarity the origin, in order to change a system that reproduces domination, exploitation, and exclusion of the large majorities, that generates the concentration of wealth in a few hands, and that prioritizes the production and reproduction of capital over the production and reproduction of life.”
“Alongside the wide-ranging, systemic crisis of capitalism, we see the final gasp of the unipolar world,” the Bolivian leader added, warning of the dangers of war.
“But unfortunately we are seeing the gradual deterioration of the multilateral system, because of the whims of the capitalist powers that will not accept the existence of a multipolar world with a balance of power.”
Bolivia at the UN: "As we face multiple systemic crisis of capitalism, we see the final chapter of the unipolar world"
"However, unfortunately we see the deterioration of the multilateral system due to the capitalist powers' refusal to accept the existence of a multipolar world" pic.twitter.com/9EtUfrD2Ku
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 26, 2022
Luis “Lucho” Arce represents Bolivia’s Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) party. A trained socialist economist, he served as economic minister under former President Evo Morales.
Morales was overthrown in a violent coup d’etat in 2019, which was sponsored by the US government and led by far-right extremists. But after nearly a year of popular rebellion, Bolivia’s social movements defeated the coup regime, and Arce won October 2020 presidential elections in a landslide.
At the UN, Arce delivered a comprehensive 4000-word speech outlining his ambitious vision for changing the global capitalist system, with 14 concrete proposals.
1. Declare the world to be a zone of peace
Many armed conflicts are “promoted by transnational war corporations, but also by the desire to impose a political and economic order that serves the interests of capitalism,” Arce said.
He called for a concerted campaign to ensure world peace. The Bolivian leader emphasized the importance of “reaching a cease-fire between Russia and Ukraine, making sure the historic rights of the state and people of Palestine are respected, and that NATO stops thinking about expansionist plans.”
2. Substitute the manufacturing of weapons of mass destruction with just compensation for the poor people of the world
Nuclear weapons threaten life on the planet, Arce warned.
He proposed to “substitute military spending on the manufacturing of weapons of mass destruction with a just economic compensation that the countries at the core of capitalism owe, morally and historically, to the countries of the periphery and the poor people of the world.”
3. Against the commercialization of health care, systems of universal health care
The Covid-19 pandemic “exposed the vulnerabilities and inequalities in the health systems of all of the world, as well as the global financial and economic system,” the Bolivian leader said.
He insisted that the state has an “obligation to protect and guarantee collective rights” and “reduce the effects of the world economic crisis on the most vulnerable sectors of the population.”
4. Global program of food sovereignty, in harmony with Mother Earth
World hunger is getting worse, not better, Arce warned.
In 2021, 828 million people suffered from hunger, representing 9.8% of the world population.
He proposed a program to strengthen food sovereignty by supporting small-scale agricultural producers, giving peasants and farmers all the seeds, fertilizers, technology, and financial support they need.
5. Rebuild the productive and economic capacities of the country of the periphery hurt by the logic of the unrestrained concentration of capital
The Bolivian president warned of the damage being done to the world by the inflation crisis and the rapid increase in the price of energy, fertilizers, and raw materials caused by the proxy war in Ukraine.
He called for debt relief for the Global South, maintaining, “The restructuring of the world financial architecture is vital for the relief of external debt on the global scale, so that we developing countries have the space to implement sovereign social policies from the perspective of integral and sustainable economic and social development.”
“And, as has always been a cry from the countries of the South, we must balance the trade relations that currently keep benefiting only the North,” he said.
Arce then explained how his government helped to stabilize Bolivia and recover its economy after the chaos of the US-backed far-right 2019 coup d’etat.
“Following the recovery of democracy in 2020,” he recalled, Bolivia returned to its “social, communitarian, productive economic model, a sovereign economic model in which we don’t accept and we will not accept impositions of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).”
Arce explained that this economic model “is based on the active role of the state in the economy, in the nationalization of our strategic natural resources, the articulation of all forms of economic organization, the strengthening of public investment, import substitution industrialization, the dynamization of the internal market, productive diversification, security with food sovereignty, redistribution of revenues, the struggle against poverty and inequalities.”
He added that this economic model is also influenced by Bolivia’s Indigenous communal traditions.
Arce boasted that this model has been so successful that Bolivia had a rate of just 1.6% inflation in August. The country has the lowest inflation rate in all of Latin America, and one of the lowest in the entire world.
“We regret that, while the countries at the core of capitalism gamble on war with large sums of money, negligible contributions are made for integral and sustainable development, for decolonization and depatriarchalization, for the eradication of poverty and economic and social inequalities,” he said.
As an example of this irresponsible behavior, Arce pointed out that, in just a few months, 20 times more financial resources have been spent on the proxy war in Ukraine than have been invested in the Green Climate Fund in a decade.
6. The climate crisis requires responsibility, solidarity, and harmony between human beings and nature, not usury
Arce warned that the climate “crisis is passing into an ecological collapse.” But he lamented that “the countries that have the means to change their patterns of production and consumption do not have the political will to do it, and those of us who have proposed ambitious goals have not received the means of implementation pledged in the [Climate] Convention and the Paris Accords.”
The Bolivian leader also pointed out that the international climate agreements that do exist do not “take into account the historic responsibilities of the developed countries, or the capacities and limitations of developing countries.”
On a sarcastic note, he added, “Perhaps the historic climate debtors want us all to worry only about the future, to avoid discussing in the present the broken promises made to developing countries about financing, technology transfers, and strengthening capacities.”
The “centuries of bad capitalist development” have done a lot of damage, Arce lamented.
“We are convinced that a future low in emissions and resilient to the climate is not possible if we keep concentrating wealth and incomes in a few hands,” he asserted. “Therefore, to reverse the climate crisis we need to resolve the economic, social, and political contradictions caused by the capitalist model, as well as those that exist between human beings and nature.”
7. The industrialization of lithium, for the benefit of the peoples and a fundamental pillar for the energy transition
Noting that Bolivia has the largest reserves of lithium on the planet, Arce pledged to use those resources “with much responsibility,” “guaranteeing that its use is of benefit to humanity, as a fundamental pillar of the just global transition to a future low in emissions, respecting Mother Earth.”
“We want our lithium reserves not to follow the path of other natural resources that, on the conditions of colonialism and capitalist development, only serve to increase the wealth of a few and make the people hungry,” he said.
“In this sense, we affirm the sovereignty over our natural resources such as lithium, its industrialization, and the benefit oriented toward the well-being of the peoples, not of transnational corporations or a small privileged group, and the sovereign appropriation of the economic surplus to be redistributed, especially among the low-income population,” the Bolivian leader promised.
Citing a statement by the commander of the US military’s Southern Command (Southcom), Arce warned that South America’s “Lithium triangle,” made up of Bolivia, Argentina, and Chile, “is in the sights of the United States.”
U.S. SOUTHCOM Commander:"This region is so rich in resources.. it's off the charts rich."
"60% of the world's lithium is in the region; you have heavy crude, you have light sweet crude, you have rare earth elements, you have the Amazon.." pic.twitter.com/33dQ6EXKAo
— Kawsachun News (@KawsachunNews) July 20, 2022
8. From nationalization to regionalization of the struggle against drug trafficking
Early in the day on September 20, a few hours before Bolivian President Arce spoke at the United Nations, Colombia’s first ever left-wing President Gustavo Petro used the General Assembly to declare that “the war on drugs has failed.”
Petro criticized the US government’s violent approach and its militarization of Latin America, as well as its internal system of racist mass incarceration of Black Americans.
Colombia’s first ever left-wing President Gustavo Petro gave a historic UN speech declaring, “The war on drugs has failed”
He warned capitalism is destroying the environment, with its “addiction to money and oil,” and called for Global South debt reliefhttps://t.co/ka4iI5TEKq
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 26, 2022
When Arce took to the podium at the UN, he made similar comments.
“It remains clear that the war on drugs, principally the one unleashed by the United States, has failed,” the Bolivian leader said. “Therefore there is an imperative need that this country [the US] does a deep analysis about changing its policy, with attention to the fact that it has become one of the main consuming countries, which has resulted in the lamentable death of more than 100,000 people by overdoses and drug addictions inside of its territory.”
“We must change the focus in the approach of the struggle against drug trafficking. To keep emphasizing supply and not demand has only served as a pretext for militarization and for the waging of the international war on drugs,” Arce added. “That has affected peasants in the South, and left absolute impunity for the large criminal groups, never publicly identified, in the countries whose populations largely consume all types of drugs.”
“The international war on drugs criminalizes and leads to unilateral sanctions against countries of the South, but it shields money laundering and facilitates drug trafficking and other crimes connected to the countries of the North. It can no longer continue this way.”
Arce proposed the “regionalization” of the struggle against drug trafficking, with an “integral focus that is less militarized and more socio-economic.”
9. Strengthen international mechanisms for preferential treatment for landlocked countries
In his UN address, Arce proposed the idea that countries have a “right to the sea.”
For landlocked nations like Bolivia, “We face grave difficulties in accessing the sea and using its resources, keeping in mind that marine spaces make up zones of great potential for the development of countries, especially developing countries,” he explained.
“All countries have the right to access and utilize oceanic space and marine resources,” he argued. And to protect those habitats, “We should ensure the just distribution of rights and responsibilities with respect to marine wealth.”
10. Widen our restricted vision of human rights and democracy
“We need to widen our restricted concept of human rights and their relation with democracy,” Arce implored.
“Neither one of the two exists,” he argued, “when the preservation of the privileges of a few is done at the cost of the effective unfulfillment of the economic, social, and cultural rights of the majorities.”
As an example of how this can be done, Arce held up Bolivia’s plurinational model, which provides equal representation for the 36 Indigenous peoples that make up the country.
11. Intergenerational solidarity
The Bolivian leader also called to protect older populations who are sometimes forgotten by society.
“This vibrant and productive generation must show solidarity with those who built the first foundations of our houses,” he said.
“One cannot assure equity with future generations if we do not show equity between the present generations.”
12. Declare the decade of depatriarchalization to struggle against all forms of violence against women and girls
Arce condemned “the persistence of violence against women and girls, and in particular Indigenous women and girls who are in poverty.”
“The pandemic and the structural crises of capitalism are deteriorating the conditions of life, especially of women, of the countryside and the cities,” he said. “Those women continue confronting complex and intersectional forms of violence.”
The Bolivian government officially declared 2022 to be the “Year of the Cultural Revolution for Depatriarchalization: For a life free of violence against women,” Arce noted.
“We are advancing policies oriented not only at strengthening regulatory goalposts but also attacking the structural causes of violence, from education, strengthening economic autonomy of women, and also through cultural processes, to transform that lamentable reality, rooted in patriarchy, as the oldest system of oppression, that has a feedback loop with colonialism and capitalism.”
13. Reject unilateral sanctions
Condemning the imposition of sanctions, Arce declared, “It is inconceivable, in a world rocked by crises and the pandemic, that unilateral coercive measures are still applied with the goal of subduing governments, at the expense of people’s hunger and suffering.”
The Bolivian leader denounced the US government’s “inhuman and criminal commercial and financial blockade against Cuba, that puts at risk the lives of millions of citizens.”
“It is a crime against humanity to maintain that type of measure,” Arce said, blasting Washington for adding Cuba to its list of so-called sponsors of “terrorism.”
Every year, more than 95% of the 193 member states of the United Nations vote to oppose the unilateral US blockade on Cuba, yet Washington has maintained it for six decades.
The impunity that the United States enjoys despite these illegal forms of aggression show “how the decisions taken by the majority each year in this [General] Assembly are not fulfilled by certain countries,” Arce lamented.
14. Guarantee the full validity of the UN charter and the principle of multilateralism
“The multidirectional crisis that the planet is going through as a result of capitalist ambition, far from being overcome will get even worse if urgent measures are not taken,” Arce warned at the end of his speech.
“Only through a strengthened multilateralism will we be able to reach greater dialogue and cooperation in search of solutions to that crisis.”
The Bolivian leader affirmed that his country is waging a “revolution” that is dedicated “to overcome the current polarization of the world architecture, to overcome the capitalist order that has put us in dizzying, dangerous, and limitless race of consumerism that puts humanity and the planet at risk, and to instead build a more just, inclusive, and equitable world, for everyone.”
|
Write an article about: It is not Nicaragua that is ‘isolated’; it’s the US and EU. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | China, FSLN, India, Japan, Korea, Nicaragua, Russia, sanctions, Sandinistas, Turkey, Vietnam | Western corporate media claims Nicaragua’s Sandinista government is “isolated,” but it has support from countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America representing billions, while US fights with EU
This January 10 was the inauguration of Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega, the leader of the socialist Sandinista Front. Western corporate media outlets are pushing a ridiculous narrative that Nicaragua is “isolated” from the so-called “international community” — by which they mean “the imperialists in the United States and European Union.”
The Economist, the coup-supporting mouthpiece of British billionaires and Western intelligence agencies, published an article that epitomizes this propaganda narrative, claiming the Nicaraguan “president is leading the country into increasing isolation.”
The piece — anonymous, like most of The Economist’s articles — happily chirped that “Dozens of countries refused to recognise the result of elections in November.” Reminder: there are 193 sovereign nations recognized by the United Nations, so a few dozen, predominately Western, countries is a small fraction of that.
The US and EU rejected Nicaragua’s November elections as “fraudulent,” and responded with economic warfare. (I’m still waiting for presidential elections to be held in the US/EU-sponsored Gulf monarchies.)
The Western imperialist powers then responded to Ortega’s January 10 inauguration with more economic warfare. Coordinating together, the US and EU jointly imposed new sanctions on top Nicaraguan government officials, as well as its military, its telecommunications institute, and a state-owned mining company.
Yet if we look past Western media distractions, we quickly see that, in reality, Nicaragua’s Sandinista government has many allies in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, representing billions of people, including the largest nations on Earth.
Representatives from the following countries greeted the inauguration of President Ortega:
Western corporate media propagandists truly think everything on Earth revolves around the roughly 15% of the global population in the US and EU, which they dub the “international community.” They ignore the vast majority of humanity in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
When you stop seeing the world that way, it is very liberating — and you begin to realize how authoritarian and tightly controlled Western capitalist so-called “democracies” are.
It is not Nicaragua that is isolated, but rather the US and EU, who more and more keep losing their allies. Even France, a longtime colonial power, says it cannot trust the United States. And Washington threatened Germany with sanctions over its Nord Stream 2 pipeline with Russia.
While Western imperialists impose illegal sanctions across the planet — and fight among themselves — Asia continues to advance at a rapid pace, Latin America and Africa are gradually developing, and mechanisms of South-South integration are strengthening.
You want to know what real isolation is? More than 95% of UN member states voting every year at the General Assembly, over three decades, to condemn the illegal US blockade on Cuba. Now that’s international isolation.
For the 29th year in a row, basically the entire world voted at the United Nations against the illegal, murderous US blockade on Cuba.
184 countries voted to end the US blockade.
Only 2 voted for it: the USA and Israel.
3 US client regimes abstained: Colombia, Ukraine, and UAE pic.twitter.com/roZsqCu0NG
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) June 23, 2021
|
Write an article about: Invocando la Doctrina Monroe, diputado de EEUU dice que Argentina es una ‘amenaza’, tras sus acuerdos con China. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fernández, Argentina, China, Doctrina Monroe, Matt Gaetz, Rusia, Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping | El congresista derechista Matt Gaetz, un aliado de Donald Trump, calificó a Argentina como una “amenaza” para la “seguridad” de EEUU, y se quejó de que su alianza con China desafía la colonialista Doctrina Monroe.
(You can read this article in English here.)
Un influyente diputado estadounidense invocó la colonialista Doctrina Monroe en el pleno del Congreso y calificó a Argentina de “amenaza” debido a su alianza con China.
El congresista republicano Matt Gaetz, un aliado clave del ex presidente Donald Trump, dijo en un discurso en la Cámara de Representantes el 7 de febrero que existe una “amenaza significativa para nuestra nación que se acelera rápidamente cerca de casa”.
“Argentina, una nación y economía importante en las Américas, acaba de unirse al Partido Comunista Chino al sumarse a la Iniciativa de la Franja y la Ruta”, declaró Gaetz.
Invocando la colonialista Doctrina Monroe, el congresista derechista Matt Gaetz, un aliado de Donald Trump, calificó a Argentina como una “amenaza” para la “seguridad” de EEUU, debido a su alianza con China.
Lea más aquí: https://t.co/AWRPXrh6IP pic.twitter.com/2fzI6IhUui
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) February 8, 2022
El legislador de la Florida estaba reaccionando a la noticia de que el presidente de Argentina, Alberto Fernández, visitó Moscú y Beijing para reunirse con los mandatarios Vladimir Putin y Xi Jinping el 3 y 6 de febrero, respectivamente.
Al explicar sus viajes, Fernández dijo, “Argentina tiene que dejar de tener esa dependencia tan grande que tiene con el FMI y los Estados Unidos, y tiene que abrirse camino hacia otros lados”.
Argentina se sumó a la campaña de infraestructura internacional de Beijing, la Iniciativa de la Franja y la Ruta, y China le ofreció a la nación sudamericana $23.700 millones de dólares en inversiones y proyectos de infraestructura. Moscú se comprometió de manera similar a fortalecer los lazos políticos y económicos con lo que llamó “uno de los socios claves de Rusia en América Latina”.
Argentina está atrapada con $44 mil millones de deuda odiosa del FMI.
Buscando alternativas a la hegemonía de EEUU, el presidente Alberto Fernández viajó a Rusia y China, formando nuevas alianzas y incorporándose a la Iniciativa de la Franja y la Rutahttps://t.co/h7Eg59LRjM
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) February 6, 2022
El representante Matt Gaetz describió con enojo los crecientes vínculos de Argentina con China como “un desafío directo a la Doctrina Monroe”.
La Doctrina Monroe, que data de 1823, fue un mensaje a los colonialistas europeos de que Estados Unidos considera a América Latina como su propio territorio colonial.
Hace dos siglos, el secretario de estado John Quincy Adams creó la doctrina, y el presidente James Monroe la convirtió en política de gobierno, insistiendo en que EEUU no intervendría en las esferas de influencia de las potencias coloniales europeas mientras reconocieran que Centroamérica y Sudamérica eran parte de la esfera de influencia imperial de Washington.
Esta actitud de que Latinoamérica es propiedad colonial de EEUU sigue muy viva hoy en día, y es completamente bipartidista en Washington.
Varios altos funcionarios de la administración de Donald Trump invocaron la Doctrina Monroe para justificar su intento de golpe en Venezuela, incluido el ex director de la CIA y secretario de estado, Mike Pompeo, más el asesor de seguridad nacional, John Bolton.
Este enero, el presidente Joe Biden se hizo eco de la retórica colonial de la Doctrina Monroe al referirse a América Latina como el “patio delantero” de Washington.
Si bien Matt Gaetz, al igual que su mentor político Donald Trump, a veces critica de manera oportunista a otras facciones de derecha como los “neoconservadores”, propone una política exterior imperialista igualmente agresiva.
Una constante en prácticamente todos los discursos de Gaetz es su demonización obsesiva de China. Aboga firmemente por una nueva guerra fría para contener a la superpotencia asiática.
Mientras muchos neoconservadores e intervencionistas liberales quieren una política agresiva contra Rusia, el mensaje de Gaetz es esencialmente que China es la verdadera amenaza para Estados Unidos, no el Kremlin, y que Washington debería buscar la guerra con Beijing en lugar de la guerra con Moscú.
En su discurso ante el Congreso, en el que declaró a Argentina como una “amenaza”, Gaetz reiteró este tema y afirmó que “China es una potencia en ascenso. Rusia es una potencia en declive. Concentrémonos, para que no nos unamos a ellos en ese destino eventual”.
Gaetz, que representa el Panhandle del noroeste de Florida, se unió a la administración Trump para apoyar firmemente el intento de golpe de estado en Venezuela.
El legislador republicano también pide con frecuencia el derrocamiento del gobierno de Cuba, mientras difunde noticias falsas que afirman que “los matones venezolanos, con algunos rusos, ahora son ‘escuadrones de la muerte’ que recorren los hogares. Están masacrando adultos y secuestrando niños”.
Gaetz está estrechamente relacionado con la extrema derecha. En 2018, invitó a un notorio bloguero nacionalista blanco, que ha promovido el revisionismo del Holocausto, al discurso del estado de la unión de Trump.
Además de su política extremista, Gaetz ha sido investigado por las autoridades estadounidenses por el presunto tráfico sexual de una niña de 17 años.
|
Write an article about: In fiery UN speech, Honduras condemns colonialism, neoliberalism, coups, corporate exploitation. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Cuba, Honduras, UN, United Nations, Venezuela, Xiomara Castro | In her first UN speech, Honduras’ left-wing President Xiomara Castro denounced colonialism, “neoliberal injustice,” and the foreign corporations that have exploited her country. Calling for multipolarity, she declared, “Never again will we carry the stereotype of a banana republic.”
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
Honduras’ new left-wing President Xiomara Castro delivered a fiery speech at the United Nations General Assembly denouncing colonialism, “neoliberal injustice,” and the foreign corporations that have exploited her country.
Calling for a multipolar world, the Honduran leader declared, “Never again will we carry the stereotype of a banana republic. We will put an end to monopolies and oligopolies that only impoverish our economy.”
“Honduras will only have a future if it takes firm steps to dismantle the neoliberal economic dictatorship,” she asserted.
Castro (of no relation to Cuba’s Fidel Castro) also condemned the violent right-wing military coup that the United States sponsored in Honduras in 2009, which overthrew democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya – Castro’s husband.
“We poor nations of the world will no longer tolerate coups d’etat; we will no longer tolerate the use of lawfare, or color revolutions, which are usually organized to plunder our extensive natural resources,” she proclaimed.
The September 20 speech was the first time the Honduran president addressed the United Nations since coming to power this January.
Wearing a bright-red suit – the color of her socialist political party, the Liberty and Refoundation Party, or Libre (“Free”) Party for short – Castro stressed, “It is time to seriously discuss multipolarity in the world.”
She demanded an end to the US government’s “despicable and brutal blockade” on Cuba, and added that “the aggression against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela must stop.”
Castro also decried the US-dominated international financial institutions that have trapped her country in unpayable odious debt and imposed devastating neoliberal austerity policies.
“It is clear that today, for our country to survive, we must reject this so-called austerity, which awards those who concentrate wealth in a few hands, and favors those who exponentially increase inequality,” she said.
Following the US-backed 2009 coup, Honduras became one of the most violent countries on Earth. This created a crisis that turned hundreds of thousands of Hondurans into refugees and migrants.
Castro used her UN speech to explain the importance of her landslide victory in the November 2021 elections and her efforts to reverse this social catastrophe:
I stand on this international platform in what for my country is an historic event, not only because I am the first woman to have the honor of leading our Central American nation, but also because I represent the first democratically elected government after our country went through 13 years of dictatorship.
The 2009 coup, which saw us mired in cruel murders and death squads, two fraudulent elections, a pandemic, and two hurricanes – it is impossible to understand the Hondurans and the huge caravans of migrants without recognizing this context of cruel suffering which we have been forced to endure.
However, electoral democracy is not enough to guarantee the material and spiritual well-being of our people. 13 years of dictatorship, overseen by the international community, led to the country multiplying its public debt by six times, and saw the country reach a 74% poverty rate, the highest ever seen in the history of Honduras.
Five of every 10 of my compatriots live in extreme poverty. However it is my firm belief that none of these figures will astound anyone in a world which today lives under a monetary dictatorship, which imposes on the poorest of people draconian measures of fiscal discipline, which increases the suffering of the left-behind majority, in which speculative capital has no limits.
The Honduran leader was especially critical of international institutions that did nothing as the US-backed coup regime stole numerous elections over 13 years.
“None of the observers of of the fraudulent elections of 2013 and 2017 were unaware of what they were dooming our people to. Instead, they showed themselves to be indifferent to the worst plague which has ever ravaged our country,” she said.
“The arrogance of capital and petty self-interest led many to choose deceit, while organized crime brought the country to the abyss,” she added.
At the UN, Castro emphasized how the US-backed coup regime had trapped her impoverished nation in debt.
Multipolarista previously reported on Castro’s inauguration speech on January 27, in which she blasted the coup regime that had “submerged” the state in debt, leaving it in “bankruptcy” and “economic catastrophe.”
At the time of the coup in 2009, Honduras had $2.48 billion in external debt. By the end of 2021, its external debt skyrocketed to $9.25 billion – a 373% increase.
Honduras’ internal debt also grew drastically, from roughly $810 million in 2009 to around $7.3 billion by the time Castro took power in January 2022.
With a GDP of just $23.8 billion, and more than $16.5 billion in debt, this means Honduras’ debt is 70% of its entire economy.
Castro denounced this odious debt as illegitimate and unpayable, noting it already consumes 50% of the government’s budget.
US-backed coup regimes trapped Honduras in unpayable odious debt, warns new President Xiomara Castro
At the UN, Castro said wealthy countries in the Global North trap nations in the South in debt, extract wealth from them, and use it to live “lifestyles of excess.”
“The world’s industrialized nations are those responsible for the grave degradation of our environment, but they make us pay for their lifestyles of excess. And to do that, they spare no effort to embroil us in their plans, and in an endless crisis, to ensure that our hands and feet are tied,” she declared.
“Public policies endorsed by the rent-seeking model on the part of the international financial community over the last 13 years have pulled us into a world full of violence and poverty, with failed and abandoned projects, corruption, looting, and drug trafficking,” she added.
Castro emphasized that this extreme economic exploitation fueled rampant poverty and violence, which pushed many Hondurans to leave the country.
“Every caravan of migrants that fled the dictatorship that imposed itself for more than a decade is a painful loss for our country and for their families. The numbers show us that this exodus, caused by neoliberal injustice, creates more unemployment and traps us in an undesirable dependency,” she lamented.
The Honduran president outlined her government’s ambitious goals to transform the country.
She said her administration is cracking down on tax evasion, strengthening the internal market, and using import substitution industrialization to develop the local economy.
Emphasizing the need for food sovereignty, Castro said Honduras is renegotiating free-trade agreements, while expanded social services and subsidizing energy bills for poor people.
She outlined her party’s revolutionary program:
In Honduras, my government has begun a process of refoundation and deep change, which is based on four fundamental pillars:
One, the revolutionary transformation of education, to elevate the human spirit and end with colonialism.
[Two], to build an alternative economic model which is deeply sovereign.
Three, to build a system whose very core is the exaltation of humanism, solidarity, integration with brotherly peoples, peace, and respect for human rights.
Four, the gradual de-privatization of public services, such as healthcare, drinking water, electrical energy, and the internet.
Although the 2009 Honduran coup was finally reversed in November 2021, Castro warned that capitalist oligarchs are once again plotting against her elected government.
“Conspiracies are being planned by the same sectors which looted the country and their pro-coup allies, emboldened by a shameless anti-democratic attitude, which sometimes disguises itself as diplomacy,” she cautioned.
Castro called on foreign powers to stop meddling in her country’s sovereign affairs.
“I’m using this platform to demand that you respect us. We want to live in peace. Stop trying to destabilize Honduras, and imposing your measures upon us, and choosing who we can have relations with. The people are sovereign,” she said.
These comments in particular seemed to be a reference to Washington’s new cold war on China.
Honduras is one of just 13 countries in the world that recognize Taiwan as an independent country. But before the November 2021 elections, Castro had pledged that, if she won, should would break off ties and instead recognize the People’s Republic of China.
Taiwan and its US sponsors have put heavy pressure on Honduras to maintain its formal diplomatic relations.
Castro condemned the arrogance of powerful imperialist countries in the Global North, that treat nations like Honduras as “third and fourth class.”
“What is unacceptable to us is this arbitrary world order in which there are third- and fourth-class countries, while at the same time those that think of themselves as civilized never tire of launching invasions, waging wars, engaging in financial speculation and crucifying us with their inflation, time and time again,” she said.
The Honduran leader added, “Every millimeter of the homeland that they pillaged in the name of the sacrosanct freedom of the market and other systems of privilege was tainted with the blood of Indigenous peoples.”
|
Write an article about: Nicaragua’s Sandinista gov’t expels OAS, calling it US ‘colonial instrument’ of coups and invasions. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Denis Moncada, Nicaragua, OAS, Organization of American States | Nicaragua’s Sandinista government withdrew from and expelled the coup-supporting Organization of American States (OAS), denouncing it as a “deceitful agency of the State Department of yankee imperialism” and US “Ministry of the Colonies.”
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government has expelled the Organization of American States (OAS), calling it “one of the US State Department’s political instruments of intervention and domination.”
Managua also declared its immediate withdrawal from the organization, stating clearly, “Nicaragua is not a colony of anyone, therefore it is not part of the Ministry of the Colonies.”
The OAS was founded by the United States in 1948, at the beginning of the first cold war, as a coalition of right-wing anti-communist countries in the Americas. Among its founding members was Nicaragua’s US-backed military dictatorship, run by the brutal Somoza dynasty.
The OAS is based in Washington, and still today receives the majority of its funding from the US government.
In Latin America, the OAS has earned an infamous reputation for supporting numerous coups d’etat, including the violent overthrow of Bolivia’s elected socialist President Evo Morales in 2019.
In November 2021, Nicaragua announced its decision to leave the OAS, after the US-dominated body refused to recognize the Sandinista Front’s victory in the elections earlier that month.
This initiated a formal withdrawal process that would have taken two years. But in a fiery speech on April 24, Foreign Minister Denis Moncada declared that Nicaragua was leaving the OAS immediately, blasting it as a “deceitful agency of the State Department of yankee imperialism.”
Nicaragua leaving US-controlled, coup-plotting OAS: ‘We are not a colony’
“The people and government of Nicaragua have not recognized and do not recognize this instrument of colonial administration, which does not at any time represent the sovereign union of Our America and the Caribbean, and that, on the contrary, is an instrument of yankee imperialism, to violate rights and independence, supporting and promoting interventions and invasions, legitimizing coups d’etat in various forms and modes,” Moncada said.
“We will not have any presence at all in the organizations of that diabolical instrument of the badly named OAS,” he added, referring to the organization’s officials as “employees of the Yankee State Department.”
By denouncing the OAS as the “Yankee Ministry of the Colonies,” Moncada was referencing a phrase famously coined by Cuba’s revolutionary leader Fidel Castro.
Cuba was suspended from the OAS in 1962, while US-backed right-wing dictatorships were welcomed in the organization.
In 2017, Venezuela’s elected Chavista government announced its decision to leave the OAS as well, condemning the organization for supporting violent US-backed coup attempts.
The OAS then went on to recognize US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó as supposed “interim president” of Venezuela, despite the fact that he never won a single vote in a presidential election.
Nicaragua’s Foreign Minister Moncada affirmed in his April 24 speech, “By denouncing and rejecting that infernal mechanism, from which we are leaving immediately with absolute dignity, we ratify, definitively, our respect, affection, and recognition of heroic Cuba and Venezuela, and the peoples that bravely wage their struggles, and that have accompanied us and accompany us in the battles that they have fought and fight for justice, the peoples’ rights, sovereignty, dignity, and peace.”
|
Write an article about: Nicaragua se sale de la OEA, arma golpista controlada por EEUU. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Bolivia, Cuba, Denis Moncada, golpe de estado, Juan Guaidó, Luis Almagro, Nicaragua, OEA, Venezuela | El gobierno sandinista de Nicaragua se sale de la Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA), condenándola como un “instrumento de injerencia” que “tiene como misión facilitar la hegemonía de EEUU”
El gobierno sandinista de Nicaragua se salió el 19 de noviembre de la Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA), condenándola como una “entidad colonialista” dominada por Estados Unidos.
Por varias décadas, la OEA ha sido conocida popularmente en Latinoamérica como el “ministerio de colonias yanquis”.
La OEA siempre ha sido un arma del poder geopolítico de EEUU, pero su actual secretario general, Luis Almagro, infame por su corrupción y extremismo político, ha destruido la reputación de la organización.
En 2019, la OEA orquestó un golpe de estado de extrema derecha en Bolivia, derrocando al presidente socialista Evo Morales, quien fue elegido democráticamente por el pueblo. La OEA inventó acusaciones falsas de “fraude electoral” para justificar la operación anti-democrática.
Siguiendo el ejemplo de Washington, la OEA desconoció las elecciones del 7 de noviembre de 2021 en Nicaragua, pretendiendo hacer otro intento de golpe.
Nicaragua, con dignidad, se sale de la OEA, el ministerio de colonias yanquis.
El Canciller Moncada: La OEA es "instrumento de injerencia" que "tiene como misión facilitar la hegemonía de EEUU"
La OEA orquestó el golpe de estado fascista en Bolivia, pero no podrá en Nicaragua. pic.twitter.com/g4fUpRqsgy
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) November 19, 2021
En una carta oficial a Almagro y la OEA, el canciller de Nicaragua, Denis Moncada, dijo que la OEA es un “instrumento de injerencia” que “tiene como misión facilitar la hegemonía de EEUU”.
“No nos reconocemos como colonia de ninguna potencia”, dijo Moncada. Y la OEA es una de las “entidades colonialistas” de EEUU.
Estados Unidos creó la OEA en 1948, al inicio de la primera guerra fría, como una alianza anti-socialista de regímenes derechistas. La reunión fundacional tuvo lugar en Colombia y fue organizada por el secretario de estado de EEUU, George Marshall, un fanático anti-comunista.
Uno de los miembros fundadores de la OEA fue la brutal dictadura nicaragüense del general Anastasio Somoza, cuyo régimen dinástico, patrocinado por EEUU, asesinó, torturó y desapareció a decenas de miles de sus compatriotas.
El presidente de EEUU, Richard Nixon, con el dictador nicaragüense, Anastasio Somoza Debayle, en 1971
La Agencia de EEUU para el Desarrollo Internacional (USAID), una fachada de la CIA que Washington usó para financiar a la Contra, los escuadrones de la muerte de extrema derecha, en Nicaragua en la década de 1980, admitió en su informe interno en 2018 que la OEA “promueve los intereses políticos y económicos de EEUU en el hemisferio occidental, contrarrestando la influencia de los países que están en contra de EEUU como Venezuela ”.
Cuba fue expulsada de la OEA en 1962, después de su revolución. Y el gobierno chavista de Venezuela se salió de la OEA en 2019.
El mismo año que la OEA patrocinó el golpe de estado de extrema derecha en Bolivia, también reconoció a Juan Guaidó, el títere golpista de Washington, como el supuesto “presidente” de Venezuela. Aunque Guaidó no controla prácticamente nada dentro del país, su régimen paralelo creado por EEUU ocupa el puesto de Venezuela en la OEA.
El secretario general de la OEA, Luis Almagro, con Juan Guaidó, el títere golpista de EEUU
Después de que Estados Unidos orquestó un golpe militar en Honduras en 2009, la OEA también ayudó a legitimar el nuevo régimen anti-democrático. Hizo lo mismo después de dos golpes de estado derechistas en Haití.
Además, la OEA apoyó las operaciones de desestabilización de Washington en Brasil, donde el gobierno del Partido de los Trabajadores fue derrocado en un golpe parlamentario suave, y el principal candidato presidencial, Lula da Silva, fue encarcelado por cargos falsos, otorgando al candidato de extrema derecha Jair Bolsonaro la victoria en la elecciones de 2018.
El canciller nicaragüense anunció que el país se salió de la OEA frente a un retrato grande de Augusto Sandino, el rebelde nicaragüense que dirigió una guerrilla revolucionaria que luchó y expulsó con éxito a los militares estadounidenses que ocupaban su país en las décadas de 1920 y 1930.
El Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (FSLN), que derrocó a la dictadura de Somoza en 1979 y que ha gobernado el país desde que regresó al poder a través de elecciones democráticas en 2006, es inspirado en el legado anti-imperialista del general Sandino.
La salida de Nicaragua de la OEA ocurre en un momento en que muchos países de la región están hablando de reemplazar la organización por la Comunidad de Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños (CELAC), que excluye a Estados Unidos y Canadá.
Este septiembre, la CELAC realizó una cumbre histórica en México, donde el presidente venezolano Nicolás Maduro declaró que la diferencia entre la CELAC y la OEA es la diferencia entre el bolivarianismo (la integración latinoamericana) y el monroeísmo (el neocolonialismo estadounidense).
|
Write an article about: China ayuda al gobierno sandinista de Nicaragua a construir viviendas para el pueblo. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | China, Daniel Ortega, FSLN, Nicaragua, Rosario Murillo, Sandinistas | China firmó un acuerdo con el gobierno sandinista de Nicaragua para construir miles de viviendas para familias pobres y trabajadoras, expandiendo el Programa Bismarck Martínez de casas dignas.
(You can read this article in English here.)
El gobierno sandinista de Nicaragua ha revelado que firmó un acuerdo con la República Popular China para construir miles de viviendas para familias pobres y trabajadoras.
La Vicepresidenta Rosario Murillo anunció la noticia el 28 de enero.
China “ha aprobado un importante proyecto de cooperación con nuestra Nicaragua y el pueblo nicaragüense, un gran programa de viviendas para las familias en todo el país”, dijo Murillo.
“El plan es para tres años, beneficiando a decenas de miles de familias nicaragüenses en 84 municipios del país, familias que van a recibir una casa bonita, segura, digna, con todos los servicios básicos”.
La vicepresidenta dijo que el diseño de las casas se está desarrollando en coordinación con los ministerios de Nicaragua. Las llamó “obras que son de fraternidad, de solidaridad y de bien común”.
Murillo también anunció otros proyectos de infraestructura pública en construcción, incluyendo calles, caminos y un nuevo estadio de béisbol.
Viviendas construidas por el gobierno nicaragüense como parte de su Programa Bismarck Martínez
Aunque Nicaragua es un país pequeño de aproximadamente 6,5 millones de personas, con muy pocos recursos como el segundo país menos rico del hemisferio occidental, su gobierno izquierdista se ha dedicado a crear ambiciosos programas sociales, que consisten en salud gratuita, educación universal, carreras técnicas e iniciativas de alivio de la pobreza.
Nicaragua de hecho ya tiene una iniciativa de vivienda pública llamada Programa Bismarck Martínez. Desde su lanzamiento en 2019 hasta 2021, el proyecto entregó aproximadamente 3.000 viviendas, así como 30.000 lotes urbanizados.
En 2021, el gobierno sandinista entregó a los nicaragüenses humildes otras 3.000 viviendas como parte del Programa Bismarck Martínez. Esto además de otorgar títulos de propiedad a miles de familias y campesinos, para que no puedan ser desplazados.
El programa tiene el nombre de Bismarck Martínez, un activista sandinista que trabajaba en la alcaldía de la capital Managua. Fue secuestrado, brutalmente torturado y asesinado por extremistas de extrema derecha durante un violento intento de golpe de estado en 2018, patrocinado por Estados Unidos. El video de su espantoso asesinato se hizo viral e inspiró indignación en toda Nicaragua.
La alcaldía de Managua anunció en septiembre de 2021 que tenía planes para construir 50.000 viviendas nuevas en los siguientes siete años como parte del programa Bismarck Martínez. También planeó distribuir 50,000 lotes urbanizados más a las familias.
Pero esto fue antes de que el gobierno central restableciera las relaciones con China e hiciera planes para expandir aún más este programa con la ayuda de Beijing.
Viviendas construidas por el gobierno nicaragüense como parte de su Programa Bismarck Martínez
El gobierno de Nicaragua restableció relaciones diplomáticas oficiales con la República Popular China en diciembre de 2021.
Nicaragua rompió por primera vez los lazos con Taiwán y reconoció a China en los años ochenta, luego del triunfo de la Revolución Popular Sandinista en 1979.
Pero cuando los sandinistas perdieron el poder en 1990, en unas elecciones injustamente comprometidas por la intromisión de EEUU, la presidenta derechista que asumió el poder, Violeta Barrios de Chamorro, representante de la familia oligárquica más poderosa del país, cortó de inmediato los lazos con la RPC y reconoció a Taiwán nuevamente.
Desde que se restablecieron los lazos en diciembre de 2021, Nicaragua y China se han convertido en aliados cercanos.
El Presidente Daniel Ortega reveló en un discurso en su toma de posesión el 10 de enero que Managua había firmado acuerdos con Beijing para incorporar a la nación centroamericana a la Iniciativa de la Franja y la Ruta.
Al firmar los acuerdos con China, Ortega declaró, “Tenemos a Estados Unidos que no acepta que el fin de la hegemonía es un hecho”.
|
Write an article about: Why Peru has had 7 presidents in 6 years: Legacy of Fujimori dictatorship’s constitution. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fujimori, Dina Boluarte, Francisco Sagasti, Manuel Merino, Martín Vizcarra, Mercedes Aráoz, Pedro Castillo, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski, Peru | Peru has had 7 presidents in just over 6 years, due to the undemocratic constitution inherited created by far-right US-backed dictator Alberto Fujimori. This timeline explains how and why each head of state rose and fell so quickly.
In just over six years, Peru has had seven different presidents. The period between July 2016 and December 2022 has been a time of deep political instability.
This chaos is largely due to Peru’s deeply undemocratic constitution, which was inherited from the far-right US-backed dictator Alberto Fujimori, who governed the country with an iron fist from 1990 until 2000, committing genocide against the Indigenous population and killing, torturing, and disappearing thousands of dissidents.
Article 113 of Peru’s constitution gives the unicameral congress the ability to remove presidents if two-thirds of members vote to declare that they have a “moral incapacity.”
Fujimori wrote this constitution in 1993, after launching a self-coup against Peru’s democratic institutions the year before. Peruvian journalist, scholar, and former lawmaker Manuel Benza Pflücker explained that the Fujimori constitution was largely created by the United States in order to make neoliberal economic policies a mandatory part of the state structure:
The proximity between the coup d’état and the convocation of a constituent assembly shows us that the main reason for the 1992 coup d’état (Alberto Fujimori’s self-coup) was the drafting of a new constitution according to the ‘Washington Consensus’ (WC), a document that was delivered in New York to Fujimori by authorities of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the Department of the Treasury of the United States of America and the World Bank, institutions controlled by said country, days before take an oath to the presidency of Peru. The WC had been prepared a few months before by the aforementioned organizations, under the responsibility of [neoliberal economist] John Williamson and representatives of the establishment.
Although the gap between rich and poor in Peru has grown much wider since the acceleration of neoliberalism in the 1980s, a strong racial element remains quite apparent as well.
According to the 2017 national census, although Peru is only 5.9% white, yet four out of these last seven presidents (57%) are of European descent, making this demographic over-represented in the president’s office by a factorial of nearly 10 times.
Since December 7, 2022, the majority of the Peruvian population seems to have gotten fed up with the perpetual economic and racial disparities, and mass protests have broken out mostly in the southern region of Peru, concentrated in cities such as Arequipa, Cusco, Puno, Ayacucho, and Andahuaylas, in addition to the northern Andean city of Cajamarca, where President Pedro Castillo is from.
At least 25 protesters were killed in the first 10 days of the unelected regime of Dina Boluarte.
The following timeline shows how quickly Peruvian heads of state have changed, and provides a brief summary of why.
Pedro Pablo Kuczynski
Term
July 28, 2016 to March 23, 2018
Background
Kuczynski attended elite universities – Oxford University in England and Ivy League Princeton University in New Jersey.
He worked at the World Bank, which has trapped countries across Latin America in debt. He also worked at New York-based investment banks and U.S. mining corporations.
Kuczynski was a U.S. national who renounced his citizenship in November 2015, in order to make himself eligible to become president of Peru.
Why was their presidential term so short?
Leaked video showed supporters of Kuczynski apparently attempting to bribe members of Congress to cast their votes in Kuczynski’s favor, in the infamous “Mamanivideos” scandal.
After serving 20 months, Kuczynski resigned on March 23, 2018.
Martín Vizcarra
Term
March 23, 2018 to November 9, 2020
Background
Vizcarra was Kuczynski’s protégé, vice president, and close ally. He became wealthy through several family companies and made his name as a conservative governor of Moquegua.
Why was their presidential term so short?
Allegations of corruption during his term as the governor of Moquegua brought Vizcarra down.
After a congressional debate on November 9, 2020, the congress approved the removal of Vizcarra (in his second impeachment) due to “moral incapacity,” with 105 votes in favor – surpassing the 87 out of 130 vote supermajority threshold (67%) required to remove a political official.
He served as president for two years and eight months, with a temporary disruption in September to October 2019.
Mercedes Aráoz (right) with Kuczynski and coup-plotting OAS chief Luis Almagro
Term
September 30 to October 1, 2019
Background
Aráoz is a neoliberal economist who received her Master’s and PhD degrees from the University of Miami. She subsequently worked with U.S.-based organizations like the World Bank, the Organization of American States (OAS), and Inter-American Development Bank.
Why was their presidential term so short?
Vizcarra dissolved the congress on September 30, 2019. In response, the congress suspended Vizcarra as president, making his second vice president, Aráoz, temporary president.
With just one day in office, Aráoz never actually came to govern, and resigned the very next day. Vizcarra was quickly returned as president.
Manuel Merino
Term
November 10 to 15, 2020
Background
Merino is from the city of Tumbes, the most right-wing region of Peru, and is a lifelong conservative.
As president of congress, Merino was criticized regarding how hastily he pushed for impeachment proceedings against Vizcarra, who didn’t have a vice president at the time, which would have made Merino next in line to become president.
Two months later, Merino succeeded in his quest and ousted Vizcarra.
Why was their presidential term so short?
Merino lasted only five days as president, before resigning due to mass protests against him, which left two young Peruvians dead.
Francisco Sagasti
Term
November 17, 2020 to July 28, 2021
Background
Sagasti Hochhausler established close connections to the United States while attaining a Master’s degree in industrial engineering at Penn State University and a PhD in operational research and social systems science at the Wharton Business School, at the elite Ivy League University of Pennsylvania.
He went on to work at the World Bank.
Why was their presidential term so short?
Sagasti was named as interim president to serve until Peru’s next election in July 2021, which was the end of the five-year term begun by Kuczynski back in 2016.
Pedro Castillo
Term
July 28, 2021 to December 7, 2022
Background
Castillo is a farmer and teacher who represents the indigenous Andinos, who have had virtually no power in the government in the modern history of Peru.
After becoming well known for leading a teachers’ strike, Castillo ran for president with the Marxist-Leninist party Peru Libre, and he won the 2021 elections.
Why was their presidential term so short?
After stating his intention to dissolve congress – which he was legally entitled to do according to article 134 of Peru’s constitution – Castillo was impeached, removed by the military, and imprisoned without trial on December 7.
Castillo’s five-year term was cut short to less than 17 months. Mass national protests ensued, demanding his release from prison, fresh elections, and a constituent assembly to write a new constitution.
Castillo supporters have blocked major highways all over Peru, impeding national transportation and bringing the country to a virtual standstill.
Without any due process, the unelected Peruvian government subsequently sentenced Castillo to 18 months of “preventative prison.”
Dina Boluarte (right) with CIA agent turned US ambassador Lisa Kenna
Term
December 7, 2022 until now
Background
The neoliberal-appointed “interim” president, who had previously been expelled from the leftist Peru Libre party, was sworn in by congress in order to serve out the last three-and-a-half years of Castillo’s term.
Mass protests across Peru led Boluarte’s unelected government to suspend civil liberties, declaring a nation-wide “state of emergency.”
Boluarte’s unelected government unleashed large numbers of violent police and deployed soldiers into the streets. They shot protesters with live ammunition, even using helicopters to shoot at demonstrators and drop tear gas bombs on them.
Dozens of protesters were killed and hundreds were wounded in the first week of Boluarte’s rule.
While Peruvian civil society organizations accused Boluarte of “state terrorism,” the US government strongly supported her, claiming her unelected government was “democratic.”
|
Write an article about: Invoking Monroe Doctrine, US congressman calls Argentina a ‘threat’ over China alliance. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fernández, Argentina, Donald Trump, Matt Gaetz, Republican Party, Russia, Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping | Trump-allied Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz called Argentina a “threat” to US “security,” complaining that its alliance with China challenges the 200-year-old colonialist Monroe Doctrine.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
An influential right-wing US lawmaker invoked the 200-year-old colonialist Monroe Doctrine on the floor of Congress and called Argentina a “threat” because of its alliance with China.
Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, a key ally of former president Donald Trump, said in a speech in the House of Representatives on February 7 that there is a “significant threat to our nation accelerating rapidly close to home.”
“Argentina, a critical nation and economy in the Americas, has just lashed itself to the Chinese Communist Party, by signing on to the One Belt One Road Initiative,” Gaetz fumed.
Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, a key ally of Donald Trump, invoked the 200-year-old colonialist Monroe Doctrine on the floor of the Congress and called Argentina a "threat" to US "security" because of its alliance with China.
Read more here: https://t.co/aCiWQ7fGOc pic.twitter.com/xyVYkxfFT9
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) February 8, 2022
The Florida lawmaker was reacting to the news that Argentina’s President Alberto Fernández visited Moscow and Beijing for meetings with Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping on February 3 and 6, respectively.
Explaining his trips, Fernández said, “I am consistently working to rid Argentina of this dependence on the IMF and the US. I want Argentina to open up new opportunities.”
Argentina signed on to join Beijing’s international infrastructure campaign, the Belt and Road Initiative, and China offered the South American nation $23.7 billion in investments and infrastructure projects. Moscow similarly pledged to strengthen political and economic ties with what it called “one of Russia’s key partners in Latin America.”
Argentina is trapped in $44 billion of odious debt from the US-controlled IMF.
Seeking alternatives to US hegemony, Argentina's President Alberto Fernández traveled to Russia and China, forming an alliance with the Eurasian powers, joining the Belt & Roadhttps://t.co/rTbO1ZGsPE
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) February 6, 2022
Representative Matt Gaetz angrily described Argentina’s growing links with China as “a direct challenge to the Monroe Doctrine.”
The Monroe Doctrine, which dates back to 1823, was a message to European colonialists that the United States considers Latin America to be its own colonial territory.
Two centuries ago, Secretary of State John Quincy Adams created the doctrine, and President James Monroe made it government policy, insisting that the US would not intervene in the European colonial powers’ spheres of influence as long as they recognized Central and South America to be Washington’s imperial sphere of influence.
This attitude that Latin America is US colonial property is still very much alive today, and thoroughly bipartisan in Washington.
Multiple senior officials in the Donald Trump administration invoked the Monroe Doctrine to justify their coup attempt in Venezuela, including Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and National Security Advisor John Bolton.
This January, President Joe Biden echoed colonial Monroe Doctrine rhetoric by referring to Latin America as Washington’s “front yard.”
While Matt Gaetz, like his political mentor Donald Trump, sometimes opportunistically criticizes other right-wing factions such as “neocons,” he pushes a similarly hawkish imperialist foreign policy.
One constant in virtually all of Gaetz’s speeches is his obsessive demonization of China. He strongly advocates for a new cold war to contain the Asian superpower.
While many neoconservatives and liberal-interventionists push for an aggressive policy against Russia, Gaetz’s message is essentially that China is the real threat to the United States, not the Kremlin, and that Washington should seek war with Beijing instead of war with Moscow.
In his House speech declaring Argentina a “threat,” Gaetz reiterated this talking point, claiming, “China is a rising power. Russia is a declining power. Let us sharpen our focus so that we do not join them in that eventual fate.”
Gaetz, who represents Florida’s northwestern Panhandle, joined the Trump administration in strongly supporting a right-wing coup attempt in Venezuela.
The Republican lawmaker frequently calls for the overthrow of Cuba’s government as well, while spreading fake news claiming that “Venezuelan thugs, flavored w[ith] Russians, are now ‘kill squads’ going through homes. They are slaughtering adults and abducting children.”
Gaetz is closely linked to far-right extremists. In 2018, he invited a notorious white-nationalist blogger who has promoted Holocaust revisionism to Trump’s State of the Union address.
In addition to his extreme political views, Gaetz has been investigated by US authorities for the alleged sex trafficking of a 17-year-old girl.
|
Write an article about: Nicaragua leaving US-controlled, coup-plotting OAS: ‘We are not a colony’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Augusto Sandino, Bolivia, CELAC, Cuba, Juan Guaidó, Luis Almagro, Mexico, Nicaragua, OAS, Organization of American States, Richard Nixon, Venezuela | Nicaragua’s Sandinista government is leaving the Organization of American States (OAS), condemning the US “instrument of interference” that organizes coups to “facilitate hegemony” in Latin America.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government officially announced that it is leaving the Organization of American States (OAS) on November 19, condemning the institution as a “colonialist entity” dominated by the United States.
The OAS, which is based in Washington, DC and receives the majority of its funding from the US government, is popularly known in Latin America as the “ministerio de las colonias yanqui” – the “Yankee Ministry of the Colonies.”
The OAS has always been an arm of US geopolitical power in Latin America, but its current, notoriously corrupt Secretary-General Luis Almagro has shredded the organization’s credibility in recent years.
In 2019, the OAS helped to orchestrate a far-right military coup in Bolivia, overthrowing democratically elected socialist President Evo Morales by fabricating false claims of electoral fraud.
Following Washington’s lead, the OAS refused to recognize Nicaragua’s November 7, 2021 elections, seeking to launch a whole new coup attempt.
The US-controlled OAS:-orchestrated the 2019 coup in Bolivia-legitimized the post-coup regime in Honduras-rubber-stamped two coups in Haiti-supported the soft coup against Brazil's Workers' Party-recognizes coup puppet Guaidó in Venezuela
Now Nicaragua is in its crosshairs https://t.co/K9l4QT5fu3
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) November 10, 2021
In an official letter to OAS chief Almagro, Nicaragua’s Foreign Minister Denis Moncada called the OAS an “instrument of interference and intervention,” with the “mission to facilitate hegemony of the United States with its interventionism against the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean.”
“Nicaragua has repeatedly expressed its condemnation and rejection of the interventionist actions of the OAS, defending its sovereignty,” Moncada said.
We are not “a colony of any power,” the Nicaraguan foreign minister declared, noting that the OAS is one of the “colonialist and neocolonialist entities” controlled by Washington.
The United States created the OAS in 1948, at the start of the first cold war, as an anti-socialist alliance of right-wing regimes. The founding meeting was held in Colombia and hosted by US Secretary of State George Marshall, a hard-line cold warrior.
One of the founding members of the OAS was the brutal Nicaraguan dictatorship of General Anastasio Somoza, whose US-sponsored dynastic regime killed, tortured, and disappeared tens of thousands of his countrymen.
US President Richard Nixon with Nicaraguan dictator Anastasio Somoza Debayle in 1971
The US Agency for International Development (USAID), a CIA cutout that Washington used to fund far-right Contra death squads in Nicaragua in the 1980s, admitted in its 2018 Congressional Budget Justification report that the OAS, “promotes U.S. political and economic interests in the Western Hemisphere by countering the influence of anti-U.S. countries such as Venezuela.”
The US State Department openly boasts that the OAS is its puppet:
"The Organization of American States (OAS) promotes U.S. political and economic interests in the Western hemisphere by countering the influence of anti-U.S. countries such as Venezuela"https://t.co/D9d0jnHyrX pic.twitter.com/hG69W5Qf8v
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) November 15, 2019
Cuba’s revolutionary government was expelled from the OAS in 1962, and Venezuela’s leftist Chavista government withdrew in 2019.
The same year the OAS backed the far-right coup d’etat in Bolivia, it also recognized Washington’s coup puppet Juan Guaidó as so-called “president” of Venezuela. Although Guaidó controls virtually nothing inside the country, his US-appointed parallel coup regime fills Venezuela’s seat at the OAS.
Corrupt, coup-plotting OAS chief Luis Almagro (right) with Washington’s Venezuelan coup puppet Juan Guaidó (left)
After the US government orchestrated a military coup in Honduras in 2009, the OAS helped rubber-stamp the new undemocratic regime. It did the same after right-wing coups in Haiti.
And the OAS supported the US-backed destabilization operations in Brazil, where the Workers’ Party government was overthrown in a parliamentary soft coup, and leading presidential candidate Lula da Silva was imprisoned on false charges, handing far-right candidate Jair Bolsonaro victory in the 2018 elections.
Reminder: @Almagro_OEA2015 and @OAS_official congratulated Brazil on legitimacy of 2018 election, despite the leading candidate being jailed in connivance with the US and military.Bolsonaro won as a result.
The OAS is not a serious organization.
????https://t.co/AE8bBrZmRJ https://t.co/yLwKK61sOD
— Brasil Wire (@BrasilWire) November 10, 2021
Nicaragua’s foreign minister announced that the country is leaving the OAS in front of a large portrait of Augusto Sandino, the Nicaraguan rebel who led a revolutionary guerrilla army that fought and successfully expelled the US military occupiers from his country in the 1920s and ’30s.
The Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN), which overthrew Nicaragua’s US-backed Somoza dictatorship in 1979 and has governed the country since it returned to power through democratic elections in 2006, is inspired by the anti-imperialist legacy of General Sandino.
Nicaragua’s departure from the OAS comes at a time when many countries in the region are talking about replacing the organization with the Community of Latin American and the Caribbean States (CELAC), which excludes the United States and Canada.
This September, CELAC held a historic summit in Mexico, where Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro declared that the difference between CELAC and the OAS is the difference between Bolivarianism (Latin American integration) and Monroeism (US neocolonialism).
|
Write an article about: Latin America refuses to send Ukraine weapons, despite Western pressure. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fernández, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Gustavo Petro, Latin America, Lula da Silva, Russia, Ukraine | Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia have refused to send weapons to Ukraine, despite pressure by the US and EU. Latin American left-wing leaders have urged peace with Russia and called for neutrality in the West’s new cold war.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia have rejected requests by the United States and European Union that they send weapons to Ukraine.
The commander of the US military’s Southern Command (Southcom), which operates in Latin America and the Caribbean, revealed on January 19 that Washington has been pressuring countries in the region to arm Ukraine.
Southcom wants Latin American nations to “replace [their] Russian equipment with United States equipment – if those countries want to donate it to Ukraine”, said Army General Laura J. Richardson.
But Latin America’s left-wing leaders have refused, instead maintaining neutrality and urging peace.
The socialist governments in Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua blamed NATO expansion and US meddling for causing the war in Ukraine.
Mexico’s progressive President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) offered to hold peace talks to end the conflict.
And the leftist governments in Bolivia and Honduras have joined Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia in refusing to be part of the proxy war.
The US and EU have pressured Latin America to send weapons and military equipment to Ukraine.
Brazil, Colombia, and Argentina refused, instead calling for peace.
Many other left-wing governments in the region did the same, staying neutral.
More here: https://t.co/bnVOY6qqlS pic.twitter.com/quZn1BwMiw
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 29, 2023
Germany announced on January 25 that it would send tanks to Ukraine, in a significant escalation of the NATO proxy war against Russia.
Berlin subsequently asked Brazil to ship tank munitions to Kiev. But newly inaugurated left-wing President Lula da Silva declined to do so.
Lula was a co-founder of the BRICS bloc, consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. He has long called for a multipolar world, and supports South-South cooperation and regional integration.
Lula has denounced Western governments for ramping up the violence in Ukraine instead of encouraging peace negotiations.
During his presidential campaign in 2022, Lula criticized the White House, asking, “How can the world’s largest economic power say that it has no milk for children after President Biden announced $40 billion to buy arms meant for the war in Ukraine?”.
In an interview with Time magazine in May 2022, Lula pushed back against Western anti-Russia hysteria and pointed out that Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky “is as responsible as Putin for the war. Because in the war, there’s not just one person guilty”.
“If I win the elections”, Lula tweeted in August, “we will make an effort for dialogue to establish peace again. We are not interested in any type of war”.
“The only position that interests Brazil in terms of the question of Ukraine and Russia is peace“, he added in October. “The time of war is the time of destruction. The world needs peace, addressing the issue of the climate, and ending hunger”.
A única posição que interessa ao Brasil na questão da Ucrânia e Rússia é a paz. Tempo de guerra é tempo de destruição. O mundo precisa de paz, cuidar da questão do clima e acabar com a fome.
— Lula (@LulaOficial) October 1, 2022
Colombia’s first ever left-wing president, Gustavo Petro, revealed that the United States pressured his country as well to give weapons to Ukraine. But he refused to do so, instead urging peace.
In comments at the summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Buenos Aires on January 24, Petro noted that Colombia had previously purchased Russian military equipment, “for its own purposes inside the country”.
Washington wants Bogotá to send that Russian equipment to Ukraine, but Petro stressed that his nation’s constitution calls for international peace, and therefore those military technologies “will stay as junk in Colombia“.
“We are not with anyone; we are with peace. That is why no weapon will be used in that conflict”, Petro stated.
“The best that could happen to humanity is peace between Ukraine and Russia, and not prolongation of the war”, the Colombian president tweeted.
“I will not help to prolong any war”, he asserted, calling for “neither invasions nor blockades”.
Lo mejor que le puede pasar a la humanidad es la paz entre Ucrania y Rusia y no la prolongación de la guerra. Yo no ayudaré a prolongar ninguna guerra.
En cambio pido que se eleve a delito internacional la agresión de un país a otro, sea el que sea.
Ni invasiones ni bloqueos. https://t.co/19Pr2GdEeP
— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) January 27, 2023
Germany’s Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Argentina on January 28. There, he asked President Alberto Fernández to send military equipment to Ukraine.
Fernández declined, instead stating firmly at a press conference that “Argentina and other Latin American countries do not plan to provide weapons to Ukraine, or to any other conflict zone”.
Fernández did criticize Russia for invading Ukraine, but he called for an end to the war, urging peace, not escalation.
Trapped in $44 billion in debt with the US-dominated International Monetary Fund (IMF), Fernández’s government has boosted Argentina’s ties with China and Russia, joining Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative.
Argentina applied to join the extended BRICS+ bloc. It attended the virtual BRICS summits in 2022, at China’s invitation.
|
Write an article about: Terror attacks on Cuba’s embassy fueled by aggressive US policy. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Cuba, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Mike Pence, Ron DeSantis, sanctions, terrorism | Cuba’s embassy in Washington has been attacked two times in three years, and no one has been held accountable. This reflects the long history of US-backed terrorism against Cuba, and six decades of illegal economic warfare.
Cuba’s embassy in Washington, DC was attacked with two Molotov cocktails on the night of September 24. This was the second terrorist attack against the embassy in the past three years.
The US Secret Service responded at around 8pm, but did not apprehend any perpetrators.
The explosives hit the front side of the embassy, which is already scarred with AK-47 bullet holes from a shooting attack in April 2020 — an emblem of the deadly risk it takes to be a Cuban diplomat in the United States, and of the long history of US-backed terrorism against the country.
The moment when the terrorist stands in front on the @EmbaCubaUS, lights up the Molotov cocktails & hurls them against the façade of the mission.
This footage was handed over to US authorities.
Original camera video of the Cuban diplomatic mission in Washington#NoAlTerrorismo pic.twitter.com/c9VWJsQ0xU
— Bruno Rodríguez P (@BrunoRguezP) September 26, 2023
The Molotov cocktail attack occurred the same day that a Cuban delegation led by President Miguel Díaz-Canel returned to Havana, after participating in the 78th session of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). It also came soon after Cuba chaired a historic summit of the G77+China.
The attack was clearly an act of violent intimidation against Cuban diplomats, and a reaction to the powerful show of solidarity by hundreds of people in the US throughout President Díaz-Canel’s visit to New York.
An emotional moment as Cuban President joined our rally to #LetCubaLive
“Thank you for your solidarity, thank you for your support, and thank you for being here with us!” —@DiazCanelB
CUBA SÍ, BLOQUEÓ NO! pic.twitter.com/ttgWcEY0Bz
— The People's Forum (@PeoplesForumNYC) September 22, 2023
Following the second terror attack, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez announced that no embassy staff had been injured and an investigation was underway.
Initially, the US government was eerily quiet about the attack on a foreign embassy just blocks from the White House.
The night of September 25, a day after the attack – and hours after about 100 DC locals rallied outside the embassy in support of Cuba – US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan finally released a statement condemning the attack and agreeing to an investigation.
Speakers at the rally called not only for an investigation into the attacks, but also an end to the illegal, six-decade US blockade – which virtually every country on Earth votes against each year in the United Nations.
The UN General Assembly vote against the US blockade of Cuba, on November 3, 2022
Cuba is a victim of US-backed terrorism, yet the Joe Biden administration has continued Donald Trump’s designation of Cuba as a “state sponsor of terrorism” (SSOT), as part of an economic war against 11 million Cuban people.
In a statement, Cuba’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs put blame for this latest attack directly on the US government’s aggressive policy and hateful discourse:
Anti-Cuban groups resort to terrorism due to the moral bankruptcy of their hatred against Cuba and the impunity they believe they enjoy. On a regular basis, in the official exchanges between the Embassy and the Department of State, it has been warned that the permissive behavior of United States law enforcement agencies in the face of violent actions can encourage the commission of acts of this nature.
It is the second violent attack against the diplomatic headquarters in Washington, since April 2020. On the night of that day, an individual of Cuban origin, standing in the middle of the street in the US capital and using an assault rifle, fired a burst of thirty cartridges against the building. Fortunately, there were no injuries to the personnel inside the building on that occasion, but there were considerable material damages.
After three years, the perpetrator still awaits trial and the United States government has refused to classify the incident as a terrorist act.
…
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemns this terrorist action and hopes that the United States Government will act in accordance with the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, in the interest of avoiding the repetition of these events.
…
It also warns against the double standards used by the US government’s supposed commitment against terrorism.
The CIA and FBI have created, financed, and trained hundreds of anti-Cuba terrorist groups since the triumph of the revolution in 1959.
At least 3,478 Cubans have been killed and 2,099 have been disabled by US-sponsored terrorism since the revolution.
This includes 581 attacks against the country’s diplomatic representations abroad, according to Cuba’s Center for Historical Investigations of State Security (CIHSE).
At their peak violence, in 1974, Cuban exiles accounted for 45% of all terrorist bombings on the planet.
The most notorious of these terrorists, Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada Carriles, bombed a Cuban plane and numerous hotels. They were trained by the CIA and exonerated by the US government for their crimes. They died peacefully in Florida, celebrated as local heroes by the extreme anti-Castro community.
As Cuban Foreign Minister Rodriguez wrote after the latest attack, “The anti-Cuban groups resort to terrorism when feeling they enjoy impunity, something that Cuba has repeatedly warned the US authorities about.”
The weak response to the April 2020 shooting on the embassy is exactly what enabled an attack to happen again, the Cubans say.
The perpetrator of that previous attack, 42-year-old Cuban immigrant Alexander Alazo Baró, has yet to be convicted.
“The author of that barbaric act that machine-gunned our diplomatic headquarters … is still awaiting sentencing,” wrote leading Cuban diplomat Johana Tablada, deputy director general of the Foreign Ministry’s US Division. “Cuba is awaiting condemnation from the US government, which did not even call this terrorist act by its name.”
Cuban journalist El Necio reported, “The defendant is expected to face a mandatory sentence of no less than 10 years in prison, a fine of $250,000 and up to three years of supervised release … However, the defense seeks to prove a clinical picture of schizophrenia. There is still no sentence for this case, but the attacker is in preventive detention.”
(+ detalles) ⤴️
– Se produjeron daños materiales en la fachada y los interiores: paredes, columnas, ventanas, escalera y lámpara interior, el asta de la bandera, la reja y la estatua del Héroe Nacional de Cuba, José Martí, frente a la sede (ver fotos)
– El informe policial lo… pic.twitter.com/XIiV23Ih4p
— El Necio (@ElNecio_Cuba) September 25, 2023
At 2:05am on April 30, 2020, Alazo Baró parked his truck 16th Street NW, in front of the Cuban embassy. He approached the fence, yelled and desecrated a Cuban flag, then proceeded to fire 32 shots from an AK-47 at the embassy.
None of the dozen staff inside were injured, but easily could have been. The outside and interior of the building are completely riddled with bullet holes. Now the embassy has bulletproof doors.
Upon his arrest, Alazo Baró claimed he was motivated by his hatred of Cuba and fear of assassination by the Cuban government and alleged criminal groups. At his trial, said he “hated Cubans” and would have shot the ambassador if he saw him, because he was the “enemy.”
After weeks of silence from the United States following the 2020 attack, Cuban Foreign Minister Rodríguez publicly denounced Washington’s lack of cooperation in the investigation, accusing the US of failing to “fulfill its obligation to prevent this attack, of which it received sufficient signals.”
US media and law enforcement dismissed Alazo Baró as a lone wolf, but he was a vocal Trump supporter linked to extremist anti-Cuba groups in Miami.
Alazo Baró had left Cuba in 2003 to settle in Mexico on a religious visa. He then immigrated to the US, crossing the southern border in 2010. He lived first in Florida, then in Texas, and later in Pennsylvania.
Like many Cubans permanently residing abroad, he maintained a normal relationship with Cuba, and visited eight times after leaving, last in 2015. He never exhibited any concerning behavior during his returns to Cuba or interactions with Cuban authorities.
However, during his time in Miami, Alazo Baró associated with the Doral Jesus Worship Center, a religious center and hot spot of aggression and violence against Cuba.
He befriended Pastor Frank López, a vocal extremist who has close relationships with anti-Cuba hawks like Florida Representative Mario Díaz-Balart and Senator Marco Rubio.
According to Facebook posts, Alazo Baró also befriended members of the congregation who advocated using drones to kill Raúl Castro and President Miguel Díaz-Canel.
In February 2019, a year before the AK-47 terror attack on the embassy, Vice President Mike Pence spoke at the Doral Jesus Worship Center alongside Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, Senators Rubio and Rick Scott, and Representative Díaz-Balart.
Their remarks showed utter contempt for Cuba and Venezuela, which Díaz-Balart said were suffering from “the same cancer.”
President Trump also spoke at the church in July 2020.
#US President @realDonaldTrump will speak today at the Doral Jesus Worship Center, involved in instigation to violence and #terrorism against #Cuba, frequented by the attacker who shot against our embassy in Washington with an assault rifle.
Will he condemn that action? pic.twitter.com/71EkgG802k
— Bruno Rodríguez P (@BrunoRguezP) July 10, 2020
In March 2020, a month before the attack, Alazo Baró was admitted to a psychiatric hospital, diagnosed with delusional disorder, and prescribed medication. He already had a license to carry and, after being medically discharged, he acquired the AK-47 rifle.
Two weeks before the attack, Alazo Baró visited the embassy to scope out the target.
Cuba’s Foreign Affairs Ministry called for the US to investigate these links between the shooter and anti-Cuba leaders.
Cuba questions how Alazo Baró was able to purchase an assault rifle with such ease, and then travel around doing reconnaissance at the site of the attack.
After the shooting, the embassy repaired the shattered glass and installed bulletproof doors, but Cuban officials decided to leave most of the bullet holes in place, marking them with plaques, so that this act of violence and intimidation can never be forgotten.
Meanwhile, the US government and media remain disturbingly quiet about these acts of terrorism in the heart of the capital.
Cuba’s Foreign Ministry argued the attacks on the embassy could not be seen as separate, but rather as a direct result “of the permanent instigation of violence by American politicians and anti-Cuban extremist groups that have made this type of attacks their livelihood,” in a hostile political climate which heightened during the Trump administration.
Clearly this hostility against Cuba did not end with Trump, but rather continues under Biden, as shown by the second attack.
Biden has upheld nearly every one of the hundreds of additional sanctions Trump designed to strangle the Cuban economy, including by renewing the designation of Cuba as a so-called “state sponsor of terrorism.”
Despite US-Cuba cooperation on migration, drug-trafficking, and counter-terrorism, and despite Biden’s campaign promises to return to Obama-era rapprochement with Cuba, his administration has carried on Trump’s policy of “maximum pressure” and continues to fund $20 million each year to groups that attack and destabilize the Cuban government.
Cuba has received messages of support from Mexico, Bolivia, Venezuela, and other allies.
Cuba also saw an outpouring of solidarity from the US people, following a week of actions against the blockade and in support of Cuba during the UNGA.
On September 23, the night before the attack, Cuban President Díaz-Canel rallied with 900 people in New York City for the solidarity event “Voices of Dignity: People vs Blockades”.
As a leader of Cuban-America solidarity group Puentes de Amor, Carlos Lazo, wrote after the attack, “It is sad and disturbing that while the Cuban president advocated yesterday, in front of hundreds of Americans, for the construction of bridges of love between Cuba and the United States, today, in Washington D.C., a terrorist launched two explosives against the Cuban embassy.”
On September 25, local supporters gathered outside the Cuban embassy to show solidarity with the country, calling for the US to investigate these attacks as acts of terrorism, and demanding an end to the US economic war against Cuba.
Against the hateful attack of two Molotov cocktails thrown at our Embassy in #Washington, a wall of love, affection and support from loyal friends in solidarity with the Cuban people was erected. Hate will never defeat noble and genuine love. #CubaIsNotAlone pic.twitter.com/tD5wL7t0U6
— Sandra Yisel Ramírez (@carantosan) September 26, 2023
(Editor’s note: This article was updated soon after it was published on September 25 to include the statement from the White House and the newly released video footage of the second attack.)
|
Write an article about: In Cuba, Mexico’s AMLO calls for end to blockade, urges Latin American unity amid ‘US economic decline’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, blockade, Cuba, Latin America, Mexico, sanctions | Mexican President López Obrador took a historic trip to Cuba, where he called for an end to the US blockade and criticized right-wing “coup-plotters.” He said Latin America should form a union, amid “the economic decline of the United States.”
Mexico’s progressive President Andrés Manuel López Obrador took a historic trip to Cuba, where he called for an end to US sanctions and urged Latin America to form an economic union.
López Obrador, who is commonly referred to by the acronym AMLO, also stated that “the economic decline of the United States,” and the corresponding rise of China, has created both challenges and opportunities for the region. He argued Latin America should unite to mutually develop, take advantage of its natural resources, and fight poverty, immigration, and violence.
Criticizing right-wing “coup-plotters” and Washington’s aggressive foreign policy, AMLO went so far as to announce that he will not attend the conference of North, Central, and South American countries meeting in California in June, the Summit of the Americas, if the US government refuses to invite Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
In La Habana on May 8, López Obrador met with Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel. The Mexican leader thanked “the generous, supportive, and exemplar people of Cuba.”
Díaz-Canel presented AMLO the Order of José Martí, the highest award that the Cuban government gives to foreigners.
“I have never sought, do not seek, and will not seek the failure of the Cuban Revolution, of its idea of justice and its lessons of independence and dignity,” AMLO declared. “I will never join with the coup-plotters who conspire against those ideals.”
López Obrador criticized the suffocating US sanctions that have been imposed on Cuba since immediately after the triumph of its socialist revolution in 1959.
“I will keep trying to get the United States to lift the blockade,” the Mexican president said.
Las relaciones entre #México y #Cuba son históricas y entrañables. #CubaNoEstaSolahttps://t.co/8PLbpeKiEJ pic.twitter.com/rsz5hzPtTU
— Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez (@DiazCanelB) May 9, 2022
Mexico and Cuba signed various bilateral agreements concerning trade and immigration.
After the global Covid-19 pandemic broke out in 2020, Cuba provided Mexico with some of the vaccines it developed. In one of the new agreements, Cuba will send the Abdala vaccine, which is designed for children between ages 5 and 12.
AMLO used his trip to Cuba to call for the unity of Latin America.
“We should build something similar to the European Union, but based on our history, reality, and identities,” López Obrador said.
“In that spirit we should not rule out the elimination of the Organization of American States for a truly autonomous organization that is not a lackey of anyone,” he added, condemning the US-dominated OAS.
While in La Habana, AMLO also met with Raúl Castro, the former army general and revolutionary leader.
El General de Ejército, Raúl Castro Ruz, sostuvo un fraternal encuentro con el presidente de #México, @lopezobrador_ durante su visita de trabajo a #Cuba. ?? ?? pic.twitter.com/ZtFGXD6uyI
— Presidencia Cuba ?? (@PresidenciaCuba) May 10, 2022
AMLO’s trip to Cuba was part of a tour of numerous countries in Latin America.
On May 7, López Obrador met with the prime minister of Belize, John Antonio Briceño. There, the Mexican leader reiterated his calls for Latin American unity.
“I maintain that it is necessary to move forward in an integration of all of America, in the construction of a model similar to that of the European Community, a model that preceded what is today the European Union,” AMLO said.
“Only in that way can we confront the turbulence of the global economy and the geopolitical danger that the economic decline of the United States represents for all of the world, as opposed to other regions, especially Asia, and in particular I am referring to the economic advance of China,” he explained.
“In addition to halting this course of undesirable events, the union of America would develop our natural resources, tourism, and our financial systems to provide well-being and justice for our populations, to jointly confront problems like poverty, immigration, insecurity,” López Obrador added.
Its truly an honor to welcome the Mexican President, @lopezobrador_ on his first official visit to Belize. Our delegations will hold high-level bilateral talks on issues of mutual interests and partnerships.#Belize #Mexico pic.twitter.com/9v1sycqqSH
— John Briceño (@JohnBricenoBZE) May 7, 2022
AMLO then criticized the Summit of the Americas, which will be held by the US government and OAS in California from June 6 to 10.
The US State Department has refused to invite the socialist governments of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua to this meeting.
AMLO said he would pressure US President Joe Biden to not exclude anyone from the summit.
“I have insisted in the necessity that no government in the hemisphere and no country in America be excluded from the upcoming summit that will be taking place in Los Angeles, in the United States, that no one excludes anyone. It should be a meeting that allows us to resolve our disagreements without hegemonies or arrogance,” the Mexican leader said.
López Obrador took the extraordinary step of declaring that he will not attend the summit if Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua are not invited.
President @lopezobrador_ wont attend the Summit of the Americas in an act of protest if countries are excluded— but @m_ebrard will. pic.twitter.com/dBqzxTm2Ll
— Kawsachun News (@KawsachunNews) May 10, 2022
López Obrador’s trips to Cuba and Belize were part of a larger tour of the region.
AMLO also visited Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, where he met with new left-wing President Xiomara Castro.
Socialists in Latin America did however criticize López Obrador for skipping Nicaragua on his trip to Central America.
Nicaragua has a leftist government, run by the democratically elected Sandinista Front and its revolutionary leader Daniel Ortega.
Socialists in the region have criticized Mexico’s Foreign Ministry for sometimes joining with the United States in voting against Nicaragua in the United Nations and OAS, although on occasions Mexico has abstained from these votes.
While AMLO did not travel to Nicaragua, he did meet with the corrupt right-wing president of Guatemala, Alejandro Giammattei, as well as the increasingly authoritarian neoliberal president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, who in April alone detained more than 20,000 people, in what he claimed was a crackdown on gangs but also included brutal suppression of his political opponents.
Visita Oficial del Presidente de los Estados Unidos Mexicanos, @lopezobrador_, a El Salvador ???? pic.twitter.com/WquD9PTQ2o
— Nayib Bukele (@nayibbukele) May 9, 2022
AMLO skipping over Nicaragua on his trip was rather ironic given his calls for unifying the region and his opposition to the US refusal to invite its leftist Sandinista government to the Summit of the Americas.
But López Obrador has still at times maintained an independent foreign policy.
The Mexican leader refused to impose sanctions on Russia over its war in Ukraine, for instance. And he criticized the US government for claiming his country is hosting more Russian spies than any other.
AMLO is Mexico’s first left-wing president in decades. He was elected in 2018 on a promise to end the neoliberal economic policies of the administrations that had governed since the 1980s.
Although it was only founded a decade ago, AMLO’s progressive Morena party quickly broke the two-party dictatorship that had controlled Mexican politics for decades.
The two establishment parties, the neoliberal PRI and right-wing PAN, have been thoroughly discredited among the Mexican population.
A poll this May found that 64% of Mexicans said Morena manages social programs better, and 59% said the party is more concerned for the people.
On the other hand, 58% of Mexicans said the PRI has done damage to their country, and 52% said it robbed the people when it governed.
López Obrador consistently has an approval rating of between 60 and 70%, making him one of the most popular leaders of large countries on Earth.
It's amazing how Mexico's left-wing Morena party, only founded a decade ago, so quickly and completely discredited the neoliberal parties that controlled politics for decades.
64% of Mexicans say Morena manages social programs better. 59% say it is more concerned for the people pic.twitter.com/en2eYaFUoD
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 10, 2022
|
Write an article about: AMLO says Mexico is more democratic than oligarch-run USA, condemns State Dep’t ‘meddling’ against electoral reform. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Enrique Peña Nieto, Felipe Calderón, INE, Mexico, PAN, PRI | Responding to State Department criticism of Mexico’s popular electoral reform, President AMLO denounced US “meddling”, support for coups, and the Monroe Doctrine. He said, “There is more democracy today in Mexico than in the United States… because here the people govern, and there the oligarchy govern”.
Mexico’s leftist President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) gave a fiery speech condemning the US State Department’s “bad habit” of “meddling” in other country’s “internal affairs”.
“There is more democracy today in Mexico than in the United States”, López Obrador said, “because here the people govern, and there the oligarchy govern”.
AMLO lamented that politicians in Washington “still will not abandon the two-century-old policy, the Monroe Doctrine, of thinking of themselves as the world’s government”, calling it a “centuries-old habit of the US government and US elites”.
As an example, López Obrador pointed to Peru, where he said “the US ambassador is the advisor of the coup-mongers, who trampled on the liberties and democracy in that country, unjustly overthrowing the President [Pedro Castillo] and imprisoning him”.
AMLO also denounced US corporate media outlets for spreading propaganda against his government, supporting Mexico’s right-wing opposition, and “protecting the mafias of economic power in the world”.
López Obrador is Mexico’s first left-wing president in decades. When he came to power in 2018, he broke a decades-long cycle of bipartisan rule, which he blasted as the “neoliberal period” in which the “oligarchy” ruled the country.
In addition to expanding social programs, a key part of AMLO’s political agenda has been electoral reform.
For decades, Mexico has faced rampant corruption and very reputable accusations of electoral fraud. López Obrador has vowed to change that.
His government proposed legislation to reform Mexico’s National Electoral Institute (INE). The plan is to simplify the country’s voting system, cutting funding to highly overpaid executives, while making it easier to vote for people living in rural areas, those with disabilities, and Mexicans abroad.
Numerous INE executives already get paid more than the president himself, and the huge sums of money in and around the institution has made corruption a systemic problem.
A survey from late 2022, which was conducted by the INE itself, found that the vast majority of Mexicans support electoral reforms, with 74% to 93% of people agreeing with proposed reforms, such as cutting funding and creating elections for electoral magistrates.
In fact, the poll found that 52% of Mexicans support replacing the INE with an entirely new institution called the National Institute of Elections and Consultations (INEC), while just 40% of people oppose this.
Although electoral reform is widely popular among the Mexican people, it has angered the country’s political and economic elites, as well as their backers in Washington.
On February 26, Mexico’s right-wing opposition parties – many of which are closely linked to drug cartels and have benefited from decades of systemic corruption – held a march against the Mexican government’s proposed electoral reforms, calling for the INE to be left alone.
Major US media outlets showered the protests with support. The US State Department expressed its approval as well, criticizing the electoral reforms.
CIA official turned State Department spokesman Ned Price applauded the demonstrations as part of a “great debate” to “support healthy democracy” in Mexico.
Responding to US gov't criticism of Mexico’s popular electoral reform, President AMLO denounced US “meddling” and support for coups:
“There is more democracy today in Mexico than in the US… Here the people govern; there the oligarchy govern”
Full video: https://t.co/A75h7mmmpv pic.twitter.com/6ThH7gY7xU
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) March 9, 2023
López Obrador denounced the US government’s “meddling” in a press conference on February 28.
“The US State Department [has] the bad habit, always, they meddle in affairs that don’t involve them”, he said.
This contradicts the attitude of “President Biden, who always talks about equality, rhetorically”, AMLO added.
Condemning this “bad habit” of the United States, the Mexican president lamented, “They still will not abandon the two-century-old policy, the Monroe Doctrine, of thinking of themselves as the world’s government”.
He continued: “What do I say, with all due respect, to Mr. Blinken of the State Department? That there is more democracy today in Mexico than in the United States”.
“Instead of meddling, acting in an interfering way in our internal affairs, if they want to continue with the same policy, they should take care of what is happening in Peru”, AMLO said.
In Peru, he warned, “the US ambassador is the advisor of the coup-mongers, who trampled on the liberties and democracy in that country, unjustly overthrowing the president [Pedro Castillo] and imprisoning him“.
“But this is nothing more than the State Department. It is its nature”, AMLO argued, denouncing the “centuries-old habit of the US government and US elites”.
“When I say that we have more democracy than they do, it is because here the people govern, and there the oligarchy govern, nothing more”, AMLO added.
The Mexican president also criticized the Wall Street Journal, which had a front-page story praising the right-wing opposition protest against his government.
AMLO said the newspaper was promoting “the march of the corrupt”. He quipped that the Wall Street Journal “and other newspapers in the United States protect the mafias of economic power in the world”.
The leaders of the march were “corrupt” and “hypocritical”, López Obrador argued. He noted that it featured many of the same politicians who voted against his proposed policies to support pensions for elderly Mexicans and scholarships for students.
“That is their mentality. They are very conservative and very hypocritical”, he said.
AMLO likewise made fun of the hyperbolic media outlets and opposition activists who “say that we are dictators”.
He also lampooned right-wing politicians who claim, “You are either with me or against me”. Instead, AMLO countered, you are “either with the people or with the oligarchy”.
López Obrador is one of the most popular heads of state in the world. He has consistently enjoyed an approval rating of between 60% and 70% since he came to power in 2018.
His proposed electoral reform is very popular as well.
The main goal of the reform is to simplify Mexico’s electoral system, and trim down the National Electoral Institute (INE), which is notorious for its massive bureaucratic bloat, and which provides a lot of room and money for corruption.
President AMLO has often pointed out that some high-level INE officials make more money than he does.
By streamlining the system, López Obrador hopes to make it much more difficult for Mexican elites to steal elections.
Throughout his career, going back decades, AMLO has campaigned against the rampant corruption in Mexico’s political and electoral system.
A progressive outsider, López Obrador ran against the two parties that dominated Mexican politics: the center-right neoliberal PRI and the hard-right conservative PAN. Both are infamous for their documented involvement in corruption.
The PRI governed the country (under various names) from 1929 until 2000, and then returned in 2012. The PAN reigned from 2000 to 2012.
AMLO came very close to winning the 2006 presidential election, losing by a fraction of a percentage point. He accused his right-wing opponent Felipe Calderón of stealing the election through fraud.
Calderón, who served as president from 2006 to 2012, is well known to have close links to drug trafficking and corruption. Former officials in his government said he oversaw a “death squad” that killed civilians.
Calderón’s chief of security, Genaro García Luna, was found guilty in a US federal court in February of having collaborated with the bloody Sinaloa Cartel and protected drug lord El Chapo Guzmán.
In the 2012 presidential elections, the neoliberal PRI returned to power. López Obrador once again came in second place.
AMLO accused the PRI of buying 5 million votes. And there was ample evidence for his accusations – these are not at all like Donald Trump’s baseless allegations.
In the wake of the 2012 elections, numerous videos went viral on social media showing long lines of Mexicans who received payment cards to vote for the PRI.
A diehard right-wing Colombian hacker who is currently in prison, Andrés Sepúlveda, told Bloomberg in 2016 that he helped PRI candidate Enrique Peña Nieto rig the 2012 elections, by stealing data, hacking phones, installing spyware, manipulating social media, spreading fake news, among other dirty tricks.
Bloomberg wrote (emphasis added):
When Peña Nieto won [in 2012], Sepúlveda began destroying evidence. He drilled holes in flash drives, hard drives, and cell phones, fried their circuits in a microwave, then broke them to shards with a hammer. He shredded documents and flushed them down the toilet and erased servers in Russia and Ukraine rented anonymously with Bitcoins. He was dismantling what he says was a secret history of one of the dirtiest Latin American campaigns in recent memory.
For eight years, Sepúlveda, now 31, says he traveled the continent rigging major political campaigns. With a budget of $600,000, the Peña Nieto job was by far his most complex. He led a team of hackers that stole campaign strategies, manipulated social media to create false waves of enthusiasm and derision, and installed spyware in opposition offices, all to help Peña Nieto, a right-of-center candidate, eke out a victory.
…
Sepúlveda’s team installed malware in routers in the headquarters of the PRD candidate [AMLO], which let him tap the phones and computers of anyone using the network, including the candidate. He took similar steps against PAN’s Vázquez Mota. When the candidates’ teams prepared policy speeches, Sepúlveda had the details as soon as a speechwriter’s fingers hit the keyboard. Sepúlveda saw the opponents’ upcoming meetings and campaign schedules before their own teams did.
Money was no problem. At one point, Sepúlveda spent $50,000 on high-end Russian software that made quick work of tapping Apple, BlackBerry, and Android phones. He also splurged on the very best fake Twitter profiles; they’d been maintained for at least a year, giving them a patina of believability.
Sepúlveda managed thousands of such fake profiles and used the accounts to shape discussion around topics such as Peña Nieto’s plan to end drug violence, priming the social media pump with views that real users would mimic. For less nuanced work, he had a larger army of 30,000 Twitter bots, automatic posters that could create trends. One conversation he started stoked fear that the more López Obrador rose in the polls, the lower the peso would sink. Sepúlveda knew the currency issue was a major vulnerability; he’d read it in the candidate’s own internal staff memos.
Just about anything the digital dark arts could offer to Peña Nieto’s campaign or important local allies, Sepúlveda and his team provided. On election night, he had computers call tens of thousands of voters with prerecorded phone messages at 3 a.m. in the critical swing state of Jalisco.
As an alleged victim of voter fraud, AMLO has insisted on the importance of electoral reform, to make the country’s corruption-ridden system more equitable.
In February, Mexico’s Senate approved “Plan B” of the proposed electoral reform. This version is much less ambitious than the overhaul that was proposed in 2022 (Plan A), but which did not get enough votes to pass.
Despite the law being watered down, Mexico’s right-wing opposition – which is notoriously corrupt and unpopular – has capitalized on it to try to portray AMLO as a would-be “autocrat”.
This is despite the fact that López Obrador is only going to be in power for one term, and has made no efforts to change Mexico’s law restricting presidencies to a single term.
Mexico’s conservative opposition has powerful friends in Washington, and particularly in the US press corps.
The editorial board of the Washington Post, which is owned by billionaire oligarch Jeff Bezos, blasted AMLO’s electoral reform as “a knife stabbing at the heart of Mexico’s democracy”.
Reuters cited anonymous “critics” who “warn it will weaken democracy“, while the Los Angeles Times did the same to portray it as a “threat to democracy“.
Neoconservative activist David Frum, a former speechwriter for President George W. Bush and accomplice in the illegal US invasion of Iraq, claimed in The Atlantic that “liberal democracy in Mexico is under assault”, demonizing democratically elected President AMLO as “erratic and authoritarian”.
Not one of these media outlets mentioned the 2022 INE survey that found that 74% to 93% of Mexicans support AMLO’s proposed electoral reforms, or that the president has consistently had an approval rating of between 60% and 70%.
|
Write an article about: Inside Nicaragua’s free socialized health-care system. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | FSLN, Health Care, Nicaragua, public health, Sandinistas | An inside look at the free universal health-care system created by Nicaragua’s Sandinista government, which has saved countless lives.
Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.
(This piece was originally published by the Casa Benjamin Linder.)
We’re settling in to our daughter Orla’s sixth night in the hospital. Visiting hours are over and only 10 of the beds in our 32-bed pediatric ward are occupied tonight, down from 20 a few nights ago.
The patients – mostly young teens in our room – are tucked in under mosquito nets. Their caretakers – mainly grandmas, aunts and moms – are slouched in chairs or curled around their patients on the beds. A few of us stretch out on unoccupied beds to get some rest before the nurse turns on the lights for the next regular blood pressure and temp check.
Our 14 year-old was admitted to the pediatric ward with dengue fever on July 19th, Revolution Day in Nicaragua. Poor Orla sobbed in disappointment that she wouldn’t be able to celebrate the holiday.
After two days of fever, I had taken her to the emergency room in our local Ciudad Sandino Primary Hospital where the blood work they ordered indicated dengue and showed that her platelet count was low enough to be of concern.
“She’ll be staying here with us,” the doctor announced. Since then, either my husband Paul or I have been with her in the hospital, tasked with making sure she’s kept hydrated and informed of her progress via blood test results each day.
Dengue fever is a virus transmitted by mosquitoes that propagate in the tropics during the rainy season and it affects 50 million people annually worldwide.
Nicaragua works to control outbreaks through regular house-to-house fumigation and eliminating stagnant water – the epidemiology department of the health services visited our house shortly after Orla was hospitalized to get kill any mosquitoes or larvae.
There is no cure for dengue, just symptom management over its eight-day cycle. The virus attacks the body and can cause leakage in vessel walls, resulting in water loss in the circulatory system and rapid dehydration.
Much rarer severe cases can cause internal bleeding and for blood platelets to drop to dangerously low levels. Hemorrhagic dengue is particularly dangerous because patients can go into shock and die before they can get the blood transfusion they need.
Because of this risk, the Nicaraguan Ministry of Health’s policy is to hospitalize anyone with dengue who shows signs of possible complications, including low blood platelets. Thanks to this prudent policy and quality care, Nicaragua is the country with fewer deaths from dengue than any other country in the region – in a normal year, zero deaths.
Treatment for the 12 pediatric patients we’ve seen come through our room has been intravenous rehydration fluids and ultrasounds upon being admitted; blood pressure, temp and blood oxygen level checks every two hours; daily blood tests; and constant monitoring of liquid intake and outflow.
Patients with fevers get acetaminophen; patients with suspicious pain are taken for another ultrasound; patients not getting enough fluids are put back on IVs.
Although the staff has been concerned about possible complications for at least four of our patients, including Orla, no one on our ward has been transferred to a larger Managua hospital for emergency transfusions; but the ambulance is standing by outside if its needed.
Knowing that gives me incredible peace of mind – at home, how could I possibly have known what Orla’s platelets were doing?
Growing up in the U.S., I never had a close family member admitted to the hospital; in fact, visits to the doctor were rare. As a kid, I remember knowing that if I got sick over the weekend, I’d have to tough it out until Monday when we could see the doctor during office hours.
A trip to the emergency room at the hospital – the only after-hours option in my rural county – was too expensive. For the most part, everyone I knew only went to the doctor if they’d been sick for more than a week – their families simply couldn’t afford more frequent care.
By contrast, Nicaraguans seem to go to the doctor all the time. If my neighbor’s kid gets diarrhea, they bring her straight to the emergency room. I used to think this was because people were afraid – in the 1990s and early 2000s, child and infant mortality rates were high in Nicaragua and many kids really did die of preventable diseases.
But as child health has improved – infant mortality down by 61% and chronic malnutrition reduced by 66% over the past 15 years – I have finally begun to understand that Nicaraguans take their kids to the hospital because they can.
Back in Idaho where I’m from, Orla’s emergency room visit alone would have cost $2,159 and her six nights in the hospital would have totaled more than $60,000.
In the United States, medical debt cripples 41% of all U.S. adults and they scramble to pay outrageous bills: more than a quarter of all fundraisers on crowdfunding sites are for health-related costs.
My mom has been telling her friends in Idaho of our woes. “My granddaughter in Nicaragua has spent the week hospitalized with dengue fever.”
“Oh dear!” Her friends all exclaim (dengue fever does sound awfully dramatic).
“Guess how much their hospital bill is so far?” She asks. They frown and shake their heads, already anticipating that my mom is about to hit them up for donations for a GoFundMe campaign to help cover our bills.
“How much?” They ask.
“Nothing at all!” My mom gleefully reports. “Nicaragua has free universal health care!”
Her friends’ shock is palpable. “How,” they ask, “can a poor country like Nicaragua afford to give free health care to its people?”
The answer, of course, is because Nicaragua chooses to make free health care a priority for its people.
Nighttime in the pediatric ward means little sleep for caretakers. In the morning I wake at 3, holding a sleepy Orla upright while the lab tech gets a blood sample from her arm, and then try to coax a bit more fluid down her throat. I crash back into sleep until the nurse comes to collect the papers where we write down our patients’ intake and outflow and do the consequential math: are more fluids going in than coming out?
Next the doctors arrive with the lab results for the day: who gets to go home and who has to stay. The hopeful have their bags packed, waiting. The feverish ones stay wrapped in restless sheets, in and out of consciousness, knowing they’ll be here another night.
On our third morning, I start awake at 10 minutes to 7 and rush to shower and change before my husband Paul arrives – bless him – with strong coffee and the car keys. I kiss Orla goodbye and drive straight from the hospital to interpret for a delegation that is in Nicaragua to celebrate the 43rd anniversary of the triumph of the Sandinista Revolution, when the Nicaraguan people overthrew the cruel Somoza dictatorship.
Our first meeting is with Nicaragua’s Finance Minister Iván Acosta. It’s my first time interpreting for him and I soon realize that even with a full-night’s sleep I couldn’t do him justice with my interpretation.
He has an obvious grasp of details – quoting figures off the top of his head and speaking for two hours with no notes – but above all else, Minister Acosta is a Big Picture person. He connects the dots for us between policy, action and results, giving perspective to Nicaragua’s entire revolutionary project.
“When we came into office in 2007, following nearly 17 years of neoliberal governments,” he says, “we found the country in chaos.”
Minister Acosta explains that the period from 1990 to 2006 when Nicaragua had followed structural adjustment policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund led to extreme inequality, seriously deteriorated infrastructure, and deep poverty, particularly in Nicaragua’s countryside.
“There was no magic solution for any of this. What could we do?” he asks.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government decided on a blend of social responsibility and economic principles. They began restoring rights – to free health care, free public education, and land tenure.
But they also worked to find ways to ensure that Nicaragua’s poor majority became active participants in the economy as a solution to improve the country’s struggling economy.
“We realized that we need to lower the cost of doing business to be competitive; in order to achieve that, we needed to increase public spending.”
To that end, Nicaragua set about building state-of-the-art roads – now the best in the region – to ensure that products could get to market cheaply and easily.
Nicaragua improved access to basic services: now reaching 99% electrical coverage up from just 53% in 2006; ending 12-hour a day rolling blackouts and diversifying to generate clean energy. Today 80% of the electricity produced is from renewables;
Nicaragua also trained new teachers and made new schools. And it has built 24 new hospitals since 2007.
Over just 10 years, Minister Acosta explains, social spending went from being 10% of overall spending to making up 57% of the country’s budget.
But have these policies been effective?
“We have these pro-poor policies, but in many countries only lip service is paid to political policy and it isn’t followed by action,” explains Minister Acosta. “So we do the math – all the various quotients and formulae recommended by international experts – to ensure that our policies are being translated into results: real improvements in the lives of the poor.”
The numbers show that not only has Nicaragua’s economy turned around – sustained GDP growth of 5% to 10%, historic international investment, and 90% food sovereignty have all been achieved – but also the lives of the country’s poor majority have improved. In 2006, GDP per capita was at $990, but by 2018 it had risen to $2,300.
“We don’t have a significant middle class yet,” Minister Acosta cautions, but progress is being made.
Nicaragua’s policy could be described as “trickle up economics” – ensure the poor access to health care, education, land, markets, financing, and the economy will follow.
This is the inversion of “trickle down economics,” the U.S. policy made famous by Ronald Reagan which gives tax breaks and benefits to corporations and the wealthy on the theory that it will stimulate economic growth from the top down.
The problem with the U.S. policy is not only a moral one; in economic terms, it just plain doesn’t work.
Under four decades of “trickle down” policy, income inequality in the U.S. has grown to shocking levels: the wealthiest 0.1% have become rich beyond all comprehension, while most U.S. workers now earn less than half of what they would have been earning if incomes had continued to grow equitably.
In other words, tax breaks and benefits to the richest simply don’t trickle down: U.S. families now work longer hours for less pay while struggling to cover skyrocketing costs.
Currently, 22% of the U.S. population can’t access health care due to lack of adequate insurance, 12% experiences hunger and more than half a million people are homeless –many living under the country’s collapsing bridges – one in every five of which are in need of reconstruction.
Given what we know about how stability and quality of life for the majority can improve the overall economy, perhaps instead of asking, “How can a poor country like Nicaragua afford to give free health care to its people?”, we should really be asking, “How can a wealthy country like the United States afford NOT to?”
“Dengue is treacherous,” the doctor explains to me. “A patient can suddenly experience internal bleeding and become critical in the blink of an eye.”
Orla’s platelets have dropped, and she is in the most crucial day in the virus’ cycle when signs of hemorrhagic dengue can appear.
As I sit on the edge of her bed urging her to drink more rehydration fluid, a woman who has been visiting another patient comes over to Orla’s bed carrying a Bible.
“Would you like me to pray for your daughter?” she asks. Orla agrees and the woman asks, “Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?”
I stop her, not wanting her to get the wrong idea. “We’re not Pentecostals,” I say, “but Orla believes in God.” The woman nods and holds her hands out, palms up.
We close our eyes as she begins praying in a soft singsong voice, asking God to look after my baby and heal her. When she finishes, she surprises me by saying, “It doesn’t matter which religion we belong to, it’s all the same God.”
That day, Orla turns a corner – her fever drops and her health begins to improve. I’m grateful to all those responsible – as we say here in Nicaragua, “Thanks to God and the Revolution.”
Why the Revolution? Because it has restored Nicaraguans’ rights to free quality health care.
Our entire delegation gets to see the quality of this health care up close. After our talk with Minister Acosta, we visit one of the best-equipped hospitals in the country, Velez Paíz, built new and opened in 2018.
Director Dr. Virginia Garcia tells us that patients with non-urgent emergencies wait a maximum of 30 minutes to be seen by ER doctors, and that patients wait a maximum of one month for non-emergency surgeries.
“We have four laparoscopic towers performing gall bladder surgeries all day every day,” she says. That surgery would cost $54,000 in my home country, but is free in Nicaragua.
I interpret for Minister of Health Dr. Martha Reyes when she describes to the delegation the advances made in public health over the past 15 years. As she talks, it is easy for me to chart that path from policy to action to results that Minister Acosta talked about.
When she finishes speaking, I thank Dr. Reyes personally for the quality care that Orla is receiving in our hometown public hospital. “Not so long ago,” I tell her, “that wouldn’t have been possible.”
When I moved to Ciudad Sandino 20 years ago, our hospital was literally an empty shell, unable to provide even the most basic services to our community of 180,000. Not only did patients in “public” hospitals have to pay for everything from gloves to sutures, but a dengue patient in Orla’s condition would have actually been safer at home – hospitals were in such appalling conditions with lack of staff, beds and even basic sanitation that it was commonly said that hospitals were where patients went to die.
Thanks to public investment in health infrastructure, increase in personnel, improved and specialized training, and tireless work to involve communities and families in their own health care, Ciudad Sandino now has seven health centers and a hospital which includes outpatient, inpatient and emergency care, a maternal wait home, rehabilitation and physical therapy services, a natural medicine center and a center for cataract surgeries – all services offered free of charge.
Comparable improvements have happened all over the country – the change in people’s lives is palpable and the results in overall health are measureable: maternal mortality rates have dropped by 70%, deaths from cervical cancer are down by 25% and average life expectancy has increased.
On the morning of Orla’s seventh day in the hospital, the doctor tells us that her platelets count is high enough to safely send her home.
We leave the hospital with nothing more than her official diagnosis paper, a stamped doctor’s excuse for missing school, and a follow up appointment.
We owe no money. There is no itemized bill showing how many nights (6), how many sheets were washed (3), how many cafeteria meals she ate (17), how many full blood tests (10), urine tests (1), ultrasounds (1), IVs (1), or how much oral rehydration fluid she drank (53 liters).
Orla and I walk out into the sunshine of a new day, ready to rest and recover, secure in the knowledge that the Nicaraguan government has made a choice to look after us … recognizing that it is a privilege to have access to free quality health care.
|
Write an article about: Fewer than 15 countries recognize US-appointed Venezuelan coup leader Juan Guaidó. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Bank of England, Britain, Canada, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Juan Guaidó, Julio Borges, Justin Trudeau, Leopoldo López, Nicolás Maduro, PSUV, Spain, UK, United Kingdom, Venezuela | A right-wing Venezuelan opposition leader and former top Juan Guaidó functionary admitted a maximum of 15 countries recognize the unelected coup leader as “interim president.” The Joe Biden administration is one of them.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
January 23, 2022 marks the third anniversary of the US government’s ongoing coup attempt against Venezuela’s only constitutional government, that of democratically elected President Nicolás Maduro.
On that day in 2019, the Donald Trump administration appointed little-known Venezuelan opposition politician Juan Guaidó, who had never received a single vote in a presidential election, as supposed “interim president” of the Caribbean nation.
At the peak of the US-led coup attempt, fewer than 60 of the 193 UN member states recognized Guaidó. And that number has dropped precipitously since then.
One of Guaidó’s top former functionaries, the right-wing Venezuelan opposition politician Julio Borges, has admitted in an interview that a maximum of just 15 countries still recognize Guaidó as of January 2022.
Major Western media outlets have acknowledged that Guaidó does not actually control anything inside Venezuela, other than what the United States stole for him.
Yet the Joe Biden administration has maintained Trump’s policy of support for Guaidó.
This recognition has continued despite November 2021 regional elections in Venezuela, which were observed by the European Union, in which Guaidó’s party faced a crushing defeat, and the United Socialist Party (PSUV) of President Maduro won in a landslide.
Venezuelan coup leader Juan Guaidó in the White House with US President Donald Trump in February 2020 (Photo credit: public domain)
The nations that still refuse to recognize Venezuela’s constitutional President Maduro consist primarily of the United States and its right-wing allies in Latin America, including Colombia, Brazil, Guatemala, Paraguay, and Ecuador, along with the Washington-controlled Organization of American States (OAS).
The Liberal Justin Trudeau government of Canada still backs Guaidó as well.
Britain is one of the only remaining European countries that refuses to acknowledge Maduro – partially because, by continuing to formally recognize Guaidó, it provides a judicial excuse for the Bank of England to steal nearly $2 billion worth of Venezuelan gold.
Guaidó’s coup regime in fact used money illegally seized from Venezuela’s Central Bank to pay legal costs in the UK, in its efforts to control these billions of dollars worth of looted Venezuelan gold, journalist John McEvoy revealed.
Even Spain, which harbors Venezuelan fugitives from justice who organized violent coup attempts against the Chavista government, no longer really recognizes Guaidó.
Perhaps the most powerful member of Venezuela’s political opposition, Leopoldo López, a right-wing extremist from an ultra-wealthy oligarch family, lives in Madrid, where he has enjoyed the support of the Spanish government. This is despite the fact that López admitted to orchestrating violent coup attempts and plotting a failed invasion of Venezuela in May 2020, known as Operation Gideon.
In an implicit admission that all of these efforts at overthrowing Venezuela’s legitimate government had failed, the European Union stopped recognizing Guaidó as of January 2021.
Julio Borges, the Venezuelan opposition politician who said a maximum of just 15 countries still recognize Guaidó, knows from firsthand experience.
Borges previously served as so-called “foreign minister” for Guaidó’s parallel coup regime, which has never exercised power inside Venezuela and was never voted on by the Venezuelan people.
Borges resigned from Guaidó’s coup regime in December 2021, saying the unelected “interim government has been deformed,” and “it should disappear.”
|
Write an article about: Inside Cuba’s socialist health system, with journalist Rania Khalek. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Covid-19, Cuba, public health, vaccines | Journalist Rania Khalek discusses her reporting trip to Cuba, where she got a firsthand look at its socialist health system, under the brutal US blockade.
Journalist Rania Khalek, of BreakThrough News, discusses her reporting trip to Cuba, where she saw how US sanctions, which are illegal under international law, have caused hardship and shortages.
She interviewed medical experts and describes Cuba’s socialist health system, which has produced multiple Covid-19 vaccines, despite being under a suffocating blockade imposed by the United States.
“People are dealing with a lot of difficulties because of the blockade,” Khalek recalled. “And that’s in combination with all kinds of US schemes to undermine the socialist revolution in that country, you know whether it’s hundreds of assassination attempts, attempted invasions, actual terrorism sponsored by the United States, and so many other ways the US has tried to undermine the Cuban government, through various NGOs, and NGO money, and using the internet, and on and on.”
Former US President Donald Trump added 243 new sanctions measures against Cuba, many in the middle of the Covid pandemic. And the Joe Biden administration has maintained those illegal unilateral coercive measures, while adding even more.
Yet despite these enormous difficulties, Cuba has an “incredible medical system,” Khalek explained.
“It’s free, and it all revolves around preventative care, in a really holistic way, where you have layers of medical care, from your local neighborhood doctor – whose house you can go to for easy visits, who goes and actually checks on disabled and elderly people in the neighborhood, to make sure their vitals are good, their blood pressure is good, they’re getting what they need – to neighborhood clinics, to bigger hospitals that they’ll send you to if the neighborhood clinic can’t help you. And then there are various specialties they’ll send you to if you need really serious care, for a really serious problem.”
“And so their medical system inside the country is incredible, because it exists across the country, even in the countryside, which was a huge accomplishment of the revolution in Cuba,” Khalek said.
“But more than that, Cuba has these international medical brigades, and they send their doctors to provide basically free medical care to areas around the world, particularly the developing world. And they’ll serve in very poor areas of like Brazil, and Venezuela, and Bolivia, and various countries in Africa, in order to provide care to people who otherwise don’t have access to medical care.”
You can watch or listen to the interview below:
|
Write an article about: Why is US easing some sanctions on Venezuela? Economic blackmail, oil, Russia. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Iran, Juan Guaidó, oil, PSUV, Russia, Venezuela | The US government is lifting a few (not even close to all) sanctions on Venezuela, after banning imports of Russian oil. But only on the condition that Caracas make economic reforms and concessions to the right-wing opposition.
The US government has announced that it is lifting a small number of sanctions on Venezuela. A major left-wing newspaper in Turkey, BirGün, interviewed Multipolarista editor Benjamin Norton about the situation. His comments follow below:
The US government is not lifting the vast majority of its unilateral coercive measures against Venezuela, which are illegal under international law, and have led to tens of thousands of civilian deaths.
Instead, the Joe Biden administration offered to ease a few specific sanctions, especially related to the oil sector, largely because the White House has banned Russian energy and wants to make up for the crude it had been importing from Russia, to try to stabilize spiking energy prices.
But Washington is only doing this under the condition that, one, Venezuela make political concessions to the right-wing opposition, and two, that Caracas partially liberalize its economy, implementing reforms that allow US corporations to invest 5% to 10% in state-owned companies, for instance.
This is a form of economic blackmail by the US government. Venezuela has essentially been forced at gunpoint to implement economic reforms, because, as the UN special rapporteur on sanctions reported, the Venezuelan state lost 99% of its revenue due to the illegal US blockade and other Western coercive measures.
The structural problems with the Venezuelan economy long predate the rise of the leftist Chavista movement. Caracas has relied on oil for the vast majority of its revenue for roughly a century. The Venezuelan state was heavily dependent on hydrocarbons for many decades before Hugo Chávez became president in 1999.
The illegal US sanctions are very unpopular in Venezuela, even among some right-wing opposition parties. The US economic warfare has essentially divided the opposition between those who support Washington’s sanctions and coup attempt, and those who are against the sanctions.
As for average Venezuelans, polling has consistently shown that the vast majority of Venezuelan civilians are strongly against the US sanctions on their country.
Even an explicitly partisan polling firm run by a wealthy anti-Chavista right-wing opposition figure, called Datanálisis, was forced to concede in August 2021 that 76.4% of Venezuelans reject the sanctions on the oil sector. The actual figure is likely even higher, as less biased polling firms have shown even more widespread opposition to sanctions.
Given the brutal economic attacks that Washington has unleashed on the Venezuelan people in the past several years, many people are welcoming the news that the blockade may be softened, even if only slightly.
The illegal US blockade on Venezuela did fail to bring about regime change, which was Washington’s number-one goal, but it devastated the Venezuelan economy and successfully forced the leftist Chavista government to implement reforms to partially liberalize it. This was Washington’s number-two goal.
The US imperial strategy is to use hybrid warfare to force Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and other countries where socialist parties are in power to make economic concessions to US capital.
This strategy goes back decades. When socialist Salvador Allende was democratically elected president of Chile in 1970, US President Richard Nixon infamously called to “make the economy scream.”
Washington uses sanctions and hybrid warfare to destroy economies in countries run by socialist parties, then blames socialism for the economic chaos that it intentionally caused.
The difference is that the United States succeeded in overthrowing Allende in a violent coup, where it has repeatedly failed to overthrow Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in its numerous violent coup attempts.
One of the main reasons the Biden administration decided to soften (but not end) its attacks on Venezuela is because the United States is cutting oil imports from Russia and needs to find a replacement, especially if it wants to lower the skyrocketing energy prices that have fueled the highest rates of inflation in the US in 40 years.
Washington tried to force Saudi Arabia to increase oil production to make up the difference, but Riyadh refused. Other significant oil and gas producers had similar responses. OPEC members are sticking with their production plans, and say they don’t even have the capacity anyway to make up for lost Russian exports.
The Biden administration has also refused to undo aggressive anti-Iran policies imposed by Donald Trump, such as listing the Iranian military branch the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a supposed “terrorist” organization. This means that Washington is effectively killing any hopes of returning to the nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Trump unilaterally sabotaged in 2018. Therefore the US can’t rely on Iranian oil to make up for the Russian crude.
Given this situation, the Biden administration apparently made the calculation that, at this moment, its hybrid war on Venezuela is not as important as its proxy war on Russia. So the United States is slightly easing its war on Venezuela while doubling down on its war on Russia.
But the Venezuelan leadership is very clear-eyed and can see that Washington’s strategy is a cynical act of divide-and-conquer. Russia remains one of Venezuela’s most important allies, and Caracas is not for a second going to abandon it.
Venezuela was simply forced to make temporary compromises to try to reactivate its besieged economy, allowing a little room for US companies like Chevon to operate. But Caracas is by no means going to let those foreign firms control its oil sector or other state-owned companies, which will still remain firmly under government control. Allowing investors 5% to 10% stakes is a far cry from full privatization.
The ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) has maintained a solid and consistent base of support among working-class and poor Venezuelans. PSUV won the November 21, 2021 regional elections, which were monitored by the European Union, in a landslide, with more votes in 20 of 23 states and the capital Caracas.
Meanwhile, Venezuela’s political opposition is completely divided and discredited. Juan Guaidó has lost the backing even of many right-wing opposition figures, who see him as weak and incompetent. Opposition parties are unable to win elections because they are driven by individual personalities who are notoriously unable to unite, and lack popular support because they are widely seen as corrupt and beholden to a foreign power (the United States).
Internationally, the US coup strategy of recognizing Guaidó – who never received a single vote in a presidential election – as supposed “interim president” has totally collapsed. Fewer than 15 countries still recognize Guaidó, as even his own former ally admitted.
Although Washington still maintains the illusion that Guaidó is something more than a political cosplayer, the Biden administration tacitly acknowledged the reality that Nicolás Maduro is the real, elected president when it sent a delegation to Caracas to negotiate with him.
|
Write an article about: US-backed coup regimes trapped Honduras in unpayable odious debt, warns new President Xiomara Castro. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Argentina, debt, Greece, Honduras, IMF, Manuel Zelaya, odious debt, Puerto Rico, Xiomara Castro | At the time of the 2009 US-backed coup, Honduras had $2.48 billion in external debt. Now it has $9.25 billion. New leftist President Xiomara Castro says this odious debt is unpayable. It already eats up 50% of the government budget.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
The new leftist administration in Honduras managed to win November 2021 elections in a landslide and defeat an authoritarian coup regime, but now it faces a huge problem that will make it difficult to govern: odious debt.
When a US-sponsored military coup overthrew Honduras’ democratically elected left-wing President Manuel Zelaya in 2009, the country had $2.48 billion in external debt.
By the end of 2021, after 12 years of rule by corrupt right-wing coup regimes, Honduras’ external debt had swelled to $9.25 billion – a 373% increase.
The Honduran state’s internal debt to private parties likewise skyrocketed from approximately $810 million in 2009 to roughly $7.3 billion today.
Honduras’ GDP is only $23.8 billion, yet the country is saddled with more than $16.5 billion in debt – meaning its debt is nearly 70% of the size of its entire economy.
The Central American nation’s new leftist President Xiomara Castro, Honduras’ first democratic leader since the coup, has said this burden on the government is a form of odious debt, and is simply unpayable.
Castro declared in a speech at her inauguration on January 27 that the previous coup regimes had “submerged” the state in debt, leaving it in “bankruptcy” in an “economic catastrophe.”
Debt payments now eat up a staggering 50% of the government’s budget, Castro stressed.
This graph from Honduran media outlet La Prensa shows how the debt skyrocketed after the US-backed coup.
A graph of Honduras’ external debt
This graph does not include Honduras’ massive internal debt.
“After 12 years of dictatorship the amount of internal debt increased from 20 billion lempiras (USD $810 million) to 179 billion lempiras (USD $7.3 billion),” Castro said in her inauguration speech.
“With these figures it is clear that the state does not have the capacity to sustain the outrageous and shameful debt that we are inheriting,” the new Honduran president added. “It is practically impossible to meet the debt requirements.”
Castro said the only way to manage the debt is to renegotiate it with the creditors.
“My government will not continue the vortex of plunder that has condemned generations of youth to pay the debt they took on behind their backs,” she declared.
“The country should know what they did with the money and where are the $20 billion that they took out in loans.”
The new Honduran president warned that this “plunder” caused poverty to increase by 74%, “turning us into the poorest country in Latin America.”
“This statistic itself explains the [migrant] caravan of thousands of people looking for opportunities,” she said.
Other countries in Latin America have been caught in these same kinds of debt traps.
In 2018, Argentina’s right-wing President Mauricio Macri took the largest loan in the history of the International Monetary Fund (IMF): $57.1 billion.
This enormous debt incurred by Macri pushed the subsequent center-left government of President Alberto Fernández into a debt spiral that has made it very difficult to spend on social programs.
The IMF, which is dominated by the United States, and is used as an economic weapon to advance Washington’s foreign-policy agenda, has often trapped Global South nations in unpayable debt.
The IMF uses this debt as leverage to force countries to sell off their natural resources, privatize state-owned enterprises, slash social spending, and cut labor protections that challenge the interests of foreign corporations.
Puerto Rico, a US colony, also suffers from painful odious debt. The US government used this debt burden to impose an unelected Financial Oversight and Management Board that controls Puerto Rico’s spending, and has imposed devastating austerity measures on the Puerto Rican people.
Even Greece, a member of the European Union, has similarly been crushed under the weight of odious debt. While Greeks work the most hours in Europe, economics experts have said the country’s debt is impossible to pay off.
|
Write an article about: US funds ‘independent journalists’ in Cuba to spread propaganda, ex CIA spy admits. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | CIA, Cuba, disinformation, information war, La Prensa, National Endowment for Democracy, NED, Nicaragua, propaganda, Venezuela | Former CIA analyst Fulton Armstrong told The Guardian that, in Cuba, “a lot of the so-called independent journalists are indirectly funded by the US”. They spread anti-government disinformation with the support of the NED.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
A former top CIA spy has admitted that the United States funds anti-government propagandists in Cuba who portray themselves as “independent journalists”.
Major British newspaper The Guardian spoke with CIA veteran Fulton Armstrong, whom it described as “the US intelligence community’s most senior analyst for Latin America from 2000 to 2004”.
Armstrong stated that, in Cuba, “a lot of the so-called independent journalists are indirectly funded by the US”.
The ex CIA analyst pointed out that, today, the Joe Biden administration bankrolls anti-government opposition forces in Cuba with at least $20 million in annual support for supposed “democracy promotion” activities.
The Guardian acknowledged that the CIA has a history of spreading disinformation inside Cuba, as part of a US information war aimed at destabilizing the revolutionary government. The newspaper wrote:
Financing media has long been part of Washington’s diplomatic toolkit.
In the 1960s in Cuba, Radio Swan, a CIA covert action programme, attempted not only a propaganda offensive to undermine support for Fidel Castro, but doubled up as a communication link, sending coded messages to paramilitaries during the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of 1961.
A decade ago it emerged that the US government had paid contractors to create ZunZuneo, a social network built on texts, to organize “smart mobs” on the island. And during historic, largely spontaneous anti-government protests on the island in 2021, externally funded, externally directed bots made anti-government hashtags trend on Twitter.
Still today, Washington funds another prominent Spanish-language, anti-Cuba disinformation outlet called Radio y Televisión Martí, which is part of the government’s propaganda arm the US Agency for Global Media (formerly known as the Broadcasting Board of Governors).
Armstrong, the former CIA agent, explained to The Guardian the US destabilization strategy in financing opposition media outlets in foreign countries like Cuba:
US programs are designed with a win-win strategy. We win if the opposition media gain a foothold, and we win if they provoke government repression.
That thrusts the government into a dilemma – to let the organizing and funding go forward or to risk image and credibility by crushing it.
In addition to spying for the CIA, Armstrong worked for the State Department’s US Interests Section in Cuba (a diplomatic office located inside Switzerland’s embassy in Havana).
Armstrong served as the US “National Intelligence Officer for Latin America”, the intelligence community’s top analyst focused on the region. He also oversaw Latin America for the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The Guardian – which is itself closely linked to and collaborates with the UK’s intelligence services – portrayed the Cuban government as repressive for cracking down on foreign-funded disinformation agents.
The British newspaper gloated over the large revenue streams that anti-government media outlets in Cuba have, writing, “Tiny state salaries have also been unable to compete with the private sector”.
While The Guardian praised two right-wing Cuban opposition media outlets, called El Toque and El Estornudo, it admitted that both are bankrolled by the US government.
El Toque disclosed to The Guardian that “it has received US federal funds ‘indirectly’ as part of a mix of money from corporations and foundations”.
El Estornudo is financed by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a notorious instrument of US regime-change operations that has meddled in the internal politics of countries all around the world.
A co-founder of the NED, Allen Weinstein, told the Washington Post in 1991, “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA“.
The NED reported that it gave El Estornudo $180,000 in 2021 – a huge sum of money in any Latin American country, but especially in Cuba, which has trouble getting access to dollars due to Washington’s illegal, six-decade blockade against it.
In a 1977 report titled “Worldwide Propaganda Network Built by the C.I.A.“, the New York Times admitted that the CIA had established a media outlet in the early 1960s called Free Cuba Radio, whose “propaganda broadcasts against the Government of Prime Minister Fidel Castro were carried over radio stations” in various cities inside the US and in the Caribbean.
The prominent newspaper explained:
One motive for establishing the Free Cuba radio network, a former C.I.A. official said he recalled, was to have periods of air time available in advance in case Radio Swan, meant to be the main communications link for the Bay of Pigs invasion, was destroyed by saboteurs.
Radio Swan’s cover was thin enough to warrant such concern. The powerful station, whose broadcasts could be heard over much of the Western Hemisphere, was operated by a steamship company in New York that had not owned a steamship for some time.
The United States has used the same tactics to try to destabilize the leftist governments in Venezuela and Nicaragua.
The NED has spent hundreds of millions of dollars funding right-wing opposition media outlets and so-called “civil society organizations” in Venezuela.
Many of these groups have been complicit in violence and participated in coup attempts against democratically elected Presidents Hugo Chávez and Nicolás Maduro.
In Nicaragua in the 1980s, the CIA supported far-right death squads known as the Contras (short for “Counterrevolutionaries”), who burned down schools and hospitals and waged a campaign of terror to try to overthrow the socialist Sandinista government.
A key part of the US hybrid war on Nicaragua in the 1980s, and still today, included the dissemination of disinformation through NED-funded newspapers like La Prensa, which is owned by the Central American nation’s most powerful right-wing oligarch family, the Chamorro dynasty.
After the Sandinista Front returned to power in 2007, through democratic elections, the US again began pouring millions of dollars into opposition media outlets in Nicaragua.
During a bloody coup attempt in 2018, US-funded Nicaraguan opposition media outlets spread extreme propaganda and fake news, openly inciting violence and encouraging people to murder President Daniel Ortega and hang his body in public.
Right-wing Nicaraguan media outlets funded by the US government constantly spread blatant fake news to attack the Sandinistas https://t.co/hzafT2yLH0
— Geopolitical Economy Report (@GeopoliticEcon) August 8, 2022
|
Write an article about: US war on China/Russia targets new multipolar world, sabotages global economy: Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | China, Daniel Ortega, FSLN, imperialism, multipolarity, Nancy Pelosi, Nicaragua, Russia, Sandinistas | Analyzing the geopolitical crisis, Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega said the US war on China and Russia is an attack on the new world of “multipolarism,” because “North American imperialism is trying to maintain its hegemony at all costs, even at the risk of sinking its own economy.”
In a fiery speech denouncing US imperialism, Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega analyzed the shifting balance of power in the world today. He explained that “a new order is being born in the world that buries imperialism, buries the colonialists, and opens the way to a democracy of nations, a multipolarism that is manifesting itself in various ways.”
But in an attempt to halt this transition to a multipolar world, the United States is waging war on China and Russia, Ortega continued. “North American imperialism is trying to maintain its hegemony at all costs, even at the risk of sinking its own economy,” he said.
The Nicaraguan revolutionary leader argued that “fascism left its roots and is embedded” in parts of the United States and Europe, and they “have the objective of trying to destroy the People’s Republic of China” and the Russian Federation.
The Western “ideologues of imperialism” are “worried,” Ortega added, because “they see the People’s Republic of China providing benefits to the peoples” of Latin America, Africa, and Asia, “and they feel that they are losing the power to keep these peoples enslaved.”
President Ortega made these remarks at a August 2 event marking the anniversary of the Nicaraguan Air Force.
He had also made similar comments on July 19, commemorating the 43rd anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution, on which Multipolarista reported.
The Nicaraguan leader’s August 2 speech expanded his geopolitical analysis in greater detail.
Multipolarista has translated excerpts of President Ortega’s speech and published them below.
Ortega noted that we live in a “world that goes from explosion to explosion.” He then continued:
“They are explosions that are part of a birth – a new order is being born in the world that buries imperialism, buries the colonialists, and opens the way to a democracy of nations, a multipolarism that is manifesting itself in various ways.”
“We see the initiatives emerging in different spaces, and on the other hand we see North American imperialism trying to maintain its hegemony at all costs, even at the risk of sinking its own economy.”
“But in the arrogant attitude of feeling that they can still maintain their hegemony, that they can and must defend their hegemony, what they are doing is sinking themselves. They are sinking themselves, and they are causing great harm to the North American people.”
“And with all the sanctions that have been imposed on the Russian Federation, that is waging a just war against fascism, against Nazism, which is entrenched there in the power of the coup-plotters in Ukraine, they are destroying the European economy, and they are liquidating NATO – they are liquidating it with every aggressive action, with the multiple decisions that they have made to try to destroy the Russian Federation.”
“They also have the objective of trying to destroy the People’s Republic of China, because they see them as the two great powers that are already overtaking them, in terms of development, in terms of science, in terms of technology.”
“And they have gone against the Russian Federation, but there is Russia fighting back against fascism. Fascism did not disappear with the fall of the bunker, where the first to arrive were the soldiers of the Red Army, and they planted the flag where the command post of the tyrant Hitler had been.”
“Fascism left its roots and is embedded in some European countries, and it is embedded in North American society, and it is embedded there in Ukraine – yes, a fascist government.”
“And while this situation affects the richest countries, it affects all of humanity, it affects the world economy, but the North American empire does not care, thinking that its strength is so great that it will be able to win by trampling on and destroying the world.”
“And what can clearly be seen is the crazy attitude where we see it (the United States) carrying out aggressions against the People’s Republic of China. What harm has the People’s Republic of China done to the United States? What harm has the People’s Republic of China done to the peoples of the world? What harm has the People’s Republic of China done to the peoples of Latin America and the Caribbean, of Africa, of Asia?”
“The same ideologues of imperialism say it, that what worries them is that they see the People’s Republic of China providing benefits to these peoples, and they feel that they are losing the power to keep these peoples enslaved. They say it very clearly, that is, they are annoyed, angry, because the People’s Republic of China is investing billions in Africa, in Asia, in Latin America.”
“They are investments for the development of our peoples. Ah, for them (the United States) that’s bad. But why don’t they do that? Why don’t they bring those investments? Why have they never brought them on the conditions that the People’s Republic of China is bringing them?”
“But it is truly an act of madness that they are attacking the People’s Republic of China, simply because it is a power that is growing, without harming anyone.”
“And they are launching a challenge, a provocation, this morning (August 2), when we see a top representative of the North American state, of the government of the United States, (Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the US House of Representatives), with the arrogant attitude of invasion. It is an act of invasion!”
“That is in the blood of the yankee empire, the practice of invasion. And it says, ‘Here I come! Here I come!’ They feel they have the right to invade, a territory which they know well, because they were part of those agreements and were part of the resolutions that were passed in the United Nations, when they agreed on the existence of just one China.”
“But deep down they did not agree, and the proof is that, we see it now, them launching a provocation. It is a provocation, because it is a power like the United States invading, entering with its official plane, one of the highest authorities of the North American state entering, because she decided so, and because the government of the United States itself is endorsing and applauding it.”
“She (Pelosi) is logically part of the government, from which she flew with her plane, sure that the People’s Republic of China was not going to do what they do, to drone strike them to destroy the plane. Because they are used to launching drone strikes everywhere, killing.”
“They launched a drone strike against our brother Nicolás Maduro there in Venezuela, during a ceremony where they were going to strike all the ministers, officials, army commanders who were with Nicolás presiding over the ceremony. That was them (the United States).”
“And now they are launching drone strikes again in Afghanistan, and boasting that they launched a drone strike where they killed a leader they describe as a terrorist. After they left, fleeing Afghanistan, after they signed agreements right there that this practice was going to end, now they come and they need blood in the current conditions, so they launch the drone strike, and the cowboy comes out boasting.”
“And as I was saying, they sent the plane knowing that the brothers of the People’s Republic of China are not terrorists, and they were not going to shoot down that plane, or strike it with a drone.”
“It is an act of arrogance, of trying to reaffirm that they are the hegemonic power, that they continue to be the hegemonic power that is going to destroy the Russian Federation, and is destroying the countries of the European Union, that is destroying the economy, that is destroying trade, that is destroying their possibility of even living. Why? Because winter is coming and heating is needed. In other words, it (the United States) is exposing them to death.”
“And this step that they have taken today, which we have logically condemned, is an act that has no way of characterizing it other than as a crazy act of those who feel that the empire is collapsing. They are the insane acts of people like Hitler, who feel that they have an empire and therefore seek to strengthen their positions by setting off to challenge the People’s Republic of China, to invade. It is an invasion that occurred today. It is an invasion. It is a crime.”
“And we are sure, yes, that the Chinese people have strength, historical intelligence, experience – there, under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, it is there. We are sure that they will know how to provide the correct answer that will further strengthen the People’s Republic of China and will further weaken the hegemony that the US government is trying to maintain at all costs.”
…
“They have to learn to respect, the United States has to learn to respect all the peoples of the world, if they want them to respect them. Meanwhile, well, the struggle is going to continue.”
“And as I was saying, in the middle of all these explosions of violence that are taking place everywhere on our planet, these economic tensions, tensions around fuels, tensions around food, all the great tensions that there are in these moments in the world, in the middle of all this, here a new world is being formed. A new world is being born. And that new world is going to be a democratic world, where there will be respect between nations, where there will be cooperation between nations, where there will be no threats between nations.”
“I am certain, I am sure, that that world is being built. It is already being forged. And that is the world that is going to bring peace, stability, to humanity.”
“Dear brothers and sisters, dear comrades, let’s continue with our effort, with the tasks that you carry out every day, contributing to the forging of this new world. Our little grain of sand, yes, we are providing it from Nicaragua, contributing to the forging of this new world.”
In his same speech on August 2, President Daniel Ortega emphasized that Nicaragua’s military, which was re-created after the 1979 Sandinista Revolution that he helped lead, “was born at the clamor of the struggle for self-determination, for independence, for sovereignty,” following “the thought, the example of our General Sandino.”
Ortega used the anniversary event to call for Latin America to unite:
“These are times that call for integration. Today more than ever they call for the integration of Central America, here in Latin America and the Caribbean. And in that process of integration, the path is in the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and the ALBA (Bolivarian Alliance).”
“The ALBA was the bridge that opened it, inspired by our brother, Commander Hugo Chávez, and by Fidel (Castro), the bridge that was opened with a spirit of solidarity, a spirit of developing collaboration, cooperation, taking into account the imbalances between our countries.”
“At no time was the ALBA considered to be a mercantile project, but rather a project full of humanism, full of solidarity, full of love. And imperialism, logically, did not like that.”
“The ALBA brings benefits to the most impoverished peoples of this region, without any conditions, to Central America as well as to the brothers of the Caribbean, there are so many benefits.”
“Then the Empire tried to destroy ALBA, thus affecting the poorest people of our region, because the empire has not been able to provide the levels of unconditional cooperation that ALBA has provided, that the Bolivarian Revolution has provided to our peoples, even with the empire being a thousand times more powerful in economic terms, in financial terms, than Venezuela, than Cuba.”
In the August 2 anniversary event, President Daniel Ortega praised Venezuela for the “generous attitude” it showed in its Petrocaribe program, which provided energy to Nicaragua at very low prices.
Ortega recalled that, after the Sandinista Front returned to power democratically by winning the 2006 elections, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez helped Nicaragua to develop programs, build power plants, and build infrastructure in order to expand access to electricity in poor and working neighborhoods, which had been abandoned by the right-wing US-backed neoliberal regimes that governed Nicaragua from 1990 until 2007.
“In that moment, Chávez did not ask for guarantees, nor did we sign a contract so that later we would pay them for the plants,” Ortega said.
“No capitalist country, no capitalist government in the world offered us cooperation of that type, not to their neighboring countries, not to the African peoples that had been conquered and enslaved by them,” he added.
“The pro-imperialist capitalists did not worry about investing in energy plants while they were in power in government for 17 years.”
The Nicaraguan president continued: “And here we cannot forget it, we can never forget it, that in the year 2006, when there was a third neoliberal government ruling our country, under the tutelage of the North American government; here illiteracy, poverty, hunger had multiplied; education and healthcare had been privatized; and they had abandoned the public projects that we had been developing since the triumph of the revolution. They were simply governments that thought about the strengthening, the enrichment of a minority.”
“They did not care about the country either,” Ortega said. “The energy service began to disappear in our country. Yes, it is incredible, but the energy service was disappearing because they were making themselves rich at whatever cost. They did not invest in the field of energy. And already in the year 2006, when the third neoliberal government was in Nicaragua, we had blackouts every day. The plants were paralyzed, the economic activity affected, everyone affected. I mean, if there is no energy, a country simply sinks.”
“And logically, the United States was not willing to offer cooperation to the people,” he added. “Only a revolution with a truly generous soul, like the Bolivarian Revolution, would act in that way.”
President Daniel Ortega also emphasized in his August 2 speech the importance of Nicaragua’s alliance with the former Soviet Union and the Russian Federation today.
“We have always counted on the invaluable cooperation, since the triumph of the (Sandinista) Revolution, cooperation in all fields that was given to us by another revolution: the October Revolution (in Russia),” he said.
“In the middle of antagonisms, in the middle of the harassment, in the middle of the blockade, in the middle of the counter-revolution that was launched against the (Sandinista) Revolution, we found ourselves with the Soviet Union, led by Russia.”
The Nicaraguan president explained, “There were two extraordinary moments in our history: the invaluable cooperation of the Russian people, headed then by what was the Soviet Union, and then, in this new stage, the invaluable cooperation of the Bolivarian Revolution, headed by Commander Hugo Chávez.”
“And in this new stage we linked again, as expected, with the Russian Federation, we linked, it was normal that we linked with a sense of cooperation, a sense of friendship,” he added.
“When has the United States donated wheat? No, they put it on the market. The brothers of the Russian Federation have donated wheat to our people.”
Ortega continued, “Here, in those 17 years of neoliberal governments, public transportation vehicles were not updated and public transportation was totally destroyed. In this, the Russian Federation cooperated with us, and Mexico as well – cooperation that we have always appreciated, from the Mexican people and government.”
The Nicaraguan leader was referencing the fact that Russia provided 550 new buses in 2021, so the Central American nation could modernize its public transportation system. 250 of these buses were donations, a gift of the Russian people to the Nicaraguan people.
|
Write an article about: Venezuelan’s view on Gustavo Petro victory in Colombia, US sanctions, Iran pact. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Colombia, Francia Márquez, Gustavo Petro, Iran, oil, sanctions, Venezuela | A leftist Venezuelan journalist discusses the victory of left-wing candidate Gustavo Petro in Colombia’s presidential election, the easing of a few US sanctions, and Venezuela’s 20-year cooperation agreement with Iran.
Multipolarista host Benjamin Norton speaks with Venezuelan journalist Jesús Rodríguez Espinoza, editor of independent news outlet the Orinoco Tribune, about the victory of left-wing candidate Gustavo Petro in Colombia’s presidential election, the easing of a few US sanctions, and Venezuela’s 20-year cooperation agreement with Iran.
You can read the Orinoco Tribune at orinocotribune.com
|
Write an article about: Brazil at crossroads: Bolsonaro means subordination and deindustrialization, Lula means independence and development. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Brazil, China, Jair Bolsonaro, lawfare, Lula da Silva, religion | Round two of Brazil’s presidential election offers deeply opposing visions: Bolsonaro would mean more subordination and deindustrialization. Lula would mean independence, economic nationalism, and multipolarity.
The first round of the general elections in Brazil was held on October 2, and the results show that the country is at a crossroads.
Former President Lula da Silva of the Workers’ Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores, or PT) did not achieve victory in round one, and will face current far-right President Jair Bolsonaro in a run-off on October 30.
Lula da Silva obtained 48.4% of the valid votes, while Bolsonaro reached 43.2%. The other candidates combined did not get 9% of the valid votes.
The results of the elections point to a great paradox: despite being ahead of Bolsonaro, the Brazilian left did not obtain a significant vote for state governments and did not even win a third of the seats in the two chambers of the Congress, the Federal Senate and the Chamber of Deputies.
The far right has consolidated itself as a real political force with a mass base. It elected a majority of federal deputies, and has candidates for governor in very competitive states in the second round.
The explanation for this is not simple.
Lula da Silva, at 76 years old, is the greatest popular leader in the country’s history. He managed to demonstrate his own power, but he is up against an adversary who has gathered many of the fundamental tools needed for a competitive electoral campaign.
Bolsonaro’s strength lies in the economic power of large business sectors, combined with the use of ample public resources to guarantee a majority in Congress during his administration.
Bolsonaro has also created a so-called “secret budget,” a corrupt structure of patronage to maintain the political support of a great part of Brazilian congressmen.
But it is not just that. The Brazilian far right has created roots in the Brazilian population, and the reasons are not few.
Most notable is the systematic campaign attacking “communism,” as a way of mobilizing a broad social base highly influenced by Protestant churches.
The phenomenon of the growth of Protestant churches in Brazil is something to be studied. It is not strictly internal; it has great external support. The United States has played a role in disrupting entire societies by exporting far-right ideologies based on a strong religious base.
The extreme right is advancing in Brazil also as a result of a systematic campaign against “corruption.”
For over a decade, the right has been very successful in spreading a false image that links the political left to the practice of government corruption.
The media was fundamental in this campaign to weaken the left, turning politicized judges and public prosecutors into true “superheroes” in the fight against corruption.
This systematic campaign against alleged corruption, heavily supported by the US Department of Justice, has not only weakened the left; the liberal right itself was made politically unfeasible.
Thus, the fight against “corruption” was a form of hybrid war, or lawfare. And it has destroyed the Brazilian political system.
Bolsonaro is a product of this process.
The result of the first round of the Brazilian presidential election cannot be disconnected from the international reality either.
The advance of the far right has been a worldwide phenomenon since the 2008 international financial crisis. It has made significant advances in Europe and, especially, in the United States – the main disseminator of far-right sects around the world.
The big contradiction is that, in a world where the struggle for multipolarity is gaining strength, with countries like China and Russia taking confrontational positions against imperialist militarism, the consolidation of the extreme right in Brazil is a bad sign for global politics.
On the other hand, some questions remain open and should be investigated.
What do Lula da Silva and Jair Bolsonaro represent in terms of economic policy and foreign relations, especially in relation to countries like China?
Bolsonaro is the face of a very peculiar extreme right. He combines an ultra-conservative view on questions of cultural customs, and preaches “nationalism” against “communism,” but represents a radical neoliberal economic agenda.
In his government, Bolsonaro has very strongly continued the process of deindustrialization and expanded Brazil’s dependence on commodity exports, mainly to China.
This deindustrialization was accelerated by the Lava Jato (“Car Wash”) operation that destroyed the country’s most important economic and industrial sectors, along with the slow dismantling of the largest Brazilian company, Petrobras.
This has unleashed a disaster that is unprecedented in the history of Brazil. Currently, about 100 million Brazilians live in a state of food insecurity caused by this ultra-liberalism.
Lula da Silva represents an alternative vision, one that combines economic nationalism with the promise of resumption of industrial jobs and an active role for large public banks.
Lula tries to represent the promise of a national project based on the reindustrialization of the country, while Bolsonaro bets on a subordinate position of Brazil in global value chains.
Both perspectives have impacts on foreign relations. Certainly Lula would have a relationship with countries like China based not only on common global interests such as multipolarity, but also guided by Brazilian strategic interests.
Lula’s government could review the economic terms of our relations with China, recognizing that Beijing and its experience could help strengthen the industrialization process.
With Bolsonaro, the trend is toward deeper alignment with the United States – especially if Donald Trump’s team wins the 2024 elections – as well as greater dependence on commodity exports to China. This would only continue accelerating the process of deindustrialization.
But hope can overcome fear in Brazil. The second round of elections will take place on October 30.
The probability of Lula da Silva’s victory is great. But the fact is that the political strength shown by Jair Bolsonaro cannot be underestimated.
Brazil, a young nation of 523 years of age, is experiencing a true paradox. Either it consolidates itself as a great emerging power, capable of being an actor of global relevance, and capable of taking its place in a multipolar world; or it will have a destiny committed to the civilizational setback that the consolidation of the extreme right represents in our country.
The Brazilian extreme right is unpatriotic and relies on a racist and anti-popular elite. Its aesthetic does not match the beauty of the Brazilian people.
On October 30, we will be facing another chapter of a real battle for the Brazilian nation. Lula da Silva and Brazil could emerge victorious. That is what the progressives of the world expect.
|
Write an article about: US President Bush praised dictator Fujimori as ‘Peru’s hope for the future’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fujimori, CIA, genocide, George H W Bush, Indigenous peoples, Keiko Fujimori, Peru, racism, USAID, Vladimiro Montesinos | US President George H. W. Bush welcomed far-right Peruvian dictator Alberto Fujimori to the White House in 1991, heroizing him as “Peru’s hope for the future” and praising his neoliberal economic policies.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
US President George H. W. Bush welcomed far-right Peruvian dictator Alberto Fujimori to the White House in September 1991, heroizing him as “Peru’s hope for the future”.
With US backing, Fujimori committed genocide, sterilizing roughly 300,000 Indigenous people while killing, terrorizing, and torturing thousands of leftist dissidents.
The former Peruvian dictator was later sentenced to 25 years in prison on charges of crimes against humanity, murder, kidnapping, and corruption. He was convicted of ordering a military death squad to massacre poor people in rural areas.
But back in 1991, former CIA Director turned US President Bush praised Fujimori for the neoliberal economic reforms he imposed in Peru.
US President George H. W. Bush welcomed far-right Peruvian dictator Alberto Fujimori to the White House in 1991.
Bush heroized Fujimori as “Peru’s hope for the future”, and praised his neoliberal economic policies.
More information here: https://t.co/ikikPheeE0 pic.twitter.com/HrddVHeVmK
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 24, 2023
Bush told Fujimori at the White House with pride, “Mr. President, since taking office, you have cut government spending, eliminated price controls, knocked down barriers to trade and investment – and those reforms have begun paying off; they’ve begun paying dividends”.
“We want to be a full partner in your efforts to restore Peru’s economy”, Bush declared.
“We have spoken openly, discussing the tough challenges Peru faces, from economic hardship to renegade insurgencies, from the war against drugs to the battle to preserve human rights. And much has been done on all these fronts. But much more waits to be achieved”, the US president added.
“My administration wants to send $94 million in economic and military assistance”, Bush noted. But “unfortunately the Congress has placed a hold on disbursement of these funds, chiefly because of stated human rights concerns. We share these concerns and so do you, Mr. President”.
“But you have made progress on human rights, and let’s also then see progress on releasing these funds”, he continued.
Just a few months after this meeting, in April 1992, Fujimori carried out a “self-coup” or “auto-coup”, destroying Peru’s democratic state institutions and establishing a brutal dictatorship.
The Bush administration later superficially criticized Fujimori in public, but continued to support him.
US assistance continued when President Bill Clinton took power in 1993.
The US Agency for International Development (USAID) provided funding for Fujimori’s “family planning” program, which he used as cover to commit genocide against Peru’s Indigenous nations, sterilizing nearly 300,000 people between 1996 and 2000.
Peru's far-right US-backed dictator Alberto Fujimori carried out genocide against Indigenous communities, sterilizing nearly 300,000 people.
His sterilization of Indigenous women received funding from the US Agency for International Development @USAID.https://t.co/63yXrqNBGg pic.twitter.com/NpQRkVZbt4
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) July 24, 2022
As the New Republic put it in 2018: “Under former President Fujimori, over 200,000 women were violated—one of the largest such projects since Nazi Germany. His party is still in power”.
USAID boasted in a report (emphasis added):
After the [United Nations] International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in 1994 and with political support from the president, the Peruvian Ministry of Health instituted a policy in 1995 mandating free contraceptives for all Peruvians through government facilities. As a result of this policy change, modern contraceptive use increased, particularly among rural and poor inhabitants.
USAID and other donors provided 100 percent of the contraceptives to the government while also providing technical assistance for training, supervision, education, information, and communication. Annual investments in family planning doubled from $12.9 million in 1994 to $28 million in 1998.
Fujimori committed many of his crimes with the help of his far-right intelligence chief, Vladimiro Montesinos, who was also imprisoned on dozens of charges, such as murder, drug trafficking, and bribery.
Montesinos was a longtime CIA asset who started his career by spying on Peru’s left-wing government and giving the United States confidential intelligence about Lima’s relations with the Soviet Union and Cuba.
Today, the far-right followers of the former dictator, known as Fujimoristas, still have significant influence in Peru’s political system.
Fujimori’s daughter Keiko was the right wing’s leading presidential candidate in 2021, running against leftist Pedro Castillo.
Castillo won the election, but was subsequently overthrown in a US-backed parliamentary coup in December 2022.
A 2021 debate between Peru’s presidential candidates Keiko Fujimori and Pedro Castillo
|
Write an article about: Brazil elections: Leftist Lula wins, goes to round 2 against far-right Bolsonaro. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Brazil, Camila Escalante, Jair Bolsonaro, Lula da Silva | Brazil’s leftist presidential candidate Lula da Silva won with 48.4% and over 6 million more votes than far-right incumbent Jair Bolsonaro. The Workers’ Party is organizing with social movements in the lead-up to the October 30 runoff election.
Brazil’s left-wing former president Lula da Silva won the first round of the presidential election on October 2 with 48.43% of the vote.
Lula got over 6 million more votes than far-right incumbent Jair Bolsonaro, who earned 43.20%.
This put Lula just shy of the 50% he needed to avoid a runoff, which means the candidates will compete in round two on October 30.
To analyze the election results and what they mean for not just Brazil, but also Latin America and the world as a whole, Multipolarista editor Ben Norton spoke with journalist Camila Escalante, of Kawsachun News, who is reporting on the ground in São Paulo.
Escalante discussed what social movements in Brazil like the Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) are saying, and why they are supporting Lula.
She also addresses how Bolsonaro’s policies have devastated Brazil’s economy, under the watch of Chicago Boy economic minister Paulo Guedes, an alumnus of the neoliberal University of Chicago who taught economics under the dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet in Chile.
|
Write an article about: EEUU secuestró y encarceló al diplomático venezolano Alex Saab por comprar alimentos. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alex Saab, CLAP, Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela | El diplomático venezolano Alex Saab esencialmente fue secuestrado por Estados Unidos porque estaba comprando comida para el programa de alimentos del gobierno, los CLAP, para apoyar al pueblo de Venezuela.
(You can read this article in English here.)
Traducido por Michelle Ellner
“No es un delito cumplir una misión diplomática. No es un delito eludir sanciones que perjudican a todo un país. No puede ser ilegal ayudar a un pueblo”. Camilla Fabri Saab hizo estas vehementes declaraciones al explicar la situación en la que se encuentra la detención ilegal y la extradición -el secuestro, en esencia- de su marido, el diplomático venezolano Alex Saab.
Saab es prácticamente desconocido en Estados Unidos, donde actualmente permanece en una prisión de Miami, pero ha sido vital para la capacidad de Venezuela de sobrevivir a la brutal guerra económica emprendida por Estados Unidos.
Saab es un preso político cuyo caso tiene paralelismos con el de Julian Assange. Ambos han sido objeto de alcance extraterritorial por parte de las autoridades estadounidenses, ya que ninguno de los dos es ciudadano estadounidense y sus presuntos delitos tuvieron lugar fuera del país. Assange está en la cárcel por decir la verdad. Saab está en la cárcel por ayudar a alimentar a los venezolanos.
Saab se enfrenta a un cargo de conspiración para cometer lavado de dinero por su participación en el programa de vivienda de Venezuela y fue sancionado por la administración Trump en 2019 por su trabajo con el CLAP de Venezuela, un programa que envía alimentos y otros artículos de primera necesidad a las familias venezolanas.
Referido rutinariamente en los medios de comunicación como un empresario colombiano, Saab goza de doble nacionalidad venezolana y colombiana además de ser diplomático. Fue nombrado enviado especial de Venezuela en abril de 2018, más de dos años antes de su detención.
Según la Convención de Viena y la Ley de Relaciones Diplomáticas de Estados Unidos, un diplomático no puede ser detenido por una potencia extranjera. Esto incluye a los diplomáticos que están en tránsito entre los países emisores y receptores, Venezuela e Irán, en el caso de Saab.
Alex Saab volaba de Venezuela a Irán cuando su avión se detuvo para repostar en Cabo Verde, un país insular situado en la costa occidental de África. Fue detenido sin orden judicial y retenido en Cabo Verde durante casi 500 días mientras se desarrollaba en los tribunales una prolongada batalla sobre su extradición a Estados Unidos.
Fue golpeado, le fue negada la atención médica y se le mantuvo aislado. Cabo Verde hizo caso omiso a una sentencia de un tribunal regional que ordenaba su liberación, así como a una decisión del Comité de Derechos Humanos de las Naciones Unidas que suspendía su extradición. Ni su familia ni sus abogados fueron informados de su extradición hasta después de que se produjo.
En resumen, Saab fue secuestrado dos veces: una cuando su avión estaba repostando y otra cuando fue trasladado a Estados Unidos.
Estados Unidos argumenta que la extradición fue legal y que cualquier violación de la Convención de Viena fue cometida por Cabo Verde. David Rivkin, uno de los abogados de Saab, dice que el hecho de que “Cabo Verde haya violado absolutamente su obligación legal no proporciona ninguna excusa a Estados Unidos”.
Rivkin describe el caso contra Saab como “sin precedentes”, dada la amplia y protectora visión que Estados Unidos ha mantenido habitualmente sobre la inmunidad diplomática. Saab tiene una comparecencia en abril ante el Tribunal de Apelación del Undécimo Circuito sobre esta misma cuestión.
“Estados Unidos no puede tener un mundo en el que terceros países puedan molestar a los diplomáticos estadounidenses, y si se establece una norma que dice que los diplomáticos de terceros países pueden ser molestados por Estados Unidos, es inevitable que ocurra lo mismo con los diplomáticos estadounidenses. Este enjuiciamiento no tiene ninguna base legal y no redunda en los intereses a largo plazo del propio Estados Unidos”, explica Rivkin.
Más allá de la cuestión crucial de la inmunidad diplomática, los cargos y el caso contra Saab son claramente políticos. Durante años, Estados Unidos ha perseguido a figuras clave en Venezuela, incluso poniendo recompensas sobre el presidente Maduro y otros, como parte de sus intentos de derrocar al gobierno.
Estos intentos, que incluyen librar una guerra económica bárbara e ilegal que ha diezmado la economía de Venezuela, han provocado un aumento de la migración y han causado la muerte de decenas de miles de venezolanos. Camila Saab califica con razón las sanciones de Estados Unidos como un “acto de guerra contra toda la población venezolana”.
Su marido desempeñó un papel clave en la mitigación de las terribles consecuencias de las sanciones. Se involucró por primera vez con Venezuela al conseguir contratos para la Gran Misión Vivienda, un programa social del gobierno que ha construido 3,9 millones de viviendas para los venezolanos de clase trabajadora desde 2011, la mayoría bajo las sanciones impuestas al país.
Luego Saab obtuvo contratos para el programa venezolano CLAP, a través del cual 7 millones de familias venezolanas reciben cajas de alimentos y bienes esenciales cada mes.
Las sanciones no sólo dificultan la vida de los venezolanos, sino que hacen que sea un reto hacer negocios con Venezuela. Los bancos se niegan a realizar transacciones (incluso cuando son perfectamente legales). Las compañías de seguros suben los precios o se retiran por completo. Las compañías navieras suben las tarifas. Los vendedores exigen dinero en efectivo y no operan a crédito.
En lugar de retirarse de Venezuela, como hicieron muchos empresarios, Saab decidió seguir con el pueblo venezolano y pasó del sector privado al público, convirtiéndose en diplomático encargado de encontrar “soluciones prácticas” al “bloqueo económico y financiero” impuesto a Venezuela desde 2015, lo cual incluía la negociación de acuerdos comerciales con Irán.
La relación económica con Irán ha sido fundamental para ayudar a la recuperación de la industria petrolera de Venezuela y, por extensión, de su economía.
Saab desempeñó un papel fundamental en los acuerdos comerciales entre Irán y Venezuela para todo tipo de productos, desde gasolina y repuestos hasta alimentos y medicinas. Según Forbes, Saab era un blanco de Estados Unidos porque tenía “los medios y los conocimientos técnicos para ayudar a mantener discretamente toda una economía en movimiento bajo los ojos de un mundo vigilante”.
Saab ha negado las acusaciones en su contra y señala una investigación suiza que se abandonó luego de tres años por falta de pruebas.
“Los méritos de las acusaciones son débiles a primera vista. Implican actividades que no tuvieron lugar en Estados Unidos y su conexión con Estados Unidos es muy tenue”, dice el abogado David Rivkin.
Su detención en Cabo Verde, a instancias del gobierno estadounidense, se produjo apenas unos meses después de que Trump anunciara una campaña de “máxima presión” sobre Venezuela. Su extradición a Estados Unidos descarriló el diálogo entre el gobierno y la oposición venezolana.
Estados Unidos planea ahora “presionar” a Saab “para que arroje luz sobre la red económica de Venezuela tras las sanciones”, según Forbes. Después de soportar ser torturado en Cabo Verde, la palabra presión se queda corta.
“Desde el día que él voló a Irán, nos han perseguido a todos. Nos han acosado en los medios de comunicación, nos han demonizado, no nos han dejado verle”, dijo Camilla Saab, describiendo lo que ha sufrido su familia.
Alex Saab, sobreviviente de cáncer, no ha podido tomar sus medicamentos diarios desde su detención. Ha perdido 65 libras. Sus padres murieron de COVID-19 mientras él estaba encarcelado en Cabo Verde.
Su familia ha sufrido también. Sus hijos adultos fueron sancionados por la administración Trump. Su hija menor nunca lo ha conocido. Sin embargo, en todas sus comunicaciones, Saab mantiene su lealtad al pueblo venezolano.
Al perseguirlo, Camila Saab cree que Estados Unidos está enviando un mensaje: “Intentan intimidar, pero el pueblo venezolano resiste y sigue en su lucha por la soberanía. Estados Unidos no es la policía del mundo. Liberen a Alex Saab”.
|
Write an article about: ‘Mexico is not a colony’: President AMLO criticizes US claim it hosts Russian spies. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Mexico, Northcom, Northern Command, Russia | Left-wing Mexican President AMLO criticized the US government accusation that his country hosts more Russian spies than any other, stating “Mexico is not a colony of any foreign country. Mexico is a free, independent, sovereign country.”
Mexico’s left-wing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has criticized the United States for claiming his country hosts more Russian spies than any other.
“We need to send them telegrams, informing them that Mexico is not a colony of any foreign country, that Mexico is a free, independent, sovereign country,” declared López Obrador, who is known popularly by the acronym AMLO.
“More and more this should be known, because sometimes it appears that it is not understood well enough,” the Mexican president added.
Mexico's left-wing President AMLO criticized the US claim that his country hosts Russian spies
"We need to send them telegrams informing them Mexico is not a colony of any foreign country, that Mexico is a free, independent, sovereign country"
Read more: https://t.co/9c6QqmzTDf pic.twitter.com/w7225NJCb2
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) March 27, 2022
The leader of US Northern Command (Northcom), General Glen VanHerck, claimed in a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on March 24 that Russia’s foreign military intelligence agency the GRU supposedly has more spies in Mexico than anywhere else.
The general accused Russia of using Mexico to spy on and try to infiltrate the United States, alleging “that most of the GRU members in the world are in Mexico at the moment,” and that “they keep a very close eye on their chances of influencing the opportunities and access that the United States has.”
AMLO rejected the US government’s accusations in his morning press conference on March 25.
“We are not a colony of Russia, or of China, or of the United States,” AMLO asserted. “Mexico is an independent country, free and sovereign.”
“We don’t have information about that,” he stated in response to the US general’s allegations.
AMLO said Washington has the right to share its views, because, “We respect the free expression of ideas.” But he condemned the idea that Mexico is controlled by any foreign power.
President López Obrador also stressed that Mexico maintains an independent, non-aligned foreign policy, which respects all countries.
“We have a policy of non-intervention,” AMLO explained.
“We don’t go to Moscow to spy on anyone, nor do we go to Beijing to spy on what they’re doing in China, nor do we go to Washington, or even to Los Angeles. We don’t involve ourselves in that.”
The president added that his government respects the rights of foreigners who abide by Mexico’s laws, while those who violate the law will be detained and face consequences.
AMLO has repeatedly criticized the US government for funding right-wing opposition groups in Mexico.
He also condemned the European Union for meddling in his country’s internal affairs. In a scathing open letter on March 10, AMLO’s office denounced the European Parliament as “flunkies of the reactionary and coup-plotting strategy of the corrupt” right-wing Mexican opposition.
The European Parliament condemned Mexico’s left-wing President AMLO for his “populist rhetoric” against the biased corporate media
He responded by blasting the EU body as a reactionary gang of coup-plotters, declaring “we are no longer a colony of anyone”https://t.co/D9qXQbiIdQ
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) March 11, 2022
AMLO called on Brussels to “evolve, leave behind your obsessive meddling disguised as good intentions,” adding, “Don’t forget that we are no longer a colony of anyone. Mexico is a free, independent, and sovereign country.”
In both his March 25 press conference and his March 10 letter to the European Parliament, AMLO quoted former president Benito Juárez, who said, “Among individuals, as among nations, respect for the rights of others is peace.”
When Russia invaded Ukraine on February 24, the United States pressured Mexico to join the Western powers in imposing sanctions on Moscow, but AMLO refused, emphasizing Mexico’s policy of non-intervention.
López Obrador has enjoyed a consistent 66% approval rating among Mexicans, making him one of the world’s most popular leaders.
|
Write an article about: US and Colombia do military exercises with nuclear submarine near Venezuela, after sending warship through Taiwan Strait. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Colombia, nuclear submarine, Taiwan, Ukraine, Venezuela | While the world is focused on Ukraine, the US and Colombia threatened Venezuela in military exercises with a nuclear submarine, a day after Washington intimidated China by sending a warship through the Taiwan Strait.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
While the world is fixated on the war in Ukraine, the United States is taking provocative military actions against Venezuela and China.
The US and Colombia held military exercises with a nuclear submarine in the Caribbean Sea, near Venezuela, just one day after Washington sent a warship through the Taiwan Strait.
Both Venezuela and China saw the US military moves as clear threats, condemning the actions as provocative.
On February 27 and 28, the US Navy held anti-submarine warfare exercises with the Colombian Navy.
Colombia’s Ministry of Defense boasted that this was the first time they had done a military exercise with a nuclear submarine, the USS Minnesota.
Por primera vez fue utilizado un submarino nuclear en un ejercicio de interoperabilidad entre Colombia y EE.UU. El submarino USS Minnesota ?? y el ARC ‘Pijao’ ?? pusieron a prueba sus capacidades, ratificando la cooperación y confianza entre ambos países. @ArmadaColombia @USNavy pic.twitter.com/WcGkBsVlvL
— Mindefensa (@mindefensa) February 28, 2022
US Southern Command (Southcom) shared photos of the exercises on its official Instagram account.
A post shared by U.S. Southern Command (@ussouthcom)
The Colombian Defense Ministry emphasized that the exercise highlighted the “interoperability between Colombia and the US.”
The private intelligence firm Stratfor, which is popularly known as the “shadow CIA,” noted that the US military exercises with Colombia were “within [the] scope of NATO.”
Although the US-led military alliance is called the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and the South American nation is decidedly not in the North Atlantic region, Colombia is a special “partner” of NATO.
It is NATO’s first and only “partner” in Latin America.
Washington and Bogotá claimed the exercises were aimed at fighting drug trafficking, but in reality Colombia’s government is deeply linked to drug cartels, organized crime, and violent paramilitary groups.
Colombia’s former president Álvaro Uribe, the most powerful politician in the country and a top ally of Washington, works closely with drug cartels and death squads. And Colombia’s current, far-right president, Iván Duque, only came to power because Uribe ordered an infamous drug dealer, Ñeñe Hernández, to buy votes for him.
The Colombian Navy said it felt “proud” to collaborate with the US military and deepen their integration.
? La @ArmadaColombia se siente orgullosa de hacer parte de la operación “Contralmirante José David Espitia Jiménez” en aguas del Caribe, para el progreso de la educación marítima, siendo participe de la protección y el desarrollo de los intereses nacionales. ???? pic.twitter.com/nBHTPJFGYL
— Armada de Colombia (@ArmadaColombia) February 28, 2022
For its part, Venezuela recognized the US-Colombian military exercises near its borders with a nuclear submarine as a blatant threat.
Venezuelan Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino tweeted, “Why is there such imperialist flashiness? Is this a copy of NATO expansion in the Mediterranean of the Americas?”
“You don’t battle drug trafficking, the war in Arauca [in Colombia], systematic murders and terrorist groups with nuclear submarines,” he wrote. “I categorically reject this.”
¿Para qué tanta ostentación imperialista?¿Es una réplica de la expansión Otanista en el Mediterráneo de América? El narcotráfico, la guerra en Arauca, los asesinatos sistemáticos y los grupos terroristas no se combaten con submarinos nucleares. Lo rechazo de manera categórica. pic.twitter.com/aDeLONv5AO
— Vladimir Padrino L. (@vladimirpadrino) February 28, 2022
Just one day before these US-Colombian naval exercises started, Washington threatened China by sending a large warship through the Taiwan Strait.
On February 26, the US Navy’s guided-missile destroyer USS Ralph Johnson sailed through the narrow strait.
Destroyer USS Ralph Johnson Performs Taiwan Strait Transit – USNI News https://t.co/joAxUU4480 pic.twitter.com/VG0Izmujkn
— U.S. Naval Institute (@NavalInstitute) February 28, 2022
China condemned the exercise as “provocative.”
“It is hypocritical and futile for the US to conduct this provocative action in an attempt to bolster the ‘Taiwan independence’ forces,” the Chinese military said.
Beijing’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Wang Wenbin, then added, “If the US wants to embolden the ‘Taiwan independence’ forces in this way, then we have this to say to the US: such move will only accelerate the demise of the ‘Taiwan independence’ forces.”
“The US will also pay a heavy price for its adventurist act,” he continued. “If the US tries to intimidate and pressure China in this way, then we have this stern warning: the so-called military deterrence will be reduced to scrap iron when facing the steely great wall of the 1.4 billion Chinese people.”
Comment on the US guided-missile destroyer USS Ralph Johnson's recently sail through the Taiwan Strait and all the hype. pic.twitter.com/j5RXw7Vw28
— XIE Yongjun 解勇军 (@XIEYongjun_CHN) March 1, 2022
|
Write an article about: Peru rises up after coup against elected President Pedro Castillo. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fujimori, Daniela Ortiz, Indigenous peoples, Keiko Fujimori, Pedro Castillo, Peru, racism | Peru’s elected left-wing President Pedro Castillo was overthrown in a coup by the right-wing-controlled congress. A Peruvian activist explains why the people are rising up and demanding a new constitution.
Peru’s democratically elected left-wing President Pedro Castillo was overthrown and arrested in a coup on December 7 by the right-wing-controlled congress, which has an approval rating of between 7% and 11%.
Castillo is a humble teacher and union organizer from a rural, indigenous-descent community in a country whose political system has long been dominated by racist elites.
As soon as Castillo entered office at the end of July 2021, far-right elements in the congress, loyal to the US-backed former dictator Alberto Fujimori, constantly tried to overthrow him and destabilize his government.
Multipolarista editor Ben Norton interviewed Peruvian activist Daniela Ortiz about the protests going on across the country calling for a new constitution and demanding that Castillo be freed from prison.
BEN NORTON: Hey, everyone. I’m Ben Norton. And today I have the privilege of being joined by an activist in Peru, Daniela Ortiz. She is an anti-racist activist, and also an artist.
And today, we’re going to be talking about the coup that happened against the elected left-wing president, Pedro Castillo, on December 7 there. This was wildly distorted in foreign media reporting.
And I’m going to ask you about this, Daniela, but there was essentially an attempt to have a congressional coup against the elected President Castillo by the right-wing-controlled congress. And the most recent poll from just a few days ago shows that the congress in Peru has an 11% approval rating.
And in response to the congressional coup attempt, we saw that President Castillo dissolved congress and called for a constitutional referendum, and that led to a coup against him.
And now there has been a new president that has been appointed, who is unelected, his vice president, Dina Boluarte, who has made a political alliance with the right wing and called for a government of national unity with the right wing.
Meanwhile, there are large protests going on in Peru demanding that Castillo, who was arrested by the police, be freed, and calling for new elections, and also calling to have a constituent assembly to create a new constitution.
?️@VimermaM desde Espinar.#AdelantoDeEleccionesYa #QueSeVayanTodosYa pic.twitter.com/DwLkEI7LjX
— ?? Wayka? (@WaykaPeru) December 9, 2022
So, Daniela, can you talk about the situation that has happened in the past few days? What do you think about this coup? How is it being portrayed outside of Peru? And what do people not understand about what’s going on?
DANIELA ORTIZ: Thanks a lot for having me. What we’re seeing these days is the end of a long process that started the first day that Castillo was elected.
Since the first day, the right wing, together with the media – not only the national media, also the international media – have been creating a lot of strategies in order to take Castillo down.
Strategies that went from accusing not only Castillo, but everybody that was around him, of “terrorism”; several lawfare processes that happened against Castillo, against Vladimir Cerrón, who is the leader of Perú Libre, that was the party that Castillo entered with,
Then a lawfare that also was against citizens that only were at the polling tables during the election and the voting. And they were accused of committing fraud, what they called “fraud in the table,” like the fraud was committed by the people that were in charge of the tables during the elections, when Castillo won.
So this is one of the many attempts they had, all the “vacancy” impeachments and all these processes. And they finally did what they wanted.
That is not taking down Castillo; it is putting themselves in power, because it’s something also that we’re seeing from before.
This is not the first president to be taken out by the right wing; he is actually the third president.
And we’re not talking of just any right wing. We’re talking about the Fujimori right wing that wants to be in power and continue that dictatorship that we had with Alberto Fujimori.
But now where we have Keiko, his daughter, and all the people from Fuerza Popular, the party of Keiko Fujimori, that are aiming basically to take power and not let anyone be in the executive power.
Because it is not just now; it has been for many years that Fuerza Popular has been controlling the congress, and then also creating the laws, in order to be able to control executive power and not let the Peruvian people have the president that we have elected.
BEN NORTON: This is very important. For people who don’t know the modern history of Peru, there was a fascist dictator, Alberto Fujimori, who governed until 2000.
And both his son and his daughter are prominent politicians in the congress in Peru. And his daughter, Keiko Fujimori, was the other candidate who ran against Pedro Castillo in the second round of the elections.
And the Fujimori dictatorship committed genocide, sterilization of indigenous women. So they represent the far-right wing of Peruvian politics.
Now, you mentioned something very important, Daniela, which is that the right-wing-controlled congress has taken out multiple presidents.
In fact, Peru has had six presidents in five years, because of this Fujimorista constitution that allows the Congress to remove elected presidents because of “moral incapacity,” which really means whatever they want.
Can you talk about why the political system is so unstable, and why Castillo and also people in the streets right now have been demanding a new constitution where the elected president can actually be allowed to govern?
DANIELA ORTIZ: Another demand that is happening now is not only that we need a new constitution, not having the constitution that was imposed by Alberto Fujimori during the dictatorship in 1993, by a real a coup d’etat that he carried out.
He [Fujimori] closed the congress not in these conditions, not in this situation we are in now.
And they have been manipulating all the laws for many years, in order to impose power and to demand things like, for example, that the president has to ask permission from the parliament in order to travel.
So they, for example, didn’t allow Castillo to go to the inauguration ceremony when [Colombia’s President Gustavo] Petro won. And they decided not to let him go to that, but yes to Chile, for example.
So they have absolute and total control in regard to this.
All the proposals that come from the executive power in order to make the changes that we need – like, for example, in regard to gas, or that there is needed in regard to the second agrarian reform, that was one of the big promises of Castillo – these were, blocked by the parliament.
So then there is the accusation that Castillo is not doing anything, but he cannot do anything because he has a parliament that is operating in this way.
And then something really important that is happening in this context is the media power. There is a situation in which, if you listen nowadays, the media in Peru, they are claiming that Castillo was the one that carried out a coup d’etat, and they are using, literally, the word “dictator.”
So there is an absolute misconception, or manipulation of that situation.
And obviously there is no control over what is going on in the parliament.
But something good in regard to the media is that happens in Lima, and that is what people mainly from Lima or the big cities claim.
But if you go to the countryside, for example, and if you go to many places where Castillo has a lot of people that defend him, where they have more community radios – it’s not that there is no access to that media; it’s that people from the countryside, and people who are Indigenous, people who are mestizo, don’t feel identified with the media from Lima.
Therefore there is a possibility of having another type of information and another type of of a perspective, in regard to the situation of what is going on.
And that is why, since the beginning, people mostly outside Lima have been defending their vote. That is basically what is going on.
They [the opposition] haven’t accepted that Castillo won the elections until now.
And as you mentioned, also something really important, is that even the Fujimori party, Fuerza Popular, even they took down a right-wing president, Pedro Pablo Kuczynski.
Because, as I said before, it’s not about not letting Castillo be in the presidency; it’s not about having only the right wing; it’s about having this extreme right wing that is a continuation of a dictatorship that has persecuted, killed, disappeared student, union leaders, workers, and people who were getting organized in the ’90s.
BEN NORTON: You mentioned the role of the media. In fact, there has been a video clip going viral on social media showing a right-wing TV presenter literally saying that the police should “shoot protesters in the head.”
So we see an incitement to a massacre.
En un canal peruano el conductor le pide abiertamente a la Policía que le "metan un balazo en la cabeza" a los manifestantes. La situación cada vez más crítica en Perú. pic.twitter.com/mL2qhC3OgT
— Marco Teruggi (@Marco_Teruggi) December 9, 2022
And of course, it was a massacre in 2019 of working-class Indigenous people in Bolivia that is what solidified the coup against Evo Morales.
And, of course, Peru and Bolivia have differences, but they also have a lot of similarities. And one of those similarities is that both countries have a very large Indigenous population that has been excluded from the bourgeois political system for many decades.
And Evo Morales in Bolivia was the first ever Indigenous president. And similarly, Castillo represents the Indigenous-descent communities in rural areas.
He himself is from a very humble background. He was a teacher in a rural area who led a teachers’ strike.
And the media coverage against him has often been very racist. Of course, in Peru, the political class has been dominated by many people of European descent who look down upon the Indigenous-descent majority.
So can you talk about the the racism that Castillo has dealt with, and also the classism, given that he represents the poor and working-class majority of the country who have been marginalized and excluded from politics for so long?
DANIELA ORTIZ: That comes from a media, and precisely with this Congress, that do not allow to have laws and to execute the laws that protect population from that media that is so aggressive, not only against Castillo, but all his ministers have been accused with racist arguments, classist arguments of not being capable.
That’s the the argument they usually use. And it’s absolutely normalized in the context of Peru, of saying they are not capable of doing this.
But also of really complex things like accusations of being “terrorists,” for example.
That was what we call “terruqueo,” the practice of claiming that somebody is linked to terrorism comes from the ’90s. And that has absolute impunity in the media.
And the level of racism, for example, going from comparing Castillo with animals. We saw one day that there was a party of the elite, that they were dressing up like Castillo, and making fun of him, and killing him.
This is the level of violence.
And we can see in Argentina, before the attempt of murdering Cristina [Fernández de Kirchner], there were a lot of contexts in which this violence was being represented. One was the media, but also in parties, and also in Twitter.
Everywhere there was this type of of aggressiveness, with absolute impunity.
And also, it’s not only Castillo. It’s all the people who entered into the parliament.
It’s the first time, for example, that we could have – before the use of Quecha in the parliament was like a symbolic thing. Like, for example, somebody saying hello and presenting in Quecha, or doing something symbolic in Quecha.
But in this moment, and this parliament, where some of the parliamentarians at the beginning were from Perú Libre, the party of Castillo, we saw figures like Guido Bellido, for example, giving full speeches in Quecha, making a political use of Quecha.
And that is frustrating white people who do not understand the language that is spoken by a great proportion of the population here in Peru, and that is one of the languages of Peru.
And they were even trying to file legal complaints because some politicians were using Quecha in the context of the parliament.
The level of racism at that moment was was really strong.
And then in the past few days we saw the humiliation of the family of Castillo. They had to take their things out of the presidential palace in bags.
And that is the image that the right wing and the elite from Lima wanted, because they cannot accept having in power somebody who comes from a rural area, who is a teacher, who comes from a humble background.
BEN NORTON: Absolutely. And I want to talk now about the complex situation in terms of the dissolution of the congress, the way in which Castillo temporarily at least tried to dissolve the congress.
We know from day one, as you mentioned, that the right-wing-controlled congress, which has an 11% approval rating, has constantly tried to overthrow the elected President Castillo.
In just over a year, they tried, they were on their third attempt to impeach him.
And unlike the impeachment system in other countries, if the congress has a majority vote to impeach the president, the president has to step down in Peru. It’s not like, for instance, in the United States where President Donald Trump was impeached, but he did not step down.
In Peru, it has led to six presidents in five years. And this is the context in which Castillo dissolved the congress.
And in fact, even ironically according to the the Fujimorista constitution, the president actually does have the ability to dissolve the congress in circumstances of obstructionism.
So can you talk about the misleading narrative that we see in corporate media, and also spread by the US embassy, claiming that Castillo was carrying out an “autogolpe,” a “self coup” against the government, when in reality of course it was the coup being carried out against him.
pic.twitter.com/cyDlKaxiC8
— Embajada EEUU Perú (@USEMBASSYPERU) December 7, 2022
DANIELA ORTIZ: Well actually the demand to close to close that Congress was a popular demand. Many of the marches, and the blockades, and the demonstrations recently were not against Castillo, but pushing him to make the agenda he entered with.
It was not for him to step down or to become more right-wing; it was for him to become more left-wing. That was a protest of the people: with Castillo, not against him but with him.
And what happened was that he did what the people was asking: to close the congress. Because everybody is conscious, and we can see it, as you mentioned it, that the congress has only 11% approval – and I don’t want to see what the number is going to be after what they did.
There is a general consensus in many contexts that the congress is interrupting.
And then also he did what [Martín] Vizcarra did, our last president. He also decided to close the congress. That was also a demand from the people at the moment.
And obviously what they came out to say is that it was a coup d’etat, and they were talking about a dictatorship, but, I mean, Castillo didn’t even appear with a military when he decided to close the congress.
And it was a policy that was closing the congress and not making a dictatorship or a coup d’etat, as what they were saying, every word, and the argument and the excuse in order for them to carry out a real coup d’etat.
What happened is that it seems that Castillo had information that the congress would have the amount of votes in order to do the impeachment and remove him.
That’s what it seems, because really, until this moment, there are many versions and theories, but nobody knows really what happened and why he took that decision.
But anyway, even though – because there are people saying that it was a mistake to do it at this time, and how he did it, and how he didn’t have support or wasn’t organized with certain groups or political groups, etc.
But the main point is that there was a general demand to close in the congress. That’s what he did.
And also something really positive is that, if you listen [to Castillo’s] message – and most people haven’t even listened to what he was saying – is that he said that he was closing the congress and was also going to open a constituent process in order to change the constitution.
That is one of the main demands.
And then the really complex thing is that, when the congress impeached him and they kicked him out of the government, the congress was already closed. They were working absolutely illegally.
So because Castillo already closed the congress, and then they took that decision, and he was detained – and even if we have these laws – they were not legal procedures.
And nobody knows what is happening in regard to him, because they are accusing him of starting a rebellion. But in the penal code that talks about this, it says clearly that you have to be armed. And Castillo was not armed.
He was basically alone. And he was detained alone. And he was not rebelling with arms.
So many of us understand that the detention of Castillo is absolutely illegal. Even under the rules that they have imposed.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, it’s almost comical in a way to see people accuse him of being a dictator when Castillo was clearly impeded in every single way.
He had no control over the political system and the congress, no control over the elite economic groups, the big corporations and oligarchs, no control over the media, which constantly attacked him every day, 24/7, and certainly no control over the military and police, which arrested him!
So this would be the weakest “dictator” ever.
DANIELA ORTIZ: And they were operating against him. We have been, for example, in the processes of lawfare in regard to supposed cases of corruption.
In one of them, they even entered his room. And actually it is the same policemen that detained him the other day.
And they even had the power to enter the room of the president, and to touch, remove, and take documents that are a secret of his state, that were not only his personal belongings, but they are part of that.
I mean, there is a law that protects the president and his belongings. And the police entered the presidential palace, and they were taking everything.
So obviously, we say, what type of dictatorship lasted three hours? That wasn’t a dictatorship.
But a dictatorship we really lived under was the Fujimori dictatorship. There were, for example, at the beginning – once he [Fujimori] was elected – there were conversations and audio recordings of Vladimiro Montesinos, who was the chief of the intelligence service, which was actually a form by the CIA.
And he [Montesinos] studied in the [US military’s] School of the Americas. And we know how many people in Latin America that were part of dictatorships studied there. And he was one of the main characters of the Fujimori dictatorship.
There were audio recordings of him [Montesinos] giving orders from prison on how to deal with the elections, in order to put in Keiko Fujimori. And nobody investigated that.
And what they were investigating [instead] – and I’m not making a joke – there was an investigation that was of how they paid for the food at Castillo’s birthday party in the palace, and who paid for the birthday party of his daughter.
That is the huge “corruption” information that they have.
And here we also have this figure of the protected witness, the person that can accuse you that you were part of a corruption process, and they have benefits in the legal process.
So there were many of these people, and many of them have been being linked to the Fujimoris’ party. And they were friends, and together with them.
And these same people – actually, one of the it protected witnesses that was accusing Castillo of being corrupt, in one of the corruption cases, she had the same lawyer as Fujimori!
How come they are not going to investigate that? This media that is so worried, how are they not going to investigate what are the links of the people that are accusing Castillo to the Fujimoris’ party?
BEN NORTON: Yeah, it’s quite incredible seeing the media and the right-wing opposition accuse Castillo of corruption.
Meanwhile, it’s in fact the Fujimori family – and especially in the infamous corruption scandal of the Mamanivideos, where we have concrete evidence; they have been proven to be engaged in corruption, bribing politicians to vote in their interests.
I mean, of course, corruption is nothing new in in Peru. But the accusations against Castillo remind me of the accusations of corruption against [left-wing President] Dilma Rousseff in Brazil that were being made by the most corrupt people in Brazilian politics.
DANIELA ORTIZ: And then with this logic of, well, now you have to prove [you’re not corrupt].
And people say like, “It’s really easy, yes, you have to prove that you are innocent.” But what they have been doing – and we see, we know how it’s a process of lawfare, and how long the process is to prove that you are not guilty.
And, for example, they detained the daughter of Castillo.
So that’s also really important to know how, in the lawfare processes in different contexts of Latin America, they kind of reinforce their strategies and create new strategies,
Something new that we have seen here – well, we also saw it in Argentina with Cristina [Fernández de Kirchner’s] daughter – but here they also detained the daughter of the president. And they opened a process against his wife.
But then, for example, with Vladimir Cerrón, the leader of Perú Libre, the party that entered the government together with Castillo, and then he stepped out – but, for example, [they targeted] the mother of Vladimir Cerrón, and all his family, everybody that is around him.
Actually one of the ministers of Castillo stepped down and he explained, almost crying, saying that he didn’t want to have – because they were starting to attack his daughter, and his ex-wife, and opening legal processes against him – and he said that he didn’t want to put at risk the well-being of his daughter, because they are detaining the families also, as a strategy of pressure.
And then they are let go, not guilty, but they have been already detained two years, or one year, or six months, and the media has already created huge headlines that then are never erased.
Because we have seen it with Lula [da Silva, president-elect of Brazil]. When everything is shown that he was not guilty, like in many other cases, for example, the media says almost nothing about that.
And then nobody is processed, or investigated, or denounced, or pays for carrying out these processes of lawfare. There is absolute impunity in regard to that.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, I mentioned earlier that there have been large protests going on demanding that Castillo be freed.
But they’re also demanding a new constitution, and specifically a constituent assembly.
And this is a tweet here from a left-wing member of congress, Guillermo Bermejo Rojas.
Can you talk about this demand for a constituent assembly, and what the people of Peru want to try to create a new constitution to get rid of the dictatorship-era constitution?
DANIELA ORTIZ: Well, like in many other countries, like Chile, for example, we have a constitution that comes from the dictatorship of Fujimori, that doesn’t allow, for example, the state to intervene in emergency situations – like the Covid-19 pandemic, for example, not nationalizing, at least momentarily, the medical services.
And for example, during the Covid-19 pandemic, we saw that the government couldn’t do anything, because the constitution was created so the interests of companies, private entities, and the interests of transnational [corporations] are absolutely [the priority].
For example, with the gas situation, there is a problem that we cannot nationalize the gas. The price of the gas in Peru is amazing, when, at the same time we have gas; we are producers of gas.
But because of the constitution, it is really difficult to make a change in regard to that.
And now you can see it is even bigger, the demand that we need to change the constitution.
But more than changing the constitution, I think the most important thing is the process, and to think about what is going to be the process that we’re going to have in order to build that new constitution.
For example, a discussion here is also to have a plurinational state.
We have so many different communities, and people, and identities, and languages in the context of Peru that have been not only excluded, they have been basically almost persecuted.
Like we saw, as I said, in the parliament, people were speaking Quecha in the parliament, and they were almost trying to process them legally because the white people couldn’t understand what they were saying.
So we need a new way of getting organized in regard to this.
So I hope, many of us hope, that even though we have to go through this moment, it’s a moment that is going to strengthen in the streets, in order to demand this new constitution.
BEN NORTON: I am very grateful for this analysis.
Finally, just to conclude here, I know in moments like these, with a coup, it’s always the worst moment to criticize a leader who has been overthrown in a coup.
So I don’t want to ask this question to criticize Castillo in this very dangerous moment for him, but just for people outside of Peru, so they can understand the political context.
One of the narratives that we’ve seen, which is true, is that Castillo did alienate some of his former leftist allies.
You mentioned that he came in as president as part of the socialist party Perú Libre, and later had a split with the party.
And he also had multiple prime ministers, [known officially as] the president of the council of ministers – you mentioned some of them, Guido Bellido and others – and they kind of had falling outs.
So there were people in the Peruvian left who had criticisms of Castillo. Although it seems like, in this moment, the left is unified against the coup.
Just to provide that context for people to understand, how would you say the relationship of Castillo has been to the left and the social movements in Peru?
DANIELA ORTIZ: Well, I think it’s a general problem in many contexts in the Global South, and even Europe for example, that we have a problem with a unity of the left wing, many times.
And I think there is a problem in regard to that, that there is only unity when it comes to an emergency moment – like, for example, the election moment, or the moment of a coup d’etat.
We shouldn’t have allowed this to happen. And mostly we shouldn’t have allowed this to happen when the left wing didn’t have any problem.
Because, obviously, there were criticisms of Castillo, because he was not accomplishing most of the promises that he entered it with. But we also needed to understand that he had a parliament that didn’t let him approve any type of laws.
And then he had such a level of the media [opposition], that it is really difficult to create any type of changes, if what you have to do in your daily life as a president, as the government is just defending yourself.
I do think that it would have helped Castillo, for example, to be a stronger if he had the first group of ministers he had and keeping it that way, and not changing it, because then he was changing, every time there was some sort of attack from the media, then he would change the minister, thinking that the media was going to stop.
And I think he some way trusted or thought that if he would get less “radical,” they were going to stop. But it was even worse, because they wanted to take him out.
And then also something that I see as a problem – I lived in Spain for 13 years, and I saw it, I see it nowadays a lot, for example, with the racist speeches from the ultra-right wing from there – that we have allowed here to have a right wing that is setting the agenda.
If there is an accusation of corruption, everybody says, yeah, maybe he is corrupt. They’re not thinking that everything that the right wing says, and the media from the right wing says, is part of the agenda of kicking him out of power.
So I do think there have been several mistakes.
There is also, I think, a need to not only discuss how to stay in the government, but there is a need to have a political project that we hope goes through the constituent process.
But I hope really that after this situation, there is a deep reflection, in every space on the left wing, on the mistakes that have been committed.
That I think, basically, is not having the unity we need, not only in moments of election, or when a coup d’etat happens and we need to go to the streets, but in the process of building that.
Also, I do not think that a president alone is going to change things. I do not think that only a group in the congress is going to change things.
And I do think that, if there is a mistake from the government, it can count on other organizations and the people that want to contribute in this process of change, and that we are going to be there to defend our president.
BEN NORTON: Very well said. I think that’s a perfect note to end on. I want to thank you, Daniela Ortiz.
Daniela is an activist and an artist, and she is involved in the anti-racist movement and the feminist movement in Peru.
People can follow her on Twitter at @DanillaOrtiz.
Daniela, thank you so much for providing this context in this moment.
DANIELA ORTIZ: Thanks a lot, and take care. We hope we get support during these days of mobilization. Thanks.
|
Write an article about: Imperialism and capitalism are ‘bleeding the world dry’: At UN, Nicaragua calls for global rebellion. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | capitalism, Denis Moncada, imperialism, Nicaragua, UN, United Nations | At the United Nations General Assembly, Nicaragua’s Sandinista government called for a global rebellion against the “imperialist and capitalist system” that is “bleeding the world dry.” Condemning illegal sanctions and war, it urged a new multipolar order.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government used its platform at the United Nations General Assembly to call for a global rebellion against the “imperialist and capitalist system” that is “bleeding the world dry.”
“It is time to say enough to the hypocritical imperialism that politicizes, falsifies, and denigrates human rights, that they themselves violate and deny every day,” declared Nicaraguan Foreign Minister Denis Moncada.
“Imperialism and its coercive actions are anti-life, in all spheres, and because of this, they are contrary to international law,” he added.
In his September 26 UN speech, Moncada proclaimed, “A better, just, multipolar world” is “already being built, and we are here to keep creating it, and to defend it.”
“It is time to say enough, and to rebel and keep rebelling against the innate evil of capitalism, that suffocates the majority and brutally enriches a few.”
Nicaragua delivered the most revolutionary speech at the UN:
"It's time to reject criminal blockades; all illegal, arbitrary, aggressive sanctions," which expose "the perversion of an imperialist and capitalist system" that is "bleeding the world dry" ? pic.twitter.com/ALrbDt5hNc
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 26, 2022
Moncada continued:
“It is time to transcend the egoism that kills, that murders millions of human beings in the world, who are subjected to the cruelty of poverty and extreme poverty, by the barbarous instincts of the beasts, the great powers that seek to continue and perpetuate their dominion at the expense of hunger, lack of health, destruction of the climate, ignorance, war.”
“It is time to keep rejecting the criminal blockades; the aggressions of so-called sanctions, which are illegal, arbitrary, illicit; which clearly show the perversion of the imperialist and capitalist system and model, that continue punishing the bleeding the world dry, while organizations that should defend it just watch, doing nothing.”
“It is time to make important the principal of the sovereign equality of states in all international organizations and fora, so that multipolar and non-aligned world that we have so yearned for can be reality, can be strengthened, can grow and include all of us.”
“It is time to make important the world of dialogue and peace, of justice and solidarity, of brotherhood and good will.”
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government at the UN ?
“It’s time to say enough is enough, to rebel against the innate evil of capitalism, which suffocates the majority while brutally enriching the few”
Reject “the hypocritical imperialism” that violates human rights “on a daily basis” pic.twitter.com/TeVxR0w7KO
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 26, 2022
The Nicaraguan foreign minister emphasized the long history of his people’s struggle against foreign conquest.
“The heroic, dignified, sovereign, free people” of Nicaragua have worked with other peoples to “confront, throughout the centuries, the colonial and imperial avarice and greed that, from Europe and the north of this wounded continent [the Americas], has shown no mercy, attacking, intervening, invading, occupying our sacred lands,” he said.
“The invaders have left Nicaragua, expelled and defeated by the bravery of Nicaraguan patriotism,” he added.
“The assault, the robbery, the ignoble and abominable plunder, the larceny and genocides unleashed by the colonialists and imperialists of Earth, those are the true crimes, and those are the true criminals against humanity.”
Urging unity, Moncada stressed, “We should unite to keep confronting the great social, economic, climatic, cultural, and security challenges, which endanger the human family every day.”
Nicaragua's Foreign Minister Denis Moncada at the UN: "The assault, the robbery, the ignoble and abominable plunder, the larceny and genocides unleashed by the colonialists and imperialists of Earth, those are the true crimes, and those are the true criminals against humanity" pic.twitter.com/pZq6YhFB7c
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 26, 2022
At the United Nations, Nicaragua’s Sandinista government sent its “committed embrace of solidarity with dignified and brave Venezuela, with heroic Cuba, with the noble and historic battles of the Palestinian people, the Islamic Revolution of Iran’s families, the grand ongoing battle of the Russian Federation against fascism and for security, integrity, and peace.”
Moncada likewise stressed Nicaragua’s “embrace of solidarity with the admirable resistance and just development of the People’s Republic of China, that causes such discomfort, concern, and envy for the enemies of the common good.”
Nicaragua similarly reaffirmed its solidarity with “Syria, the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, Belarus, the peoples of Asia, Africa, and Our America and the Caribbean.”
|
Write an article about: Nicaragua at UN: Pandemic exposes ‘irrational, oppressive capitalist system,’ US/EU sanctions are ‘savage’ crime against humanity. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | capitalism, climate change, Denis Moncada, EU, European Union, imperialism, Nicaragua, Puerto Rico, reparations, sanctions, UN, United Nations | At the United Nations, Nicaragua’s Sandinista government condemned US and EU imperialism, called for climate reparations and decolonization, and said the Covid-19 pandemic exposed “savage capitalism.”
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government used its platform at the United Nations General Assembly to condemn the unjust global capitalist system, and to call to create a new international economic model built on equality, solidarity, and peace.
Foreign Minister Denis Moncada delivered a fiery speech in the UN headquarters on September 27.
Moncada emphasized that the Covid-19 pandemic had exposed the “irrational and oppressive system of capitalist exploitation,” in which rich imperialist countries hoard vaccines while building more and more weapons of mass destruction.
“It is part of the heartless creation of savage capitalism, an insatiable desire for accumulation,” he said.
Nicaragua condemned the constant US meddling in its internal affairs, noting that the imperial attacks hinder its fight against poverty, “which is the world’s cruelest pandemic.”
“It is not the US empire that elects the government of Nicaragua; it is the Nicaraguan people,” Moncada declared.
The top Nicaraguan diplomat condemned the illegal, “savage” sanctions the United States and European Union have imposed on his nation and on countries around the world.
“In times of pandemic, these measures become a crime against humanity,” Moncada said.
Nicaragua affirmed its solidarity with the more than 2 billion people living in countries suffering under these US or EU sanctions.
Moncada reiterated his nation’s call for global de-nuclearization, warning of the dangers of nuclear weapons.
On the subject of climate change, Nicaragua emphasized that imperialist countries in the Global North, as the largest carbon emitters, are the most responsible, and thus must pay reparations and bear the majority of the burden in combatting the ecological “catastrophe.”
Moncada also addressed the crisis of people fleeing Central America (although Nicaragua does not contribute much to that migration crisis, and most of it comes from neighboring Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala). He called for respecting the rights of immigrants and refugees, while emphasizing that many are in fact fleeing due to Western-fueled wars and coups, as well as Western-imposed neoliberal policies that destroyed their local economies.
Nicaragua criticized the United States and Europe for “their culture of war.” It was an ironic jab at Western colonialists who spread racist tropes claiming people in the Global South have a “culture of violence.”
The Sandinista government likewise used its international stage to call for independence for Puerto Rico and an end to US and British colonialism in Latin America.
At the same time, Nicaragua affirmed its “total solidarity” with Palestine, Syria, Iran, the DPRK, Russia, and Western Sahara.
Translated highlights of Moncada’s speech follow below, in which Nicaragua calls to build a peaceful, multipolar international order based on multilateralism, non-intervention, and respect for national sovereignty.
At the UN, Nicaragua said the pandemic exposes "the irrational & oppressive system of capitalist exploitation"
Rich imperialist countries hoard vaccines while building more weapons. "It's part of the heartless creation of savage capitalism, an insatiable desire for accumulation" pic.twitter.com/Qypd3uuoQc
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 28, 2021
“This global health crisis continues to erode our efforts to overcome existing problems and challenges, such as poverty, hunger, and malnutrition, inequality, unemployment, and climate change, produced by the irrational and oppressive system of capitalist exploitation.”
“The inhumane hoarding of Covid-19 vaccines is unacceptable, on the part of developed countries, which prevents the fair and equal distribution for everyone, including developing countries. It is necessary and fair to guarantee technology transfers and financial resources, as well as declaring the vaccines a common good for humanity.”
“The pandemic that affects all countries on our Mother Earth has proven the need to create a new international economic model, fundamentally based on inclusion, equity, social justice, respectful equality between states and governments, prioritizing the eradication of poverty, and healthcare as a universal right for humanity, demanding that the resources that are used for war, aggression, and destabilization of countries are instead used, in a humanistic spirit, for life, for peace, for the security and progress of the people.”
“It is unacceptable that, in the middle of this pandemic, they continue modernizing weapons of mass destruction, putting all of humanity at risk.”
“It is part of the heartless creation of savage capitalism, an insatiable desire for accumulation, at the cost of peace, international security, and human life.”
Nicaragua condemned the constant US meddling in its internal affairs, noting that the imperial attacks hinder its fight against poverty, "which is the world's cruelest pandemic."
"It is not the US empire that elects the government of Nicaragua; it is the Nicaraguan people." pic.twitter.com/fEK22g9I8E
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 28, 2021
“Nicaragua is a free, independent, and sovereign state, but imperialist powers still attack our project of national development, and undermine our efforts, above all, our project to eradicate poverty, which is the world’s cruelest pandemic.”
“In Nicaragua, the first Sunday of November this year, the Nicaraguan people will elect our authorities with their vote, with the participation, with gender equality, of 15 political parties, both national and regional parties.”
“It is not the US empire that elects the government of Nicaragua; it is the Nicaraguan people, confirming its commitment to continue working for peace, security, and the tranquility of people, families, and communities.”
At the UN, Nicaragua condemned the illegal, "savage" sanctions the US and EU have imposed worldwide.
"In times of pandemic, these measures become a crime against humanity."
Nicaragua reaffirmed "our solidarity with the more than 2 billion people who suffer from these sanctions" pic.twitter.com/7XjhuHLOTh
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 28, 2021
“The illegal unilateral coercive measures must cease immediately, to guarantee stability, peace, and development, for families, peoples, and nations.”
“These coercive and aggressive policies of the empires constitute a savage obstacle for the eradication of poverty, and to advance to sustainable development.”
“In times of pandemic, these measures become a crime against humanity, on the part of those who impose them.”
“For Nicaragua, they are unacceptable; we reject them, and we reiterate our condemnation and our solidarity with the more than 2 billion people who suffer from these sanctions.”
Nicaragua called at the UN General Assembly for reparations to combat climate change.
It stressed that rich imperialist countries have caused the majority of environmental damage, and thus must contribute much more.
"The biggest emitters have that historic responsibility" pic.twitter.com/tvAlmgRXCR
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 28, 2021
“While our people work, resist, respond, and recover from the pandemic, we should not forget the challenges that the threat of climate change poses, and its devastating impact, particularly in developing countries, a threat that will continue even after overcoming the Covid-19 pandemic and recuperating the economy.”
“To preserve and defend our Mother Earth’s right to life, concrete results are needed in the COP26 UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow, that are based on the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, that strengthen the responsibility and fulfillment of the commitment to climate justice, and the indispensable policy of reparations, as a form of direct and unconditional cooperation.”
“If we allow time to pass without developed countries fulfilling their commitments, the damage to Mother Earth caused by global warming will be irreversible.”
“Being those who are historically responsible for this catastrophe, it is extremely important that the biggest [fossil fuel] emitters, who are responsible for the plunder, damage, and the imbalances recognize our losses and harm, contributing to the recuperation of our ecosystems.”
“The biggest emitters have that historic responsibility.”
Nicaragua's Sandinista government used its platform at the United Nations to call for an end to US and British colonialism in Latin America and the decolonization of Puerto Rico.
Cuba also joined Nicaragua in calling for Puerto Rico's independence and freedom. pic.twitter.com/L4agrK44gv
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 28, 2021
“Nicaragua advocates for the full decolonization of our continent, including the decolonization of the people of Puerto Rico, and the return of Argentina’s sovereignty over the Islas Malvinas [UK-colonized Falkland Islands].”
|
Write an article about: Venezuela and Iran sign 20-year cooperation plan, Maduro pledges joint ‘anti-imperialist struggle’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Algeria, Ebrahim Raisi, Iran, Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela | Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro visited Iran and signed a historic 20-year cooperation agreement involving energy, technology, and trade. He pledged solidarity against Western aggression in a joint “anti-imperialist struggle for a better world.”
Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro took a historic trip to Iran and announced a 20-year cooperation agreement, pledging to more closely integrate the countries’ economies and work together in a joint “anti-imperialist struggle for a better world, of international respect and peace, without hegemonies.”
Maduro signed the pact with Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi in Tehran on June 11. It was described by the Venezuelan and Iranian governments as a “partnership agreement” and “cooperation agreement.”
The deal involves collaboration in science, technology, agriculture, oil and gas, petrochemicals, tourism, and culture, according to Tehran’s Press TV.
Iranian President Raisi said the document establishes formal “cooperation in the fields of energy, thermal power plants, repair and overhaul of refineries, exportation of technical and engineering services, economic, defense and military relations in the current government are indicative of the existence of many potentials and capacities in the two countries.”
Iran-Venezuela sign 20-year partnership agreement to bolster ties pic.twitter.com/ea3UiHRKeV
— Press TV (@PressTV) June 11, 2022
This agreement follows another historic 25-year cooperation plan that Iran signed with China in 2021, which has been estimated at $400 billion.
Top Iranian diplomats signed similar deals with Nicaragua’s Sandinista government in May.
Nicaragua signs historic agreements with Iran, discusses bartering to evade illegal US sanctions
These pacts are signs of growing South-South cooperation against Western imperialism, not only within Latin America and Asia, but even across the ocean.
Both Venezuela and Iran suffer from aggressive sanctions imposed unilaterally by the United States, which are illegal under international law.
“The Islamic Republic of Iran has always sought relations with independent countries in its foreign policy, and Venezuela has resisted the sanctions of the enemies and imperialism and has shown exemplary resistance,” Raisi said at the signing ceremony.
“There have been numerous sanctions and threats against our country over the past 24 years, but the Iranian nation decided to turn the sanctions into an opportunity for the sake of the country’s progress,” the Iranian leader added.
Maduro emphasized upon signing the agreement, “The youths of Iran and Venezuela must know that the world of the future is a world of equality and justice. We stand against imperialism, and together we must build the future.”
The Venezuelan president likewise tweeted his “love, solidarity, brotherhood” for Iran, referring to the country as “brothers and comrades in anti-imperialist struggle.”
El amor, la solidaridad, la hermandad, no tiene distancia y más cuando hemos logrado reconocernos con la República Islámica de Irán como hermanos y compañeros de lucha antiimperialista por un mundo mejor, de respeto internacional, Paz y sin hegemonías. pic.twitter.com/dgeBdipZle
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) June 10, 2022
Maduro announced that, as of July, there will be regular flights between Caracas and Tehran.
He added that a large oil tanker built by Iranian company Sadra was delivered to Venezuela. The vessel has a capacity of 800,000 barrels.
Iran has helped Venezuela circumvent illegal US sanctions, breaking the blockade that Washington has imposed on the South American nation, which makes it difficult to export oil and import the lighter petroleum and diluents that Caracas needs to process its heavy crude.
Recibimos la entrega del Tanquero Yoraco, construido por la Empresa iraní Sadra, y por la clase obrera de PDVSA, con capacidad de 800 mil barriles. Estoy más que agradecido por la construcción de este moderno buque que refleja la capacidad industrial de la hermana nación de Irán. pic.twitter.com/Q445kx3WHO
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) June 11, 2022
After meeting with President Raisi, Maduro sat down with Iran’s Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Sostuve un encuentro lleno de espiritualidad y sabiduría, con el Líder supremo de Irán, Ali Jameneí. Agradezco sus palabras, que fortalecen mi alma y nos brindan la fuerza necesaria para seguir transitando el camino del mundo de Paz y hermandad que queremos consolidar. pic.twitter.com/yztGAUvei8
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) June 11, 2022
“Iran and Venezuela have closer ties with each other than any other country. The Islamic Republic of Iran has proven that when dangers arise for its friends, Iran takes risks and helps its friends,” Khamenei remarked, according to a readout.
Iran & Venezuela have closer ties with each other than any other country. The Islamic Republic of Iran has proven that when dangers arise for its friends, Iran takes risks & helps its friends.
— Khamenei.ir (@khamenei_ir) June 11, 2022
“The successful experiences of Iran and Venezuela in standing up to US’s intense pressures and hybrid warfare have proven that the only way to confront the US is through resistance and persistence,” Khamenei said.
“The Venezuelan government and nation’s victorious fight against the US and its all-out hybrid war on Venezuela, plus Mr. Maduro the Venezuelan nation’s resistance, are invaluable. Resistance raises a nation’s and its leaders’ status and esteem. The US views Venezuela differently today,” Khamenei added.
Maduro vowed support for Palestinian liberation, and Khamenei praised the Venezuelan leader’s “courageous” stance “against the Zionist regime.”
Khamenei’s official Twitter account shared a metaphorical image of an Iranian oil tanker and a Venezuela jet destroying a US flag in the ocean.
Irán ha demostrado que en los momentos de riesgo se arriesga y estrecha la mano de sus amigos.
? https://t.co/LwLevaOdwp pic.twitter.com/CJkJCMWN3y
— Jameneí Multimedia (@JameneiM) June 11, 2022
Before his trip to Iran, Maduro also visited Algeria and Turkey.
In his meeting with Algerian President Abdelmadjid Tebboune, Maduro said the leaders discussed “our firm solidarity with Palestine, support for the Saharawi people, and shared concern about the situation in brotherly Libya.”
Durante la reunión con el Presidente de la República Argelina Democrática y Popular, Abdelmadjid Tebboune, coincidimos en tres temas: nuestra firme solidaridad con Palestina, el apoyo al pueblo Saharaui y la preocupación compartida por la situación de la hermana Libia. pic.twitter.com/zRFPBT8Z53
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) June 9, 2022
Maduro later tweeted, “Total success! We continue building a new map of strategic alliances, in benefit of the Venezuelan people. A new world is possible!”
Agradecidos con el pueblo y el gobierno de esta hermana nación, nos despedimos de la República Argelina Democrática y Popular. ¡Éxito Total! Seguimos construyendo un nuevo mapa de alianzas estratégicas en beneficio del pueblo venezolano. ¡Un Nuevo Mundo Es Posible! pic.twitter.com/P867kERRHW
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) June 10, 2022
|
Write an article about: US kidnapped and imprisoned Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab for buying food. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alex Saab, Camilla Fabri Saab, CLAP, Iran, sanctions, Venezuela | Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab was essentially kidnapped by the United States because he was buying food for the government’s CLAP food program, to feed the people of Venezuela.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
“It’s not a crime to fulfill a diplomatic mission. It’s not a crime to evade sanctions that are harming an entire country. It can’t be illegal to help a people.” Camilla Fabri Saab made these impassioned remarks when explaining the situation behind the illegal arrest and extradition – the kidnapping, in essence – of her husband, Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab.
Saab is virtually unknown in the United States, where he is currently languishing in a Miami prison, but he has been vital to Venezuela’s ability to survive the brutal economic war being waged by the U.S.
He is a political prisoner whose case has parallels to that of Julian Assange. Both have been subjected to extraterritorial reach by U.S. authorities, as neither are U.S. citizens, and their alleged crimes took place outside of the country. Assange is in jail for telling the truth. Saab is in jail for helping feed Venezuelans.
Saab faces a charge of conspiracy to commit money laundering for his involvement in Venezuela’s housing program, and was sanctioned by the Trump administration in 2019 for his work with Venezuela’s CLAP, a program that sends food and other necessities to Venezuelan families.
Routinely referred to in the media as a Colombian businessman, Saab has dual Venezuela-Colombian citizenship and is a diplomat. He was appointed as a Venezuelan special envoy in April 2018, more than two years before his arrest.
Under the Vienna Convention and the U.S. Diplomatic Relations Act, a diplomat cannot be arrested by a foreign power. This includes diplomats who are in transit between the sending and receiving countries, Venezuela and Iran, in Saab’s case.
Alex Saab was flying from Venezuela to Iran when his plane stopped to refuel in Cabo Verde, an island country off the western coast of Africa. He was arrested without a warrant and held in Cabo Verde for nearly 500 days, as a protracted battle over his extradition to the U.S. played out in the courts.
He was beaten, denied medical care, and held in isolation. Cabo Verde ignored a ruling from a regional court ordering his release, as well as a decision by the United Nations Human Rights Committee suspending his extradition. Neither his family nor his lawyers were informed of his extradition until after it occurred.
In short, Saab was kidnapped twice: once when his plane was refueling and again when he was spirited to the U.S.
The U.S. government argues that the extradition was legal and that any violation of the Vienna Convention was committed by Cabo Verde. David Rivkin, one of Saab’s attorneys, says the fact that “Cabo Verde absolutely violated its legal obligation does not provide any excuse for the United States.”
Rivkin describes the case against Saab as “unprecedented,” given the broad and protective view the U.S. has typically held on diplomatic immunity. Saab has an April appearance in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals on this very issue.
“The U.S. cannot have a world in which third countries can molest U.S. diplomats and if you establish a rule that says third country diplomats can be molested by the United States, it is inevitable that the same would happen to U.S. diplomats. This prosecution is not based on the law and is not in the long-term interests of the United States itself,” Rivkin explains.
Beyond the crucial issue of diplomatic immunity, the charges and case against Saab are clearly political. For years, the U.S. has gone after key figures in Venezuela, including putting bounties on President Nicolás Maduro and others, as part of its attempts to overthrow the government.
These attempts, which include waging a barbaric and illegal economic war that has decimated Venezuela’s economy, led to increased migration and caused the deaths of tens of thousands of Venezuelans. Camila Saab rightfully calls U.S. sanctions an “act of war against the entire Venezuelan population.”
Her husband played a key role in mitigating the disastrous consequences of the sanctions. He first became involved with Venezuela by winning contracts for the Great Housing Mission, a government social program that has built 3.9 million homes for working-class Venezuelans since 2011, the majority of those with the country under sanctions.
Saab later won contracts for Venezuela’s CLAP program, through which 7 million Venezuelan families receive boxes of food and essential goods each month.
The sanctions not only make life difficult for Venezuelans; they make it a challenge to do business with Venezuela. Banks refuse to carry out transactions, even when they’re perfectly legal. Insurance companies raise prices or back out altogether. Shipping companies raise rates. Vendors demand cash and won’t operate on credit.
Instead of pulling out from Venezuela, as many businesspeople did, Saab decided to stick with the Venezuelan people and went from the private sector into the public one, becoming a diplomat tasked with finding “practical solutions” to the “economic and financial blockade” imposed on Venezuela since 2015, which included brokering trade deals with Iran.
The economic relationship with Iran has been critical in helping with the recuperation of Venezuela’s oil industry, and by extension, its economy.
Saab played a critical role in trade agreements between Iran and Venezuela for everything from gasoline and spare parts to food and medicine. According to Forbes, Saab was a target of the U.S. because he had “the means and know-how to help discreetly keep an entire economy moving under the eyes of a watching world.”
Saab has denied the allegations against him, and points to a Swiss investigation that was dropped after three years due to a lack of evidence.
“The merits of the charges are weak on their face. They involve activities that did not take place in the United States and their connection to the U.S. is very tenuous,” says attorney David Rivkin.
Saab’s arrest in Cabo Verde, at the behest of the U.S. government, came just months after Trump announced a “maximum pressure” campaign on Venezuela. His extradition to the U.S. derailed the dialogue between the Venezuelan government and opposition.
The U.S. now plans to “pressure” Saab “to shed light on Venezuela’s post-sanction economic network,” according to Forbes. After enduring torture in Cabo Verde, the word pressure is an understatement.
“Since the day he flew to Iran, they have persecuted all of us. We have been harassed in the media, they have demonized us, they have not let us see him,” Camilla Saab said, describing what her family has been through.
A cancer survivor, Alex Saab hasn’t been able to take his daily medicines since his arrest. He has lost 65 pounds. His parents died of Covid-19 while he was imprisoned in Cabo Verde.
Saab’s family has been targeted too. His adult children were sanctioned by the Trump administration. His youngest daughter has never met him. Yet in all of his communications, Saab maintains his allegiance to the Venezuelan people.
In persecuting him, Camila Saab believes the U.S. is sending a message: “They’re trying to intimidate but the Venezuelan people resist and continue in their fight for sovereignty. The U.S. is not the world’s police force. Free Alex Saab!”
|
Write an article about: Argentina plotted potential US-backed military invasion of Venezuela in 2019. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Argentina, Donald Trump, Horacio Verbitsky, Juan Guaidó, Leopoldo López, Mauricio Macri, Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela | Argentina’s right-wing Mauricio Macri government made plans for a military invasion of Venezuela in 2019, in coordination with the United States and Colombia, using “humanitarian” intervention as an excuse.
With the support of the United States, Argentina’s right-wing government made plans for a potential invasion of Venezuela in 2019, according to leaked documents from the South American nation’s military.
The military operation was called the “Puma” exercise, and was overseen by Argentina’s conservative President Mauricio Macri, who was closely coordinating with the Donald Trump administration.
Macri’s Argentina had rejected Venezuela’s democratically elected President Nicolás Maduro and instead recognized Trump-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó, after the little-known politician declared himself unelected “interim president” in January 2019.
Macri continued supporting the US-led coup attempt in Venezuela until he lost the October 2019 election and was replaced by current center-left President Alberto Fernández that December.
Argentine journalist Horacio Verbitsky, of the independent media outlet El Cohete a la Luna, received materials from internal military sources exposing the Venezuela invasion plans.
Mientras EE UU apostaba al derrocamiento militar del gobierno venezolano, el general Martín Paleo planificó y ejercitó una invasión a Venezuela por la frontera con Colombia. La excusa fue una misión humanitaria.
Leé a @VerbitskyH en @elcoheteluna ??
➡️ https://t.co/J0Hbk1esGo pic.twitter.com/8kj3VTBiLy
— El Cohete a la Luna ?? (@elcoheteluna) February 14, 2022
Between April and July of 2019, the Argentine military carried out the “Puma” exercise in seven sessions. The operation was overseen by General Juan Martín Paleo.
In addition to support from the United States, the Argentine invasion would have been coordinated with the military of Venezuela’s neighbor Colombia, which refuses to recognize President Maduro and backs coup leader Guaidó.
Colombia has a far-right government, closely linked to drug trafficking and death squads, and has been involved in numerous violent incursions into Venezuelan territory, including a botched invasion in May 2020 that coup-plotters say was backed by the Trump administration and the CIA.
The Argentine government was planning to used “humanitarian intervention” as an excuse for the invasion, claiming that Venezuela was blocking so-called “humanitarian aid” that the United States had been trying to force across the Colombian border.
Argentina’s military made plans for three potential paths to invade Venezuela, including by crossing the Colombian border. Verbitsky, the Argentine journalist, published a map of the Puma exercise scenarios.
Plans by Argentina’s military for a potential invasion of Venezuela in 2019
On April 30, Guaidó’s US-backed team launched a violent coup attempt. It failed, because only a few dozen soldiers rose up against the Venezuelan government.
But the soldiers who did rebel managed to free far-right Venezuelan oligarch and coup-plotter Leopoldo López, who was under house arrest at the time.
López sought refuge in the Chilean and Spanish embassies, and eventually moved to Madrid, where he continues to live with the protection of the government of Spain, the former colonizer of Venezuela.
With the backing of the US and Colombian governments, López later helped to organize a failed May 2020 invasion of Venezuela, called Operation Gideon.
On April 30, the day of Guaidó’s attempt to create a violent mutiny within the military, Argentine President Macri showed his full support for the operation, tweeting in all capital letters, “WE SUPPORT MORE THAN EVER DEMOCRACY IN VENEZUELA.”
Macri reaffirmed Argentina’s recognition of unelected coup leader Guaidó, and demonized the elected President Maduro as a so-called “dictator.” Macri praised the release of López and wrote, “We join the struggle of the Venezuelan people to retake their freedom.”
Esperamos que este sea el momento decisivo para recuperar la democracia. Que la larga angustia que llevó al sufrimiento y al miedo a los venezolanos llegue a su fin y comience un período de libertad, sensatez y crecimiento. No será fácil, como bien sabemos los argentinos
— Mauricio Macri (@mauriciomacri) April 30, 2019
The Argentine journalist who exposed the Puma exercise, Verbitsky, noted that the former FBI deputy director under Trump, Andrew McCabe, revealed that the US president had wanted to control Venezuela’s oil.
According to McCabe, Trump said, “I don’t understand why we’re not looking at Venezuela. That’s the country we should be going to war with. They have all that oil and they’re right on our back door.”
The US government also backed other attempts to assassinate Maduro, including a failed operation using drones.
An image from the Argentine military’s plans for an invasion of Venezuela in 2019
|
Write an article about: Brazil’s President-elect Lula calls to free Julian Assange from ‘unjust imprisonment,’ sends ‘solidarity’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Brazil, Daniel Ortega, Julian Assange, Lula da Silva, Nicolás Maduro, WikiLeaks | Brazil’s left-wing President-elect Lula da Silva called for journalist Julian Assange to be freed from his “unjust imprisonment” and said he “sent my solidarity,” after meeting with his colleagues from WikiLeaks.
Brazil’s left-wing President-elect Lula da Silva has called for journalist Julian Assange to be freed from his “unjust imprisonment.”
Assange, the founder of whistle-blowing journalism publication WikiLeaks, has languished since 2019 in a maximum-security British prison, where he has suffered from prolonged torture that could threaten his life, according to the top United Nations expert.
The United Kingdom is preparing to extradite the Australian journalist to the United States, where he is facing up to 175 years in prison on politically motivated charges based in part on illegal CIA spying and threats.
On November 28, Lula met with Assange’s colleagues from WikiLeaks. The Brazilian president-elect said he “sent my solidarity” and expressed hope that “Assange will be freed from his unjust imprisonment.”
Estive com @khrafnsson, editor-chefe do WikiLeaks, e com o editor Joseph Farrell, que me informaram da situação de saúde e da luta por liberdade de Julian Assange. Pedi para que enviassem minha solidariedade. Que Assange seja solto de sua injusta prisão.
?: Cláudio Kbene pic.twitter.com/DuSvdEBQQY
— Lula (@LulaOficial) November 29, 2022
Lula tweeted a photo of his meeting with Kristinn Hrafnsson, an Icelandic journalist who serves as editor-in-chief of Wikileaks, and Joseph Farrell, another editor of the publication.
Hrafnsson said Lula expressed “his ongoing support for Julian Assange and the demand to end the persecution, understanding it can damage press freedom worldwide.”
The WikiLeaks chief called the Brazilian politician a “true man of passion, vision and sympathy.”
President-elect of Brazil Lula da Silva expressed, in a private meeting tonight, his ongoing support for Julian Assange and the demand to end the persecution, understanding it can damage press freedom worldwide. A true man of passion, vision and sympathy. Obrigado Lula pic.twitter.com/pq22nRYljD
— Kristinn Hrafnsson (@khrafnsson) November 29, 2022
Numerous prominent journalists and lawyers have sued the CIA for spying on them as part of its 24/7 surveillance operation targeting Assange.
The US spy agency even made plans to kidnap and murder Assange when he was trapped for years in Ecuador’s embassy in London.
Lula da Silva won the second round of Brazil’s presidential elections on October 30. He will officially become the head-of-state of the largest country in Latin America on January 1, 2023.
Lula is just one of several leftist leaders in the region who have called for Assange to be freed, along with Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega, and Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro.
A few days before meeting with Lula in Brazil, the WikiLeaks editors were in Bogotá, where they met with Colombia’s first-ever left-wing President Gustavo Petro.
Petro also expressed support for freeing Assange, and said he and other Latin American heads of state would pressure the US government and President Joe Biden to drop the charges against the journalist.
Colombia’s President Petro supports freedom for Julian Assange, meets with WikiLeaks editors
|
Write an article about: Brazil’s President Lula is back – and Bolsonaro fled to Florida. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Brazil, Brian Mier, Florida, Jair Bolsonaro, Lula da Silva, MERCOSUR, Orlando, UNASUR | Lula da Silva returns as Brazil’s president, calling for fighting poverty and hunger, re-industrializing, strengthening the BRICS, and deepening Latin American integration. Far-right leader Jair Bolsonaro fled to Florida, fearing legal consequences for his corruption.
Lula da Silva has returned as president of Brazil, the world’s sixth-most populous country. This will cause a major geopolitical shift.
Meanwhile, far-right former leader Jair Bolsonaro fled to Florida, fearing legal consequences for his corruption.
Multipolarista spoke with Brazil-based journalist Brian Mier about what Lula’s third government means for Latin America and the world.
In his speech before the congress at his January 1 inauguration, Lula stressed that everyone has the “right to a dignified life, without hunger, with access to employment, health, education.” He said his “life mission” is to guarantee that every Brazilian has three meals a day.
As president, Lula stressed that he is a “representative of the working class” who “promotes economic growth in a sustainable way and to the benefit of all, especially those most in need.” He committed himself to the “widest social participation, including workers and the poorest in the budget.”
“Our first actions aim to rescue 33 million people from hunger and rescue from poverty more than 100 million Brazilian men and women, who have borne the hardest burden of the project of national destruction that ends today,” Lula added, condemning the economic crisis left behind by Bolsonaro.
Lula was a co-founder of the BRICS bloc, bringing together Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.
In his inauguration speech, Lula called for “strengthening the BRICS,” as well as deepening Brazil’s “cooperation with African countries.”
In a significant reversal of Bolsonaro’s staunchly pro-US foreign policy, President Lula also urged “the resumption of South American integration,” through the “revitalization” of regional institutions like UNASUR and Mercosur.
Bolsonaro only came to power in the first place due to two US-backed coups against Brazil’s left-wing Workers’ Party: the overthrow of President Dilma Rousseff in 2016 and the subsequent imprisonment of Lula in the lead-up to the 2018 election, on false charges that were subsequently expunged by the country’s supreme court and condemned by the United Nations Human Rights Committee.
Soon after he entered office thanks to this US meddling, Bolsonaro visited CIA headquarters. He also dedicated himself to sabotaging institutions of Latin American integration, withdrawing Brazil from UNASUR.
In contrast, as a symbol of his commitment to the Patria Grande (the project of Latin American unification), Lula waved the flag of Mercosur alongside that of Brazil at his inauguration.
Brazil's far-right leader Bolsonaro fled to Florida before Lula's inauguration, fearing consequences for his extreme corruption
So instead Lula was given the presidential sash by leaders of social movements fighting for the rights of Indigenous, Afro-Brazilian, & disabled people pic.twitter.com/g3nutP5793
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 2, 2023
Because Bolsonaro fled to Florida two days before his presidential term ended, he was not in the country to pass over the presidential sash to Lula.
So instead, Lula invited leaders of Brazil’s social movements, who fight for the rights of workers, Indigenous communities, Afro-Brazilians, and disabled people. They marched with Lula and gave him the presidential sash at the inauguration ceremony.
Lula's innauguration ceremony is still hours away and the line is already over 3 kilometers long pic.twitter.com/UMOlO0zQ29
— BrianMier (@BrianMteleSUR) January 1, 2023
While large numbers of Brazilians celebrated Lula’s return, Bolsonaro was in Florida.
The far-right former leader was filmed walking through a gated community in Orlando, posing for photos with his US-based supporters.
Bolsonaro fled justice, knowing that he was going to be investigated and likely charged by Brazil’s justice system over his flagrant corruption and his refusal to implement public health measures during the Covid-19 pandemic, which led to 700,000 deaths – one of the worst per capita death rates on Earth.
The US backed 2 coups in Brazil, installing far-right Bolsonaro in power
He stole huge sums of public money to fund his campaign and enrich his oligarch friends
Bolsonaro then fled justice and is now living in Florida
He just met with supporters in a gated community in Orlando pic.twitter.com/DPvfH75RVj
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 2, 2023
Lula’s inauguration was attended by left-wing leaders from across Latin America, including:
Together, they called for deepening the integration of the region.
Also present at Lula’s inauguration were representatives from fellow BRICS members, including China’s Vice President Wang Qishan and the chair of the Russian Federation Council, Valentina Matviyenko.
China's Vice President Wang Qishan also attended Lula's inauguration in Brazil.
Both are cose allies and members of the BRICS bloc. In his speech, Lula called for strengthening BRICS pic.twitter.com/AUZT5Nr7C4
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 2, 2023
|
Write an article about: Argentina adopting US dollar to fight inflation would be ‘insane’ neocolonialism, says economist Ha-Joon Chang. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | ARENA, Argentina, Brazil, China, de-dollarization, dollar, Ecuador, El Salvador, FMLN, Francisco Flores, Guillermo Lasso, Ha-Joon Chang, Javier Milei, Latin America, Lula da Silva, Salvador Sánchez Cerén, Taiwan | Right-wing politicians in Argentina want to adopt the US dollar as the national currency to fight inflation. Development economist Ha-Joon Chang said this is “insane”, warning dollarization would make the Latin American nation a “colony”.
Argentina is suffering from high rates of inflation, largely due to odious debt owed in US dollars to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and Western vulture funds.
The South American nation sometimes suffers from a current account deficit, and relies heavily on imports of oil, technology, and medical equipment. Low revenue from its mostly agricultural exports means that Argentina faces a chronic shortage of foreign currency – and most of the dollars it gets end up flowing out of the country to paying interest on the unsustainable external debt, draining the country’s foreign-exchange reserves and making it difficult to stabilize the national currency, the peso.
National elections are approaching in October, and among the presidential hopefuls is far-right politician Javier Milei.
Milei describes himself as a “libertarian” and is running on an extreme neoliberal platform, pledging to slash all social spending, privatize the health system, sell off state companies, remove all currency controls, and abolish the central bank – while simultaneously militarizing the country, giving police more authority to arrest “criminals”, and building private prisons.
Despite his “libertarian” pretenses, Milei vowed to make abortion illegal as well, promising to take Argentina “back to being the thriving country that we were at the start of year 1900”.
Milei’s proposed solution to end inflation is for Argentina to abandon its monetary sovereignty, drop the peso, and adopt the US dollar as the country’s official currency.
His call for dollarization has been echoed by fanatical Austrian School economists like former Ronald Reagan advisor Steve Hanke, who is publicly supporting Milei and tweeted, “It’s time to dump the pathetic PESO and DOLLARIZE NOW“.
Prominent South Korean development economist Ha-Joon Chang has shot back, denouncing this as “the worst idea” and “insane”.
Chang warned that dollarization would turn Argentina into a US “colony”.
In an interview during a visit to Argentina this May, first reported on by Nick Corbishley at Naked Capitalism, Chang explained:
If you want to adopt the dollar as your official currency, you should apply to become a colony of the United States of America, because that’s what it makes you. Because this means that your macroeconomic policies will be written in Washington, DC.
Now, in a big country like the United States, actually, when the macroeconomic policies are made in Washington DC, there will be states elsewhere in the US that suffer, because the federal government might be tightening the economy, because in general there is inflation, but then in some regions there might already be recession, and then they’ll be in big trouble.
So the fact [that it is] a single country, what you do is you make transfers to these regions suffering from recession. And, most importantly, people in those regions in economic recession can move elsewhere, to take up jobs in the areas that are doing well.
A fiscal union and labor market integration are the necessary conditions for this to make the currency union viable.
And the reason why the Eurozone had such crisis was because they didn’t do this enough. The labor market is integrated, but there’s a language barrier; so it’s not perfect. There is no fiscal union, so they cannot make a transfer to the poor regions. So this is why they had such trouble.
Now, Argentina unilaterally accepting the US dollar as a currency is insane, because you don’t have labor market integration; you don’t have fiscal transfers.
It’s not as if the [North] Americans are going to say, ‘Oh you cute guys in Argentina, now that you want to use the dollar as your currency, we will accept more immigrants from you; we’ll give you some money’. No.
This is the worst idea.
Argentina is suffering from high inflation due to odious debt owed in US dollars to the IMF and Western vulture funds.
Argentine right-wingers insist the "solution" is to abandon monetary sovereignty, adopting the US dollar.
Economist Ha-Joon Chang said "this is the worst idea"… pic.twitter.com/MAvHN2RCwb
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 24, 2023
While Argentine right-wingers are calling for dollarization, the left across Latin America – and in many other parts of the Global South – are advocating for de-dollarization.
The government of Brazil’s President Lula da Silva has initiated research to develop a currency for trade within the region, which will tentatively be called the Sur.
This issue is clearly important for Lula, because he used his first foreign trip after returning to the presidency in January, a visit to Argentina for the summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), to publicly announce the plans to develop the pan-Latin American currency.
Argentine’s current, center-left government has joined China’s Belt and Road Initiative and signed several economic agreements with Beijing, including currency swap lines between the countries’ central banks, seeking to replace the dollar with the renminbi in their bilateral trade.
Argentina, which has the third-largest economy in Latin America, has also formally applied to join the BRICS bloc, joining its neighbor Brazil, which has the biggest economy in the region.
There are two countries in Latin America that already use the dollar as their national currency: El Salvador and Ecuador.
El Salvador dollarized starting at the end of 2000, under the conservative government of President Francisco Flores, from the far-right, staunchly pro-US ARENA party.
Flores was notorious for his extreme corruption, and when he died in 2016, he was under house arrest for stealing millions of dollars that were donated by Taiwan, in what was effectively a bribe to maintain diplomatic recognition. (El Salvador formally recognized the People’s Republic of China in 2018, under leftist President Salvador Sánchez Cerén of the socialist FMLN party.)
Ecuador’s right-wing government surrendered its monetary sovereignty and adopted the dollar in 1999, in response to a banking crisis that devalued the national currency.
The economic minister who oversaw that dollarization was Ecuador’s current right-wing president, Guillermo Lasso.
Steve Hanke, the ultra-neoliberal Austrian School economist who is calling for Argentina to dollarize and publicly supporting far-right politician Javier Milei, took credit for Ecuador’s lack of monetary sovereignty, boasting on Twitter: “The only thing stable & reliable in Ecuador is its money: the USD. With an assist from yours truly, Ecuador dollarized in 2000”.
In May 2023, Lasso dissolved Ecuador’s unicameral parliament – the National Assembly, in which the opposition had a majority – and essentially declared himself a dictator.
He is now ruling by decree, and ramming through extreme neoliberal policies.
Lasso plans to impose laws that will cut wages, make new employees work for five months without benefits, and even force workers to pay back their employers a month of their salary if they are unilaterally fired (while making it significantly easier for companies to fire their employees).
The US government has strongly supported Lasso as he has dissolved parliament and declared a de facto dictatorship.
Full video with much more research here — US backs Ecuador dictator: Right-wing banker dissolves parliament to stop impeachment for corruptionhttps://t.co/n1yiZSNQdM
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 20, 2023
|
Write an article about: Colombia’s new president reverses US coup, visits Venezuela, pledges unity in ‘spirit of Bolívar’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Colombia, Donald Trump, Gustavo Petro, Iván Duque, Joe Biden, Juan Guaidó, Nicolás Maduro, Simón Bolívar, Venezuela | Colombia’s first-ever left-wing leader Gustavo Petro took a historic trip to Venezuela, pledging regional unity following the anti-imperialist model of Simón Bolívar. Meeting with President Nicolás Maduro, Petro said it is “suicidal” to divide the countries, “because we are the same people,” in “historically one single Bolivarian nation, reunited.”
Colombia’s first ever left-wing President Gustavo Petro made history on November 1 by visiting his neighbor Venezuela, officially normalizing relations after years of hostility.
After a meeting with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, the two leaders signed a joint declaration pledging to unify the countries and integrate Latin America, following the anti-imperialist model of Simón Bolívar.
Petro said it is “suicidal” to divide the countries, “because we are the same people,” in “historically one single Bolivarian nation, reunited.”
The presidents symbolically posed for photos in front of large portraits of Bolívar, the revolutionary general who led a successful armed uprising against Spanish colonialism and established many of the modern states of South America.
Sostuve una amena reunión con el Presidente de Colombia, @petrogustavo, en la que tratamos temas de interés común entre ambas naciones; que fortalecen la cooperación, el encuentro y el bienestar a favor de nuestros pueblos. pic.twitter.com/13d9dYwnoi
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) November 1, 2022
Colombia’s previous administration had formally cut off diplomatic relations with Venezuela in 2019, when the United States initiated a coup attempt against the nation’s democratically elected leftist Chavista government.
The right-wing government in Bogotá at the time became Washington’s most important ally in its often violent attempts to overthrow President Maduro.
Petro is the first Colombian leader to travel to Caracas since 2011, when Hugo Chávez was Venezuela’s elected president. And in that year more than a decade ago, Colombia’s President Juan Manuel Santos did not visit specifically to meet with Chávez, but rather to attend the international summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC).
En imágenes ? | Encuentro entre el Presidente de Colombia @petrogustavo y el Presidente de Venezuela, @NicolasMaduro. ???? pic.twitter.com/qfFSFIXXQO
— Presidencia Colombia ?? (@infopresidencia) November 1, 2022
Petro’s office said one of the main goals of the meeting was to “kickstart the economy of the region and socialize its agenda in the favor of the interests of the Latin American bloc and the protection of the Amazon.”
Venezuela called the historic visit the beginning of a “new era of cooperation.” Maduro declared, “We keep taking good steps toward integration!”
El destino común nos convoca a la unión por el crecimiento, el desarrollo y la Paz de Colombia y Venezuela. Trabajaremos firmemente por eso. ¡Sigamos dando buenos pasos hacia la integración! pic.twitter.com/pmYZjzUIae
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) November 2, 2022
The two countries signed a joint declaration pledging to advance “toward the union and peace of our countries, as our Liberators did in the same patriotic emancipatory achievement.”
Maduro and Petro wrote that they were “inspired by the historical legacy of union and the spirit of fraternity that we inherited from the Father Liberator Simón Bolívar and the brotherhood of our peoples, which now are geographically and politically two sovereign republics, but historically one single Bolivarian nation, reunited.”
Declaración conjunta de los presidentes de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela y de la República de Colombia. pic.twitter.com/e7v28xpJkG
— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) November 2, 2022
The agreement emphasized the importance of economic relations between the neighboring countries.
The document called for cooperation in trade, transport, and agricultural production. It also proposed coordination of mining and exploration efforts.
Venezuela and Colombia share a massive, 2341-kilometer border. Colombia closed this crossing in 2015. It was temporarily unblocked in 2016, but later shut again, until Petro’s government agreed to re-open it this September 26.
The new joint declaration prioritized security cooperation on the border, in order to “fight against organized crime.”
Petro said, “We are here to start over on a path, which is difficult, but we must go down it. That path begins with rebuilding the border. The border is in the hands of mafias.”
“Aquí estamos para recomenzar un camino, que es difícil, pero que hay que andar. Ese camino comienza por reconstruir la frontera. La frontera está en manos de las mafias”: Presidente @petrogustavo. pic.twitter.com/58OCldVuG3
— Presidencia Colombia ?? (@infopresidencia) November 1, 2022
Petro called for Venezuela to be re-integrated into regional institutions.
The Colombian leader also pressured Maduro to hold a dialogue process with the opposition.
Petro said it would be “suicidal” to divide the countries: “It is not natural. In more human terms, it is anti-historical that Colombia and Venezuela be separated, because we are the same people.”
“Es antinatural, en términos más humanos, es antihistórico el que Colombia y Venezuela se separen porque somos el mismo pueblo”: Presidente @petrogustavo. pic.twitter.com/Y25T6gX2KV
— Presidencia Colombia ?? (@infopresidencia) November 1, 2022
In press statements on the historic meeting, Caracas criticized the “interventionist conduct” of the previous right-wing Colombian administrations and their “attack against the Venezuelan government.”
Petro’s predecessor, right-wing former President Iván Duque, had been Washington’s top asset in the US-led coup attempt against Venezuela’s elected leftist government.
In 2019, the Donald Trump recognized Juan Guaidó, a little-known opposition figure, as supposed “interim president” of Venezuela, despite the fact that he had never participated in a presidential election.
Duque’s government immediately joined in backing Guaidó and sponsoring his gang of coup-plotters, many of whom were physically based in Colombia.
En fotos: Reunión del vicepresidente Pence con el presidente de Colombia, Iván Duque, y el presidente interino de Venezuela, Juan Guaidó, en Bogotá. pic.twitter.com/CzNyZpX0b8
— USA en Español (@USAenEspanol) February 25, 2019
The Trump administration sponsored a series of training camps in northern Colombia, where right-wing extremists prepared cross-border attacks and made plans to try to violently overthrow President Maduro.
Trump’s Defense Secretary Mark Esper revealed in a memoir he published after leaving office that senior US officials had often discussed launching military strikes on Venezuela.
After Trump met with Guaidó in the Oval Office in February 2020, Esper, Guaidó, and other coup-plotters talked about the training of far-right militants in Colombia and plans to invade Venezuela.
In May 2020, these terrorists launched a failed invasion of Venezuela, known as Operation Gideon. Top coup-plotters involved in the operation said they had the support of the CIA and Colombian intelligence services.
Trump’s Defense Secretary Esper revealed top US officials often discussed launching military attacks on Venezuela
After Trump met with Guaidó in the Oval Office, Esper and coup-plotters discussed plans to train terrorists in Colombia to invade Venezuelahttps://t.co/QBMYtJitX3
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) November 1, 2022
Still today, the Joe Biden administration technically recognizes Guaidó as Venezuela’s supposed head of state. Colombia, too, had still sponsored Guaidó, until Petro won the June 19 presidential election.
Petro immediately pushed to normalize relations with Venezuela. On June 22, Colombia’s then president-elect called Maduro to inform him that he prioritized restoring diplomatic and commercial ties as soon as possible.
Soon after entering office on August 7, Petro moved to re-open Colombia’s border with Venezuela.
In September, Venezuela also agreed to help mediate peace talks between armed socialist militia the ELN and the Colombian government. The parties signed an agreement formally initiating the diplomatic process in Caracas in October.
Venezuela had previously played a similar role in co-sponsoring successful peace talks between the Colombian government and another armed socialist militia, the FARC.
Firmamos una Declaración Conjunta Colombia – Venezuela que apunta al bienestar y el desarrollo para ambos pueblos. Rumbo hacia un 2023 de integración, fortalecimiento de relaciones de hermandad y entendimiento entre nuestros países. pic.twitter.com/DY2VvPbWTM
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) November 1, 2022
The historic meeting of Maduro and Petro and their pledge to pursue regional unity is reminiscent of the political integration of Egypt and Syria in 1958, under the revolutionary left-wing nationalist President Gamal Abdel Nasser.
Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser signs an agreement with Syrian President Shukri al-Quwatli, unifying their countries in the United Arab Republic, on February 1, 1958
|
Write an article about: ‘Western dominance has ended’, EU foreign-policy chief admits, warning of ‘West against the Rest’ geopolitics. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | EU, European Union, Gaza, General Assembly, Global South, Josep Borrell, Sahel, Ukraine, United Nations | The European Union’s top diplomat, Josep Borrell, admitted that the “era of Western dominance has indeed definitively ended”. He warned that the EU must not divide the world into “the West against the Rest”, as “many in the ‘Global South’ accuse us of ‘double standards’”.
Europe’s top diplomat has acknowledged that the “era of Western dominance has indeed definitively ended”.
Josep Borrell, the European Union’s high representative for foreign affairs, wrote this in a blog post on the official website of the EU’s diplomatic service on February 25.
“If the current global geopolitical tensions continue to evolve in the direction of ‘the West against the Rest’, Europe’s future risks to be bleak”, he warned.
The wars in Ukraine and Gaza, along with the anti-colonial uprisings in Africa’s Sahel region, have “significantly increased this risk” of Europe becoming geopolitically irrelevant, Borrell said, lamenting that “Russia has managed to take advantage of the situation”.
The European foreign-policy chief revealed that “improving our relations with the ‘Global South'” is one of ” the four main tasks on EU’s geopolitical agenda”.
“Many in the ‘Global South’ accuse us of ‘double standards'”, he confessed.
Borrell is known for sporadically making frank comments, admitting inconvenient truths that most European diplomats leave unsaid.
In 2022, the EU foreign-policy chief confessed, “Our prosperity was based on China and Russia – energy and market”, with “cheap energy coming from Russia” and “access to the big China market” as the cornerstone of the European economy.
However, Borrell’s insistence that Europe must not divide the world into the “West against the Rest” was contradicted by his insistence in the same February 2024 article that the EU must expand its “cooperation with key partners, and in particular the US”.
The top European diplomat wrote that “recent months have reminded us how important NATO remains to our collective defence”, calling to strengthen the US-led military bloc.
In 2023, the influential think tank the European Council on Foreign Relations published a white paper titled “The art of vassalisation”. It warned of “Europe becoming an American vassal”, noting how the war in Ukraine had “revealed Europeans’ profound dependence on the US”.
The EU’s foreign-policy chief does recognize that it would be an error to pit “the West against the Rest”, yet he is simultaneously calling for deepening the trans-Atlantic alliance between the US and Europe, which only exacerbates that geopolitical division.
On the global stage, Europe frequently joins the United States in violating the will of the international community.
At the United Nations, the US and Europe often vote together, while the vast majority of member states, which are located in the Global South, vote against them.
Source: Alastair Iain Johnston, “China in a World of Orders: Rethinking Compliance and Challenge in Beijing’s International Relations”, International Security (2019)
The US only voted with the majority of the world at the UN General Assembly 32.7% of the time from 1983 to 2012.
In 1988, just 15.4% of overall UNGA votes coincided with the US vote.
Europe is the only region of the world that consistently votes with the US.
In November 2023, the West voted against the vast majority of the world in UN General Assembly resolutions concerning democracy, human rights, cultural diversity, mercenaries, and unilateral coercive measures (sanctions).
In April 2023, the West once again voted as a bloc against the other countries on the UN Human Rights Council, defending unilateral sanctions, which violate international law.
In December 2022, the West voted against the rest of the planet in UN General Assembly votes calling for a new international economic order.
West votes against democracy, human rights, cultural diversity at UN; promotes mercenaries, sanctions
|
Write an article about: ‘War on drugs has failed’: At UN, Colombia condemns ‘addiction to money and oil’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Amazon, capitalism, climate change, coal, Colombia, Gustavo Petro, oil, UN, United Nations | Colombia’s first ever left-wing President Gustavo Petro delivered a historic UN speech declaring, “The war on drugs has failed.” He warned capitalism is destroying the environment, with its “addiction to money and oil,” and called for debt relief for the Global South.
Colombia’s first ever left-wing President Gustavo Petro delivered a historic speech at the United Nations declaring, “The war on drugs has failed.”
Petro emphasized that drug addiction is a social problem, and cannot be solved with violence and militarization. Rather, he argued, it is a mere symptom of a much deeper problem: the capitalist system itself, with its “addiction to money and oil.”
The Colombian leader warned that the infinite greed of capitalism is destroying the planet, threatening life on Earth.
“The cause of the climate disaster is capital – the logic of dedicating ourselves to consume more and more, to produce more and more, and so that a small few can earn more and more [money],” Petro proclaimed.
The “logic of increasing accumulation of capital” is ravaging the environment, he warned. “The increasing accumulation of capital is the increasing accumulation of death.”
In a jab directed toward the Global North, Petro added, “You all insist that the market will save us from what the market itself has created. Humanity’s Frankenstein is allowing the market and greed to act without any planning, giving up our brains and reason, making human rationality kneel before greed.”
Petro’s powerful speech, delivered on September 20, was the first time the Colombian president had addressed the UN General Assembly since winning elections in June and entering office in August.
Unlike many of the world’s presidents, who have their words carefully decided by speechwriters, Petro himself penned large parts of the address.
Knowing how explosive it would be politically, Petro kept the speech secret, sharing it with just a small handful of his closest aides, telling them, “Keep it safe, so no one can read it.”
Spain’s establishment newspaper El País noted that Petro’s UN address includes “all of his ideological corpus: anti-capitalism, environmentalism, even the anti-Americanism in which many leftists of his generation were raised.”
For decades, Colombia had been at the center of the US-led “war on drugs.” Washington spent billions of dollars militarizing the South American country through its Plan Colombia program.
Petro used the platform at the United Nations to declare that this policy has been an utter disaster, fueling countless deaths in Latin America, as well as racist mass incarceration in the United States itself.
“For destroying or possessing the coca leaf, 1 million Latin Americans are killed, and they imprison 2 million African-Americans in North America,” he said.
While demanding an end to the “war on drugs,” Petro called in general for peace and an end to all wars.
He urged a peaceful settlement to the proxy war in Ukraine, while also condemning the Western wars on Iraq, and Libya, and Syria.
“There is no total peace without social, economic, and environmental justice,” he said. “We are at war, as well, with the planet. Without peace with the planet, there will be no peace between nations.”
Petro condemned the Global North for its rampant abuse of refugees and migrants, comparing their cruel policies to Nazi Germany.
He called on the North to forgive the debt of the Global South, so it can invest resources in saving the environment.
“If it is more important to dedicate the money to weapons than to life, then reduce the external debt to free our own state budgets, and with those we can fulfill the duty of saving humanity and life on the planet,” Petro implored.
Gustavo Petro opened his speech emphasizing the natural beauty of his country. He warned, however, that this is being destroyed.
The Amazon rainforest helps combat climate change by absorbing CO2 and creating oxygen. But the rainforest is being cut down and polluted in the name of corporate profits. Petro stressed that this endangers life itself.
There were some problems with the translation done by the UN’s English-language interpreter, perhaps because it was done simultaneously and was thus rushed. Petro repeatedly mentioned coal and oil, but the interpreter mistakenly translated “coal” (carbón in Spanish) as “carbon” (carbono in Spanish).
Colombia is a significant oil producer, and petroleum-based products make up the value of nearly one-third of its total exports. But Colombia is also the world’s fifth-largest exporter of coal.
Multipolarista has translated the bulk of Petro’s speech and published it below.
The Colombian president said:
The jungle that tries to save us is, at the same time, being destroyed.
To destroy the coca plant, they spray poisons, glyphosate en masse that runs through the waters. They arrest and imprison those who grow it.
For destroying or possessing the coca leaf, 1 million Latin Americans are killed, and they imprison 2 million African-Americans in North America.
“Destroy the plant that kills,” they shout from the North, “destroy it!” But it is just one plant, among the millions more species that perish when they unleash the fire on the jungle.
Destroy the jungle, the Amazon, has become the slogan followed by states and businessmen. It doesn’t matter that scientists are crying out, baptizing the jungle as one of the great climatic pillars.
For the power relations of the world, the jungle and its inhabitants are to blame for the plague that ravages them. The power relations are ravaged by the addiction to money, to keep on, to oil, to cocaine, and to the hardest drugs to be able to anesthetize themselves more.
[There is] nothing more hypocritical than the discourse about saving the jungle.
The jungle is burning, gentlemen, while you wage war and play with it. The jungle, the climatic pillar of the world, disappears with all its life. The great sponge that absorbs the planetary CO2 evaporates.
The jungle, our savior, is seen in my country as the enemy to defeat, as the weeds to be extinguished. The space of coca and of the peasants who cultivate it, because they have nothing else to cultivate, are demonized.
For you all, my country is of no interest except to spray poisons into its jungles, to throw its men to jail, and push its women into exclusion. You all are not interested in the education of the child, but rather in killing his jungle and extracting the coal and oil from its entrails.
The sponge that absorbs the poisons is useless, they prefer to spray more poisons into the atmosphere.
We are only useful to you all to make up for the emptiness and loneliness of your own society, which leads you to live in bubbles of drugs. We hide your problems that you refuse to reform. It is better to declare war on the jungle, on its plants, on its peoples.
While you let the jungles burn, while hypocrites destroy the plants with poison to cover up the disasters in their own society, you ask us for more and more coal, more and more oil, to calm the other addiction: the addiction of consumption, of power, of money. What is more harmful to human beings: cocaine, coal, or oil?
The judgment of power has declared that cocaine is a poison must be destroyed, even though it causes few deaths by overdose, and more because of the mixtures which lead to it being trafficked.
But on the other hand, coal and oil must be protected, even though their use can lead to the extinction of all humanity.
This is the way world power works, with injustice, with irrationality, because world power has become irrational.
They see in the exuberance of the jungle, in its vitality, a sign of lust and sinfulness, the guilty cause of the sadness in their societies, imbued with the limitless drive to have, to have and to consume.
[They] hide the loneliness in people’s hearts, the drought in societies without affection, that are so competitive they imprison souls in loneliness, by putting the blame on the plant, the people who cultivate it, the secret freedoms of the jungle.
According to the irrational power of the world, it is not the fault of the market, that cuts off existence; it is the fault of the jungle and those who live in it.
Bank accounts have been filled without limits. The most powerful people on Earth have stashed so much money they couldn’t even spend it in centuries.
The sadness of existence that is produced by that artificial call for competition, it is filled with noise and drugs.
The addiction to money and to possession, it has another face: drug addiction in people who lose the competition, the artificial race that they have transformed humanity into.
The disease of loneliness is not cured by spraying the jungle with glyphosate. It is not the jungle that is guilty.
What is guilty is their society taught to endlessly consume, in the stupid confusion between consumption and happiness, which is what allows the pockets of the powerful to be filled with money.
The cause of drug addiction is not the jungle; it is the irrationality of their world power.
In the next part of his speech, Petro stated clearly that the “war on drugs” has been a complete failure, and called on the world to abandon it:
The war on drugs has lasted for 40 years. If we do not correct our course, and it goes on for another 40 years, the United States will see 2.8 million young people die of overdoses on fentanyl, which is not produced in our Latin America.
It will see millions of African-Americans incarcerated in its private prisons. The African-American prisoner will become the business of prison corporations.
Another million Latin Americans will be killed. They will fill our waters and our green fields with blood.
They will see the the dream of democracy die, both in my America [Latin America] and in Anglo-Saxon America.
…
To hide the truth, you will see the jungle and democracies die.
The war on drugs has failed.
The struggle against the climate crisis has failed.
The deadly consumption of soft drugs has increased. It has moved to harder drugs. It has caused a genocide on my continent and in my country. It has condemned millions of people to prison.
To cover up their social causes, they have blamed the jungle and its plants. Their narratives and policies have been filled with irrationality.
I call on you all here, from my wounded Latin America, to end the irrational war on drugs.
Wars and guns are not needed to decrease drug consumption. What is needed is that we all build a better society: a society with more solidarity, with more affection, where the intensity of life saves people from addiction and new forms of slavery.
Do you want fewer drugs? Think of fewer profits and more love. Think of the rational use of power.
Do not touch the beauty of my homeland with your poisons. Help us, without hypocrisy, to save the Amazon rainforest, to save the life of humanity on the planet.
Petro went on in his speech to warn that climate science is being ignored, and that wealthy countries in the Global North have used war as an excuse to not take action to stop it:
You brought together the scientists, and they spoke with reason, with mathematics and climatological models.
They said that the end of the human species was approaching, that the time left to us is not millennia, not even centuries. Science sounded the alarm. And we stopped listening.
War served us as an excuse to not take the necessary measures.
When action was needed most, when speeches were no longer useful, when it was indispensable to invest money to save humanity, when we had to move away as soon as possible from coal and oil, they started one war after another.
They invaded Ukraine, but also Iraq, and Libya, and Syria. They invaded in the name of oil and gas.
In the 21st century, they discovered the worst of their addictions: the addiction to money and oil.
Wars have served them as an excuse to not act against climate change. Wars have shown them how dependent they are on that which will put an end to the human species.
Petro continued discussing the migration crisis from Latin America, and emphasized its roots in these very same economic problems.
He condemned the Global North’s abuse of refugees and migrants, likening it to the genocidal policies of Nazi Germany:
You observe that people suffer from hunger and thirst, and immigrate in their millions toward the north, toward where there is water, then you lock them up, you build walls, you use machine guns, you shoot at them, you expel them as if they were not human beings.
You multiply by five the mentality of those who who created the policies of gas chambers and concentration camps. You are reproducing 1933 on a planetary scale – that era of the great victory of the assault on reason.
Do you not see that the solution to the great exodus scrambling toward your countries in the North is returning to filling the rivers with water and filling the countryside with nutrients?
The climate disaster fills us with viruses, which are swarming to lay waste to us. But you all are doing business with medicines, and even turning vaccines into merchandise.
You all insist that the market will save us from what the market itself has created. Humanity’s Frankenstein is allowing the market and greed to act without any planning, giving up our brains and reason, making human rationality kneel before greed.
Petro warned that Global North countries are fighting to save their empires, while destroying the environment and the possibility for life on the planet:
Why have war if what we need is to save the human species? What is the point of NATO and empires, if what is coming is the end of intelligence?
The climate disaster will kill hundreds of millions of people.
And listen up: it is not the planet that produces this; it is capital that produces this.
The cause of the climate disaster is capital. The logic of dedicating ourselves to consume more and more, to produce more and more, and so that a small few can earn more and more [money]. That is what produces the climate disaster.
They applied the logic of increasing accumulation of capital to the energy motors of coal and oil, and they unleashed a hurricane: the chemical change of the atmosphere keeps getting deeper and deadlier.
Now in a parallel world, the increasing accumulation of capital is the increasing accumulation of death.
From the lands of jungle and beauty, there, where they decided to turn a plant from the Amazon rainforest into an enemy, to extradite and imprison those who grow it, I ask you all to stop the war and to stop the climate disaster.
Petro argued “the true addiction of this phase of human history” is “the addiction to irrational power, to profit and to money.”
He concluded his speech with a powerful call for peace, but underscored that peace is only possible with justice:
Here, in this Amazon rainforest, there is a failure of humanity. From the stakes where they burn it, from the poisoning, there is a wholesale civilizational failure of humanity.
Behind the addiction to cocaine and drugs, behind the addiction to oil and coal, there is the true addiction of this phase of human history: the addiction to irrational power, to profit and to money. This is the enormous deadly machinery that can extinguish humanity.
I request of all of you, as president of one of the most beautiful countries on Earth, and one of the most bloodstained and brutalized countries, that you end the war on drugs, and end all wars, and let our people live in peace.
I call on all of Latin America with that purpose. I call on the voice of Latin America to unite to defeat the irrationality that is tormenting our body.
I call on you to save the Amazon rainforest, as a whole, with resources that can be devoted around the world to life.
If you don’t have the capacity to finance the fund to revitalize the jungles, if it is more important to dedicate the money to weapons than to life, then reduce the external debt to free our own state budgets, and with those we can fulfill the duty of saving humanity and life on the planet.
We can do it ourselves if you all, those in the North, do not want to. Just exchange the debt for life; just exchange the debt for nature.
I proposal this to you all, and I call on Latin America to do this, to hold dialogue to end war.
Don’t pressure us to pick a side in the fields of war. This is the time of peace.
The Slavic peoples should speak to each other; the peoples of the world should speak to each other. War is just a trap that brings the end of the times closer in a grand orgy of irrationality.
From Latin America, we call on Ukraine and Russia to make peace. Only in peace can we save life on our shared Earth.
There is no total peace without social, economic, and environmental justice.
We are at war, as well, with the planet. Without peace with the planet, there will be no peace between nations.
Without justice, there is no social peace.
|
Write an article about: UN human rights chief: End Venezuela sanctions, which ‘exacerbated economic crisis and hindered human rights’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alena Douhan, Michelle Bachelet, sanctions, Venezuela, Volker Türk | UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk said sanctions on Venezuela “have exacerbated the economic crisis and hindered human rights”, calling for the unilateral coercive measures to be lifted.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
The United Nations human rights chief has called for sanctions on Venezuela to be lifted, stating that they “exacerbated the economic crisis and hindered human rights” and created “hurdles” for “the country’s recovery and development”.
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk visited Venezuela in January. There, he met with government officials, right-wing opposition leaders, civil society groups, and religious institutions.
“I heard from across the spectrum of people I spoke to, including humanitarian actors and UN agencies, about the impact of sectorial sanctions on the most vulnerable segments of the population and the hurdles sanctions create for the country’s recovery and development, not least in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic”, Türk said.
“It is clear that the sectorial sanctions imposed since August 2017 have exacerbated the economic crisis and hindered human rights”, he added.
The UN human rights chief’s comments reflect similar remarks made by the international organization’s top expert on sanctions, Alena Douhan, the UN special rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights.
Douhan visited Venezuela in 2021 and reported that “unilateral sanctions increasingly imposed by the United States, the European Union and other countries have exacerbated the [economic crisis]”.
The UN sanctions expert stated that the Venezuelan “government’s revenue was reported to shrink by 99% with the country currently living on 1% of its pre-sanctions income”.
Douhan wrote (emphasis added):
The Special Rapporteur notes with concern that sectoral sanctions on the oil, gold and mining industries, the economic blockade of Venezuela and the freezing of Central Bank assets have exacerbated pre-existing economic and humanitarian situation by preventing the earning of revenues and the use of resources to develop and maintain infrastructure and for social support programs, which has a devastating effect on the whole population of Venezuela, especially those in extreme poverty, women, children, medical workers, people with disabilities or life-threatening or chronic diseases, and the indigenous population.
Volker Türk is an Austrian lawyer who became the UN high commissioner for human rights in October 2022, replacing his predecessor, former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet.
Bachelet was criticized and accused of anti-Venezuela bias by Alfred de Zayas, a prominent UN lawyer and expert. De Zayas said Bachelet’s reports on Venezuela were “fundamentally flawed” and “unbalanced”. He also warned that the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has become increasingly slanted and influenced by the US government.
#Venezuela: UN Human Rights chief concludes visit after meeting w/ authorities & 125+ civil society reps.
High Commissioner @volker_turk welcomes extension of our Office’s presence & calls #UDHR75 “real chance" to tackle long-standing issues.
? https://t.co/7Lx3Ljdmus pic.twitter.com/Ff7NbiEiSl
— UN Human Rights (@UNHumanRights) January 28, 2023
In his official statement on Venezuela, Türk said (emphasis added):
I heard from across the spectrum of people I spoke to, including humanitarian actors and UN agencies, about the impact of sectorial sanctions on the most vulnerable segments of the population and the hurdles sanctions create for the country’s recovery and development, not least in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. People I met described their struggle to get basic and essential products to sustain their livelihoods, the impossibility of finding medicines their loved ones so badly need, and the mental impact, anxiety, and depression of falling ever further into debt to survive.
While the roots of Venezuela’s economic crisis predate the imposition of economic sanctions, as I highlighted in my interactions, it is clear that the sectorial sanctions imposed since August 2017 have exacerbated the economic crisis and hindered human rights.
My Office has repeatedly recommended that Member States suspend or lift measures that have a detrimental effect on human rights and that are aggravating the humanitarian situation, a call we make with regard to unilateral coercive measures imposed on other countries too.
|
Write an article about: Why Peruvians keep protesting against an unelected coup regime. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fujimori, BirGün, Dina Boluarte, José Williams, Keiko Fujimori, Pedro Castillo, Peru | Turkish newspaper BirGün interviewed Ben Norton about the protests in Peru against the unelected government of Dina Boluarte, installed after a coup against President Pedro Castillo.
The Turkish newspaper BirGün interviewed Geopolitical Economy Report editor Ben Norton about the months-long protests in Peru against the unelected government of Dina Boluarte, installed after a US-backed coup in December 2021 against President Pedro Castillo.
The interview was translated into Turkish, but the original English-language version is below.
Dinmeyen öfke oligarşiyi bitirecek
Peru’da solcu Başkan Castillo’nun 7 Aralık’ta azledilmesinin ardından başlayan protestolar sürüyor. Siyaset bilimci Norton, “İstikrar isteniyorsa Peru’nun oligarşik yapısı ve anayasası temelden değiştirilmeli” diyorhttps://t.co/1f6Bo9d7rw pic.twitter.com/cg7tfw5UuZ
— BirGün Gazetesi (@BirGun_Gazetesi) February 17, 2023
What do the Peruvian protesters want?
The protesters in Peru have three main demands:
Who is participating in the protests?
The protests have been organized by activist organizations, Indigenous communities, human rights groups, and left-wing political parties like Nuevo Perú and Perú Libre.
Working-class Peruvians of Indigenous descent, who largely live in rural areas, make up the main base of the demonstrations.
They will continue protesting until their demands are met.
The problem is that Peru’s congress – which is notoriously corrupt and controlled by wealthy right-wing oligarchs, and recently had a 7% approval rating – refuses to hold new elections; it is repeatedly blocking attempts to organize a vote.
Can the process in Peru be similar to that of Bolivia?
There are similarities between Peru and Bolivia. Both have majority Indigenous-descent populations who were largely ignored and marginalized by the mainstream political system for decades. But the political situation in Bolivia is very different.
Bolivia’s leftist Indigenous leader Evo Morales first came to power in 2006, and he completely transformed the country. His Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) party has governed since then (excluding the year-long rule of an unelected right-wing regime after a violent coup d’etat in November 2019).
Under Morales, Bolivians democratically created a new constitution, establishing a plurinational state. His successor, current President Luis Arce, has continued that revolutionary process.
For many protesters in Peru, Bolivia is a political model for what they would like to try to accomplish in their own country. In fact many demonstrators have called for creating a plurinational state as well, in which Indigenous nations have equal representation.
But in Peru, the left is significantly weaker and less organized, particularly because the Fujimori dictatorship used extreme violence to repress left-wing forces in the 1990s.
What does the structure of the Congress tell us about the political crisis in the country?
Peru’s former dictator Alberto Fujimori, who ruled in the 1990s, destroyed all democratic institutions. The Peru of today inherited the structural problems he created.
As part of Fujimori’s changes, he established a unicameral congress, which according to article 113 of the constitution can overthrow the elected president by declaring that the head of state has a “moral incapacity”. All the congress needs is a two-thirds vote.
Numerous scandals, like the infamous Mamanivideos, have shown how corrupt Peru’s congress is. Rich right-wing politicians and their corporate sponsors have been caught bribing congressmembers to vote for or against this impeachment process, which is known as “presidential vacancy”.
Immediately after Castillo was elected, the congress tried to overthrow him using this process. When he tried to dissolve the congress on December 7, it was in order to prevent such a parliamentary coup. And some Peruvian legal experts have argued that Castillo had the right to do so according to article 134 of the same constitution.
These structural problems explain why Peru has had seven presidents in six years. Peru’s political system and constitution must be fundamentally changed if it wants stability.
Castillo had campaigned for president on the promise that he would change the constitution. That is why he won the 2021 presidential election in the first place. And that is why people are in the streets protesting today.
Boluarte’s request for early elections was rejected. What is the Congress’ plan?
It is hard to say with certainty what the congress is planning, but it is clear that what Peru is going through now is a power struggle between different factions of the country’s right-wing oligarchy.
At the current moment, the right-wing and conservative forces are in charge of the state, in alliance with Boluarte (who was expelled from the leftist Perú Libre party in January 2022, and who said she never even believed in its ideology in the first place).
But the far-right, fascistic Fujimorista forces want control of the Peruvian state. The Fujimoristas are those who supported the dictatorship in the 1990s and want to bring back its policies. The movement’s leaders are in fact family members of the former dictator Alberto Fujimori (who is in prison for crimes against humanity), including his daughter Keiko and son Kenji (who is also currently in prison on corruption charges, although Keiko hopes to free them both).
The Fujimoristas have significant influence in the congress, and in other institutions. So their strategy may be to either form an alliance with and co-opt Boluarte, or to replace her with someone like José Williams, the current president of the congress.
Williams is a former military chief who oversaw massacres and is linked to drug trafficking. He would likely be very amenable to the Fujimoristas’ interests.
The Fujimoristas desperately want to prevent new elections from being held, because they are very unpopular among the vast majority of Peruvians, and they know they would likely lose.
What does it mean for the police and the state to take political sides, like we have seen in Brazil?
The military and police in Peru have long been linked to the right wing. During the far-right Fujimori dictatorship in the 1990s, they were the key to maintaining him in power. The military and police committed massacres against people accused of being Maoist guerrillas from the group Shining Path, although in many cases they were actually killing civilians.
There are parallels with the situation in Brazil, which also had a far-right military dictatorship until the 1980s. But we shouldn’t overstate the similarities.
Some elements of the Brazilian military were indeed loyal to far-right former leader Jair Bolsonaro, but he never had the support of most of the military leadership. This is why the coup attempts led by the Bolsonaristas failed.
In Peru, the state is even less democratic, and the military and police have significant power over the civilian government. That is how they were able to easily imprison Pedro Castillo.
We have seen how this political power in the hands of the Congress leads to danger. How should changes be made so that the Peruvian people can have their voice?
The path for the changes that Peru needs is quite clear: a constituent assembly in which the people of Peru democratically create a new constitution to replace the current one that was written by the Fujimori dictatorship.
The Peruvian oligarchy is clearly against this, as it benefits economically and politically from the Fujimorista constitution.
But a constituent assembly is one of the main demands of the protesters in the streets, and it is the only solution that will provide true stability for Peru.
|
Write an article about: BRICS expanding into economic powerhouse: Petrodollar under threat. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Argentina, Bandung Conference, Brazil, BRICS, China, Cuba, Cyril Ramaphosa, Javier Milei, Lula da Silva, Patricia Bullrich, South Africa, Xi Jinping | In its South Africa summit, BRICS invited six new members: Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. The bloc now represents 37% of global GDP (PPP), 40% of global oil production, and roughly 1/3rd of global gas production, challenging the US petrodollar system.
In its summit in Johannesburg, South Africa this August, BRICS invited six new members: Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.
The bloc now represents 37% of global GDP (measured at purchasing power parity, or PPP), as well as 40% of global oil production and roughly 1/3rd of global gas production.
The inclusion of top oil producers like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which have long priced their crude in dollars, is a direct challenge to the US petrodollar system.
All of the invited nations have indicated that they will officially join the extended BRICS+ bloc on 1 January 2024.
Four of Earth’s top 10 gas producers are now de facto BRICS+ members, making up 32% of global production.
Seven of the world’s 10 largest oil producers are now de facto BRICS+ members. According to 2022 data from the US Energy Information Administration, these include the:
In this video I discuss the importance of the expansion of BRICS
The BRICS+ bloc now represents:-37% of global GDP (PPP)-40% of global oil production-1/3rd of global gas production
It can challenge the petrodollar system that undergirds US economic hegemony
Full video below pic.twitter.com/SDQm1ymacV
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) August 25, 2023
A key topic at the Johannesburg BRICS summit from 22 to 24 August was de-dollarization – the international movement of countries seeking alternatives to the hegemonic US currency.
The Russian government has confirmed that some BRICS members are slowly making plans for a new global currency for international trade, to settle balance of payments, and to hold in central bank foreign-exchange reserves.
Brazil’s President Lula da Silva, an original co-founder of the BRICS, used the meeting in South Africa as a platform to call for creating a new international reserve currency, to challenge the dollar.
BRICS has a working group dedicated to developing concrete proposals for this new reserve currency.
Lula emphasized that it would be “a unit of account for trade, which will not replace our national currencies”.
These comments made it clear that BRICS model is not the euro; it is rather something like the bancor, the international unit of account proposed by economist John Maynard Keynes at the 1944 Bretton Woods Conference (which ended up adopting the dollar as the global reserve currency, under US pressure).
Discussions of a new international unit of account are still in the early stages, however, and the currency is only on the horizon in the medium-to-long term.
In the short term, BRICS members voted to increase their use of national currencies in bilateral trade.
The BRICS New Development Bank (NDB), now under the leadership of Brazil’s former President Dilma Rousseff, has promised to gradually de-dollarize the bank’s lending, instead providing financing for projects in the national currencies of members.
In an August article published before the BRICS bloc announced its expansion, economic geographer Mick Dunford explained:
In 2022, the combined economic output of the five BRICS members, measured in purchasing power parity, exceeded for the first time that of the US-led G7.
At market exchange rates in 2021, the BRICS accounted for 26.1 percent of global GDP and 53.1 percent of world population, compared with 43.5 percent and 9.8 percent for the G7. However, GDP is misleading.
If one examines the production of manufactures, energy and raw materials and food, the BRICS countries account for 36.6 percent, 28.3 percent and 53.1 percent of world output, respectively (compared with 35.5 percent, 28.1 percent and 14.1 percent in the case of the G7).
This contribution to the production of real goods vital for human survival significantly exceeds the BRICS’ share of GDP (without correcting for purchasing power differences which significantly raise its shares) while those of the G7 are much smaller than its GDP share.
The bloc has become a massive economic powerhouse – and is only growing in influence.
President Xi Jinping stressed in his speech at the BRICS summit that China does not want a “new cold war”.
Xi called for “win-win cooperation”, guided by the goal of “common prosperity” for all.
At the same time, the Chinese leader warned of the “hegemonic and bullying acts” of “some country” – obviously a reference to the United States.
Xi stated:
We need to promote development and prosperity for all. Many emerging markets and developing countries (EMDCs) have come to what they are today after shaking off the yoke of colonialism. With perseverance, hard work and huge sacrifices, we succeeded in gaining independence and have been exploring development paths suited to our national conditions.
Everything we do is to deliver better lives to our people. But some country, obsessed with maintaining its hegemony, has gone out of its way to cripple the EMDCs. Whoever is developing fast becomes its target of containment; whoever is catching up becomes its target of obstruction.
But this is futile, as I have said more than once that blowing out others’ lamp will not bring light to oneself.
China's President Xi at the BRICS summit:
"some country [hint: the USA], obsessed with maintaining its hegemony, has gone out of its way to cripple the EMDCs (emerging markets and developing countries). Whoever is developing fast becomes its target of containment; whoever is… https://t.co/mjXvydA5yz pic.twitter.com/XNHc0aYsPT
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) August 23, 2023
On the sidelines of the summit, Xi also met with Cuba’s President Díaz-Canel. State media reported that Xi pledged that “China will continue to firmly support Cuba in defending national sovereignty and opposing external interference and blockade”.
In a similar vein, Brazil’s President Lula condemned the unjust, Western-dominated international financial system and insisted that countries need “a fairer, more predictable, and equitable global trade”.
“We cannot accept a green neocolonialism that imposes trade barriers and discriminatory measures under the pretext of protecting the environment”, he added.
In his speech at the BRICS summit, South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa compared the bloc to the 1955 Bandung Conference, which was organized to oppose colonialism.
“When reflecting on the purpose and role of BRICS in the world today, we recall the Bandung Conference of 1955, where Asian and African nations demanded a greater voice for developing countries in world affairs”, he said.
“We still share that common vision”, Ramaphosa added. “Through the 15th BRICS Summit and this Dialogue we should strive to advance the Bandung spirit of unity, friendship and cooperation”.
Among the six countries invited to join BRICS+, a question mark is hanging over the head of one.
Argentina’s current, centrist government, led by President Alberto Fernández, has vowed to join BRICS+. However, whether or not the South American country actually does depends on the results of the elections approaching in October.
Two of the three main presidential candidates have publicly stated that they will not join BRICS+: the right-wing candidate Patricia Bullrich and the far-right extremist candidate Javier Milei.
Milei wants to abolish Argentina’s central bank, abandon monetary sovereignty, and adopt the US dollar as the official national currency (while also implementing mass privatizations of state institutions, building private for-profit prisons, and heavily militarizing the country).
When asked if he would consider joining BRICS+ if he won the election, the far-right extremist Milei declared: “Our geopolitical alignment is with the U.S. and Israel. We are not going to align with communists”.
|
Write an article about: Mexico’s President AMLO condemns EU Parliament as ‘corrupt reactionary coup-plotters’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Bolivia, EU, European Parliament, European Union, Juan Guaidó, Mexico, Venezuela | The European Parliament condemned Mexico’s left-wing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador for his “populist rhetoric” against the biased corporate media. He responded by blasting the EU body as a reactionary interventionist gang of coup-plotters, declaring, “we are no longer a colony of anyone”
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
Mexico’s left-wing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador published a blistering statement denouncing the European Parliament as “flunkies of the reactionary and coup-plotting strategy of the corrupt” right-wing oligarch-backed opposition in his country.
López Obrador, who is known popularly by the acronym AMLO, criticized the European Union’s lawmaking body for meddling in Mexico’s internal affairs, and implored its members to “evolve, leave behind your obsessive meddling disguised as good intentions.”
Noting that he has a 66% approval rating, which is higher than any leader in Europe, AMLO stressed, “Don’t forget that we are no longer a colony of anyone. Mexico is a free, independent, and sovereign country.”
López Obrador made these trenchant remarks in response to a resolution that was overwhelmingly approved by the European Parliament on March 10, which condemned Mexico for allegedly violating the freedom of the press and the rights of journalists.
While it is true that the level of violence against journalists in Mexico is very high, this has been a consistent problem for decades. The European Parliament resolution, however, blamed President AMLO’s “populist rhetoric” for the death of reporters, despite the fact that he has only been in power since December 2018.
López Obrador has criticized corporate media outlets in his country, many of which are owned by right-wing oligarchs and have been notoriously biased against him and his progressive government. Major newspapers have published demonstrably false stories and propaganda to try to sabotage AMLO’s ambitious project of social change, called the Fourth Transformation.
Some of these right-wing anti-AMLO journalists have been funded by the US government and EU through interventionist soft-power organizations like the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), US Agency for International Development (USAID), and European Endowment for Democracy.
The European Parliament resolution condemning Mexico was approved with 607 votes in favor, and just two against, with 73 abstentions.
The EU’s law-making body has a long history of supporting coups, regime-change operations, and interventionist policies across the Global South.
In 2019, the European Parliament recognized unelected US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó as supposed “president” of Venezuela, in another overwhelming vote of 439 for and 104 against, with 88 abstentions.
Later that same year, the European Parliament supported a violent far-right coup against Bolivia’s democratically elected socialist president, Evo Morales, the first and only indigenous leader in the history of the nation-state.
The European Parliament even honored Bolivian coup leader Jeanine Añez in 2021 by making her a finalist for its prestigious Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought, named after a Western-backed right-wing anti-Soviet dissident. (The prize that year ended up going to Western-sponsored Russian regime-change activist Alexei Navalny, a far-right nationalist who has demonized Muslim immigrants as “cockroaches” and participated in racist marches with skinheads.)
The EU praised Añez as a hero while ignoring the fact that she was a corrupt and brutal right-wing dictator who oversaw massacres of indigenous pro-democracy protesters and violently repressed progressive social movements, while imposing neoliberal shock therapy policies, privatizing state assets and selling them off to foreign corporations for pennies on the dollar.
Comunicado del gobierno de la República al Parlamento Europeo.https://t.co/VNfogiVCX9 pic.twitter.com/IylpebkJGx
— Gobierno de México (@GobiernoMX) March 11, 2022
The office of Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) wrote the following letter to the European Parliament on March 10. Multipolarista has translated it from its original Spanish into English, and published the statement in full below:
“To the members of the European Parliament:
“Enough with the corruption, lies, and hypocrisies.
“It is unfortunate that you all are allowing yourself to become flunkies of the reactionary and coup-plotting strategy of the corrupt group that is opposed to the Fourth Transformation, driven by millions of Mexicans to confront the monstrous inequality and violence inherited by the neoliberal economic policies that were imposed on our country for 36 years.
“Know, European lawmakers, that Mexico has ceased to be a land of conquest, and, as in very few occasions in your history, it values freedom-loving principles like equality and democracy.
“Here no one is repressed; the freedom of expression and work of journalists is respected. The state does not violate human rights like happened with previous governments, when you all, by the way, were complicit in your silence.
“Mexico is a pacifist country that has chosen non-violence, and we support dialogue, not war. We don’t send weapons to any country under any circumstance, as you all are doing now.
“If we were in the situation that you all describe in your resolution, our president would not be supported by 66% of the citizens, as was published yesterday in a poll by the firm Morning Consult, which puts him [López Obrador] in second place among the presidents of the world’s largest countries.
“By the way, that is higher approval than European leaders.
“For the next [declaration], inform yourselves and carefully read your resolutions before voting.
“And don’t forget that we are no longer a colony of anyone. Mexico is a free, independent, and sovereign country.
“Evolve, leave behind your obsessive meddling disguised as good intentions. You all are not the world government.
“And don’t forget what was said by that giant of the Americas, President Benito Juárez: ‘Among individuals, as among nations, respect for the rights of others is peace.'”
|
Write an article about: Illegal US blockade against Cuba continues harming millions on 60th anniversary. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | blockade, Cuba, Donald Trump, embargo, Joe Biden, sanctions | February 3, 2022 is the 60th anniversary of the illegal blockade against Cuba, which the US admitted aims “to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.” Cuba estimates the embargo has cost its economy $144.41 billion.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
February 3, 2022 marks 60 years since the United States officially declared an economic embargo against Cuba.
Washington imposed this blockade in order “to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government,” as a former US State Department official admitted.
Cuba’s government has condemned the illegal US embargo as “the most complex, prolonged and inhuman act of economic warfare ever committed against any nation,” stating that it “constitutes a massive, flagrant and systematic violation of the human rights of all Cubans.”
Cuba estimates that the blockade has cost its economy at least $144.41 billion.
When the people of Cuba overthrew the right-wing dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista in a popular revolution on January 1, 1959, the United States responded with coercive measures aimed at punishing the country for toppling Washington’s loyal client regime.
On February 3, 1962, the already existing US sanctions escalated into a full on blockade, when President John F. Kennedy issued Proclamation 3447, declaring an “Embargo on All Trade with Cuba.”
Washington’s Proclamation 3447 claimed that Cuba’s revolutionary government “is incompatible with the principles and objectives of the Inter-American system,” due to “the subversive offensive of Sino-Soviet Communism with which the Government of Cuba is publicly aligned.”
This US embargo, which continues to this day, is flagrantly illegal under international law.
Cuba’s Foreign Ministry published a statement condemning the blockade on its 60th anniversary, stating, “Washington’s policy of siege and economic suppression has become the core of a strategy designed to curtail the legitimate right of the Cuban people to defend their sovereignty and realize a program of development free of imperialist domination.”
“Although the blockade against Cuba was officially declared in 1962, its application goes back to the very moment of the victory of the revolution,” the Foreign Ministry added.
In April 1960, just over a year after the revolution, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Lester Mallory published a memo titled “The Decline and Fall of Castro.” This document is a smoking gun, clearly revealing the goals behind the US blockade: “hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.”
Mallory admitted that the “majority of Cubans support Castro” and that there “is no effective political opposition.”
The senior US diplomat wrote that the “only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship.”
The US State Department memo declared that “every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba,” in order to make “the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.”
Cuba’s Foreign Ministry said the US embargo has “constrained the scope for economic growth, being designed to impede trading relations with third countries, cause maximum possible obstruction of banking and other financial operations, deter foreign investment and cut off all sources of revenue.”
Blatantly violating international law, the US blockade “uses pressure, blackmail and penalties in seeking to isolate Cuba and penalize those who establish any trading, commercial or financial links with the country,” the Foreign Ministry wrote.
“It is a practical expression in the 21st century of the Monroe Doctrine, which takes a proprietorial view of Latin America and the Caribbean as either America’s ‘back yard’ or ‘front yard,'” the Cuban government added.
For the 29th year in a row, basically the entire world voted at the United Nations against the illegal, murderous US blockade on Cuba.
184 countries voted to end the US blockade.
Only 2 voted for it: the USA and Israel.
3 US client regimes abstained: Colombia, Ukraine, and UAE pic.twitter.com/roZsqCu0NG
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) June 23, 2021
Washington’s illegal blockade against Cuba is opposed by almost the entire international community.
In June 2021, 184 of the United Nations’ 193 member states (95%) voted against the US embargo on Cuba. Only the United States and Israel voted in support of the blockade, while just Colombia, Ukraine, and Brazil abstained.
This was the 29th consecutive year in which the US blockade was condemned with the vast majority of votes at the United Nations.
At the 2021 UN vote, Cuba’s Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla called the blockade a “massive, flagrant and unacceptable violation of the human rights of the Cuban people,” which constitutes “an economic war of extraterritorial scope against a small country already affected in the recent period by the economic crisis derived from the pandemic.”
“Like the [Covid-19] virus, the blockade asphyxiates and kills,” Rodríguez said. “It must stop.”
While 95% of the countries on Earth oppose Washington’s illegal blockade, it has bipartisan support inside the United States.
The Donald Trump administration imposed hundreds of new economic sanctions against Cuba. The Joe Biden administration has refused to lift these unilateral coercive measures, and has instead imposed even more.
The New York Times noted that “Biden is taking an even harder line on Cuba than his predecessor, President Donald J. Trump.”
|
Write an article about: Inside Latin America’s new currency plan, with Ecuador’s presidential candidate Andrés Arauz. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fernández, Andrés Arauz, Argentina, Brazil, Bretton Woods, BRICS, Ecuador, Latin America, Lula da Silva, Rafael Correa, Sur, Zoltan Pozsar | Ecuadorian economist and former presidential candidate Andrés Arauz explains Latin America’s attempt to create a new currency and regional financial architecture, to challenge the “hegemonic, neo-colonial” US dollar-dominated system.
Geopolitical Economy Report editor Ben Norton spoke with Ecuadorian economist Andrés Arauz, a former presidential candidate who came close to winning the 2021 elections.
Arauz discussed Latin America’s attempt to create a new currency and regional financial architecture, to challenge what he described as the “hegemonic, neo-colonial” US dollar-dominated system.
“We need the type of bank that can really serve the Global South”, he urged, calling for a “clearing and settlement bank that can allow for these transactions to take place, and that is not afraid of sanctions from the United States”.
“We’ve seen tectonic shifts in the functioning of the international monetary system”, Arauz said, agreeing that the world is now seeing a new kind of Bretton Woods III emerge.
“There are many different initiatives, but this has to find a reasonable path forward, which goes along with regional integration mechanisms. So you have a sort of Eurasian hub, a pan-African hub, a Latin American hub, and then you have connections among those regions”.
“The society of the 21st century has to be a society of blocs, of large geopolitical blocs that can effectively allow for a sort of planetary governance, in more balanced terms, but also have common positions, but then within those blocs you can have quite a bit of diversity. So I think that’s how it will end up working also in the monetary sphere”.
“This is a historic moment for humanity”, he argued. “We have to show that there is an alternative, and we are in the conditions to prove that”.
But Arauz warned that Latin American unity must come quickly: “We cannot be facing this geopolitical moment, basically a world war, as 33 independent, small republics; this has to be faced as a Latin American bloc. And the political conditions are there. I just hope that we can get the structures, the instruments, in place for the regional bloc to actually assert itself”.
BEN NORTON: Hey everyone, I’m Ben Norton, and this is Geopolitical Economy Report. Today, I have a real pleasure of being joined by the Ecuadorian economist and politician Andrés Arauz.
He was the former minister of knowledge and human talent in the government of Rafael Correa in Ecuador. He was also a former general director of Ecuador’s central bank.
And he is brilliant when it comes to understanding new forms of finance, new economic alternatives.
He’s been a longtime critic of the International Monetary Fund. He has discussed a lot the importance of building a new currency system in the region, and has also discussed central bank digital currencies.
So that’s exactly what we’re going to be speaking about today.
Now, there was also recently a regional election in Ecuador, and the leftist Correísta movement swept the elections and won more than any other party. They won in the seven most populous regions, and they also won the mayorship of the major cities of Quito and Guayaquil.
So we are going to talk about the election, but I want to begin, Andrés, speaking about the discussion of creating a new currency in Latin America for bilateral trade.
There has been a lot of debate about this, especially in the financial press. We’ve seen economists from the IMF have denounced it as a “crazy” idea. But this is not necessarily a new idea.
You yourself were involved in a previous attempt at creating a unit of account in Latin America for international trade, which was called the Sucre. And I do want to ask you about that in a moment.
But I’m wondering if you can discuss this meeting that was held this January between the Brazilian President Lula da Silva and Argentine President Alberto Fernández. And in that meeting, Lula said that they are beginning the process of research to create a new currency, which he has tentatively referred to as the Sur. There are a lot of questions about this. I know it’s in the early stage.
I’m wondering what your thoughts are on this. You yourself have been promoting this idea for a long time.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Hi, Ben. Thanks for having me. Yeah, the Sur is an idea that has been in the minds of Latin American economists for decades. And we have a lot of historical precedents.
In the ‘80s, there was an initiative called the UMLA, Unidad Monetaria Latinoamericana, within the ALADI, which is the Latin American Integration Association, so that central banks could have this common currency and they could make transfers, international transfers amongst the different countries of the region without having to do it recurring to the dollar or the US financial system.
And then, you know, we had the Sucre initiative among the ALBA countries, that works, that is operation right now.
We also had the case of the Peso Andino for the Andean countries, that likewise was created in the ‘70s and ’80s.
And now we’re discussing the Sur.
Some of the critics have incorrectly basically called it a unique currency, or a currency that will replace national currencies. And that is not so.
The idea is not to replace each country’s national, sovereign currency, but rather to have an additional currency, a complementary currency, a supranational currency for trade among countries in the region, starting with Brazil and Argentina, that are the sort of two powerhouses in the Southern Cone, and that could then amplify to the rest of the region.
That’s a very important concept because people tend to compare this to the euro, and the euro had a very long process of getting there. But the euro is actually in every person’s physical wallet.
In our case, we’re not talking about replacing national currencies. We’re not talking about convergence criteria and fiscal convergence, like the Maastricht Treaty, imposing austerity and debt limits to each country.
That is not the case of our proposal. It starts from the banking sector, from the functioning of the international payment system dynamics, very much in the spirit of Keynes’ Bancor.
Now, I think that translated to the 21st century means that the Sur, this common additional currency for trade transactions within the region, has to have financial innovation incorporated in the design so that, for example, we don’t have to use the banks in Miami or in New York just to transfer funds between Chile and Uruguay, or Argentina and Colombia.
Right now, what happens is that, when a transaction from either of these countries has to take place, they have to first find what’s called the correspondent bank in the United States, usually a bank in Miami or in New York City, where the money flows.
Now, that’s not only inefficient in energy terms, and information terms, but it is also much slower because, by having to go through the US financial system, it has to comply with the United States sort of know your customer, anti-money laundering, combating financial terrorism laws and regulations. And that’s in principle okay, but they take a long time to process.
And if you think about it, if it’s a transaction between two countries within Latin America, why would they have to comply with U.S. regulations to begin with? It could be a regional financial arrangement that could make transfers in real time, what’s called real time gross settlement of these transactions.
You could have this immediately available. And you could make trade much faster. And it could be a way of promoting regional economic integration, especially for small and medium enterprises.
You usually have to wait, you know, five or six days for a transaction to finally settle.
So this is an opportunity for Latin American small businesses as well, and hopefully it can be deployed in a very quick manner.
You know, this has been discussed in theory and practice for decades. So it really shouldn’t be a challenge to get this going forward fairly quickly.
BEN NORTON: Thank you for describing that. And you mentioned something very important, Andrés, which is the Bancor.
This was the proposal that John Maynard Keynes had made back at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944, in which the US dollar was established as the global reserve currency. This is an international unit of account, so each country could still maintain its own sovereign monetary policy.
And I’m glad that you stressed that this is not based on the Eurozone model, where a country that has a current account deficit like Greece is just going to constantly be trapped in debt, whereas countries that have current account surplus like Germany, which export so much, they maintain this kind of economic hegemony.
I want to talk about what happened with the Sucre. You mentioned that the Sucre technically is still, it’s still possible to use this currency.
A lot of people associate the Sucre with former Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez, who had been a huge promoter, but it was actually under Rafael Correa in Ecuador, in whose government you served, that used the Sucre more than any other country in the region.
This is a graph showing the volume of trade, at least converted to U.S. dollars, of the use of the Sucre in bilateral trade in Latin America from 2010 until 2016. And Ecuador was responsible for the vast majority of the transactions.
Now, we do know that there are political reasons for [the reversal of] that. After Correa left power in 2017, we saw that he was betrayed by his former vice president, Lenín Moreno, who basically did a kind of internal coup.
But I’m wondering if you can discuss your experience with the Sucre, I believe you were involved in helping to develop it, what lessons you have learned from it, and if you think that it’s something that could be brought back in the future, or if the Sur is going to kind of replace it, or, in general, if you can reflect on the experience of the Sucre.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: The Sucre is like building an extra highway for financial transactions.
So you have the conventional financial system that by default requires that a US correspondent bank intermediates financial transactions, and that correspondent bank is usually based either in Miami, for the Latin American countries, or New York City, if it’s a larger business.
For example, a transaction between South America, any South American country and, for example, an East Asian country, it usually requires a correspondent bank account, and a common correspondent bank account, and that’s very hard to find.
So they have to call their bankers, and they say, “Hey, do you have any relationship with a bank in Argentina?” And they say, “No, I don’t. Let me call my bankers’ bankers”.
Then they make successive calls until they find that they both share an account at the Federal Reserve, for example, or a big bank like JP Morgan.
And so then these banks, which are in fact grouped in these large global private commercial banks, that intermediate financial transactions, are grouped into an organization called the Wolfsberg Group.
This Wolfsberg group is the group of the 13 largest international banks, and they settle most of the international trade in the world.
And they are all private banks. And they have their own standards, their own principles, and their own logic as to how they work.
Of course, they want to make money, but then they also follow their country of origin’s rules and regulations, which are hegemonic in nature, neocolonial in nature as well, and are not designed for the interests of the sort of peripheral countries or marginal users of these transactional systems.
So in the case of the Sucre, it’s a highway, it’s a platform that connects the central bank of each of the countries, of the ALBA countries, with the domestic commercial banks, where people have accounts, and then the central banks are connected amongst themselves with the Sucre platform, which is really a piece of software, a messaging protocol, which allows the central banks to talk to each other and to pay each other in Sucres.
The Sucre is the unit of account of the system, of this platform system. And like I said, it’s fully operational, in technical terms. Anyone can do a transaction, if they want to.
But politically, when Lenín Moreno came to power in Ecuador, he decided to stop sending the Ecuadorian delegates to the monthly and yearly sort of meetings that the Sucre council had, had, where they were discussing the technical operational workings of the system.
And so after Ecuador stopped sending the delegates, some of the issues on the technical workings of the Sucre started to sort of be on pause and on hold. And until now, they’re like that.
So it was a political manipulation of the process to make it slow at first, and then to completely halt. However, the software itself, the technical design, and the possibility to make transactions, could be easily retaken, if there is just enough political will to bring it back to life.
The Sur also has other precedents in the Southern Cone of South America, which was the SML, Sistema de Pagos en Monedas Locales, or Local Currency Payment System, that within the Mercosur was developed by first Argentina and adopted by Uruguay and Paraguay as well, which allows exporters to invoice their sales in local currency to get paid in local currency with transactions within Mercosur countries as if they were domestic transactions.
But then the central banks settle, at the end of the day, at the New York Fed. So again, they have to go to this sort of correspondent banking network, designed where the New York Fed has protagonism.
So it won’t be hard to sort of merge these initiatives and to have the Sur come out of that. It is not necessary to have, you know, a physical or legal merge of these two instruments. It is enough to have a conceptual merge.
We have the ideas from one, the ideas from another. We can easily design something new that takes the best from all of these designs, the historical precedents that we do have in the region.
That’s why I trust that it can be deployed fairly quickly.
I followed President Lula and President Fernández’s announcement, again, it was announced as an initial research phase.
I have been involved in the working group for the Sur with some people from the ministry of finance of Brazil.
And I think we can really go forward fairly quickly. But again, our challenge here is not technical in nature. We know how to solve all these issues.
We have the experience; we have the concrete, tangible experience. What we need is to present a system that will be supported by our local productive sectors, so that it can be sustained, so it can be sustainable in time, and not be just subject to a political backlash or, you know, flip flopping, like we have seen in the case of the Sucre, or in other initiatives in the region.
We need to make this long lasting. And for that to work, we need the productive sectors, small and medium enterprises, businesses actually use the platform and the mechanism.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, I’m glad you mentioned that, Andrés, because I was going to ask you about the politics of this.
I should say that I want to apologize a little bit to you, because I know I landed you in some hot water in Ecuador. I wrote an article after, in Brazil, after Lula won the presidential election in October, you published an excellent article in Spanish explaining your new plan for a “regional financial architecture”. And I translated it into English and was promoting it.
Advising Brazil’s President-elect Lula, Ecuadorian economist and leftist presidential candidate @EcuArauz made a blueprint for a “new regional financial architecture” to unite Latin America, including a currency to challenge the hegemony of the US dollar https://t.co/o7L0fN236F
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 1, 2022
And I saw that the Ecuadorian right wing was very angry, because they said that you are planning on ending the dollar as the Ecuadorian currency.
Of course, people might know that, in Ecuador, the dollar has been the national currency ever since the 1999 banking crash, that was actually overseen by former Economic Minister Guillermo Lasso, who is the multimillionaire banker who is now the president.
So I’m sorry for leading the right wing to attack you, even though that’s not what you proposed. You didn’t propose changing the national currency of Ecuador. And they’re obviously misinterpreting what you wrote.
But what you did write in that article, an important point, is that Latin America, at least South America at this moment, has a narrow window of time, because at the end of 2023, there are going to be presidential elections in Argentina.
And if the right wing comes to power, and especially if someone who is very extreme like perhaps Javier Milei, who is this, you know, libertarian, right-wing Koch Brother kind of figure in Latin America, I highly doubt that he would be willing to continue with this process of economic regional integration and the creation of a unit of account for trade between countries in the region.
How can a system — I know this is not an easy question to answer — but how can such a system like this be created, so if a Bolsonaro, or a Milei, or a Lenín Moreno comes to power, they can’t just sabotage it, like they have done in the past?
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Yeah, it really is a challenge. But we know the answer. The answer is to have, you know, to surpass the point of no return.
And to do that you first have to overcome the theoretical discussion. It can’t just be an idea floating around. It has to try to become at least a treaty, a law, some regulation of some sort that can exist in reality, not just an academic proposal.
So the first step is to do that. Then, of course, we need to go beyond just having it on paper. We need to have users of the system that can then become the incumbent defenders of the system, of the new system, of the alternative system.
So that is why we need to go extremely quickly.
This is what really bothers me, because sometimes, you know, the heads of state make these grand announcements, which are huge in terms of their implications, but then our bureaucracies, Latin American bureaucracies, and especially the foreign ministries do not move at the same pace that the presidents are going. They go very slowly.
And, you know, with all these bureaucratic messes and they’re still sending physical snail mail to exchange letters and you have to send a letter to the embassy, sort of ignoring that we live in the 21st century, that you have email, that you have WhatsApp, that you can send an instant message, and then you can actually make decisions quickly, and go forward quickly as well, where you have a huge pool of talent available anywhere in the world, and you can have meetings via video calls.
Somehow, this does not work in the case of Latin American government bureaucracies, foreign ministries. We have to go really quickly.
I mean, I am a technical person, I know my stuff. But I’m also active in politics. And I immediately recognize that we do have a narrow window.
We have no time to lose. And so we need to create a chat group among the presidents, and have them make decisions quickly, you know, via their cell phones.
This is how things get done nowadays in the corporate world, and big firms, and other initiatives. And this is how we have to move; we have to move forward quickly.
It is a bit frustrating, that the speed at which the bureaucracies are moving does not match the historic moment that we have in Latin America with, you know, basically all of the major economies, all of the major countries having progressive governments.
I mean, this is not an opportunity to waste.
Then, of course, once we get this done, once we get this operation going, we have to empower our citizens. We have to empower our domestic productive sectors, our small and medium enterprises, our cooperatives, our associations of producers, so that they can get the most out of these new mechanisms.
They can trade amongst themselves. We have to build networks. We have to set the infrastructure in motion quickly, so that the new opportunities for trade among our countries can be concrete, tangible, and effective.
And that is a challenge for us.
I wish we could build, you know, as quickly as the Chinese are building new rail infrastructure, for example. And that’s something that we need in South America. And that can be done as well, also quite quickly, and have profound, transformational impact within the region.
Then there are other things that are even more powerful that can be done extremely quickly, and that are very important to keep the motion and the momentum for regional integration going, which is, for example, setting up a scholarship fund, a small scholarship fund, but for what we call educational exchange between high schools and also universities of the countries in the region, so that you can do a semester or a year abroad.
And when a student leaves to another country, for example, goes from Peru to Paraguay, and then the empty spot left in Peru can be filled by a person from Bolivia, or from Ecuador.
Then you have basically a clearing system of educational exchange that does not need to cost more money for our governments.
So with very little money, basically paying for tickets, you could get this energy of regional integration going, especially among the youth, which in a young continent like Latin America is the engine for the present and the future.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, I should mention to people that Andrés was a leading presidential candidate in 2021. He won the first round of the election, and came close to winning the second. And it’s very refreshing to hear all of these very creative ideas from someone who could potentially be president someday.
Andrés, you talked about the importance of speed in this moment. I do have to say that Lula made a comment in his meeting with Alberto Fernández that gave me a little concern, when he said that “there are going to be many debates and many meetings” in the plan to create this. And it does make me a little worried that that they might not be expediting the process very rapidly.
But what I will say is Lula made another very interesting comment that I wanted to ask you about. When a journalist posed this question about the currency, Lula mentioned that the BRICS system is also working on creating an international reserve currency.
And from what we’ve seen thus far, it’s going to potentially be based on a basket of currencies of the five members, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, using their currencies. And potentially also there may be the use of commodities like oil.
So I’m curious, now that the BRICS is developing its own international financial architecture, a potential reserve currency, and Argentina has applied to join the BRICS. China invited Argentina to virtually attend the two meetings of the BRICS last year. And Iran, Algeria, Egypt has expressed interest, and Indonesia.
I’m curious if you think that, now that we’re seeing another international financial architecture being created through the BRICS system, if in Latin America the financial architecture could potentially be connected, if you could collaborate, and potentially if you can even see a country like Ecuador collaborating with BRICS or potentially joining BRICS.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: I think it would be, of course, interesting to have Ecuador join BRICS. I think that’s a very distant possibility, for different reasons.
Right now [President] Lasso is completely a right-wing ideological monster, and is not even interested in anything counter-hegemonic, and doesn’t even believe in regional integration. And of course, challenging the unipolar system is out of question, in the case of Lasso.
But also Ecuador is a fairly small country, although its human talent I think outweighs its natural size.
But I think right now what is key is to have the five BRICS countries, the core members, actually get something done. You know, the New Development Bank halted some of its operations in the pandemic.
Then more recently as well, I think Lula nailed it, correctly, when he proposed that Dilma Rousseff go to China to lead the BRICS bank, called the New Development Bank.
Hopefully it can do so without following the same sort of IMF, World Bank type logic, or the same credit rating agency type logic, and to create new markets, new ways of interacting with the Global South.
I think that the common unit of account is definitely something that can be done, again, quickly. We have the experience of setting up in South America this system for unitary compensation in the region, the Sucre. And there are other examples as well. This should not be a challenge.
Hopefully, what’s important there is to find a clearing and settlement bank that can allow for these transactions to take place, and that is not afraid of sanctions from the United States.
We need that type of bank that can really serve the Global South, the interests of the Global South, and that can help nations that are in desperate need, in this 2023, where we’re going to have a massive debt crisis in the Global South, particularly many Latin American and African countries.
Hopefully the BRICS bank will be there to support the Global South with solidarity, and not just become one more creditor that, you know, wants to join the Paris Club or whatever. We need an alternative view. And I really hope that President Dilma will bring that vision to the BRICS bank.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, very well said. I think that is a very important decision, to appoint Dilma as the head of the New Development Bank.
You mentioned an important word, the s-word, sanctions, which I wanted to ask you about.
We’ve seen that in the past few decades, the application of unilateral sanctions by the United States has skyrocketed.
And of course, in the context of South America, we’ve seen that Venezuela is suffering under a brutal embargo imposed by the U.S., with many illegal unilateral sanctions.
The central bank reserves and the gold reserves in particular, of Venezuela were effectively stolen by the Bank of England.
That established a precedent that was then used by the U.S. to freeze the central bank reserves of Afghanistan, which has fueled a horrible crisis and hyperinflation, because they can’t stabilize their currency in Afghanistan.
Then, of course, Russia. After Russia invaded Ukraine, the U.S. and the EU froze $300 billion U.S. dollars worth of the central bank reserves, the foreign exchange reserves of Russia.
So clearly that has established a precedent that has frightened countries around the world. And it makes sense why countries are trying to find new reserve currencies and new payment mechanisms.
The prominent Credit Suisse economist Zoltan Pozsar has been talking a lot about this concept of Bretton Woods III.
He argues that we’re entering this new kind of monetary era where Bretton Woods I, from 1944, in the Bretton Woods conference, until 1971 or ‘73, when the US dollar was delinked from gold, was Bretton Woods I, and then we’ve been living through Bretton Woods II. But he argues that now we’re moving into a kind of Bretton Woods III.
I’m wondering if you agree with that argument, and what role you see Latin America playing in kind of forging this path.
I always shout at the top of my lungs, you know, people talk about Eurasian integration, but I think Latin American integration is just as important in challenging this financial hegemony and building a truly multipolar system.
And I’m curious if you think that we are in this Bretton Woods III world, and what role Latin America plays in that.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Yeah, definitely, we are in this Bretton Woods III world. This is obvious, not in question.
We’ve seen tectonic shifts in the functioning of the international monetary system. Some are not detected until after a while.
But those who follow this, you know, those who follow this closely, I think we are in the capacity to say that, yeah, we’re living this Bretton Woods III moment. There are many, many conversations happening right now.
I think right now we’re still in a moment of what Ilene Grabel calls “productive incoherence”, in the sense that there are a million ideas, you have BRICS, you have the different regions, you have Latin America, you have the SDRs, you have the crypto movement, I mean, all these different alternatives and ideas.
And for now, it’s okay that it’s sort of chaotic and there are many different initiatives, but this has to find a reasonable path forward, which goes along with regional integration mechanisms, and the connection among regional integration mechanisms.
So you have a sort of Eurasian hub, a pan-African hub, a Latin American hub, and then you have connections among those regions. And the society of the 21st century has to be a society of blocs, of large geopolitical blocs that can effectively allow for a sort of planetary governance, in more balanced terms, but also have common positions, but then within those blocs you can have quite a bit of diversity.
So I think that’s how it will end up working also in the monetary sphere. And we need these sort of communicating chambers or layers, and that would be the suprabloc or the supranational mechanisms, you know, like the BRICS bank, but also the SDRs at the International Monetary Fund and other such initiatives.
So we’re definitely living this moment of creativity. And I think it’s important to get these things rolling, so we have to go from talking about them to actually setting them in motion, and then testing which initiatives are most successful.
Now, all of this has to be done in the context of geopolitical confrontation and the weaponization of the incumbent financial system, which is the dollar-based, US financial system-based, correspondent banking and sort of FATF-governed, US hegemonic financial system.
And that is really both a cause for the major change, but also it stifles that change, because the smaller countries, but also maybe banks that do not want to lose their incumbent position, are afraid of taking on this role of an alternative system, because the US institutions, the OFAC, the Treasury, FinCEN, and their position in international multilateral organizations have really weaponized the system against any sort of this creativity.
So it will take a lot of courage, but also a lot of coordination, so that things can be done in a unified way, opposing hegemony, but in a coordinated way, so that not each individual country suffers the weight of the sanctions, but that we can do it in such a coordinated way that, you know, we can all go forward without fear of retaliation from these institutions. So that’s a realpolitik kind of thing.
Coming from a small country like Ecuador, it would be impossible for us, Ecuador by itself, to try to promote something that big. So we have to trust the big players to take the first steps, and to make some long-lasting change.
And just because you mentioned sanctions, I want to add another element, which is not only the gold that was taken from Venezuela, and the asset freeze and so on, but there was a particular type of sanction that has not been well described in the media, which is the IMF, the International Monetary Fund, which is a multilateral organization, but because the US has a veto and outsized influence in the governance of the fund, decided not to recognize the Venezuelan government.
So neither the Maduro official government, nor the fake Guaidó “government”, they said, “We have uncertainty as to whom we should recognize as the official government”.
And they blocked Venezuela’s accounts at the IMF, and in de facto avoided, or it was an obstacle for Venezuela accessing its $5 billion dollars worth of recently issued SDRs in 2021, which at the moment of the pandemic, and given the economic hardship that Venezuela was going through, would have been extremely useful for fighting the economic consequences of the pandemic, and acquiring vital health and medical equipment for the population.
So this is a new type of sanction, which is not explained anywhere; it’s very difficult to pin down.
But up to this moment, even two months after Guaidó has been sort of removed from power, and there is no question as to the legitimacy of President Maduro of Venezuela, the IMF has still not recognized the Venezuelan central bank, and has still blocked the passwords to Venezuela’s account at the IMF, where there is over $5 billion worth of SDRs, which are bigger than what’s in the UK with the gold, bigger than other asset seizures that Venezuela has gone through.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, this is actually a perfect segue. I wanted to ask you about special drawing rights, SDRs.
You’ve been a big advocate internationally for expanding the use of SDRs. And in many ways, this is kind of an example of the Keynesian concept of the Bancor in practice.
The problem, of course, with the SDRs — you can explain what they are — is that they are overseen by the IMF. And we know that the IMF is a deeply politicized institution, in which only the U.S. has veto power.
Of course anyone who knows the basic history of the IMF knows it has a long history of trapping countries in the Global South in debt, and then forcing them to impose neoliberal “structural adjustment” programs, cutting the minimum wage, privatizing state assets, etc.
The IMF itself, its top economists, admitted in a report called “Neoliberalism: Oversold?” that those policies led to a decline in growth, led to increasing inequality, and unemployment, and such.
But we’re in this complicated situation, where the SDRs do propose an interesting opportunity for the Global South.
But as you mentioned, during the pandemic, Venezuela applied for an IMF loan, but also Iran, where no one contests who the real Iranian government is. The US used its veto power to block the request that Iran made for a $5 billion loan from the IMF, during the pandemic, that could have saved lives.
So I’ve always been struck by this contradiction. I think you’re absolutely right, that SDRs are an important opportunity for the South. But how do we square the circle of that contradiction, where it’s also with such a thoroughly flawed institution?
You yourself have been a leading critic of the IMF. I’m just curious what you think about the contradiction there, of the importance of SDRs, but the problem of the IMF.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: So we don’t have to compare the SDRs to perfection, because perfection doesn’t exist, and is not around. So we have to compare SDRs to other existing mechanisms.
And other existing mechanisms that we have right now in the system are the hegemonic, neo-colonial swap arrangement from the Federal Reserve, where the United States grants literally an unlimited dollar account to five other central banks: the European Central Bank, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the Bank of Canada, and the Swiss National Bank.
So these six, the six central banks, the US Fed plus these five others, have literally unlimited dollar accounts at the Fed. Now that is definitely an advantage that these partners of the US have, but Global South countries don’t.
What do Global South countries have? Well, they don’t have these unlimited dollar accounts, so what they can do is, you know, try to knock on some doors and maybe get a loan from somebody.
And you know what those loans mean? They mean conditionality; they mean austerity; they mean firing people; they mean privatizing state assets; they mean deregulating the financial system, and so on, and creating crisis.
So those aren’t really a true alternative for people that are actually concerned with the human rights and the well-being of people in the Global South.
So the next best thing that we have are the SDRs, that, yes, have to follow the conventional voting structure at the IMF; they require US consent. But once that happens, they are distributed fairly equitably to every country in the world.
They are skewed towards richer countries, but the richer countries are not making any use of them anyway. So what you really have to count is how much arrives to the Global South countries.
I’ve done several studies to show that it’s the Global South countries that are the ones taking advantage of the SDRs, and that we need more.
We need more of these SDRs for several reasons, more specifically because they benefit the fiscal budget, the budget of these countries, that allows them to invest in their economies, and save lives, and help people very concretely. But also because it creates an alternative to the hegemonic system.
So I think, in that sense, SDRs are a very powerful instrument. Again, they are not perfect. I hope one day we can reform the IMF governance and so on.
But in the meantime, SDRs are a viable alternative that can happen.
And as happened during my [presidential] campaign in 2021, when I said that I would help the people in the pandemic by giving $1,000 to each of the 1 million families that were in the most vulnerable condition in my country, they said, “Where is that money going to come from?” I said, “Well, from the SDRs. It’s issued out of thin air”.
And the people that didn’t know how money works sort of made fun of that, because they don’t know how it works. But SDRs are issued out of thin air; they are politically created.
You know, the countries literally meet, in this case by email, and they vote on creating new money, new money that is a hard currency that can be issued to every country in the world that’s an IMF member country, and then that can be swapped or traded for dollars, euros, yuan, yen, or the British pound.
And they can be used for countries’ day-to-day operations and purchases in the international market. So it’s a concrete benefit to Global South countries.
Yeah, we have to overcome the governance dynamics of the IMF. But in the meantime, it’s the most concrete, most tangible, most equitable, debt-free solution for getting liquidity, getting money to the poorest countries in the world.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, very well said. I have one final economics question, and then we can conclude talking about the politics in Ecuador briefly.
You’ve also been a promoter of central bank digital currencies. I’m wondering if you can talk about this. This has become a very hot topic in the financial press.
And something that’s also related, we saw that Argentina and China just signed a currency swap line agreement. And the Chinese media discussed this as a way of encouraging bilateral trade between Argentina and China using their domestic currencies.
But also it’s clearly a way to provide liquidity for Argentina, which is facing this inflation crisis, so Argentina can service its dollar-denominated debt, while also having these Chinese yuan.
I’m curious if you think that currency swaps — we’ve seen China, the Chinese central bank, has really expanded its use of currency swap lines with countries that are suffering with dollar-denominated debt, like Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Argentina — I’m curious what you think about that in the future.
People have argued that this is basically a way of providing loans that get around the SWIFT system and around sanctions.
So these are both examples, central bank digital currencies and currency swap lines, of ways for central banks to kind of oversee alternative payment mechanisms or alternative loan mechanisms.
What do you think about both of those?
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Well, swap lines are loans, they are mutual loans between central banks. So one central bank lends some of its own currency to another country and gets a loan in return.
Usually it’s a country with a harder currency that is actually the one that’s lending the currency to another country with the weaker currency. And usually there’s an asymmetry; there’s a difference in the sort of relative hierarchy of currencies between the countries that are engaged in swap arrangements.
I think they are a valid alternative. Again, this is part of this “productive incoherence”, part of these, you know, many, many initiatives that have sprawled, especially after the great financial crisis of 2008, where, you know, countries started to be creative about how we can get our hands on liquidity without having to return to the IMF and to get a loan and, you know, go through this whole conditionality stuff.
So many, many of these initiatives have sprawled. You also have the Arab countries developing swap networks, also the Arab Monetary Fund, and so on.
We have a Latin American Reserve Fund. We wanted to have a Fund of the South in our region; unfortunately, that did not go through.
But again, there are many other initiatives, and I think swap lines are an important one as well.
Now, central bank digital currencies are a bit different. They are mostly designed for domestic payment purposes, basically people, and businesses, but also directly human beings, can have a type of account or a wallet at the central bank.
That has many other implications, you know, implications as to how that will compete with a conventional banking system, with cash, and so on. And I think we can have basically two main ideas here.
One, I think that any successful CBDC — because we were the first country in the world, Ecuador, to do a pilot, to actually launch and have a CBDC fully operational — is that it has to be mindful of true financial inclusion.
So you don’t really have to target the people who already have a conventional banking account. You want to try to reach the people that do not have financial services, that may have a phone, may have you know, a data connection, or not even, just ap hone connection. But it is that sector that you want to reach.
Then the other one it is that you have to keep in mind that you are legal tender. If you want to have a CBDC, it has to be as good as legal tender.
Legal tender, the physical currency, has some protections for the consumer, with regard to the anonymity, privacy, and non-traceability of its use.
So legal tender is not just the thing that forces businesses to accept your currency. It is also a thing that protects the user of cash by granting them the possibility of deciding to do with their money whatever they need to do with it, without, you know, supervision by anybody else, much less so a bank.
So the digital currency, central bank digital currency, to be successful, has to replicate those characteristics that are present in physical cash in the digital version.
I think most central banks have not understood this. They are trying to, you know, basically create accounts in the conventional sense.
And they’re really excited about the surveillance possibilities that now they will have over society, by controlling every single transaction that they make, and so on.
They’re not getting the point that adoption will only be there if they replicate the characteristics of physical cash.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, very well said, again. It’s extremely refreshing hearing a prominent politician who could one day be a president discussing such innovative ideas.
This leads me to my last question or two here, as we wrap up. And that’s the discussion of the politics in your home country, in Ecuador.
I mentioned at the beginning that Andrés was the former central bank manager in Ecuador. He also was minister of knowledge and human talent.
But in 2021 he was a presidential candidate. Andrés won the first round and came close to winning the second. He lost by several points to the current right-wing millionaire banker president, Guillermo Lasso.
But in regional elections that were just held, the leftist Correísta movement did very well, winning more than any other party.
¡Gracias Ecuador!¡Qué respuesta a seis años de infamias, persecución y destrucción!¡De aquí pa’ arriba, hasta recuperar la Patria!#LosCorruptosSiempreFueronEllos pic.twitter.com/qeyzk39aO1
— Rafael Correa (@MashiRafael) February 11, 2023
Here is former President Rafael Correa, thanking his country, and you can see the results of the Citizens’ Revolution movement that was founded by Correa, got 61 mayor’s seats and nine governorships, basically is the equivalent. That’s more than any other party. And especially in the big cities of Quito and Guayaquil.
But also something that was very important is that the president, Guillermo Lasso, had been trying to propose a referendum to change the constitution, and we know that he lost every single measure. He had eight different proposals to change the constitution.
The leftist opposition just had a huge victory in Ecuador:
The Correísta movement dominated local elections across the country
And right-wing millionaire banker President Guillermo Lasso held a referendum to try to add 8 changes to the constitution, but he lost every single one pic.twitter.com/r5HAZULBbm
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) February 7, 2023
And in response to that, there were reports that Lasso actually was calling the leaders of the electoral council and yelling at them, and threatening the members of the electoral council.
This has led to people, including people who previously supported Lasso, to suggest that that would be an impeachable offense in Ecuador.
So Andrés, can you reflect on this historic victory of the Correísta Citizens’ Revolution movement that you are a leader in, in these historic elections, and the failure of Lasso in this constitutional referendum?
What does this mean for Ecuador?
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: This is great news for our country. It was a historic victory after years of political persecution.
My campaign was extremely difficult in its conditions. We had all the referees against us. I had to run a campaign where I was constantly under death threats and threats of imprisonment.
The incumbent government was a traitor, and had already put many of my comrades in prison and so on.
So it was under very difficult conditions, and we lost by a very slim margin in the second round.
But in this case, we have one main lesson that unfortunately was learned by the population the hard way, which is that, in the last campaign, we did suffer a bit of punishment from the electorate, because we had previously supported Lenín Moreno.
And they said, “Well, yeah, whatever, “I don’t care that he’s a traitor; he’s part of your camp; “and we’re going to punish you for having selected him in the past”.
But now that Lasso has been in power for almost two years, and has governed exactly the same way, with the same policies as Lenín Moreno, people have understood that it was really a massive act of betrayal, and that it was the right wing that was governing all this time, especially after Lasso decided not to investigate Moreno or to try to or to try to get him into any serious trouble.
So people have noticed that it has been Lasso and the right wing that has been actually governing all these last five, six years.
So that has been the key difference in the structure of the vote. And of course, we have sort of amended our relationship with the people and that gave us a huge victory in these last elections.
We won all major cities, all of the major prefectures, and our demographic weight has gone up tremendously. And of course, that gives us a lot of possibilities for a subsequent presidential campaign in the future.
Now, in the case of Lasso, his defeat was complete not only because the Citizens’ Revolution won some of these key races, but because he lost the referendum in each of the eight proposals he made. And that was a resounding victory of the people.
The margin of that victory was much larger than the people who voted for us. So that means that there is a critical majority that is not just voting for the Citizens’ Revolution, but for a larger anti-right-wing type coalition.
That is our challenge now, how we can build a relationship within that coalition of not just coexistence, but also amending those the links, so we can go together and have a resounding victory in the next electoral cycle.
Now, for Lasso, this has been total collapse. He has basically no support within the parliament, no support no support with the people, electoral defeats, all his most trusted elements have quit.
And now he has to basically survive, and probably he won’t make it in the next few days or weeks.
So we’ll probably have some news coming from Ecuador fairly quickly.
BEN NORTON: Yeah, that would be incredible. That’s the positive news.
I want to conclude, unfortunately, on I guess a more tragic note, which is the social cost of the Lasso government. We saw that under President Rafael Correa and the Citizens’ Revolution, there was a massive decrease in violence and organized crime in Ecuador.
The violent death rate in Ecuador over time, by president
This is a graph showing the death rate, violent death rate in Ecuador. When Correa came in, it just plummeted, the death rate in Ecuador.
Ever since the return to the right, by Lenín Moreno and now Lasso, we’ve seen a massive increase in violence.
And there have been so many horrible reports that I’ve seen, of reports of mass killings in prisons and drug violence.
In fact, before the elections, there was a prominent Correísta leftist candidate who was assassinated.
So I’m wondering if you can reflect on the social cost of the Lasso government thus far, and why you think that there has been such a massive increase in violence and drug trafficking in Ecuador under Lasso.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Unfortunately, this violence that we’ve seen in Ecuador is, and it really saddens me to say this, but it’s part of a plan.
It’s part of Lasso’s plan to weaken the social organization capacity, to instill fear in the population, and to demobilize people and to remove hope from them.
We have seen, in parallel to this violence, we have seen the largest migration wave out of Ecuador, that’s comparable to the large migration waves that we’ve seen from other countries, but without an embargo, a blockade, or financial or economic sanctions against it.
This is basically the collapse of Ecuadorian society, from the fact that Lasso’s policies have decided to destroy our domestic economy, the relationship between the productive sectors and society and so on.
And unfortunately, it seems that has been part of a plan to create this sort of fear, this element of fear in society for him to implement his neoliberal policies in a much easier way or a much easier fashion.
So now, the evidence that points to this is the fact that the minister of security for over a year was Alexandra Vela, who has said continuously that she’s not an expert in security; that is not her forte; that is not what she’s good at.
She was still kept at the Ministry of Security for a long time, only to be replaced by Diego Ordóñez, who is this other guy who has no experience whatsoever in matters of security, his only expertise is sort of a libertarian political persecution against the left in Latin America.
That’s all that he has. He has no expertise in security matters whatsoever. So these are the people that are running our security forces. These are the bosses of the police and the armed forces in Ecuador.
And of course, that can only make sense if the plan was to not do anything about the violence.
Now, the good news is that as soon as a progressive government takes power in Ecuador, the progressive government will have a lot of legitimacy. It will have a lot of trust from the people.
And as we have demonstrated in the past, with the leadership of Rafael Correa, there will be immediate action, because we know how to get things done. We’ve done that in the past.
We reduced, like you showed, the homicide rate in a very short amount of time. So we know how to do that, by managing the local police force, by being very meticulous about studying the causes of crime, the geography of crime, and so on.
So the good news for the people of Ecuador is that as soon as we have a progressive government in place, those indicators will improve tremendously, quickly, and with immediate benefits for the families of the Ecuadorian citizens.
BEN NORTON: Very well said. I guess, just to not end on a super dark note, I will ask one final question. And I know you’re a busy man, then I’ll let you go.
There has been a lot of discussion of the return of the so-called “Pink Tide”. I know, in my experience in the region, people don’t really use the term “Pink Tide”, but a progressive wave, a left-wing wave of governments across the region.
In fact, for the first time in modern history, the six most populous governments in the region were left wing, until the coup in Peru in December.
But, I mean, we see for the first time ever a left-wing government in Colombia. We see for the first time in many decades a left-wing government in Mexico. And of course, Lula has now returned in Brazil.
Unfortunately, the only holdouts, the right-wing holdouts, are Ecuador and Uruguay. And I guess you could say Guatemala. And well, El Salvador is complicated.
But the point is that Ecuador is, I think, probably next in line for the left wing to come back.
The last question that we can end on is, what do you see in the short to the medium term, maybe even the long term, for the future of Latin America?
And especially with the left being able to govern, do you think that you’ll be able to continue the process of regional integration and turn Latin America and the Caribbean into, I would say, a pole in a multipolar world?
I increasingly think that might be the case. But I’m curious what your final thoughts are.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Yeah, we need to we need to have some key conversations in the region among the largest players, you know, I’m talking about Lula, talking about AMLO, talking about Fernández, Petro.
I think if we could get these four presidents together on the table, to have off-the-record conversations, maybe sit down for an entire day and have them come up with some key ideas. It’s very important.
We need that kind of conversation right now. This cannot just be, you know, some random ideas floating around and then making some headlines in the papers, but then not being implemented in reality.
We need to have a true political consensus among the progressive governments, serious conversation, to overcome issues about egos, and vanity, and stuff like that.
And we need to understand that this is a historic moment for humanity, and that the Latin American people have a duty to the continent, of course, but also to the rest of the world.
We have to show that there is an alternative, and we are in the conditions to prove that. So we really need to make that happen.
Then, after the conversation of the presidents, we need to go beyond the political integration of political parties, or chiefs of states, or, whatever, the summit pictures.
We need to have an integration of the peoples. This is important, Ben, and I mentioned this already, but I want to say it again, we need to make regional integration tangible for the people, the everyday citizen.
We need to make this concrete. We need to make this, you know, felt in their bodies, in their minds, in their day to day. And this is done with the educational exchange program.
We need a cultural program, where we have small kids in elementary schools discussing, what should the flag of Latin America be like? What should the anthem be like? With the music, musicians, poets of each of our countries.
We need to discuss, you know, how the coat of arms should be? What kinds of symbols do we want to adopt as a Latin American civilization?
These are the discussions that will make so many other things happen, especially if we start with the younger kids in our generation.
We also need to have this infrastructure immediately.
You know, we have almost $1 trillion in reserves being deposited in Swiss and US bank accounts, if you add up South American, and Mexico’s, and Central American reserves. We have that money deposited in the Global North, but we should invest at least a tenth of that in our own region, in concrete, tangible assets, in roads, in electric interconnection system, in a rail network to connect the big cities of Latin America amongst ourselves.
And we need to make that happen quickly. Otherwise we’ll lose this opportunity.
So my call is to have a little wake-up call, and get our regional movements going, and pressure the governments to go forward much faster in terms of regional integration.
Not every country can save itself. We cannot be facing this geopolitical moment, basically a world war, as 33 independent, small republics; this has to be faced as a Latin American bloc. And the political conditions are there.
I just hope that we can get the structures, the instruments, in place for the regional bloc to actually assert itself and start projecting and acting in real life.
BEN NORTON: Wow, those are powerful words to end on. I must say that I hope that today I was speaking with the next president of Ecuador. I think the president of any country that could implement those kinds of ideas, or at least try to implement those ideas, I think would be such a positive force for the entire world. Andrés Arauz was the central bank director in Ecuador, and under former President Correa, he was also minister of knowledge and human talent.
He is finishing up, I believe you’re finishing up your PhD in economics, right?
And everyone should check out Andrés Arauz over at his Twitter account. You can follow him at @EcuArauz. And I know that, Andrés, you’re also a fellow at the Center for Economic and Policy Research, CEPR, in Washington, DC, which I often joke is the only good think tank in Washington. They do a lot of very important work over there.
Is there anything else that you would like to plug at the end here, where people could find your work or follow what you do?
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Yeah, I’m just waiting for the slow university bureaucracy to print my little diploma, and I’ll be ready with that. But yeah, I finished my degree in mid last year, and I’m happy to have that done.
So, yeah, thanks again, Ben, for everything. Thanks for this interview. I hope we’ve clarified some of these issues for a wide audience.
BEN NORTON: You absolutely did, and I hope you inspire people to do more research into these very fascinating topics.
I think we’re living in a deeply important, watershed moment in history. And I do think Latin America plays a key role in that, especially with brilliant political leaders and economists like you and others.
So thanks so much for being generous with your time today.
ANDRÉS ARAUZ: Thank you, Ben. Bye bye.
|
Write an article about: Colombia’s President Petro supports freedom for Julian Assange, meets with WikiLeaks editors. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Colombia, Gustavo Petro, Julian Assange, WikiLeaks | Colombia’s first-ever left-wing President Gustavo Petro met with WikiLeaks editors and said he “supports the worldwide struggle for the freedom of the journalist Julian Assange.” He pledged to pressure Joe Biden to drop the charges.
The editors of the whistle-blowing journalism publication WikiLeaks met with Colombia’s new left-wing President Gustavo Petro on November 22.
Petro stated that he “supports the worldwide struggle for the freedom of the journalist Julian Assange,” the Australian founder of WikiLeaks, who has been incarcerated in a maximum-security British prison since 2019, awaiting extradition to the United States.
“I will ask President Biden with other Latin American presidents so they don’t put charges on a journalist only for saying the truth,” vowed Petro, Colombia’s first-ever leftist head of state.
Me reuní con los voceros de Wikikeaks, para apoyar la lucha mundial por la libertad del periodista Julian Assange.
Le soliciaré al presidente Biden con otros presidentes latinoamericanos que no se pongan cargos a un periodista solo por decir la verdad pic.twitter.com/kWyoXrHhyV
— Gustavo Petro (@petrogustavo) November 22, 2022
Petro was joined in the meeting in the Casa de Nariño presidential office in Bogotá by WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Kristinn Hrafnsson, WikiLeaks ambassador Joseph A. Farrell, and Colombia’s Foreign Minister Álvaro Leyva Durán.
Hrafnsson tweeted that it was a “good meeting,” adding that both Petro and Leyva “confirmed their support for urging the US Biden admin to drop the charges against #Assange recognising the grave threat against press freedom if he is extradited.”
Good meeting today with Colombian president Gustavo Petro and his FM Alvaro Durán. Both confirmed their support for urging the US Biden admin to drop the charges against #Assange recognising the grave threat against press freedom if he is extradited. @petrogustavo pic.twitter.com/hsMt2n3eCO
— Kristinn Hrafnsson (@khrafnsson) November 21, 2022
Assange faces up to 175 years in prison in the United States, on politically motivated charges.
When Assange was trapped in Ecuador’s embassy in London, the CIA spied on him 24/7. Journalist and lawyers targeted in this operation have sued the CIA.
The top United Nations expert on torture, Special Rapporteur Nils Melzer, visited Assange in the UK’s notorious Belmarsh prison in 2019, and reported that he is suffering from torture and horrific health conditions that could threaten his life.
“While the US Government prosecutes Mr. Assange for publishing information about serious human rights violations, including torture and murder, the officials responsible for these crimes continue to enjoy impunity,” Melzer said.
The UN expert said Assange suffers from “all the symptoms typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture.”
“However, what we have seen from the UK Government is outright contempt for Mr. Assange’s rights and integrity,” Melzer lamented. “Despite the medical urgency of my appeal, and the seriousness of the alleged violations, the UK has not undertaken any measures of investigation, prevention and redress required under international law.”
In calling for freeing Assange, Petro has joined numerous other leftist leaders in Latin America, including Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro, and Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega. All have praised the WikiLeaks journalist for exposing US war crimes.
|
Write an article about: Latin American socialists unite with Iran-led Axis of Resistance against Western imperialism. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | ALBA, Bolivarian Alliance, Daniel Ortega, Denis Moncada, Ebrahim Raisi, Gaza, Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, Hugo Chávez, Iran, Libya, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Megasis, Nicaragua, Palestine, Sacha Llorenti, Syria, Venezuela | The leftist governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Bolivia have found a key strategic ally in Iran, the heart of the Axis of Resistance.
(This article was written for Al Mayadeen English.)
Revolutionary socialist movements in Latin America are developing closer relations with anti-imperialist resistance forces in West Asia, building a united front against Western aggression and exploitation.
This budding alliance is an extremely important development in the struggle against an authoritarian international political and economic system that is essentially a global dictatorship, ruled by the United States and its junior imperialist partners in the European Union, NATO, apartheid “Israel”, and the Gulf monarchies.
As this Washington-led, trans-Atlantic hegemonic order was constructed over the past century, through a long series of wars, military occupations, foreign interventions, coups, regime-change operations, assassinations, and grossly unequal trade arrangements, two regions of the world have been especially targeted: Latin America and the Middle East, or more accurately West Asia.
Both regions have plentiful natural resources and are very geostrategically located. Latin America has vast mineral reserves and agricultural products. West Asia has a plurality of the planet’s hydrocarbon reserves, and connects Europe to Asia, sitting right in the middle of what geopolitical analysts have long called the “World Island.”
Given their status as principal targets of Western imperialism, it only makes sense for resistance forces in these regions to unite. Attempts at forming such an alliance had been made in the past — revolutionary Palestinian militants trained in Cuba and with Nicaragua’s Sandinistas, for instance, and Muammar al-Qaddafi’s Libya supported leftist Latin American guerrillas — but this collaboration was historically limited in scope.
That is, until recently. As the United States accelerated its hybrid warfare to try to re-colonize Latin America and West Asia in the 2000s, indigenous anti-imperialist movements in both regions joined forces, forging not only close political ties, but economic relations as well.
The leftist governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Bolivia have found a key strategic ally in Iran, the heart of the Axis of Resistance.
The director of the main instrument of Latin American economic integration, the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America, known simply as the ALBA, took a historic trip to Tehran this August to meet with the new Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi.
“Iran and the ALBA have a lot in common, and both seek to defend the independence and sovereignty of nations and confront the outrageousness of the United States,” remarked the ALBA’s executive secretary, the Bolivian diplomat Sacha Llorenti.
Tuve el privilegio y el honor de sostener una reunión con S. E. Seyed Ebrahim Raisi, Presidente de la República Islámica de Irán. Extendimos las felicitaciones del @ALBATCP por su posesión, conversamos sobre nuestras coincidencias y la agenda en común. pic.twitter.com/atFubJwErM
— Sacha Llorenti (@SachaLlorenti) August 4, 2021
For his part, Raisi kicked off his new administration calling for strengthening relations with Latin America, stressing that it is one of Tehran’s top foreign-policy priorities.
“Iran is determined to develop its political and economic relations with the member states of the ALBA-TCP,” Raisi said, highlighting “the shared values and positions of both parties.”
“There is no doubt that a greater development of the relations between Iran and Latin American countries can halt the North Americans and other arrogant countries,” Raisi added.
Joining Llorenti in Tehran were top officials from Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Bolivia — all member states of the ALBA.
In a meeting with Venezuela’s vice president of planning, Ricardo Menéndez, Raisi stated that “ Iran and Venezuela alike have common interests and enemies. We have always shown that with resistance and wisdom, we can thwart the plots of the United States and world imperialism.”
#MásTemprano || VP Planificación de la República Bolivariana de Venezuela, @rmenendezp sostuvo un encuentro con el Pdte de la República Islámica de Irán, Ebrahim Raisi, en el Palacio Blanco, con la finalidad de estrechar las relaciones entre ambas naciones.#LaClaveEsVacunarse pic.twitter.com/dYbItJBGW6
— MinPlanificación (@MPPPlanifica) August 4, 2021
Nicaragua’s Foreign Minister Denis Moncada met with Raisi as well, and called for strengthening relations with Tehran. The Iranian president praised the Central American nation’s Sandinista government as a model of resistance against US aggression, and said, “The people of Iran have always wished for success and victory for the revolutionary nation of Nicaragua.”
Likewise, in his meeting with Raisi, Bolivian Foreign Minister Rogelio Mayta pledged to work more closely with Iran, stating, “Despite sabotage by the United States, we are determined to increase the level of relations with Tehran in all areas.”
Iran’s support for revolutionary governments in Latin America goes beyond mere words. While many liberal and center-left political forces in the region have opportunistically turned their back on Venezuela, betraying their neighbor on behalf of Washington, Tehran has shown real, tangible support for Caracas.
Both Venezuela and Iran are suffering from illegal US blockades, and these murderous sanctions have led to a shortage of food, medicine, and gasoline. (Venezuela has massive oil reserves, but it is some of the heaviest crude petrol on the planet, which cannot be used or exported without first being refined, so Caracas needs to import lighter crude or other materials that are blocked by Washington.)
To help meet the needs of the Venezuelan people, Iran has repeatedly defied the criminal US blockade and delivered supplies to Caracas, sending huge tankers full of food, medicine, and fuel.
In these altruistic acts, Tehran has valiantly risked US military aggression, putting its money where its mouth is to support the revolutionary government and people of Venezuela.
Iran has also opened a supermarket chain in Venezuela, called Megasis, to help support an ally that is heavily reliant on food imports. It is part of a larger strategy to boost bilateral trade and economic cooperation between both nations.
The brotherhood between Venezuela and Iran was most poignantly illustrated at the 2013 funeral of President Hugo Chávez, who initiated the Bolivarian Revolution. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was photographed hugging and consoling the Venezuelan Comandante’s crying mother.
In the last 400 years the world powers have either slandered or assassinated the character of the champions of freedom, and independence. Chavez is alive until freedom, justice, and humanity is alive. God bless Him. pic.twitter.com/x08q2HH58K
— Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (@Ahmadinejad1956) March 8, 2020
Revolutionary Latin American governments have also sought to collaborate more closely with other forces in the West Asian Axis of Resistance.
Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Bolivia vociferously opposed and condemned the US-led imperialist proxy wars against Libya and Syria, which expressly sought the collapse of the nations’ central governments, and succeeded in the former while failing in the latter.
Similarly, these ALBA member states have all shown unflinching solidarity with Palestine. In response to apartheid “Israel’s” 2008–2009 massacre in Gaza, Venezuelan President Chávez officially broke ties with the Zionist regime, denouncing it as a “genocidal state” and “the murderous arm of the US government.”
Then in 2010, in a daring challenge to Washington’s declaration that Iran, Iraq, and North Korea constituted a supposed “Axis of Evil,” Comandante Chávez announced an alliance with Syria, which he dubbed the “Axis of the Brave”.
The Axis of the Brave was a “strategic alliance” against US imperialism, Chávez explained. “A new world is being built,” and “we seek a strategic relationship with that continent,” the Venezuelan president said, referring to West Asia.
Less than a year after Chávez’s announcement, the United States and its proxies launched a devastating decade-long regime-change war on Syria — one that continues today, with more than one-third of Syria’s sovereign territory, seizing most of its oil and wheat reserves, illegally militarily occupied by the United States in the northeast and NATO member Turkey in the northwest.
Chávez’s defense of and alliance with Syria against Western aggression led to the inauguration this March of a monument at the University of Damascus.
#8M2021 #DiaInternacionalDeLaMujer Que mejor día que hoy para conmemorar, en la Universidad de Damasco #Siria, el 8vo aniversario de la siembra de ese gran feminista que fue nuestro Comandante Chávez. Siempre reivindicó el rol fundamental de la mujer en la sociedad. pic.twitter.com/slfIS2AyaY
— José Gregorio Biomorgi Muzattiz (@Jose_Biomorgi) March 8, 2021
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, the leader of the revolutionary Sandinista Liberation Front, has likewise steadfastly defended Syria and “ condemned all forms of aggression by foreign powers that attack the sovereignty and self-determination of the [Syrian] people, in clear and flagrant violation of international law.”
During the 2011 NATO regime-change war that intentionally collapsed the state of Libya and unleashed open-air slave markets, Nicaragua’s Sandinista government staunchly opposed Western imperial aggression.
As NATO bombed Libya, the US government refused to give a visa to the North African nation’s United Nations delegate. So in response, Nicaragua’s former foreign minister, Miguel D’Escoto Brockmann, announced he would represent Libya at the UN. (Washington then tried to block D’Escoto’s representation too.)
Axis of Resistance forces in Yemen has returned the solidarity. The de facto government in northern Yemen, ruled by the revolutionary Houthi movement, known officially as Ansarallah, has staunchly defended Venezuela against US aggression.
In a 2015 interview, a senior Ansarallah member declared, “We support Chávez in Venezuela.” When Washington initiated another coup attempt in Venezuela in February 2019, Ansarallah and leftist parties in Yemen held a protest condemning US interference.
The Houthi movement that governs northern Yemen, known officially as Ansar Allah, joined leftist parties in expressing solidarity with Venezuela against a US coup attempt.
Demonstrations like these dispel misleading corporate media narratives about Yemenhttps://t.co/0KGgM2ZHcX
— The Grayzone (@TheGrayzoneNews) September 13, 2020
Latin American socialist governments and the Axis of Resistance in West Asia are the vanguards in the struggle to build a new, truly multipolar world based on national sovereignty and self-determination.
Together, they are helping to construct a truly multilateral order that challenges the authoritarian, unilateral, and brutally violent system created and controlled by the United States and its junior partners in imperialism.
This was further illustrated in July, when these nations launched an anti-imperialist alliance inside the United Nations, called the Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter. Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Bolivia were joined by Iran, Syria, and Palestine, as well as the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, Algeria, the DPRK, Cambodia, Laos, Angola, Belarus, Eritrea, Equatorial Guinea, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
The anti-imperialist Group of Friends in Defense of the UN Charter launched yesterday, featuring:AlgeriaAngolaBelarusBoliviaCambodiaChinaCubaDPRKEqui. GuineaEritreaIranLaosNicaraguaPalestineRussiaSaint Vincent and GrenadinesSyriaVenezuelahttps://t.co/4vc9sbpOlR pic.twitter.com/ErFDIed7cW
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) July 7, 2021
The economic partnership between member states of the Bolivarian Alliance and Iran likewise serves as a model for South-South integration that not only weakens Western imperial hegemony, but also helps to develop these countries in their mutual interests.
The ALBA was itself created to remove the middleman of the United States, so that Latin American nations could trade with each other and strengthen their own domestic economies, cutting out the North American corporations that want them to be dependent on imports.
The historic, 25-year, $400 billion agreement Iran signed with China this March was another crucially important step in building alternative economic structures to weaken Washington’s dominance.
Similarly, the announcement that Cuba and Iran will work together to manufacture COVID-19 vaccines exemplifies how this South-South partnership can help overcome the global pandemic.
If Latin America and West Asia can create a coherent formal alliance with China and Russia, it could pose a serious challenge to the imperialist US-EU-NATO axis.
As the United States accelerates its new cold war on China and Russia, such a coalition will only become more urgent.
Originally published at Al Mayadeen English on August 17, 2021
|
Write an article about: How Argentina has been trapped in neocolonial debt for 200 years: An economic history. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Adolfo Diz, Alberto Fernández, Argentina, Carlos Menem, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, debt, Domingo Cavallo, IMF, International Monetary Fund, Jorge Rafael Videla, José Alfredo Martínez de Hoz, Juan Domingo Perón, Mauricio Macri, neoliberalism, P2, Propaganda Due, World Bank | Argentina has constantly been trapped over two centuries in unpayable external debt owed to foreign imperial powers. This affects the everyday life of everyone: inflation, salaries, employment, public services, elections. Here is a brief history of the deuda.
The deuda (“debt” in Spanish) is one of the most persistent elements in the two centuries of Argentina’s history. It has conditioned the political life and the economy of the country like no other factor, for generations.
But this should not be confused with just any debt. The word deuda normally refers to the external debt (both public and private), a debt owed to foreign creditors.
Historically, the key aspect of the deuda is that it is based on a foreign currency, the world trade currency controlled by the ruling empire. It was once the British pound. Since 1944 it has largely been the US dollar.
The United States can “print” dollars (and the Federal Reserve does so regularly), but Argentina cannot. The same is true of other countries in the Global South with large external debts denominated in foreign currencies.
There are only two ways for these nations to get dollars: exporting and borrowing.
But there are also multiple ways to reduce the need for dollars by reducing imports or increasing the value of exports. For example, instead of relying on a rent economy based on the export of cheap commodities with a low value added (the model adopted by many former colonies rich in natural resources), a country can develop its own industry and reduce its dependency on expensive imported goods, especially advanced technologies or fashionable consumer products.
If a nation excels in some sectors of the economy, it may be able to export more, improving its balance of payments.
In a more advanced stage, a country may even dare to associate with its friends and neighbors, creating a regional bloc in which they trade using their own currencies and rules, or a barter system, circumventing the US dollar.
All these common-sense policies may sound like nothing special for sovereign nations, yet they are a mirage in semi-colonial countries like Argentina.
As Argentine as the tango and mate, the deuda affects the everyday life of everyone: inflation, salaries, employment, public services, elections. Everything.
And yet its technical and historical intricacies make the deuda a daunting topic, perfect to keep millions in the dark and bureaucrats safe, while instigating an eternal battle of the have-nots.
The deuda doesn’t just relate to the way Argentines think about the economy. In some cases, it contributes to shaping their opinions about history, culture, media, race, and class. It almost always defines their vote as well.
Argentina has defaulted on its debt eight times. It even made history with the world’s biggest ever default ($95 billion in 2001) and largest ever loan ($57 billion in 2018) from the US-controlled International Monetary Fund, making it a privileged case study.
How could this happen? A first hint could be that a man who bears heavy responsibility for some of these negative world records, neoliberal guru and Harvard doctor in economics Domingo Cavallo – who directed Argentina’s central bank during the last dictatorship and served as economic minister in the 1990s – was lavished with years of praise, given rewards by international institutions, and heroized in the US media as a kind of semi-god.
It is no coincidence that Argentina also has the dubious distinction of boasting one of the Earth’s highest ratios of “free market” think tanks to the population.
The reality is that Argentina’s ruling class has not changed much in the last 200 years. So let’s start from the beginning.
This is a brief history of Argentina’s debt, and the neocolonial relationships that dictate it.
In 1824, only eight years after the declaration of independence from the Spanish empire, the union of provinces that would eventually become the Argentine Republic obtained a loan of £1 million pounds (a whopping £110 billion today, according to the Bank of England) from Barings Bank, a British private bank that also had lent money to the US government.
The loan, denominated in pound sterling, was supposedly destined to fund the port of Buenos Aires and build new infrastructure. Instead, it quickly evaporated in a war with Brazil (from 1825 to 1828), which was militarily supported by the British, who helped block the port of Buenos Aires for three years – cutting off Argentina from its only source of foreign currency.
Corruption and betrayal played a key role in making the 1824 loan possible. The delegation that represented Argentina in London was made up of British and Argentine traders and financiers who offered the entire State of Buenos Aires as collateral: all its assets, lands, and rents.
Of the original £1 million loan, Argentina only received £570,000, while the enormous remaining sum was lost in commissions and other fees, mostly to pay the negotiators.
Less than 20% of the money delivered was in gold coins; the rest was in paper notes.
By 1827, Argentina was already unable to service its debt obligations and entered its first default. Two frigates belonging to Buenos Aires that were under construction in England were seized by the bank, weakening Argentina’s naval defense.
A few years later, Argentina had no deterrent that could stop the British empire from occupying the Falklands, extending its power projection to Antarctica. These islands (officially known as the Malvinas) remain colonized by the United Kingdom to this day.
Argentina subsequently defaulted twice in the 19th century, and had to emit new bonds to keep paying the growing interest.
It was only in 1904 that Argentina’s original debt was formally repaid. It had taken 80 years, more than three generations, and had cost about eight times the original value.
This simplified account of Argentina’s first experience with a neocolonial debt trap only scratches the surface of a scam that inspired the more sophisticated schemes developed in the two centuries that followed.
Today’s practice of trapping former colonies in unpayable debts is the result of well-engineered financial, diplomatic, political, and legal strategies that have been tested dozens of time in a neocolonial laboratory.
These neocolonial extortion schemes have three major effects. First, they facilitate the transfer of enormous amounts of hard-earned wealth from the real economy of developing nations to banks and speculative funds controlled by super rich individuals and families in the Global North – largely based in the United States, Europe, or offshore tax havens.
Secondly, by installing dictatorships, leveraging institutions like the International Monetary Fund, or getting US courts and judges to seize funds of sovereign nations, lenders obtain the power to dictate the monetary, economic, labor, and even foreign policies of indebted countries, effectively creating semi-colonies whose democratically elected governments are incapable of implementing policies demanded by their people.
Thirdly, these policies imposed from outside in turn strengthen a local parasitic capitalist class that is fundamental to perpetuate a regime of foreign control. This type of traitorous bourgeoisie, still dominant in Argentina and in all Latin America, was described by Chinese revolutionary Mao Zedong as the “comprador” class, an appendage of foreign capital that benefits from the foreign exploitation of its own country.
Argentina is a case study of this neocolonial process.
When the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was formed in 1945, Argentina initially refused to join.
The South American country’s democratically elected President Juan Domingo Perón implemented a progressive nationalist program that encouraged independence and sovereignty. He was very successful in boosting Argentine industry through two five-year plans, and briefly neutralized the effects of the deuda during his tenure.
Argentine President Juan Domingo Perón
But Perón was toppled by a bloody military coup in 1955. And Argentina promptly entered the IMF under dictator Pedro Eugenio Aramburu in 1956.
A virulent anti-communist, Aramburu’s unelected military regime also severed the ties with the Soviet bloc and moved Argentina into the neocolonial orbit of the United States during the first cold war.
Argentina is one of the world’s biggest agricultural producers. Agriculture accounts for most of the country’s exports and it is the main source of foreign currency (the other being loans).
Because of this, Argentine landlords and their ultra-conservative civic organization, the Rural Society, have been extremely powerful throughout the country’s history.
Argentina did experience formidable industrial growth in the first half of the 20th century, especially between the 1930s and 1950s.
Until then Argentina, had often ranked among the 10 richest countries in the world by total GDP. According to long-run economic development data, the GDP per capita even ranked first in the world in 1895 and 1896. But Argentina also had a relatively small population.
When Perón took power in 1946, Europe was in ashes and Argentina’s per capita income ranked seventh in the world.
In 1955, when Perón was overthrown in a US-backed military coup, Argentina ranked 16th – still a very high position considering that the reconstruction of Europe was boosted by Washington’s Marshall Plan, not to mention the fact that Washington’s policy of flooding Europe with US agricultural products had had a negative impact on Argentine exports.
That year, Argentina’s GDP per capita was the highest in Latin America – almost five times that of Brazil. Compared to colonial Britain, it was only 19% lower. And it was half of that of the United States.
Argentina’s GDP per capita never got better than it was in the year Perón was overthrown. By 2016, it had plunged to 63rd.
The statistics aside, the point is that before it got sucked into Washington’s cold war, Argentina was a significant economic power.
Although politically unstable and dominated by a backward landlord and comprador class, the South American nation’s rapid growth, large immigration flows, and incipient industrialization created the conditions that could challenge the colonial status quo.
Perón was not a Marxist, but he envisioned a third way between US capitalism and Soviet socialism, and was a clear symptom of those tensions.
The dominance of the United States in Latin America, a region with a population of more than 660 million today, was achieved and is maintained through a number of strategies.
One of the least understood yet perhaps most significant is the intentional sabotage of independent economic development.
With a growing industry and an industrial working class strengthened by a diverse mix of immigrants, Argentina’s economy was particularly difficult to undermine. Even more so because many of the millions who had fled from poverty, fascism, and wars and ended up in the South American country were socialists or some variety of leftist.
But one of Washington’s preferred ways to impose its control over Latin America, especially during the first cold war, was through violent force.
The 1955 coup that removed Perón was carried out with aerial bombings on the presidential palace and the center of Buenos Aires. Roughly 360 people were killed.
In the two decades that followed, Argentina descended into a spiral of military coups and intermittent right-wing dictatorships backed by the United States.
In 1970, the former dictator Aramburu (de facto president between 1955 and 1958) was assassinated in circumstances that are still unclear today, accelerating a complex process of further destabilization.
Argentina’s former dictator Pedro Eugenio Aramburu (wearing the sash)
The chaos was exacerbated (or caused) by the US government’s Operation Condor, a secret plan to eradicate all Marxist elements from Latin America through the provision of anti-insurgency support, coordination between intelligence services, and training to carry out infiltrations, torture, and assassinations.
The leaders of the last Argentine dictatorship (which governed from 1976 to 1983), who were later charged and convicted with crimes against humanity, used to describe their mission as a war – more precisely as a war on “Marxist terror”.
But the limited cases of insurgent violence, which paled in comparison to the wildly disproportionate state terror and repression, were used as a pretext to persecute and exterminate all dissent and resistance against the post-1955 regimes.
Between 1973 and 1976, many of these crimes were carried out by the Triple A (Argentine Anticommunist Alliance), a death squad founded by far-right Peronist José López Rega, who had been a key ally of Perón in the 1970s and a member of Italy’s infamous Propaganda Due (P2).
But anti-Peronist and anti-communist Emilio Eduardo Massera, one of the leaders of the 1976 coup and the military regime that followed, was also a member of the P2.
P2 shows how European governments also assisted in Washington’s war on the left in Latin America.
Propaganda Due was a criminal organization based in Italy and linked to Italian intelligence, allied with the CIA and NATO. It was exposed in 1981 and dismantled in 1982 by law.
P2’s leader was Licio Gelli, an Italian fascist, intelligence operative, and financier who had lived in Argentina. The organization was considered a sort of Italian deep state with strong connections to the right-wing media and anti-communist environments.
On March 28, 1976, just four days after a right-wing coup, Gelli sent a letter to Argentine coup leader and P2 member Massera saying that he was “happy everything went according to the plans” and wishing that “a strong government” could repress “the insurrection of the Marxist movements.”
The Italian parliament published a report investigating P2 in 1984.
With a number of secretive far-right entities and plots overseen by the US and European governments at the height of the first cold war, Argentina was ready for its shock.
Argentine President Juan Domingo Perón with his wife, future President Isabel Perón
When Argentina’s military arrested constitutional President Isabel Perón (the politically unskilled wife of Juan Domingo Perón) in the early hours of the March 24, 1976, many believed that things could not get much worse. Inflation was at 700% and political violence was already extreme.
In fact, it was one of the bloodiest nights in the history of Argentina – probably only surpassed by the genocide targeting Indigenous nations and the slavery of the previous century.
What followed the US-backed coup was a campaign of terrorismo de estado (state terror), desaparecidos (forced disappearances), systematic rape and torture, arbitrary detentions, countless people forced into exile, burning of millions of books, dystopian surveillance, and propaganda.
Like Chile under Augusto Pinochet and other countries in South America, Argentina had entered its neoliberal experiment, an economic reset under the supervision of the United States and its Operation Condor, the local comprador oligarchy, and the Argentine branch of the Chicago Boys.
The new regime was called the “National Reorganization Process” – a name that implied it had a mission to accomplish.
The US-backed military junta, an unelected government controlled by the armed forces, acted as the main enforcer of the “reorganization”.
Dictator Jorge Rafael Videla, a rabid anti-communist, was in power during most of the “process,” and proudly defended his countless crimes until his death in prison in 2013.
Argentina’s military dictator Jorge Rafael Videla (in the center, with the mustache)
But the men who oversaw most of the economic shock were Adolfo Diz and José Alfredo Martínez de Hoz.
Diz directed Argentina’s central bank (and was followed in 1981 by the US media’s golden boy Domingo Cavallo). He was a pupil of Milton Friedman in Chicago and a former IMF executive director.
Elite right-wing economist Martínez de Hoz was appointed economic minister. He was a Cambridge graduate from a wealthy family of landlords, the CEO of several large Argentine companies, and a personal friend of US billionaire oligarch David Rockefeller.
Those who followed for shorter periods of time had very similar résumés, full of degrees from elite US universities and sinecures at the IMF, World Bank, and other Washington-dominated neoliberal institutions.
Martínez de Hoz used his position to favor Argentine and foreign elites, including his personal friends and the companies he had worked for.
Almost immediately after the Videla dictatorship came to power, Martínez de Hoz got a $100 million IMF loan (worth a much higher sum today).
He also implemented aggressive neoliberal shock therapy: smashing trade barriers, allowing US and European products to flood Argentina’s market, and removing subsidies (including on gasoline).
In a vicious attack on Argentine workers, Martínez de Hoz froze wages by law, while inflation remained well above 100% throughout his tenure. This caused a devastating drop in the cost of labor, and therefore in the real value of salaries, which declined some 40% by 1980.
He also successfully dismantled most of the Argentina’s still competitive industry, selectively saving his friends.
Argentina’s military dictator Jorge Rafael Videla (right) with his neoliberal economic minister José Alfredo Martínez de Hoz
The US-backed Videla dictatorship oversaw an intense de-industrialization, marking an end to Perón’s era of state-owned company, which since 1951 had produced domestically designed cars, motorbikes, trucks, airplanes, and engines.
Decades of industrial research and development, tens of thousands of jobs, and large public investments were disintegrated in Argentina.
Claiming to be fighting inflation, in 1979, Martínez de Hoz introduced an artificial system of exchange regulation between the peso and the US dollar known as la tablita (the little table).
Leveraging large and ever increasing foreign debt, la tablita overvalued the peso, favoring imported products over domestic ones, so thousands of Argentine businesses went bankrupt.
It also allowed speculative funds to exploit a scheme known as carry trade (bicicleta financiera). Speculators could get low-interest loans abroad in US dollars and absurdly high interests on pesos in Argentina, with no capital control whatsoever, so they started moving money in and out making enormous profits.
This made foreign and domestic speculators much richer than they already were, but the gains from the trick had to be paid by the state – or more precisely Argentine workers – in US dollars.
The strong peso was a clever ingredient of the dictatorship, defining a neoliberal myth that was called “sweet money” – a sort of consumerist orgy with an unhappy ending that was portrayed in a 1982 film with the same name.
Because of la tablita, the most coveted imported goods (consumer electronics, clothes, and accessories) became cheap almost overnight. Imports rose by more than 550% between 1976 and 1980.
The huge increase in imports under Argentina’s US-backed military dictatorship from 1976 to 1983
The overvaluation of the peso meant that many Argentines could suddenly afford to travel and go shopping abroad.
While factories were closing en masse – and while thousands of mothers were looking desperately for their children and grandchildren, who had been disappeared for opposing the junta – the military regime propagandists celebrated the new era as a positive opening to the world.
The euphoria after the victory at the 1978 football World Cup led to a feast of nationalist propaganda.
This economic deception lasted two years. La tablita was abolished in 1981, with a master stroke leading to the opposite effect: a sudden devaluation of the peso.
More Argentine businesses went bankrupt because their pesos were now worth nothing, and their debts denominated in US dollars had become unpayable.
Videla, Diz, and Martínez de Hoz resigned a month later, leaving the country in recession and the state in monetary and financial chaos.
In 1982, the military junta had been weakened by five years of suicidal neoliberal economic policies. It attempted to stay afloat with a jingoistic wave of paradoxical anti-colonial propaganda.
The regime that had humiliated the nation and the people of Argentina by selling it off and betraying it in all possible ways did the unthinkable: It waged a war with Britain over the Malvinas.
The Falklands War ended in a catastrophe, but also accelerated the end of the dictatorship.
Taking advantage of the last days in power, the right-wing-controlled central bank nationalized the private debt of a selected group of companies in December 1982, including Grupo Macri, a holding founded by the father of Mauricio Macri (whose neoliberal presidency between 2015 and 2019 was a nostalgic homage to the families benefited by the dictatorship).
The nationalization of this private debt cost the state about $17 billion dollars.
The financial deregulations of the regime led to uncontrolled capital flight, destructive speculative schemes, rampant fraud, and the crash of dozens of financial companies, including banks.
The desperate need for US dollars to repay debts forced Argentina’s de facto government to keep emitting bonds at always higher interest rates.
Argentina’s debt skyrocketed during the US-backed military dictatorship (1976 to 1983)
According to data from the World Bank, the external debt of the government was $4.6 billion in 1976.
At the end of the dictatorship in 1983, it was $25.6 billion – an increase of more than five times.
This debt would double to $52 billion by the end of the 1980s, and subsequently skyrocket to $103 billion in 2004, doubling again.
And these figures do not include private foreign debt.
In the 28 years since the beginning of the US-backed state terror – between 1976 and 2004, constituting roughly a generation – the deuda had increased more than 2200%, while GDP had gone up only 49%.
The world average for GDP growth in the same period was 90%.
The increase in Argentina’s external debt was 45 times the growth of its GDP.
The country was in an economic apocalypse.
Operation Condor turned Argentina into a broke country whose economy was heavily indebted in US dollars.
With the 1983 election of Raúl Alfonsín, the military boots left the presidential palace, but the debt contracted by the dictatorship never did.
Alfonsín could have contested the legitimacy of the debt. After all, it had been contracted by a dictatorial regime installed by the CIA, operating under US influence and favoring foreign interests over Argentina’s.
The debt was the result of a deliberate effort to undermine the economy and sovereignty of the Latin American country, so the legitimacy of the deuda was a valid matter of debate.
But Alfonsín’s government and the new, fragile democracy were too weak for such a challenge.
Argentine President Raúl Alfonsín
The first elected president in a decade was inaugurated in an atmosphere of great hope, after a war and nightmarish horrors that would soon become public, thanks to an investigation that concluded with the publication of the book Nunca más (“Never Again”), and a historic trial that ended with the conviction of the junta leaders.
But by accepting to comply with all the obligations imposed by the deuda, Alfonsín’s presidency was destined to be a failure.
The government depended on negotiations with the Washington, DC-based IMF and World Bank, the only entities that could provide the dollars Argentina needed.
Every decision of these organizations in matters related to Argentina had a strong influence over the country’s political and monetary stability, including the inflation which remained very high throughout the 1980s.
Alfonsín’s presidency ended with a hyper-inflation crisis in 1989 that got even worse in 1990, when wages and savings quickly evaporated, poverty and extreme poverty skyrocketed, riots and lootings erupted.
The shock caused a desperate demand for change, and played a key role in electing Carlos Menem, a conservative Peronist who had campaigned with vague promises to favor the poor and leveraged the fame of Perón, who remained popular among large sectors of the working class.
One of Menem’s most repeated slogans was “Follow me, I won’t deceive you!”, a trivial political message that was actually a lie, considering the betrayal that followed.
The unpayable debt, that kept growing like a snowball under Alfonsín, prepared the ground for the infamous “structural adjustment” programs that were “recommended” (that is to say, forcibly imposed) by the IMF, the World Bank and the US Treasury Department.
Neoliberal structural adjustment was presented as a simple technocratic solution, a doctor’s prescription to heal economies in formerly colonized countries that, coincidentally, all suffered from the same illness: external debt.
The therapy proposed in the so-called Washington Consensus demanded financial deregulation, no tariffs on imports, cuts to public services, and radical privatizations of public assets.
Medical metaphors became a classic trope of the neoliberal propaganda, and were also used by reputed economists.
Jeffrey Sachs is often associated with the infamous concept of “shock therapy.” The first patient he could experiment his theories with was Bolivia in 1985.
There, Sachs’ task was to stop a hyper-inflation crisis – which, as in Argentina, came after years of a US-backed right-wing dictatorship.
Sachs did manage to contain inflation by forcibly overvaluing Bolivia’s currency. But his treatment could only be applied by deporting labor leaders, allowing mass layoffs, impoverishing workers and Indigenous people, and undermining the country’s real economic growth.
Sachs, a Columbia University professor who would go on to rebrand himself as a progressive social democrat and supporter of Bernie Sanders, first made his name in the centuries-old tradition of colonial philanthropic megalomania.
His 2005 book “The End of Poverty”, prefaced by U2 singer Bono, used the medical metaphor to explain how to cure extreme poverty by 2025.
Despite the good will behind this and other initiatives, it is difficult to find any fundamental ideological (and especially technical) difference between Sachs and Argentina’s neoliberal idol Martínez de Hoz – even though the latter operated inside a fascist military regime that raped, tortured, and disappeared dissidents or threw leftists to their deaths out of airplanes.
Two decades after Sachs’ “therapies” were sent from Washington, DC to La Paz, Bolivia’s socialist President Evo Morales showed what an economy looks like when the state protects its people, their work, and the domestic market.
The massive growth of the Bolivian economy under Morales – an Indigenous farmer and labor organizer who did not finish high school – is only one of the many indicators that exposed the pseudo-scientific economic doctrine developed in the most prestigious US universities under the guise of clinical rigor.
Bolivia’s GDP per capita was just $1034 in 2005. Morales came to power the next year, and by the time he was overthrown in a US-backed far-right coup in 2019, Bolivia’s GDP per capita more than tripled to $3552.
Bolivia’s massive economic growth under President Evo Morales (from 2006 to 2019)
Overvaluing a currency by pegging it to the US dollar, in one way or another, was the core of the shock therapies that neoliberal economists had implemented in Bolivia, Argentina, and elsewhere.
This is certainly the easiest way to contain inflation, but it also undermines the domestic market and the people of a country – the two variables that are often ignored by free-market economists and institutions.
Other solutions to inflation exist, but because these include capital controls – an idea considered blasphemy in orthodox economics – and because they help preserve and stimulate local economies instead of international finance, they are most unpleasant to US and European banks and corporations.
No corporate media pundit or reputed economist would suggest a shock therapy that negatively affects the ruling class to fix a crisis, even though it would be sensible, because that would compromise their reputation and career.
So the concept of shock in economics is always reserved as a tactic for ripping off the working class and the poor – especially in formerly colonized nations.
Shortly after Carlos Menem took power in 1989, he pardoned all crimes committed during the Videla dictatorship. This horrified the survivors, and made it clear that his presidency would be dominated by oligarchic and foreign interests.
Menem also removed some taxes and regulations on agricultural exports, obtaining the support of the powerful landlords and the conservative establishment. The mask was off.
Hyperinflation reached a staggering 20,000% in 1990. Combined with the debt and pressure of the IMF, the crisis provided the justification for another “shock therapy”.
Inflation in Argentina in 1990
In 1991, Menem chose as his economic minister Domingo Cavallo, who had directed the central bank during the dictatorship. Together, they practiced what the president had famously called a “surgery without anesthesia”.
Cavallo’s landmark policy is known as the uno a uno (“one to one”). This was the new edition of Martínez de Hoz’s disastrous la tablita in 1979 and Sachs’ shock therapy in Bolivia.
The scheme was based on the same monetary principle: stop inflation by artificially and forcibly pegging a currency to the dollar (or overvaluing it).
Argentina’s latest version of this scam was even simpler than the previous manifestations. The Menem government issued a new currency – the peso still in use today. It retired old notes and coins and issued new ones.
The law then ordered that one new Argentine peso was now worth one US dollar – hence the name one to one. The Argentine peso would thus remain pegged to the dollar.
It was a de facto dollarization, a surrendering of Argentina’s monetary sovereignty.
Everybody could freely exchange pesos and dollars, now backed by the state with its reserves. This meant that the law restricted the emission of new pesos to the amount of US dollars in Argentina’s reserves.
From the point of view of the speculative financial markets, pesos had become “sound money” again, by law.
But they had also become expensive for the state, and therefore limited in circulation.
Inflation did go down to almost zero, but Argentine workers’ purchasing power dropped too.
Cavallo was celebrated in the West as a genius, as if he had invented free dollars. Clearly, they weren’t free.
The uno a uno was not meant to come alone, and was part of a larger plan of deregulations and privatizations.
With the support of the Peronists in the Congress, Menem launched one of the biggest operations of privatizations in history, an unprecedented pillage of public resources that Perón (who had nationalized the central bank and the railways) would have likely have opposed.
Argentina President Carlos Menem (left) with his neoliberal Economic Minister Domingo Cavallo
In a few years, the still powerful Argentine state privatized the pension system, national railways, public banks, telephone grid, national airline, ports, postal service, water supply network, power grid, gas network, several TV and radio networks, and some healthcare services.
The naval, chemical, and aerospace industries were privatized, along with the national oil company. In all, more than 400 public companies in Argentina were privatized.
US and European corporations bought the country practically overnight.
The privatizations occurred in the context of wild corruption and mismanagement. Companies and assets were sold off or given in concession at ridiculous prices and conditions.
Some services became up to 10 times more expensive. Others collapsed.
One of the most dramatic cases was the destruction of Argentina’s railways network. In its effort to de-industrialize the country, the military dictatorship had closed hundreds of stations and thousands of miles of rails.
Menem finished the job by dismantling most of the 29,000 miles of rails – which had been the eighth-largest network in the world.
Thousands lost their jobs. Some remote villages were disconnected from the rest of the world.
Neoliberalism turned a functioning public infrastructure that had been built, operated, and used by generations of Argentine workers into landfills.
In many cities and towns, these abandoned industrial, almost post-atomic ruins have not been dismantled or converted to this day, three decades later.
Trains, rails, bridges, warehouses, and stations were reconquered by nature and left to rust, offering a depressive glimpse on the past and a warning for the future.
The euphoria over Cavallo’s apparent victory against inflation did not last. An initial boost in confidence caused by the low inflation and the strong peso gave the illusion – buttressed by a worldwide neoliberal propaganda campaign praising Argentina’s model – that the economy was not going to collapse this time.
The growth between 1991 and 1994, based on the overvalued currency, gave Menem a second mandate.
But in 1995, unemployment reached 18.8%, indicating that not everybody was enjoying the consumerist joys of the rise in imported goods – the new “sweet money” phenomenon, which was similar to the one experienced in the Videla dictatorship under Martínez de Hoz.
Unemployment skyrocketed in Argentina in the 1990s, under Carlos Menem
Because of the strong currency, Argentine exports were also hurt. National products had become too expensive, leading to a growing trade deficit.
The imbalance was compensated by the dollars obtained where? From one-off income from privatizations, and, once again, loans.
But how long could this scheme last?
The recession and crisis that followed Menem was brutal. The so-called structural adjustments imposed by the IMF boosted unemployment, extreme poverty, and hunger to record levels, while capital started leaving the country.
In 1999, the widespread disgust for Menem – whom many remembered as a corrupt buffoon who drove a $120,000 red Ferrari while overseeing the pillage of his country – led to the defeat of the Peronist candidate in the presidential election.
Argentine President Carlos Menem driving in his expensive red Ferrari
At that point, Argentina had already entered a technical recession that would last four years. Yet with the shock therapy, nothing changed.
During his short presidency, from 1999 to 2001, the liberal Fernando de la Rúa kept implementing the suicidal recommendations of the IMF, with more rounds of cuts in public services and pensions.
De la Rúa reduced salaries of public employees and fired thousands. He also made it much easier, and cheaper, for employers to fire workers in the middle of a long recession, without the obligation to pay severance packages.
In December 2000, the government obtained a $37 billion “bailout” package from the IMF under the condition of annihilating the state and the economy by reaching a zero deficit.
In January 2001, the government renegotiated parts of the debt in order to postpone it for three years, while increasing the interests. But in March, the negative results forced the economic minister to resign.
In a surreal plot twist, de la Rúa called back an old acquaintance: free market star Domingo Cavallo, the former Menem minister who started the uno a uno conversion that had crippled Argentina’s national economy probably more than anything else ever conceived.
Cavallo was appointed economic minister, again.
Once back into the operatory theater, the economic butcher started doing the only thing he and all the other ministers in the previous 25 years had always done. Further cuts were approved, while the ghost of an incoming Armageddon loomed.
The unsustainable macroeconomic situation led to a bank run in Argentina in November 2001. Many people and companies feared a meltdown of the financial system. They started withdrawing large sums from banks and exchanging their pesos to US dollars, even though Cavallo’s now infamous landmark policy, the one to one conversion, was still in place.
In a desperate attempt to save the banks and contain a situation that was clearly out of control, on December 1, 2001, Cavallo and de la Rúa ordered an almost complete freeze of all bank accounts, limiting withdrawals to $250 in cash per person per week, a measure then called the corralito (small corral).
The sudden limit in liquidity, after years of financial deregulation and in the midst of a brutal recession, drastically affected trade and broke the chain of cash payments, leading to terrible consequences for millions of informal workers who did not have bank accounts, and thus could not be paid.
Considering it time to let the boat sink, the IMF announced on December 6 that it would not send the dollars expected from the last bailout, because Argentina had not met the zero deficit goal.
The following weeks were followed by a general strike, lootings, violence, and several deaths.
So on December 19, President de la Rúa ordered a curfew, inciting an infuriated response from the people. Protesters stormed the Plaza de Mayo, the square in front of Argentina’s presidential palace, the Pink House.
The day after, de la Rúa resigned and fled from the roof on a helicopter.
Three days later, on December 23, abandoned by the IMF, Argentina officially defaulted on a $95 billion debt.
Argentine President Fernando de la Rúa (right) with Carlos Menem
The 2001 default was a watershed moment for all Argentines, and became a symbol of the effects of neoliberalism and imperialism across the planet.
But this historic default on debt managed by award-winning, highly respected economists was just the surface of a decades-long, fabricated crisis that was really a neocolonial takeover.
Record levels of poverty, shocking child malnutrition, a growing infant mortality rate, devastating unemployment, and increasing outward emigration shattered the false image of the country that had once been an economic powerhouse and the destination for millions of migrants seeking a better life.
Argentina was not just broke; it had been socially, economically, and politically demolished as a sovereign country.
The state, productive fabric, currency, trade, public education, and healthcare, public transportation: nothing was left untouched by the pillage that effectively led to a reset of Argentine society.
Something similar was happening in other Latin American semi-colonies of the United States. The region found itself divided into those who recognized the fraud of neoliberalism – a word that had become in the political discourse – and those who believed that the shock therapies designed by people like Jeffrey Sachs, José Alfredo Martínez de Hoz, or Domingo Cavallo were not “true” neoliberalism.
The staunch believers in the virtues of neoliberal ideology implied that, instead of changing course, the real solution was more of the same, but in a more extreme form.
Some of these free-market pundits and academics, who still thrive in major corporate media outlets, articulated a fundamentalist “libertarian” critique, claiming the neoliberal regimes did not go far enough when they removed most tariffs on imports, that they should have eliminated all of them, effectively destroying local industries. And they insisted everything should have been privatized, not almost everything.
The extent of the privatizations is something that even the free-market fundamentalists’ most eloquent evangelist, Milton Friedman, struggled to explain in practical terms.
Friedman argued that the state should still control “some roads”, and maybe the police or the army. He confusedly claimed that he was not against public control when debating schools, but simultaneously insisted that government control was bad.
The biggest neoliberal rhetorical fallacy has always been related to the debt. Neoliberals typically associate the debt with public spending on social programs, using a straw man that implies that the debt crisis of “developing countries” is a trivial problem of excessive spending that can be solved by simply reducing it.
The neoliberals act as though poor working people, especially from oppressed Black, Indigenous, or mixed race communities, are unable to manage the money that wealthy people have supposedly given them.
This narrative is totally false. It ignores key factors, including foreign control, deliberate pillage, and de-development.
In regard to foreign control, unpayable debts were deliberately created and expanded in Argentina by dictatorships or corrupt elected governments, like Menem’s, which operated on behalf of foreign interests and oligarchs, and which were forced to apply suicidal measures demanded by the IMF, World Bank, and US Treasury Department.
As for deliberate pillage, the need for massive quantities of US dollars was in large part caused by fraudulent schemes, like Argentina’s “financial bicycle”. These were made possible thanks to the deregulation of the exchange market, overvaluation of the currency, and other policies that favored scams paid by the state.
When billionaire speculators were allowed to exchange Argentine pesos for unlimited amounts of dollars, benefiting from high interest rates in pesos, it was the state that had to borrow those dollars from US private banks or from the IMF and pay interests on them. Once exchanged, the dollars obtained by the speculators were moved out of the country, leaving the debt to the state.
And in terms of de-development, the money borrowed under Argentina’s neoliberal regimes was virtually never used for social programs that would stimulate the real economy, support domestic demand, or improve people’s lives in any way. Instead, those dollars were mostly used to pay interest, service new loans, or increase the demand of dollars for speculative purposes.
Only days after Argentina’s 2001 debt default, interim President Eduardo Duhalde abolished Cavallo’s dollarization scheme – the one peso to one dollar fixed exchange rate. The peso lost 40% of its value overnight.
This long-due monetary devaluation, together with a timid stimulus in the form of social subsidies, gave oxygen to an exhausted population and to the economy as a whole.
The defaulted country was in ruins, and the lasting crisis led to immense suffering. But as a response to the robberies and horrors of the previous decades, new creative energies and popular movements were emerging across Latin America.
In a surprising turn of events, the barely known governor of a remote southern province became president of Argentina in 2003, with a measly 22% of the vote.
The widespread contempt for the arrogant and corrupt political class of Buenos Aires played in favor of Néstor Kirchner, a progressive Peronist who belonged to the faction that opposed fascist Peronist José López Rega in the 1970s and neoliberal Peronist Menem in the 1990s.
Not many thought that Kirchner would have changed Argentina’s political direction. But he laid solid foundations for a debt-free economy that grew almost 9% every year during his presidency – a success neoliberal detractors tried to explain simply as the luck of a “commodity export boom“.
The new president joined the progressive wave that had brought Hugo Chávez in Venezuela and Lula da Silva in Brazil, forming a key part of what would later be dubbed the “Pink Tide”.
Argentine President Néstor Kirchner
As of 2003, when Kirchner became president, Argentina’s defaulted external debt was a combination of IMF loans and bonds owned by private investors of all kinds. These two types of creditors operate and affect the government in very different ways.
The IMF is a political organization ruled under a very specific economic ideology, which imposes the Washington Consensus on countries that it “helps” financially. The US has always had the main quota and veto power in the Fund.
The policies demanded by the IMF are detrimental to the real economy and undermine the borrower’s growth and domestic market, trapping it in a cycle of debt.
But the bondholders, which are mostly private companies operating in international financial markets, cannot directly enforce a policy on a government. They are private companies that profit from speculative trades, which inherently involves risks, and normally the higher the risk, the higher the gain.
The more a government is in economic trouble, the higher the interests on its bonds will usually be, in order to find speculators willing to buy them.
This game makes it very profitable to trade risky bonds – in other words, to speculate on countries that are financially desperate.
While formally separate, the IMF and the bondholders (sometimes referred to simply as “the markets”) cooperate and need each other in order to maximize their effectiveness.
The more a country is financially desperate, the more speculators will profit, and the more leverage the IMF will have in order to enforce neoliberal reforms and other political pressures.
On December 16, 2005, Kirchner announced that Argentina would repay its entire IMF debt in full, and in advance, with its foreign reserves. On January 3, 2006 the payment of $9.5 billion was confirmed by the Fund.
The central bank only held $27 billion in US dollars in its reserves, but that was still more than the record low of the previous years.
The reserves had grown thanks to the budget surplus obtained from the suspension of the payments to private bondholders, and the rapid growth of exports caused by the devaluation of the peso, which made Argentine products more competitive.
Kirchner’s decision to pay off the debt early saved the country an estimated $842 million in interest.
While far from being a long-term solution to the huge problems the Argentine people were facing, this was a game changer.
The move was anticipated by Brazil’s President Lula da Silva, who had paid the IMF in full a few months earlier.
But the announcement was received as a shocking surprise by Kirchner’s supporters and detractors alike.
It also annoyed part of the Argentine establishment, whose corruption had been mercilessly exposed: Why did none of Kirchner’s predecessors pay off the IMF debt like this before?
The repayment was a demonstration that Argentina never actually needed “aid” from the IMF. The Fund had become seen as a national enemy by popular movements, and was even publicly criticized by Kirchner in his speeches.
Argentine President Néstor Kirchner with his wife, future President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner
The debt that Argentina held with the IMF was important because of its political implications, but the government still owed much more to private creditors.
In 2003, Kirchner started a complex process of negotiations with diverse groups of creditors. These talks continued under the subsequent presidency of his wife, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (CFK).
The robust approach of the Kirchner administrations was effective – and it angered wealthy creditors, as could be seen at the time by the frustration of their media mouthpieces like The Economist.
In 2005, Argentina abandoned the seemingly endless, unsuccessful negotiations and made a unilateral offer with discounts of up to 66.3% on the original bonds. The offer was accepted by most bondholders and ended restructuring 76% of the defaulted debt (then $81.8 billion in total).
In 2010, under CFK, Argentina completed a second bond exchange under less favorable conditions for the creditors, which led to a total of 91.3% of the defaulted debt being restructured.
The Kirchners’ strategy had proved a success. Tens of billions were saved, and Argentina was on its way to finally normalize its status vis-à-vis the international credit markets, while all economic indicators were showing strong signs of recovery.
But the remaining defaulted debt, which represented just about 8% of the total from 2001, was now owned by holdouts that had refused the offers of 2005 and 2010, and decided to turn to the US judicial system to help them litigate.
Most of these creditors were known as “vulture funds” – firms that are illegal in many countries, but not the United States. (In 2008, an ambitious bill designed to prevent investors from speculating on sovereign debts of developing countries was introduced in the US Congress, but it failed to pass.)
These particular kinds of hedge funds profit by buying defaulted debts at a much lower price than their nominal value, and then use aggressive strategies, most notably lawsuits, to extort the debtor, in an attempt to get the full value plus penalties.
Some of the world’s most infamous vulture funds had bought Argentina’s defaulted bonds after 2001. The largest slice of the cake was owned by NML Capital, the Cayman Islands subsidiary of New York-based Elliott Management Corporation, whose US founder and CEO, Paul Singer, is a billionaire vulture capitalist and top donor to the Republican Party.
Billionaire vulture capitalist Paul Singer, a top owner of Argentina’s debt
Also profiting on Argentina’s debt was Cayman Islands-based billionaire Kenneth Dart, the owner of Dart Management, a pioneer in vulture practices targeting Brazil, Russia, Ecuador, Turkey, and Greece.
Part of Argentina’s remaining defaulted bonds were owned by Aurelius Capital Management, which was led by speculator Mark Brodsky, a veteran of Elliott Management Corporation who saw Singer as his mentor and has also profited from Puerto Rico’s odious debt.
Singer, Dart, Brodsky, and their super-rich colleagues belong to a generation of speculators who learned to take advantage of the 1976 Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, a law that provides the legal basis to sue a foreign country in a US court.
Before that law, vulture funds could not engage in distressed-debt litigation against sovereign countries. But in 1992, Dart opened Pandora’s box by suing Brazil, right in the middle of its debt crisis, and getting a favorable settlement.
In the following years, after the overthrow of the Soviet Union and imposition of neoliberalism across much of the world, wealthy speculators followed Dart’s example.
“When Dart and Singer started, fewer than 10% of sovereign debt crises involved litigation. Today that figure is more like 50%”, the New York Times reported in 2019.
Argentina’s record 2001 default was the perfect opportunity for vulture funds. Their threat was so clear that even right-wing media outlets in the country that were owned by pro-US oligarchs, like the conservative newspaper Clarín, dubbed Kenneth Dart “the number one enemy of Argentina”.
After a long legal battle between the vulture funds and the Kirchners’ governments in several US courts, New York judge Thomas Griesa ruled in 2012 that Argentina had to pay the vulture funds at full value.
That meant that Singer’s company, for example, would get a return of 15 times its initial investment.
The ruling became effective in 2014. It also blocked Argentina from paying any other creditor who had accepted the bond exchanges of 2005 and 2010 until it had paid the vultures in full.
This was technically possible because almost of all bank accounts and financial transfers involved were under US jurisdiction.
In other words, the US ruling created a paradoxical situation where Argentina was considered in default for being unable to comply with payment deadlines, even though the government had actually ordered the payments.
The only way to unblock the freeze of the transactions was for Argentina to submit to a parasitic group of billionaires and speculators who were trying to make a killing off of its odious debt.
Following the ruling, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner denounced the vulture funds on the international stage, accusing them of weaponizing US law to wage “economic and financial terrorism.”
Addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations in 2014, CFK argued that these companies “are economic terrorists who destabilize the economy of a country and create poverty, hunger, and misery, from the sin of speculation.”
Despite the extortion and the high tension with Washington and its local representatives in Argentina’s opposition, President Kirchner ended her mandate in December 2015, still refusing to pay the vulture funds.
Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner denounces the “economic and financial terrorism” of US vulture funds at the United Nations General Assembly in 2014
Mauricio Macri, a right-wing multi-millionaire whose family had profited from the dictatorship, and whose fortune also came from Menem’s privatizations, won the 2015 presidential election by a small margin.
At the end of CFK’s second term, Argentina’s debt-to-GDP ratio was 52.6%. It had increased a bit in the last years, but was still easily controllable.
When Macri left power in 2019, the debt-to-GDP ratio was 90.2%, and growing.
But probably the most absurd development was that under Macri, in less than four years, Argentina once again defaulted on its debt.
On December 7, 2015, three days before the inauguration of President Macri, Argentina’s future finance minister and central bank manager Luis Caputo, a former JP Morgan trader, flew to New York and met the representatives of the vulture funds. Nothing else was more urgent.
Three months later, in February 2016, Macri’s Argentina transferred $9.3 billion to the vulture funds, while the New York judge, Griesa, unblocked the other payments to the other bondholders, the owners of the 93% of the defaulted debt who had accepted the offers made in 2005 and 2010.
Paul Singer’s NML Capital alone made $2.28 billion on an original investment of just $177 million, for a total return of 1180% – while also forcing Argentina to pay the legal fees.
Macri’s payment of the vulture funds amounted to a national humiliation for a sovereign countr. It also angered many small investors, including pensioners and workers, who lost money with the debt exchanges, while a small group of US billionaires and foreign speculators made a killing.
The reason Macri gave the operation such a priority was because he hoped to obtain access to the international credit markets as soon as possible. The new right-wing president wanted to once again to borrow money by emitting new bonds – something Argentina had been banned from doing since the default in 2001.
By paying the enormous ransom to the vulture funds, Macri’s government had the power to flood the country with borrowed US dollars.
In the early days of his administration, Macri removed several regulations in order to favor financial speculators and companies in sectors like agriculture – the most important in Argentina – as well as mining, energy, finance, and the media.
These industries, especially the media, are controlled by Argentine billionaires, who were President Macri’s main supporters.
Macri got rid of capital controls and the so-called cepo, a foreign exchange regulation introduced in 2011 under CFK that limited the amount of US dollars individuals and companies could buy with pesos, in order to prevent capital flight and inflation.
For years Argentina’s mainstream media, which is dominated by the powerful telecommunications corporation the Grupo Clarín, described the “freedom” to buy dollars almost as a human right, so CFK’s regulations were presented as a violation of liberty.
Clarín was one of the most powerful supporters of Macri, so it was extremely easy for him to remove the currency controls overnight. This meant that Argentine oligarchs could buy any amount of dollars, even billions, with pesos. And that is exactly what speculators did.
The end of capital controls and the possibility to borrow virtually without limits were an explosive mix. They paved the way for Argentina’s third neoliberal robbery, the fastest and the first based almost exclusively on financial methods.
The previous two pillages had taken place during the 1976-1983 military dictatorship and Menem’s presidency from 1989 to 1999.
In a formidable show of effectiveness, Macri and his team wrecked the relatively healthy finances of the Argentine state in less than two years.
Argentina’s President Mauricio Macri (right) with Brazil’s Jair Bolsonaro
Macri’s single-term presidency used the state as a tool to bring dollars and euros into the country through easily accessible borrowing.
Those dollars ended up in private hands, thanks to the now unregulated currency market, which meant anybody could buy or sell any amount of pesos. This inevitably caused significant inflation.
At the same time, big funds were now free to move their dollars out of the country, thanks to the absence of capital controls. The new conditions led to a rapid increase in capital flight.
Under Néstor and Cristina Kirchner, capital flight was contained and was mostly paid with the surplus in the commercial balance, given exports were higher than imports.
During the “K” years, some of the money obtained from economic growth did leave the country, but under Macri, the capital flight not only grew faster, it ended up being funded with the foreign currency borrowed by the state. Capital flight was quite literally borrowed money.
Pundits propagandized on behalf of the government and Macri’s suicidal economic policies by stirring up the desire for dollars in the population, even among those who could not afford to buy any.
Deregulation of the foreign currency exchange led to high inflation in Argentina, but the right-wing-controlled media outlets blamed the Kirchners. They brought back the old neoliberal dog whistle that Argentina was now “open to the world,” and promised that the new policies would attract foreign investors who never arrived.
Macri’s most important achievement was to allow wealthy families and speculative companies to dollarize their assets, thus moving them to more profitable markets abroad.
Wealthy speculators were also allowed to profit from the old scheme known as carry trade (bicicleta financiera), which had been used during the last dictatorship.
Their trick was to buy pesos, profit from the high interest rates in pesos, then convert them to dollars and move the dollars out of the country.
In the meantime, the state had to provide a virtually infinite amount of dollars for the speculators, and was left with the pesos.
Thanks to a reckless emission of bonds to support the uncontrolled demand of foreign currency, including an extraordinary 100-year bond and very high interest rates, Argentina was already on the brink of another default just two years since Macri took power.
The debt-to-GDP ratio passed from 56% in 2017 to 86% in 2018, a catastrophic 30% increase in one year.
In 2018, the Argentine peso was the worst-performing currency in the world – excluding Venezuela, which was suffering under illegal unilateral sanctions and relentless economic war by the United States.
The Argentine peso lost about 50% of its value to the dollar. Inflation rose by the same amount.
Macri’s central bank increased interest rates to record levels in an attempt to attract investors – or more accurately, speculators – but it was too late.
The economic figures did not lie. Argentina’s debt was already unpayable in 2018, and all macroeconomic indicators showed that a crash was imminent.
At the beginning of the year, virtually no one wanted to buy Argentine bonds anymore, meaning that a country whose debt had been under control only two years before, and had no absolutely reason to rush into deregulating its currency and financial markets, was now on the brink of yet another default.
In this uncertain context, Argentina went through two major currency crises in 2018, in June and August, forcing the central bank to waste billions of dollars to contain the extreme devaluation of the peso.
The country was bleeding dollars, and toward mid-2018, the so-called “Macrisis” was a reality.
Macri’s days in power seemed numbered.
Argentine President Mauricio Macri (right) with US President Donald Trump in Buenos Aires in 2018
On May 8, 2018 Macri announced that he had formally requested financial aid from the IMF.
For millions of Argentines it was a shock. The country had not dealt with the disgraced organization since 2005, when Néstor Kirchner had paid the debt in full and decoupled the national economic policies from Washington, after years of tense relations.
The US representative at the IMF at the time, Mauricio Claver-Carone, revealed that EU members of the Fund considered Argentina’s situation at the time “unsustainable.” They were against a loan that was clearly meant to save Macri’s face and buy him time to attempt a re-election.
But according to Claver-Carone, US President Donald Trump saw Macri as an important ally in his coup attempt against Venezuela.
At the time, the White House was preparing a regime-change operation to remove Venezuela’s democratically elected President Nicolás Maduro and replace him with Washington’s hand-picked “interim president,” Juan Guaidó.
And Macri did indeed go on to recognize Guaidó, who never received a single vote in a presidential election, as the supposed head of state in Venezuela.
#Argentina
Ya nos encontramos en territorio argentino, donde nos reuniremos en instantes con el Presidente @mauriciomacri en el marco de nuestra agenda para que Venezuela recupere su democracia y conquiste su libertad. pic.twitter.com/SoCTM1bPpH
— Juan Guaidó (@jguaido) March 2, 2019
So Trump forced the IMF – whose biggest contributor is the United States, and therefore mainly controlled by the US government – to provide Argentina with the biggest loan in the Fund’s history, to keep Macri and his plutocratic friends afloat.
Agreeing on a $57 billion loan with a government whose policies allowed record levels of capital flight was economically nonsensical, especially considering that article VI, section 1(a) of the IMF articles of agreement states that a “member may not use the Fund’s general resources to meet a large or sustained outflow of capital.”
But the multifaceted scam designed in the White House was carried on anyway, and an agreement was reached in September 2018.
Under Macri, Argentina was ultimately disbursed $44 billion by the IMF.
But not a single dollar sent by the Fund was ever seen by the Argentine people, or used for any project for economic development.
The money evaporated, trickling up into the pockets of domestic and foreign oligarchs, funding the massive demand of US dollars generated by speculators and by the interests of the debt.
The billions sent from Washington disappeared in just 11 months.
In August 2019, Macri’s Argentina had to postpone some scheduled payments, meaning that it was already in default – the country’s first official default for lack of funds since 2001.
The effects of Macri’s short administration were dramatic. His tenure was dominated by politically motivated judicial attacks (known as lawfare) against the opposition, which involved the meddling of the US embassy, intelligence services, corrupt judges, illegal surveillance, and a torrent of media propaganda.
Under Macri, Argentina’s inflation skyrocketed, the value of wages plummeted, unemployment rose, and poverty grew above the 2001 crisis levels, reaching almost 40% when he left office.
Poverty was 30% when the multi-millionaire took power, meaning that more than 4 million people had become poor in four years. About one in 10 Argentines was in extreme poverty.
The total value of capital flight during Macri’s four years in government was estimated at $79.8 billion, while the payments of interest on the debt were $40.7 billion.
The debt-to-GDP ratio reached 90% in 2019, almost doubling from when Cristina Fernández de Kirchner left office in 2015.
Without Trump’s intervention, Argentina would have defaulted two years earlier, and the chaos would have probably forced Macri to resign.
So the IMF loan was effectively an injection of oxygen that gave the right-wing president a chance to run for an almost impossible re-election.
With the vote approaching in 2019, the opposition had to find a candidate to deal with Macri’s catastrophic legacy.
Polls showed that CFK could win again, but years of lawfare had weakened her to the point that a new presidency would have been politically unstable, especially looking at the trend in the region, where right-wing, US-aligned governments were thriving.
CFK therefore decided to run as vice president, and offered the lead to Alberto Fernández.
The new Peronist candidate had been chief of ministers under Néstor Kirchner, and had served briefly under Cristina as well.
But Fernández had left CFK’s government and became a vocal opposition figure within Peronism. In the past, he had even been a political ally of the infamous neoliberal economic minister Domingo Cavallo.
Because of his reputation as a “K” critic, the new alliance appeared counterintuitive, but it earned the Alberto-Cristina alliance more support at a moment of extreme vulnerability for every progressive candidate in Latin America.
In the August 2019 primary election, CFK’s coalition with Fernández, called the Frente de Todos (Front of Everyone), won with 48%, compared to the 32% of Macri’s right-wing alliance Juntos por el Cambio.
Macri’s August 2019 default was rarely called a default by Argentina’s right-wing-dominated media, especially because it occurred in the middle of the presidential campaign and the catastrophic primary vote.
But even US rating agencies like S&P and Fitch, as well as foreign financial media outlets like Bloomberg, which are notorious for their strong bias in favor of neoliberal governments, admitted that Argentina was in “selective default” or “quasi default”.
In order to protect Macri, the Argentine media made up a new word, reperfilamiento (reshaping), and used it instead of “default,” successfully obfuscating the president’s economic disaster behind a smokescreen of propaganda.
Denying the default was a desperate attempt to put some lipstick on the corpse of Macri’s political and economic legacy. But it did the job.
The multi-millionaire did lose re-election in the October 2019 presidential election, but the enormous propaganda apparatus operated by Clarín managed to significantly improve Macri’s poor result in the primary, boosting him up to 40% against Fernández’s 48%.
The election showed what a media monopoly and millions of dollars systematically invested in troll armies on social media can do, even in the most unfavorable conditions.
The media narrative of the “heavy legacy” (pesada herencia) that Argentina supposedly received from Néstor and Cristina Kirchner, and the often fabricated allegations and charges of corruption took a significant toll.
More than appreciation for Macri’s policies, the 2019 vote expressed the anti-Kirchner sentiment that had been cultivated through years of lawfare.
Argentina’s conservative sectors needed to undermine the positive reputation of the “K“ governments and character assassinate CFK, because she was by far the most popular leader on a national level.
The right-wing oligarchy’s ultimate goal was to make it impossible for CFK to run again (which they would go on to accomplish with a judicial coup in December 2022).
But the 2019 electoral victory of Fernández and CFK ended up being the easiest part.
Argentina’s President Alberto Fernández and Vice President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner
The country Alberto Fernández received on December 10, 2019 was very different from the one Macri got four years before.
In 2019, Argentina was on fire, with an economy in recession, poorer, indebted at 90% of GDP, and even more polarized than before.
The new president had the daunting task of fixing Argentina’s devastated public finances, hit by another default on its sovereign debt, while dealing with one of the worst social and economic crises in its history.
The Frente de Todos coalition that Fernández had formed with Cristina Fernández de Kirchner was very large, including parties ranging from the center to the left.
This meant there were many differences inside the Frente de Todos, which began to emerge when they took power.
But everybody in the coalition knew that Argentina’s media monopoly Clarín and the wealthy oligarchy were not going to help extinguish the fire, because they were responsible for it.
After the fall of Macri, the mainstream media continued pushing endless conspiracies against Vice President CFK.
The right-wing press even got created and added a strange new chapter about her supposed plots to undermine Fernández, the man she chose and helped put in the Pink House months before.
Although CFK was not president, and despite years of politically motivated allegations of corruption and dozens of legal prosecutions (but no convictions at this point), she was still by far the most charismatic and popular leader in Argentina.
But just a few months after Alberto and Cristina took power, in early 2020, the crisis in Argentina reached a whole new level, when the global Covid-19 pandemic hit.
In September 2018, Macri had gutted the Ministry of Health, among others, and turned it into a sub-department, as part of his harsh austerity cuts, which were justified as administrative “simplifications”.
So on March 3, 2020, when the first case of Covid-19 was identified in Buenos Aires, the new government was still in the process of reviving the national health administration, which had been systematically defunded and nearly dismantled by Macri.
In this disastrous context, President Fernández and his Economic Minister Martin Guzmán, a neo-Keynesian academic and collaborator of Joseph Stiglitz, played a complex game with the two different groups of creditors, the private bondholders and political organizations like the IMF.
Shortly after being sworn in, Fernández had said Argentina would stop until 2024 all payments on the $44 billion that the IMF had lent to Macri’s administration.
In February 2020, Vice President Kirchner publicly suggested that the debt was illegitimate.
Noting that the IMF statute forbids lending money to countries with significant capital flight, CFK pointed out that loan had not been given to fund infrastructure projects or social programs.
No fue un préstamo para hacer represas, carreteras, programas ni obras de infraestructura. El Fondo presta para dar estabilidad a los países, pero acá se prestó para que se fugara el dinero.
— Cristina Kirchner (@CFKArgentina) February 9, 2020
Following the neoliberal disasters of the 1990s, the IMF has tried to rebrand itself as a more collaborative and humanistic institution.
The Covid-19 pandemic seemed to have forced the Fund to soften its infamous obsession with austerity policies and accept the priority of economic growth over debt consolidation.
Whether this was a true change in paradigm or just a marketing campaign is not clear – although Argentines are deeply skeptical.
Part two of this article will detail the attempts by the Alberto Fernández administration to renegotiate Argentina’s debt with the IMF and private creditors.
|
Write an article about: Colombia’s far-right presidential candidate praised Hitler: Millionaire Rodolfo Hernández goes to runoff. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Colombia, Rodolfo Hernández | A far-right hundred-millionaire real estate mogul who called himself a “follower” of Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler, Rodolfo Hernández, won second place in round one of Colombia’s presidential elections. He will compete against center-left candidate Gustavo Petro in a runoff vote in June.
Colombia held the first round of presidential elections on May 29. Center-left candidate Gustavo Petro won in a landslide, with 40.32% of the vote.
The candidate who came in second place, with 28.15%, is an extreme-right demagogue named Rodolfo Hernández, who has proudly referred to himself as a “follower” of Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler.
Hernández, a real estate mogul with an estimated $100 million in wealth, ran using a far-right “populist” strategy, insulting prominent politicians and pledging to fight corruption and crime.
Hernández is notorious for physically attacking people who disagree with him politically. In 2018, he got in an argument with a councilmember of the city where he served as mayor, and Hernández slapped him on camera.
A far-right hundred-millionaire real estate mogul who praised Hitler, Rodolfo Hernández, won second place in round one of Colombia’s presidential elections.
He'll compete against left-wing candidate Gustavo Petro in a runoff vote in June.
Read more here: https://t.co/BsJdW1IR2I pic.twitter.com/Dix0sHIlZh
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) May 30, 2022
Colombia holds presidential elections in two rounds. If one candidate does not get more than 50% of the vote in the first vote, it goes to a runoff a few months later.
The left-wing candidate Petro will therefore compete against Hernández in the second round on June 19.
In the first round, the right-wing vote was divided between two main choices. The candidate who came in third place, with 23.91%, was Federico “Fico” Gutiérrez.
The former mayor of the city of Medellín, Gutiérrez represented the ultra-conservative movement that has dominated Colombian politics for decades, known as Uribismo.
Uribismo takes its name from one of the most powerful and elite politicians in Colombia, Álvaro Uribe, who served as president from 2002 to 2010. Uribe and his family are closely linked to drug cartels and paramilitary death squads.
Gutiérrez conceded defeat and immediately endorsed Hernández on the night of the first round.
Gutiérrez’s loss does represent a significant blow to Uribismo. But this hardline right-wing movement was not defeated by a more moderate candidate, but an even more extreme one.
Rodolfo Hernández, who is 77 years old, beat Gutiérrez by running as a far-right “populist,” criticizing the traditional political class and denouncing prominent politicians as “drug addicts” and “thieves.”
Hernández made a fortune in Colombia’s notoriously corrupt real estate sector, and has an estimated $100 million in wealth.
He offered no coherent economic program other than budget cutbacks and austerity. But he promised in his presidential campaign that he would dedicate himself to fighting corruption.
Hernández even called his political party the Liga de Gobernantes Anticorrupción: “League of Anti-Corruption Governors”. This is despite the fact that Hernández has been under investigation on series charges of corruption.
The multimillionaire’s hypocrisy doesn’t end there. As part of his “populist” marketing strategy, Hernández has rebranded himself as an opponent of Uribismo.
But as recently as 2019, Hernández praised Álvaro Uribe in an interview with Colombia’s TV network Cosmovisión.
“He helped me, Uribe,” Hernández said. “I have a debt of gratitude [to Uribe]”.
“He appreciates me. I think that he loves me,” Hernández said of Uribe, whom he affectionately referred to as “Doctor Uribe.”
El multimillonario corrupto Rodolfo Hernández actúa como si fuera parte de la oposición al uribismo, pero en 2019, dijo: "Él me ayudó a mí, Uribe"
"Yo tengo una deuda de gratitud", dijo Hernández. Uribe "me aprecia. Yo siento que él me quiere"
La fuente: https://t.co/pbB3PeHG3T pic.twitter.com/JMoIlILiek
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 30, 2022
In 2016, when Hernández served as mayor of the northern Colombian city of Bucaramanga, he set off a national scandal by praising Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler.
“I am a follower of a great German thinker, who is named Adolf Hitler”, Hernández said in a live video interview with the Colombian media outlet RCN Radio.
“Listen! Listen!” he continued, when the hosts tried to interrupt him. Hernández urged listeners to follow the “recommendations that he [Hitler] gives”.
“Don’t think that things will change if we always do the same”, Hernández continued. “The greatest blessing that can happen to people, cities, and countries is crisis. Because crisis brings progress. It is in crisis that the great problems of humanity are resolved”.
“Those who transcend crisis transcend themselves without being conquered”, he added.
When Hernández started campaigning for president in 2021, however, he backtracked and claimed that it was a “slip of the tongue“, and he had not actually meant to praise Hitler.
Hernández has also raised eyebrows with explicitly misogynist and racist comments, especially demonizing people from neighboring Venezuela.
In 2018, Hernández showed he is more than willing to use violence against those who disagree with him politically.
When he got in an argument with a city council member from Bucaramanga, Hernández hit the man in the face, on camera.
The Office of the Inspector General of Colombia responded by suspending Hernández from his post as mayor for three months.
Hernández remained completely unapologetic. In an interview at the peak of his presidential campaign in 2022, he stood by his decision to attack the city council member, without a hint of regret.
The Latin American media has frequently compared Hernández to far-right former US president Donald Trump. He is also very similar to Brazil’s extreme-right leader, Jair Bolsonaro, who has praised Chile’s former dictator Augusto Pinochet and called for restoring an authoritarian military regime.
Colombia’s left-wing presidential candidate Gustavo Petro at his first-round victory rally on May 29
For his part, the candidate who came in first place in round one of Colombia’s presidential elections, Gustavo Petro, is a senator from the center-left Colombia Humana (Humane Colombia) party.
A former mayor of the capital Bogotá, Petro ran on a progressive platform promising social-democratic policies, peace, and stronger support for women and marginalized communities.
In his youth, Petro fought with a revolutionary socialist guerrilla group, called M-19. But he later left and significantly moderated his political program.
In recent years, Petro has harshly criticized the existing socialist governments in Latin America, in Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba, and run on a more establishment-friendly, social-democratic program.
But in Colombia, whose political system has been dominated by far-right oligarchs for decades, even a center-left progressive like Petro is seen as a huge threat.
Petro’s running mate, vice-presidential candidate Francia Márquez, is a grassroots activist from the Afro-Colombian community. She has criticized the US government for meddling in her country’s election on behalf of the right-wing, while calling for reparations, land reform, and an end to the drug war.
Voters in Colombia will now have to decide if they want their country to move in a progressive direction or lurch even further to the extreme right.
|
Write an article about: Peru’s natural resources: CIA-linked US ambassador meets with mining and energy ministers to talk ‘investments’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Anglo American, BHP, copper, energy, Europe, gas, Glencore, gold, iron, lead, Lisa Kenna, LNG, minerals, Pedro Castillo, Peru, Rio Tinto, Shell, silver, Southern Copper Corporation | Peru has large reserves of copper, gold, zinc, silver, lead, iron, and natural gas. After a coup overthrew left-wing President Pedro Castillo, the US ambassador, CIA veteran Lisa Kenna, met with mining and energy ministers to discuss “investments”. Europe is importing Peruvian LNG to replace Russian energy.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
The US ambassador in Peru, Lisa Kenna, is a CIA veteran who supported a parliamentary coup in December 2022 that overthrew the South American nation’s democratically elected left-wing president, Pedro Castillo.
Castillo was subsequently imprisoned for 18 months without due process, setting off massive protests across Peru. The unelected government responded with extreme violence, killing approximately 50 protesters in just over a month.
One day before the December 7 coup, the former CIA officer turned US ambassador met with Peru’s defense minister, who then told the country’s powerful military to turn against President Castillo.
Since then, Kenna has been quite busy, regularly meeting with top officials in Peru’s coup government, including unelected President Dina Boluarte and her ministers.
On January 18, the US ambassador sat down with Peru’s minister of energy and mining, as well as its vice minister of hydrocarbons and vice minister of mining.
Peru’s Ministry of Energy and Mines boasted that they discussed “investment” opportunities and plans to “develop” and “expand” the extractive industries.
? Un diálogo institucional de alto nivel entre Perú y Estados Unidos, que abordó temas de desarrollo del sector minero, sostuvo hoy el ministro Oscar Vera Gargurevich y Lisa Kenna, embajadora estadounidense en el Perú. @USAmbPeru pic.twitter.com/35CRV5unSl
— Ministerio de Energía y Minas (@MinemPeru) January 19, 2023
Peru is a country rich in natural resources, especially minerals. Spanish colonialists exploited the South American nation’s substantial silver and gold reserves, and today transnational corporations see it as a very profitable resource hub.
One of Earth’s top producers of copper, lead, zinc, tin, silver, and gold, Peru’s economy relies heavily on the mining sector, which represents more than half of total national exports and over 10% of GDP.
The world’s three largest transnational mining corporations – BHP, Rio Tinto, and Glencore – are heavily invested in Peru, along with other prominent companies from Canada, Brazil, Switzerland, Britain, the US, Japan, and Australia.
Peru is the planet’s second-biggest copper producer (after its neighbor Chile), meaning it will become increasingly important in the global shift toward renewable energy technologies.
US investment banking giant Goldman Sachs stated in 2022 that “copper is the new oil”, writing: “The critical role copper will play in achieving the Paris climate goals cannot be overstated… As the most cost-effective conductive material, copper sits at the heart of capturing, storing and transporting these new sources of energy”.
Peru is also a significant producer of liquified natural gas (LNG). Its LNG exports are largely overseen by foreign corporations like Shell.
Europe became the top importer of Peruvian LNG in 2022, after the European Union boycotted Russian energy over the proxy war in Ukraine.
While natural resources are not the only reason for these coups in Latin America, they are a significant factor.
Following the violent putsch in Peru’s mineral-rich neighbor Bolivia in 2019, a critic wrote to billionaire Elon Musk on Twitter, “You know what wasn’t in the best interest of people? The US government organizing a coup against Evo Morales in Bolivia so you could obtain the lithium there”.
Musk replied, “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it”.
When he ran for office in 2021, left-wing presidential candidate Pedro Castillo had made one of the central themes of his campaign the need to reassert popular control over Peru’s natural resources.
Condemning foreign companies for “pillaging” the country, he called to renegotiate contracts to ensure that 70% of all proceeds from mining went to the state, to fund social programs.
A few weeks before the presidential elections, Castillo said, “Let’s be clear: these decades of betrayal, corruption, and cynicism are the symptoms of this neoliberal system dedicated exclusively to the exploitation of our people and natural resources for the benefit of a few scoundrels”.
When he entered office, Castillo was very limited in what he could do politically. The right-wing opposition had a majority in the congress, and they were hellbent on destabilizing and eventually removing him with a presidential “vacancy”. They used Peru’s legislature and the heavily politicized and corrupt judiciary to launch constant attacks against Castillo, as part of a campaign of systematic persecution and lawfare.
But Castillo did what he could. The president announced a “second agrarian reform” and declared, “We are rescuing the resources of the country for all Peruvians”. He explained his goal: “We want our natural resources to directly benefit the people“.
Presidente @PedroCastilloTe: "Hoy rescatamos los recursos del país para todos los peruanos. El guano de las islas permitirá que los agricultores solventen a las familias más necesitadas como parte de la Segunda Reforma Agraria". #SiempreConElPueblo pic.twitter.com/MpmTebnJjN
— Presidencia del Perú ?? (@presidenciaperu) February 27, 2022
Castillo’s government made plans with left-wing President Gustavo Petro in neighboring Colombia to develop gas infrastructure in Peru and expand internal use.
This was part of Castillo’s progressive economic model of import substitution industrialization, which aimed to grow local industry and boost domestic consumption, so Peru would not rely exclusively on low value-added exports.
Immediately after ousting Castillo, however, Peru’s coup regime returned to the neoliberal economic model of the Washington Consensus, prioritizing foreign corporate investment over internal development.
The Ministry of Energy and Mines tweeted on January 18 that it had just conducted a “high-level institutional dialogue between Peru and the United States, which addressed themes of development of the mining sector”.
US Ambassador Kenna met with Peru’s minister of energy and mining, Óscar Vera Gargurevich; vice minister of hydrocarbons, Enrique Bisetti Solari; and vice minister of mining, Jaime Chávez Riva.
El ministro Vera agradeció el apoyo del Gobierno norteamericano en temas minero-energéticos y reiteró la voluntad del Gobierno Nacional, cuya prioridad es la masificación del gas natural, la seguridad energética y el desarrollo petroquímico en el sur del país. pic.twitter.com/qTc7Uv0Gvz
— Ministerio de Energía y Minas (@MinemPeru) January 19, 2023
The ministry said they discussed “themes linked to the expansion of natural gas, mining investments, and the development of renewable energies in our country”.
It added that “Minister Vera was grateful for the support from the North American government in mining-energy issues, and he reiterated the will of the national government, whose priority is the expansion of natural gas, energy security, and the petrochemical development of the south of the country”.
The Peruvian government itself has publicly stated that its economy relies heavily on mining and exporting minerals such as copper, zinc, gold, silver, lead, iron, and molybdenum.
Peru’s top exports in 2022 included copper, gold, and liquified natural gas (LNG).
The mining sector made up 58.7% of all of Peru’s exports, 57.1% of which were metals and 1.6% of which were non-metals, according to the most recent publicly available statistics, from January to October 2022.
Copper, gold, zinc, and iron represented 88.4% of the total value of Peru’s mineral exports, and 51.9% of the value of all of the country’s exports.
As of 2022, the largest corporate investor in Peru’s mining sector was the UK-based company Anglo American.
The second biggest investor was Compañía Minera Antamina S.A., a local firm that is majority owned by Australian and Swiss mining giants. The third was the US-Mexican Southern Copper Corporation.
Local communities in the South American country, especially those of Indigenous descent, have long protested the mining companies that devastate their environment.
These rural communities were the base of support for President Castillo. Since the coup, they have organized massive protests, demanding that he be freed, that new elections be held, and that the government convene a constituent assembly to write a new constitution, to replace the current one that was inherited from the former US-backed far-right dictatorship of Alberto Fujimori.
After minerals, Peru’s other top export is natural gas – and more specifically liquified natural gas (LNG).
Peru’s gas sector saw a huge boom in 2022, with LNG exports increasing by 85% in the first eight months of the year, in comparison with the same period in 2021.
One of the main reasons for this surge was Europe’s sky-high demand for gas.
Before 2022, most of Peru’s LNG had gone to Asia (primarily Japan, South Korea, and China). But as tensions between NATO and Russia escalated in late 2021 and early 2022, and the EU moved to boycott Russian energy, this drastically shifted.
The vast majority of Peru’s LNG exports went to Europe in 2022, primarily to Britain and Spain.
In months like April, May, and August, all of Peru’s LNG exports went to Europe, according to data published by the state company Perúpetro.
Peru’s LNG exports in 2022, by region
Peru’s LNG exports are overseen by a consortium of foreign corporations including Britain’s Shell, the US Hunt Oil Company, Japan’s Marubeni Corporation, and South Korea’s SK Group.
While Peru only exports a relatively small amount of LNG when compared to the United States – which quickly established itself as the world’s top LNG exporter in 2022 – the South American nation has become an important energy partner for Europe.
In its attempt to reduce trade with Russia, Spain increased its imports of LNG from the Americas – including the US, Peru, and Trinidad and Tobago – by 77.4% in 2022. (Spain boosted its imports of US LNG specifically by 93.4% in 2022.)
Ironically, by pledging to boycott Russian oil, Spain also ended up increasing its imports of more expensive Russian LNG by 37% in 2022.
At the same time, from the beginning of 2021 to mid-2022, the price of natural gas skyrocketed by 700%.
Foreign companies have made a killing in Peru’s mining sector.
In promotional materials urging more foreign investment, the Peruvian government boasted that the planet’s three largest mining corporations are active in the country: BHP Group, of Australia; Rio Tinto, of Britain and Australia; and Glencore, of Switzerland.
The Ministry of Energy and Mines wrote with pride in 2018: “The world’s most important companies in the mining sector are making investments in our country. Due to our mineral reserves, Peru is a market that is always taken into account by these companies when they decide their investment budgets in exploration and exploitation”.
Many local mining companies in Peru are owned by foreign corporate giants.
The second-largest investor in mining in Peru, the Compañía Minera Antamina (Antamina Mining Company in English), was 33.75% owned by BHP, another 33.75% owned by Glencore, 22.5% by Canada’s Teck Resources, and 10% by Japan’s Mitsubishi, as of 2018.
The Compañía Minera Antamina operates in Peru’s western Áncash region, and was responsible for roughly one-fifth of national copper production and 15% of national silver production in 2018.
Peru was the source of 20% of BHP’s global production of copper in 2017, as well as 50% of its global production of silver and 100% of its global production of zinc.
The British-Australian Rio Tinto corporation oversees the La Granja mining project in the northwestern Cajamarca region. Peru was the source of 15% of Rio Tinto’s global production of copper in 2017.
Other large transnational corporations active in Peru’s mining sector include the US company Freeport-McMoRan and Mexican Southern Copper Corporation, both of which are based in Phoenix, Arizona; as well as Canada’s Barrick Gold.
But this is just to mention existing mining operations. Foreign companies are also heavily invested in exploration for new projects.
The top foreign countries whose companies are investing in mining exploration in Peru are Canada, Brazil, Switzerland, Britain, the US, Japan, and Australia, according to a 2022 report from the Ministry of Energy and Mines.
Companies located in Peru are responsible for 37.8% of investment in exploration, but this figure can be misleading because many of these firms are owned by much bigger transnational corporations.
As of 2022, 43.4% of exploration investment went into looking for gold, 36.1% for copper, 11.2% for zinc, 8.3% for silver, and 1% for tin.
Mining exploration projects are taking place all across western Peru.
Many of these regions, which are underdeveloped and suffer from high rates of poverty, have seen large protests against the US-backed coup regime and in support of Castillo.
|
Write an article about: Latin America is on the frontlines of the US new cold war on China and Russia. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Avril Haines, Bolivia, China, Cold War Two, Cuba, Donald Trump, James Mattis, Joe Biden, Juan Gonzalez, Matt Gaetz, new cold war, Nicaragua, Russia, Taiwan, Ukraine, Venezuela | The United States has turned Latin America and the Caribbean into a key battlefield in its new cold war on China and Russia, invoking the 200-year-old colonialist Monroe Doctrine to justify aggressive interventionist policies.
You can listen to a podcast version of this article here.
The United States has turned Latin America and the Caribbean into a key battlefield in its new cold war on China and Russia.
Washington’s hybrid war on Beijing and Moscow took shape in 2018, when the Pentagon published a National Defense Strategy identifying the two Eurasian powers as the biggest “threats” to US national security.
Following the attacks on September 11, 2001, the US government had shaped its foreign policy around a so-called “war on terror.” But Defense Secretary James Mattis announced in January 2018 that the Pentagon had changed its priorities, and “great power competition, not terrorism, is now the primary focus of U.S. national security.”
The US director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, echoed this perspective in a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing this March. Summarizing the US intelligence community’s 2022 Annual Threat Assessment report, Haines said China and Russia constitute the top “threats” to Washington, and she emphasized that Beijing in particular “remains an unparalleled priority for the intelligence community.”
In this Cold War Two, Latin America has been caught in Washington’s crosshairs.
After Russia invaded Western ally Ukraine on February 24, the US military responded by threatening China and Venezuela.
On February 26, the US Navy sent a guided-missile destroyer warship through the narrow Taiwan Strait, in a move that the Chinese government condemned as an “adventurist” and “provocative action” seeking “to bolster the ‘Taiwan independence’ forces.”
Then on February 27 and 28, the US Navy held anti-submarine warfare exercises with the Colombian military, using a nuclear submarine for the first time ever. Making it clear that this was a threat aimed at Beijing’s leftist ally in Caracas, the exercises were held in the Caribbean Sea, near the border of Venezuela.
Colombia is the first and only special “partner” that the US-led NATO military alliance has in Latin America.
A post shared by U.S. Southern Command (@ussouthcom)
Washington’s economic warfare on Moscow has also targeted Latin America.
US President Joe Biden’s special assistant for Latin America, Juan S. González, revealed in an interview on February 25 that the devastating new sanctions imposed on Russia over its intervention in Ukraine also seek to hurt the economies of Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba.
González, who serves as the US National Security Council’s senior director for the Western Hemisphere, stated clearly, “The sanctions against Russia are so robust that they will have an impact on those governments that have economic affiliations with Russia, and that is by design. So Venezuela is going to start feeling that pressure. Nicaragua is going to feel that pressure, along with Cuba.”
These three Latin American nations with socialist governments were demonized as the so-called “Troika of Tyranny” by John Bolton, the Iraq War architect and neoconservative national security advisor for former president Donald Trump.
The fact that Latin America is on the frontlines of Washington’s new cold war is also reflected in US officials’ increasing references to the Monroe Doctrine, an 1823 declaration that the United States considers the region to essentially be its colonial backyard.
Bolton invoked this two-century-old colonialist doctrine to justify Washington’s numerous coup attempts against Venezuela’s democratically elected socialist government.
Trump himself also cited the Monroe Doctrine in his speech at the United Nations General Assembly in 2018.
“It has been the formal policy of our country since President Monroe that we reject the interference of foreign nations in this hemisphere,” Trump stated on the world stage. The US president was referencing Latin America’s bilateral relations with China and Russia, which he portrayed as “threats.”
Trump’s secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, the former CEO of US oil giant ExxonMobil, likewise praised the Monroe Doctrine, while ironically claiming China is the one with “imperial” ambitions in the region.
When Argentina’s center-left President Alberto Fernández took a historic trip to China and Russia this February, to try to find ways around the $44.5 billion in odious debt that his country has been trapped in by the US-controlled International Monetary Fund (IMF), the hawks in Washington were furious.
Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, a key Trump ally representing northern Florida, characterized Fernández’s trip as a sign of a “significant threat to our nation accelerating rapidly close to home,” fuming that “Argentina, a critical nation and economy in the Americas, has just lashed itself to the Chinese Communist Party, by signing on to the One Belt One Road Initiative.”
On the floor of the House of Representatives on February 7, Gaetz angrily described Argentina’s new partnership with China as “a direct challenge to the Monroe Doctrine.”
Republican Congressman Matt Gaetz, a key ally of Donald Trump, invoked the 200-year-old colonialist Monroe Doctrine on the floor of the Congress and called Argentina a "threat" to US "security" because of its alliance with China.
Read more here: https://t.co/aCiWQ7fGOc pic.twitter.com/xyVYkxfFT9
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) February 8, 2022
Yet this colonialist rhetoric is by no means limited to Republicans. The Democratic president has made similar comments.
At a press conference on January 19, Biden referred to Latin America as the US “front yard,” stating, “We used to talk about, when I was a kid in college, about ‘America’s backyard.’ It’s not America’s backyard. Everything south of the Mexican border is America’s front yard.”
For his part, Biden has continued most of Trump’s policies in Latin America, expanding illegal US sanctions on Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, while still recognizing unelected coup leader Juan Guaidó as supposed “president” (even as the Biden administration pressures Caracas to make up for sanctioned Russian oil).
Washington has strong-armed governments in Latin America and the Caribbean, pushing them to reduce or even cut off their ties with China and Russia.
While China has become the largest trading partner for many countries in the region, the United States has resorted to blackmail to desperately try to stop the expansion of Huawei 5G networks, even when nations don’t have suitable technological alternatives.
Right-wing opposition leaders in Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Bolivia have joined Washington in demonizing Beijing, while vilifying Moscow too, demanding that their governments cut ties with the Eurasian powers and instead strengthen relations with (or rather subordinate themselves to) the United States.
In its Second Cold War, the United States sees Latin America and the Caribbean as especially strategic because it is one of the few regions of the world where countries still recognize the independence of Taiwan.
Taiwan is part of the People’s Republic of China, and 93% of UN member states recognize this fact – including the United States, at least on paper, although not in practice.
Yet 13 countries (plus the Vatican) consider Taiwan to be an independent state. All 13 are small, making up just 0.2% of global gross domestic product, but eight of them are in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Belize, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Paraguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines still have formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan.
These are all the friends Taiwan has left in the world https://t.co/DEnhigr0d0
— Bloomberg Next China (@next_china) December 10, 2021
US and Taiwanese authorities have used the carrot (favorable economic deals) and the stick (blackmail) to prevent these countries from normalizing relations with the People’s Republic of China.
The US government supports secessionists in Taiwan, and has sent military personnel there to train them to eventually fight a war with mainland China. The number of US troops in Taiwan has doubled under Biden.
Washington’s goal is to turn Taiwan into a neo-colonial outpost, hoping to build a large US military base there with nuclear weapons aimed at the mainland, as it had from the 1950s to the 1970s, at the height of the First Cold War.
Despite Washington’s intense pressure campaign, many parts of Latin America are deepening their integration with China and Russia – just as Beijing and Moscow are bolstering their own strategic partnership.
Cuba officially incorporated into China’s massive global infrastructure project, the Belt and Road Initiative, this December. Nicaragua then followed suit in January. Venezuela had already joined years before.
The right-wing US-backed regimes that governed Nicaragua in the neoliberal era, from 1990 to 2006, had cut ties with the People’s Republic of China and formed a close alliance with Taiwan.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government reversed this policy, re-establishing relations with Beijing this December, then promptly signing a series of important agreements for Chinese help in building public housing and infrastructure, including hospitals, renewable energy, roads, railways, and ports, as well as water and public health systems.
In addition to being part of the anti-imperialist Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA), Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Bolivia have joined China and Russia as key members of the Group of Friends in Defense of the Charter of the United Nations, a diplomatic alliance aimed at challenging imperialist hegemony and unipolarity.
This Group of Friends reflects a new political pole that is being developed to push back against the aggression of the US-EU-NATO imperialist bloc. This new cold war alignment was clearly reflected in the March 2 UN General Assembly vote on Russia’s military incursion in Ukraine.
The countries in Latin America with socialist and anti-imperialist governments – Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Bolivia – either abstained or did not vote for the resolution condemning Russia.
Other nations with socialist governments – China, Vietnam, Lao, and the DPRK – or which waged successful anti-colonialist revolutionary struggles – such as Iran, Eritrea, Algeria, South Africa, Angola, Syria, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique – likewise abstained or voted against the anti-Russian resolution, while the Western imperialist powers and their allies and proxies voted for it.
These are the fault lines of the new cold war.
Multipolarista editor Benjamin Norton discussed this subject at the March 19 event “21st Century Socialism: China and Latin America on the Frontline,” organized by Friends of Socialist China.
You can watch video of the talk below:
|
Write an article about: Inside Nicaragua’s Sandinista Revolution: 43 years resisting imperialism. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Daniel Ortega, FSLN, imperialism, Nicaragua, Rosario Murillo, Sandinistas, socialism, Socialism of the 21st Century | Benjamin Norton reports from inside Nicaragua on the 43rd anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution. This mini-documentary explores the Sandinista Front’s emphasis on social programs, popular participation, anti-imperialism, and internationalism.
Multipolarista editor Benjamin Norton reports from inside Nicaragua on the 43rd anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution. This mini-documentary explores the Sandinista Front’s emphasis on social programs, popular participation, anti-imperialism, and internationalism.
LYRICS: This is the war that can’t be held back, the ongoing war against the oppressor. What is the symbol? The people never give in. Never! What is the symbol? FSLN! (Sandinista National Liberation Front)
BENJAMIN NORTON: Hey everyone, I’m Ben Norton of Multipolarista. I am right now in the heart of the Nicaraguan capital, Managua. Today is July 19. It is the anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution.
On this day in 1979, the socialist Sandinista Front overthrew the US-backed right-wing dictatorship of Somoza, here in this plaza behind me.
And President Daniel Ortega, who led the Sandinista Front in the revolution, and returned to power through democratic elections, he is going to give a speech today talking about the importance of the revolution years after it succeeded.
President Ortega emphasized the centrality of sovereignty and anti-imperialism for the Sandinista Front. He reflected on the long history of the United States meddling in Nicaragua’s internal affairs, trying to overthrow the Sandinistas and reverse their revolution.
DANIEL ORTEGA: Why does the United States behave in that way? And when we say the United States, we are speaking of the North American rulers. Because when they dropped the atomic bomb above Hiroshima, they did not ask the North American people if the bomb should be dropped.
And they did a count of how many thousands the bomb could kill. And the higher the number was, that they calculated that the bomb could kill, the happier and more excited they were.
And they went ahead and dropped it, and killed, in one blow, hundreds of thousands of civilians, children, adults, because they dropped it on a city.
Right there, they killed, murdered many more civilians than all of those who could have died now in this war that the empires have started to try to destroy the struggle that humanity is carrying out to bring about the end of hegemony, and to create multipolarity on our planet.
That is the battle that is being fought over there in Ukraine, where Europe and the United States don’t want — they don’t want to see China growing economically.
It is from there, it is the evil that those powers have shown throughout history, the powers that colonized Africa, Asia, Latin America, the powers that brought slaves from Africa to these regions, to sell like them animals in slave markets.
When you asked me, and when it was asked, why not reach an understanding? They [the US] are not prepared to reach an understanding. They are prepared for nothing more than imposing, imposing, occupying, bombing, killing, as they have done throughout history.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Behind me, you can see hundreds of activists from the Sandinista Youth. They are the lifeblood of the Sandinista Front.
They’re grassroots activists. They’re all volunteers. And they are motivated by their political ideology and the project of socialism and anti-imperialism.
And here, when President Ortega and Vice President Rosario Murillo speak, they’re always joined by the youth, representing how important the future of the country is for continuing the Sandinista Revolution.
On July 18, tens of thousands of Nicaraguans flooded the plaza in the middle of Managua, and partied all night, until the early hours of the morning on July 19, celebrating the anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution.
In hundreds of humble barrios across the country, Nicaraguans held community block parties called vigilias to commemorate the revolution. This was a celebration held in the working-class neighborhood of San Antonio, Managua.
MUSICIAN: For more progress! For more houses for the people! For more free education! For more free healthcare! For more modern hospitals! For the best roads in Central America! For better technologies! For the subsidies for our peasants!
For peace, freedom, security, dignity! Long live Nicaragua! Long live the Sandinista Front!
BENJAMIN NORTON: Grassroots gatherings like these show that there remains massive popular support for the revolution, 43 years after the Sandinista Front first took power.
A June 2022 survey by the most respected mainstream polling firm in Nicaragua, M&R Consultores, found that President Daniel Ortega has a 77% approval rating, and 70% of people think he is leading the country in the right direction.
While the US government and foreign corporate media outlets constantly demonize Nicaragua, 73% of actual Nicaraguans say that Ortega is a democratically elected leader following the laws of his country, whereas just 20% agree with Washington’s claims that he is supposedly authoritarian.
Overall, 68% of Nicaraguans support the leftist Sandinista Front party, whereas 17% back the right-wing opposition.
The results of polls like these make total sense when you see the incredible enthusiasm that average working-class Nicaraguans show for the Sandinista Revolution. Everywhere you go, you see people driving with FSLN flags and wearing red-and-black clothing.
This support is especially strong in humble barrios, where low-income workers have benefited most from the social programs of the Sandinista Front, which has provided free socialized healthcare, high-quality education, and public housing projects.
The Sandinista government has drastically expanded access to electricity and clean water in impoverished areas that had been abandoned and ignored by previous right-wing governments. Today, Nicaragua has some of the best infrastructure in Latin America. And perhaps most important of all, it provides security and safety in a region that has been plagued by violence and organized crime.
At the 43rd anniversary celebration, Nicaraguan Vice President Rosario Murillo spoke about the ongoing legacy of the revolution. She also condemned US imperialism and emphasized the importance of anti-imperialism for the Sandinista Front.
ROSARIO MURILLO: Today we are walking in the path of that legacy, the legacy of everyone who physically is not here, or physically were not able to see the victory on July 19, 43 years ago, but they were there, and here they are, and they live on, because they are the ones who guide us, with their example, with their force of revolution, force of bravery, anti-imperialist force.
Because here, we have endured it (imperialism), but we have also expelled it, but we have also expelled it, and we have defeated it. at every moment.
Here, that yankee, the enemy of humanity, has met his match.
Here, no one surrenders. Here, we neither sell out nor surrender.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega just spoke tonight alongside some of the most important allies of Nicaragua, including representatives from China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba.
He also dedicated the 43rd anniversary of the revolution to the prime minister of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Ralph Gonsalves. And this shows the important alliance between countries in Latin America and the Caribbean.
And it shows how Nicaragua and the Caribbean nations are helping and leading an effort to replace the US-dominated Organization of American States, the OAS, with the Community of Latin American and Caribbean states, CELAC.
RALPH GONSALVES: When the revolution triumphed I celebrated in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. Because the revolution in Nicaragua is our revolution.
I come from a small country in our hemisphere. But this small country believes in and subscribes to large principles: the defense of sovereignty and independence, non-interference and non-intervention in our internal affairs.
Now the empire doesn’t understand that. You have a country [the US] which is 350 million people. They are reputedly the strongest military force in the world. Nicaragua is 6.2 million people, a country in Central America seeking to develop itself and its people.
Why in God’s name, with a country so large, with so many resources, with such military strength, why would you want to pick on a small country like Nicaragua? I ask myself that question every day.
And know always, that with solidarity among the people and across our Latin American and Caribbean, and the world, no power, no weapon formed against the people of Nicaragua can ever prosper.
BENJAMIN NORTON: At the anniversary celebration, Ortega criticized those calling for him to hold a dialogue with the US government. He argued that Washington cannot be trusted, because it would be like negotiating with the devil.
DANIEL ORTEGA: And they [the imperialists] waged war among themselves, to take over the world. It was war between the European powers, before there was a European Union.
You know it, dear brother. England, France, Spain, wanting to dominate all Europe, and dominating all of Europe, later taking over Africa, Asia, all of the Americas.
A hegemonic mentality. A selfish mentality. A mentality that has nothing to do with being Christian, nothing to do with being Christian. And all of that, they did it with the blessing of the different churches that existed in that time.
When they asked Roosevelt, who was a good friend of Somoza, why he was so gracious and friendly with Somoza, Somoza being a criminal, Roosevelt responded, in English, “He is a son of a…” How do you say it? “He’s a son of a bitch.” Yes, that is how he replied. “But he is OUR son (of a bitch).”
Yes, “He is a son (of a bitch), but he is OUR son (of a bitch).” That was the cynical response of the yankee.
I’m answering why there is no dialogue. Dialogue is impossible. Impossible. Dialogue is for one person to put a noose on your neck, and you to put your neck in the noose.
Look, dear brother, what dialogue can you have with the devil? As Che said, the yankees, the imperialists, you can’t trust them even a little bit, not even a little bit. Because it will end you. It will end you.
BENJAMIN NORTON: At the celebration of the 43rd anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution, President Ortega and Vice President Murillo were joined by representatives of some of the country’s most important allies, including China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba.
Also on stage at the anniversary celebration was a diplomat from the new left-wing government in neighboring Honduras. Vice Foreign Minister Gerardo Torres Zelaya explained why it is important for Honduras and Nicaragua to strengthen their relations.
GERARDO TORRES: Nicaragua and Honduras are neighbors. They are countries that have historically been brothers. We share our largest border with Nicaragua. And our relationship is respectful, fraternal, and one of cooperation.
We are here as a country, as a government, saying that the message is that Central America should integrate itself, grow closer together, and work for the common good.
BENJAMIN NORTON: I spoke to Edgardo García Aguilar, who leads a leftist peasant organization called the Association of Rural Workers, or ATC. The ATC is independent from the Nicaraguan state, but it strongly supports the Sandinista government and the revolution. Edgardo explained why.
EDGARDO GARCÍA: 43 years since July 19, we reaffirm the commitment of the generation of that time [1979], when the student youth protested, to tell Somoza that the situation was not fair, and that a change was needed.
There was no attention to the demands of the people, to the aspirations of the youth, to the plight of the peasants. There was no attention to the need for literacy. There was only support for the oligarchs.
Somoza said that he had a baton for the opposition, lead [bullets] for the rebels, and money for the oligarchy. And we insisted that we needed to have our rights.
We always have to be in the struggle. Because it is in struggle that we can lead to new times and changes. And the struggle against covid, the struggle against poverty, the struggle for work, the struggle for electrification, the struggle for social services, it is a constant struggle that is in the conscience of all the popular sectors, from the peasants, the Indigenous, the students, to the commercial sector, of small producers, and even some patriotic sectors of private businesses.
We know that we have that struggle to provide solutions, to meet people’s needs, to rise out of poverty, and to maintain anti-imperialism, because imperialism wants to crush us.
Long live the revolution on its 43rd anniversary!
|
Write an article about: Burkina Faso’s new president condemns imperialism, quotes Che Guevara, allies with Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Burkina Faso, Cuba, Daniel Ortega, Fidel Castro, France, Ibrahim Traoré, Iran, Nicaragua, Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba, Roch Kaboré, Thomas Sankara, Venezuela | Burkina Faso’s new President Ibrahim Traoré has vowed to fight imperialism and neocolonialism. Pledging a “refoundation of the nation”, invoking revolutionary leader Thomas Sankara, and quoting Che Guevara, his government has allied with Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Cuba.
The new president of Burkina Faso, Ibrahim Traoré, has vowed to fight imperialism and neocolonialism, invoking his country’s past revolutionary leader Thomas Sankara and quoting Che Guevara.
The West African nation has also formed close diplomatic ties with the revolutionary governments in Nicaragua, Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran, as well as with NATO’s arch-rival Russia.
In January 2022, a group of nationalist military officers in Burkina Faso toppled the president, Roch Kaboré, a wealthy banker who had fostered close ties with the country’s former colonizer, France, where he was educated.
The military officers declared a government run by what they call the Patriotic Movement for Safeguard and Restoration (MPSR), led by a new president, Paul-Henri Sandaogo Damiba.
They pledged to seek true independence from French hegemony, condemning the neocolonial policies and economic, political, and military control that Paris still exercises over Francophone West Africa.
Burkina Faso ended its decades-long military agreement with France, expelling the hundreds of French troops that had been in the country for years.
The new president, Damiba, was initially popular. But support waned as he was unable to defeat the deadly Salafi-jihadist insurgents that have destabilized the country.
In September 2022, discontent led to a subsequent coup in Burkina Faso, which brought to power another nationalist military leader named Ibrahim Traoré. He was just 34 at the time, making him one of the world’s youngest leaders.
Burkina Faso’s President Ibrahim Traoré
Traoré has pledged to carry out a “refoundation of the nation” and comprehensive “modernization”, to quell violent extremism, fight corruption, and “totally reform our system of government”.
The charismatic Burkinabè leader frequently ends his speeches with the chant “La patrie ou la mort, nous vaincrons!”, the French translation of the official motto of revolutionary Cuba: “Patria o muerte, venceremos!” – “Homeland or death, we will prevail!”
As president, Traoré has brought back some of the revolutionary ideas of Thomas Sankara.
Sankara was a Marxist Burkinabè military officer and committed pan-Africanist who ascended to power in a 1983 coup.
Sankara launched a socialist revolution, transforming the impoverished country through land reform, infrastructure development, and expansive public health and literacy programs.
Under Sankara’s leadership, Burkina Faso also challenged French neocolonialism and pursued an anti-imperialist foreign policy, forming alliances with revolutionary struggles across the Global South.
Burkina Faso’s revolutionary former President Thomas Sankara
These leftist policies were reversed in 1987, when Sankara was overthrown and killed in another coup, led by his former ally Blaise Compaoré – who subsequently moved hard to the right and allied with the United States and France, ruling through rigged elections until 2014.
Today, Ibrahim Traoré is drawing heavily on the legacy of Sankara. He has made it clear that he wants West Africa, and the continent as a whole, to be free of Western neocolonialism.
This July, the Russian government held a Russia-Africa Summit in Saint Petersburg. Traoré was the first African leader to arrive to the conference. There, he delivered a fiery anti-imperialist speech.
“We are the forgotten peoples of the world. And we are here now to talk about the future of our countries, about how things will be tomorrow in the world that we are seeking to build, and in which there will be no interference in our internal affairs”, Traoré said, according to a partial transcript published by Russian state media outlet TASS.
TASS reported:
In his speech, the Burkinabe head of state also focused on sovereignty and the struggle against imperialism. “Why does resource-rich Africa remain the poorest region of the world? We ask these questions and get no answers. However, we have the opportunity to build new relationships that will help us build a better future for Burkina Faso,” the president said. African countries have suffered for decades from a barbaric and brutal form of colonialism and imperialism, which could be called a modern form of slavery, he stressed.
“However, a slave who does not fight [for his freedom] is not worthy of any indulgence. The heads of African states should not behave like puppets in the hands of the imperialists. We must ensure that our countries are self-sufficient, including as regards food supplies, and can meet all of the needs of our peoples. Glory and respect to our peoples; victory to our peoples! Homeland or death!” Traore summed up, quoting the words of legendary Cuban revolutionary leader Ernesto “Che” Guevara. The 35-year-old president of Burkina Faso was attired in a camouflage uniform and red beret during the summit.
On July 29, Traoré had a private meeting in Saint Petersburgh with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
In their talks, the Burkinabè leader praised the Soviet Union for defeating Nazism in World War II.
Burkina Faso’s President Ibrahim Traoré meets with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Saint Petersburgh on July 29, 2023
The new nationalist government in Burkina Faso has also sought to deepen its ties with revolutionary movements in Latin America.
In May, the West African nation’s prime minister, Apollinaire Joachim Kyélem de Tambèla, traveled to Venezuela.
Tambèla met with Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, who pledged to “advance in cooperation, solidarity, and growth… building a solid fraternal relation”.
Con el objetivo de avanzar en la cooperación, solidaridad y crecimiento de ambas naciones, me reuní con el Primer Ministro de Burkina Faso, Apollinaire Kyélem de Tambéla. Tengo confianza que con esfuerzo y voluntad, seguiremos construyendo una sólida relación fraterna. pic.twitter.com/5mEXzzXIec
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) May 12, 2023
In July, the Burkinabè prime minister traveled to Nicaragua to celebrate the 44th anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution.
Tambèla attended the July 19 celebration of the revolution in Managua, at the invitation of Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega.
Burkina Faso’s Prime Minister Apollinaire Joachim Kyélem de Tambèla speaks at the 44th anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution in Managua, Nicaragua on July 19, 2023
Following the September 2022 coup in Burkina Faso, the new president, Traoré, surprised many observers by choosing as his prime minister a longtime follower of Thomas Sankara, Apollinaire Joachim Kyélem de Tambèla.
Tambèla was an ally of Sankara during the Burkinabè revolution. When Sankara came to power in the 1980s, Tambèla organized a solidarity movement and sought international support for the new leftist government.
Tambèla is a pan-Africanist and has been affiliated with communist and left-wing organizations.
Traoré said in a speech in December that Tambèla will help to oversee the process of the “refoundation of the nation“.
By appointing Tambèla as prime minister, Traoré tangibly showed his commitment to reviving the revolutionary legacy of Sankara.
In his remarks at the anniversary of the Sandinista Revolution, Tambèla discussed the historical legacy of solidarity between the revolution in Burkina Faso and that of Nicaragua.
Tambèla recalled that Sankara visited Nicaragua in 1986, and the Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega visited Burkina Faso that same year.
When he spoke at the United Nations General Assembly in 1984, Sankara declared, “I wish also to feel close to my comrades of Nicaragua, whose ports are being mined, whose towns are being bombed and who, despite all, face up with courage and lucidity to their fate. I suffer with all those in Latin America who are suffering from imperialist domination”.
In 1984 and 1986, Sankara also visited Cuba, where he met with revolutionary President Fidel Castro.
Burkina Faso’s President Thomas Sankara with Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega
“For people of my generation, there are things that unite us with Nicaragua, Augusto César Sandino, the Sandinista National Liberation Front and Commander Daniel Ortega”, Burkinabè Prime Minister Tambèla said in his speech in Managua on July 19, 2023.
“We have learned to know Nicaragua. When the liberation struggle began, I was small, but we followed, day by day, the context of Nicaragua’s liberation. I went in July of ’79, and when they entered Managua we were happy, people of my age celebrated that”, he recalled.
“And then, when Thomas Sankara came to power, Daniel Ortega and the Sandinista Revolution was something happy for us; we as students studied a lot the history of Nicaragua, we followed its evolution”.
Tambèla added that Burkina Faso supported Nicaragua in its International Court of Justice case against the United States. Washington was found guilty of illegally sponsoring far-right “Contra” death squads, which waged a terror war against the leftist government, as well as putting mines in Nicaragua’s ports. (Yet, although Nicaragua won the case in 1986, the US government has still to this day refused to pay the Central American nation a single cent of the reparations that it legally owes it.)
“Nicaragua’s struggle is also that of our people”, Tambèla stressed.
In his July 19 speech, the Burkinabè prime minister also sent special greetings to the diplomatic delegations from Cuba, Venezuela, and Iran.
“We have very close relations with Cuba”, Tambèla added. “President Fidel Castro has been and was a very important person for the revolution in Africa; we have excellent memories, both of Cuba and of President Fidel Castro”.
The 44th anniversary of Nicaragua's Sandinista Revolution this July 19 was dedicated to Burkina Faso's former revolutionary leader Thomas Sankara
Burkina Faso's current PM spoke at the ceremony, reaffirming solidarity
Sankara visited Nicaragua during the US terror war in 1984 pic.twitter.com/Kkng2cENR3
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) July 20, 2023
|
Write an article about: ALBA secretary: Summit of the Americas is ‘failure,’ US ‘empire is losing its power’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | ALBA, Bolivarian Alliance, Bolivia, Caribbean, coup, Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Sacha Llorenti, Venezuela | The secretary of the Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA), Sacha Llorenti, discusses Latin America and the Caribbean’s rebellion against the US government’s exclusionary Summit of the Americas, and growing efforts at regional integration against imperialism.
Multipolarista host Benjamin Norton interviewed the secretary of the Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA), Sacha Llorenti, about Latin America’s rebellion against the US government’s Summit of the Americas.
Presidents of eight countries in the region boycotted the conference, which opened in Los Angeles, California on June 6.
Llorenti discussed ALBA’s alternative summit in Cuba, efforts at achieving economic and political integration of Latin America and the Caribbean, and the importance of unity against imperialism.
“We don’t consider this a summit, nor of the Americas,” he said. Llorenti condemned the Monroe Doctrine, US sanctions, and the “superiority complex that runs through US foreign policy.”
“Things are changing,” he added. “What we are seeing is an empire which is losing its power.”
A transcript of the interview follows below. It has been lightly edited for clarity.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Hello everyone, this is Ben Norton, and you are listening to or watching the Multipolarista podcast. This is a very special episode. I have the great privilege today of speaking with the executive secretary of the Bolivarian Alliance, the ALBA.
The full name is the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America. It’s also an economic alliance, and the full name is ALBA-TCP, which is also a “Trade Agreement for the People.”
This is an economic alliance created by countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, to support independence from imperialism, sovereignty, and regional integration.
And today, I’m speaking with the secretary, the executive secretary of the ALBA, Sacha Llorenti. He is a former Bolivian diplomat and minister. He served as Bolivia’s ambassador to the United Nations, and as a minister under Bolivia’s former president, Evo Morales.
Today, we are going to be speaking about the ongoing Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles, California. This has been a diplomatic disaster for the U.S. government, which is hosting the summit.
At least eight countries in Latin America have boycotted – their heads of state have boycotted this summit, including the presidents of Mexico, Honduras, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Bolivia.
And Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba are not attending either. The U.S. government refused to invite them, but they also said that they don’t even want to attend this summit, which they do not consider legitimate.
There are also reports about members of the Caribbean and the Caribbean community, CARICOM, who said that they would potentially boycott the summit, which is going on right now. Today is June 8. It started on June 6, and is going on this week in Los Angeles, California.
So unfortunately, Secretary Llorenti does not have a lot of time today, so I’m going to go straight to him.
Secretary Llorenti, you are the the leader of the ALBA, the Bolivarian Alliance. Can you talk about what the ALBA’s position has been on the Summit of the Americas? And can you give a general response to how you think the U.S. government has managed this?
SACHA LLORENTI: Thank you very much. I want to thank you very much for the opportunity. First of all, we don’t consider this is a summit, nor of the Americas, because of the arbitrary decision of the host country, in this case the United States, to exclude some nations, countries of the Americas, of Latin America and the Caribbean, from this meeting.
The ALBA, just to give you some information about our organization, is a multilateral, subregional organization that gathers 10 countries from Latin America and also the Caribbean. It was established in 2004 by Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro. And then eight other countries joined our organization.
We held a summit of ALBA-TCP on May 27, just a few days ago. And in our declaration, we reject the exclusions and the discriminatory treatment in the so-called Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles.
I think that, for any honest analyst, this meeting that was convened by the United States has failed already, not just because of the exclusions, but also because of the reaction of most countries of Latin America and the Caribbean.
You mentioned a few. Everything started with the statements made by the president of Mexico, followed by the president of Honduras, of Bolivia. They have decided to take a strong position against this exclusion.
CARICOM, as you also mentioned, the Community of Caribbean States, had a meeting of foreign ministers a few weeks ago. And they also called the United States for everyone to participate in this meeting.
And also the president of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean states, CELAC, who is right now the president of Argentina, has said that he is going to participate in the so-called summit, but he will represent the voice of Latin America and the Caribbean, condemning the decision of the host country, the United States, to exclude these three countries.
So it is a failure, not just because the reaction that it has caused in the region, but also because I think that everyone realizes that the United States government is not interested in integration. It’s not interested in human rights, nor democracy.
What they do is they try to use every single venue, every single opportunity, in order to help their hegemonic interests instead of integration. This is a good example of what we are facing these days.
And another thing that I want to also underline is that it is not just the discrimination against these three countries, but also against many representatives of civil society from different countries.
So it shows really how the United States government considers our region. They continue to consider Latin America and the Caribbean as their backyard.
A few days ago, Joe Biden said, “It’s not our backyard; it’s our front yard.” They don’t realize that we are not anybody’s back or front yard at all.
And I think it’s a mix of not understanding what’s happening, but also this superiority complex that runs through the U.S. foreign policy towards Latin American and the Caribbean.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Ambassador Llorenti, I would like to speak also about the countries that are attending.
I mentioned the boycott by the presidents of Mexico, Andrés Manuel López Obrador; and Honduras, the new left-wing president of Honduras, Xiomara Castro; and the president of Bolivia, Luis Arce; and also the president of Guatemala, Alejandro Giammattei, for different political reasons – he’s more conservative. But those are the presidents who are boycotting this summit.
Also the governments of Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua. Together, these countries represent over 200 million people.
I should also mention mention that there are reports that the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, is reportedly not attending.
So together, that’s more than 200 million people. In the region that is more than one-third of the population.
And the leaders who are attending are some of the leaders that are the most notorious for violating human rights.
I’m talking about Ivan Duque in Colombia, who is closely linked to drug trafficking. I’m also talking about the extremely right-wing president of Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, who has threatened sitting politicians, who has praised the Pinochet dictatorship.
So what do you think this says about the fact that the progressive governments in the region are, at least their heads of state are, refusing to participate, but some of the most reactionary elements, that violate human rights and do not respect popular democracy are participating in this summit?
Along with, I should mention, the country of Spain, which was invited, which is very much not in the Americas. The last time I looked, Spain is in Europe.
So what do you think that says about this this summit that’s being organized by the U.S. government?
SACHA LLORENTI: As I said before, it’s a failure. It’s the way they look at our region.
But it’s part of a plan. It is not something that comes out of the blue. The United States has a clear policy of trying to dismantle, to destroy, every single attempt at genuine, authentic integration.
What happened in South America with UNASUR, the unity of nations of the South. It was destroyed by right-wing governments. And of course, everyone also understands that the hand of the State Department was behind that.
Also the privatization of CELAC, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, I mean, until Mexico took over the presidency.
So it is part of a plan. They don’t want a proper unity or integration of Latin American and Caribbean states.
That’s why, what they are trying to do is to have the OAS and its secretary general to be, like it was pointed out by Cuban revolutionary Che, the Ministry of the Colonies.
And I think it even goes even beyond that. I think that we have to understand that Latin America and the Caribbean has a different agenda, has different interests, has even a different doctrine than the United States.
This is the confrontation that we have now. It is a two-centuries-old confrontation.
The Monroe Doctrine, that was published in 1823 – it’s going to be 200 years old next year – and the Bolivarian Doctrine, that is also 200 years old.
Those two doctrines are in confrontation, because of the incompatibility of their interests for 200 years.
And of course some countries of our region align themselves to the Monroe Doctrine, and some others to the Bolivarian Doctrine.
I believe that our venue for integration is not the Summit of the Americas. I believe that the true, authentic venue for us to get together is CELAC, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.
And a proposal has come out in the summit of ALBA. The president of Nicaragua, Daniel Ortega, and also President Maduro recently reiterated the proposal of having meetings with the United States, of course, and Canada, but in another kind of format.
CELAC has regular meetings with China, with Russia, with different countries. And I think that this kind of format could be established with the United States and Canada.
But we need some venue in which things are run by Latin America and the Caribbean countries and interests, not the US interests. Because, as I said, they are not aligned.
And just another thing on who is going on and who is not going. What I believe is that most of the leaders or representatives that are that are going are going to protest the situation.
And the ones that are not going, of course they are not going in protest of the decisions of the United States.
The summit is a failure. But I think that we have to understand that the integration will not be achieved through the Summit of the Americas.
Because from the beginning, from 1994 when the first summit was held, the purpose of the United States was to have a free market area in America.
And of course that failed. In 2005, in the summit held Mar del Plata in Argentina, when leaders such as Néstor Kirchner, Tabaré Vázquez, Lula da Silva, Hugo Chávez, had a strong position against the Free Trade Area of the Americas.
The main interests of the United States is to have control of Latin America and the Caribbean’s natural resources. That’s the first interest.
The second one is for the region to be the market for U.S. products, or companies, or multinational corporations.
Also, they want our workers for cheap labor.
And the whole reason of their interest is for them to control all the commercial, international commercial routes. That’s why the Panama Canal is so important. That’s why they did everything that they could in order to stop the project for the canal in Nicaragua.
And the fifth reason is for them to to punish everyone who does not obey their commands.
But things are changing in Latin America and the Caribbean. And the dignity which most of the countries are expressing in their rejection of the U.S. decisions is going to be the main and most important issue that will be discussed, or is being discussed in Los Angeles right now.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Secretary Llorenti, you mentioned that, just a few weeks ago, there was a summit held in Cuba of the members of the ALBA. These are countries in both Latin America and the Caribbean.
Can you talk about what was discussed in that summit and the final declaration that was published?
SACHA LLORENTI: Well, the declaration was a very important one. As I mentioned before, ALBA brings together the 10 countries. Allow me to mention them, because I think it’s important. It’s one-third of the whole Latin American and the Caribbean region.
It’s Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Antigua and Barbuda, Grenada, Dominica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
Those 10 countries gathered in Havana. And the first point that they adopted was the rejection of exclusions and the discriminatory treatment in the so-called Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles.
They pointed out that genuine regional integration should be made by the CELAC, the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States. And the underlined the the proclamation of Latin America and the Caribbean as a zone of peace.
That’s why the presence of US military bases is an aggression to this proclamation of our region as a zone of peace. Also the presence of NATO goes against this this proclamation.
So that’s that’s another point that was underlined in our summit.
The other thing is the the support for the right of all countries of the continent to be not just invited but also to participate in meetings such as the so-called Summit of the Americas.
Also, the ALBA has denounced the discriminatory treatment by the United States as the host country of the so-called Summit of the Americas against numerous representatives of the genuine civil society of our continent.
And also we rejected the unilateral coercive measures that the United States imposes against countries of our alliance. This goes against the principles of the UN Charter. It goes against international law, and against the principles of multilateralism as well.
We have to repeat every single time that the United States imposes a blockade, an embargo, against Cuba for more than six decades. That’s a crime against humanity. Also against Venezuela and Nicaragua.
And this is, I think, something that we should should always remember, that the United States government used the [Covid-19] pandemic as a weapon. They weaponized the pandemic against not just these three countries, but some others in the world. Because instead of trying to lift some of these illegal measures against the peoples of these countries, they used the pandemic in order to strengthen these illegal, unilateral coercive measures.
So the [ALBA] summit based itself in the principles and purposes of the United Nations charter, that the United States has committed itself to uphold, the same thing with international law.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Ambassador Llorenti, you mentioned that the U.S. government has gone out of its way supporting coups to try to prevent countries from integrating into the Bolivarian Alliance.
For instance, Honduras under President Manuel Zelaya was a member of the ALBA. There was a US-backed coup in 2009, and Honduras was removed from the ALBA.
Similarly, Ecuador had been part of the ALBA, and there was this betrayal, a kind of internal soft coup by Lenín Moreno against the former president, Rafael Correa. And he withdrew Ecuador from the ALBA.
And I would say, from studying this, that one of the main reasons that Washington has been afraid of the ALBA is that it proposes an economic alternative for the region, based on regional integration, based on bartering, and based on the creation of a new currency.
The ALBA did create a new currency for trade in the region, called the Sucre.
And we saw recent comments from the former president of Brazil Lula da Silva, who said that if he wins the October election, that he plans on creating a new currency in Latin America and the Caribbean for trade called the Sur.
Can you talk about attempts in the region to create a new currency, to integrate the economics of the region, and to create more independence from the U.S. dollar and U.S. hegemony?
SACHA LLORENTI: Yes, first of all, you mentioned many of the the countries in which the United States was part of a coup d’etat. I have to add Bolivia to that list.
What the OAS and the United States supported was a dictatorship in my own country. And, I mean, what happened in Bolivia was, of course, one of the latest examples of how the United States does not care about democracy.
They talk about democracy, but what they do is they organize and finance not just coups d’etat, but also the political instability in our countries.
We we have to ask ourselves for instance, who funded, who is funding the opposition in countries such as Nicaragua, or Cuba, or Venezuela? Through NGOs, directly, is the United States.
So they are the last ones to try to teach lessons on democracy or human rights.
Our countries, our peoples, know exactly what they have done for decades and decades in Latin America and the Caribbean.
And you mentioned the efforts in order to achieve a different kind of relationship in terms of economics or finances. That’s one of the goals of ALBA-TCP.
We have made tremendous advances in terms of having an economic relationship based on solidarity, not just profit. Petrocaribe is another example, in which the solidarity of Venezuela has been shown all over the region, in terms of providing energy in an affordable way for different countries.
The idea of having our own currency is, of course, one of our goals. And we were pleased by the declaration made by Lula da Silva. That’s an effort that we have to continue working on.
Because imperialism is not just the political control; imperialism is not just territorial control; imperialism is also very, very much linked to natural resources, to the financial system, to how the debt system works; it is very much related to the World Bank, to the International Monetary Fund, the way in which the dollar imposes its will on the whole world.
And things are changing. Things are changing, not just in Latin America and the Caribbean, but also in Asia and Africa.
So what we are seeing is an empire which is losing its power. And I think that this century will be a century in which we will see the decay U.S. imperialism.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Secretary Llorenti, in addition to being the executive secretary of the ALBA, you were previously a Bolivian minister under President Evo Morales, and Bolivia’s ambassador to the United Nations.
You mentioned the US-backed coup in Bolivia in 2019 against Evo Morales. The people of Bolivia were able to overthrow, democratically, that coup, defeat the coup regime at the ballot box.
And the current government, led by the Movement Toward Socialism party and President Luis Arce, the government – the judicial system has just said that the former dictator, Jeanine Áñez, faces 15 years in prison.
I’m wondering if you can comment on the process of defeating the coup in Bolivia and the restoration of democracy in your country.
SACHA LLORENTI: Well I believe that the Bolivian people have written one of the most heroic, epic pages in the history of Latin America and the Caribbean.
Because if we compare similar processes in some other countries, we will find that there are very, very few examples in which the people itself recover democracy after a short period of time.
I mean, it took in some cases 10 or 15 years before the people would get back to power. In the case of Bolivia, it took one year.
But at a very high cost. There were two massacres in Bolivia. Almost 40 people were killed. People were persecuted and were jailed. Many of us had to go into exile.
But the people itself recovered democracy, democratically. And now what has happened in Bolivia, they are of course people who took power illegally, and are being prosecuted. And we hope that all of those responsible will be rightfully and lawfully punished.
I think that will send a clear message not just to Bolivians, but also to all Latin Americans and Caribbeans, that coups d’etat should be part of the past.
But we also understand that the right-wing interests, the oligarchy, or the U.S. interests do not support democracy. When democracy does not fit their interests, they go and do these things that they have done, not just in Bolivia; they also tried to do that in Nicaragua in 2018.
They tried to do it in Venezuela. The latest revelations of what they were organizing in Venezuela are really, really scary. Not just mercenaries, not just the discussion of military intervention, but also they tried to kill President Maduro.
So we have to be aware. We don’t have the luxury of being naive. We have to be alert 24/7. Because the rights of the people, the benefits of this revolutionary process, are not safe if we are naive.
BENJAMIN NORTON: Secretary Llorenti, I know that you are a very busy man, and I know we have to wrap up the interview. I just want to conclude with one final question.
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that, in Los Angeles right now, outside of the US government-sponsored summit, there is an alternative summit called the Summit of the Peoples, the People’s Summit for Democracy.
This has been organized by social movements across the Americas, including social movements in the United States and Canada, but also social movements in South America, Central America, and the Caribbean.
And one of the co-conveners of this People’s Summit for Democracy that’s going on in protest, is ALBA Movimientos, the social movement arm of the ALBA. I believe it’s independent from ALBA, the body that brings together the countries.
But I’m wondering if you can just speak about the People’s Summit for Democracy that’s going on to protest the US government-sponsored, exclusionary summit.
SACHA LLORENTI: I believe that’s a real summit, the People’s Summit. Because the policy of exclusion of the United States has made clear what’s at stake.
There are global and regional threats. We are missing the opportunity for governments to talk about health, to talk about climate change, to talk about debt, to talk about the real challenges that our peoples face.
So we are looking forward to the conclusions of the People’s Summit. We are going to participate. I will participate virtually on the last day of the summit.
And we we believe that they were also victims of this discriminatory policy. Because, as I pointed out, many representatives of civil society of our countries were excluded from the participation of the Summit [of the Americas], because the US government didn’t provided visas for these people.
So we look forward to the conclusions of the summit. I think that this is going to be a milestone on the long process for hope for our peoples to get together and to struggle against our common threats.
And our common threats are imperialism, capitalism, colonialism, and, of course, patriarchy as well.
So that’s my point of view. And I really thank you very much for this opportunity.
BENJAMIN NORTON: I want to thank you, Secretary Sacha Llorenti, the executive secretary of the Bolivarian Alliance, the ALBA.
For people who want to find more information about Secretary Llorenti and the ALBA, you can follow him on Twitter at @SachaLlorenti. And you can also follow the ALBA at @ALBATCP.
Again, I want to thank you, Secretary Llorenti. I know you’re a very busy man. It was a real pleasure speaking with you.
SACHA LLORENTI: Thank you. It was my pleasure, Ben.
|
Write an article about: Russia strengthens ‘military-technical cooperation’ with Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba amid US threats. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Cuba, Daniel Ortega, Miguel Díaz-Canel, Nicaragua, Nicolás Maduro, Russia, Ukraine, Venezuela, Vladimir Putin | Russia said it is expanding “military-technical cooperation” with Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba, after Putin had phone calls with the presidents of the three socialist governments, which have been targeted by illegal US sanctions and coup attempts.
Russia is strengthening its alliance with Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba, as the United States accelerates its campaign to isolate all four countries.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told his country’s parliament, the Duma, that Moscow was expanding its cooperation with the three socialist Latin American governments in all areas, including “military-technical cooperation.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin had friendly phone calls with Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel between January 18 and 24, reaffirming Moscow’s “unwavering support.”
The Donald Trump administration dubbed Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba the so-called “Troika of Tyranny,” in comments made by neoconservative former National Security Advisor John Bolton.
The United States has imposed unilateral economic sanctions, which are illegal under international law, on all three. Venezuela is suffering under an unlawful US embargo, and Cuba has been crushed by a US blockade for six decades – while more than 95% of the members of the United Nations General Assembly have voted to condemn this blockade annually for 29 years.
Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov explained that, in recent talks with the leaders of these three Latin American countries, “Ways to deepen our strategic association were looked at in all areas, without exception.”
“In terms of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, we have very close relations and strategic cooperation in all areas: in the economy, culture, education, and military-technical cooperation,” he said.
“Our partnership with Latin American countries is deepening,” Lavrov added, calling them “three friendly states close to us.”
While Russia strengthens its alliance with Latin American leftists, Joe Biden has resorted to neocolonial rhetoric. In a January 19 press conference, the US president referred to Latin America as Washington’s “front yard,” declaring, “Everything south of the Mexican border is America’s front yard.”
These diplomatic moves come at a point of historic high tensions between Washington and Moscow.
The United States and Britain have provoked a crisis in Russia’s neighbor Ukraine, sending weapons and encouraging a military buildup that could spill over into war.
This follows years of instability caused by a violent coup in Ukraine in 2014, which was sponsored by the US and the European Union in order to install a pro-Western and vehemently anti-Russian government in Kiev.
Washington and London have insisted, without presenting any evidence, that Russia will soon send troops to take over Ukraine – although top officials in Kiev have publicly denied that Russia plans to invade their country.
Russia has demanded that the United States pledge not to expand NATO further and not to deploy more weapons and soldiers to the nations on its borders.
Washington and Moscow held talks in Geneva, but they broke down on January 13, because the US refused to make any concessions.
Faced with the diplomatic dead-end, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told a Russian media outlet that Moscow could not rule out the possibility of sending a military deployment to Venezuela or Cuba.
Russia’s alliance with Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Cuba was reaffirmed in recent conversations President Putin had with the leaders of the three socialist Latin American states.
Putin called Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega on January 18, congratulating him on his re-election and January 10 inauguration.
According to the readout from the Foreign Ministry, Putin “reaffirmed Russia’s unwavering support for the efforts of the Nicaraguan Government to ensure national sovereignty and its commitment to continue facilitating the republic’s socioeconomic development.” They also “reaffirmed the importance of continued close cooperation in the international arena in keeping with the strategic partnership between Russia and Nicaragua.”
On January 20, Putin called Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. The Foreign Ministry used very similar language to describe the call: the “leaders reaffirmed their commitment to close coordination in international affairs in keeping with the principles of strategic partnership that underlie bilateral relations,” and “Putin expressed his unwavering support for the Venezuelan authorities’ efforts to strengthen the sovereignty of the country and ensure its socioeconomic development.”
Then on January 24, Putin called Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel, and Moscow said the “presidents discussed further coordination of Russia’s and Cuba’s actions in the international arena in line with the principles of strategic partnership and the traditions of friendship and mutual understanding.”
|
Write an article about: Peru’s President Pedro Castillo at UN: Healthcare, education, housing, jobs are rights, must be guaranteed to all. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | education, healthcare, housing, Pedro Castillo, Peru, UN, United Nations | In his first United Nations address, Peru’s President Pedro Castillo called for a “social transformation” that guarantees “economic rights,” while reducing hunger, poverty, and inequality
Peru’s new leftist President Pedro Castillo delivered his first address to the United Nations General Assembly on September 21.
He used the platform to call for a “social transformation” that guarantees not just civil and political rights, but also economic and social rights to healthcare, education, housing, and dignified work.
“Health, education, water, and sanitation cannot be for-profit business; they are fundamental human rights that we must guarantee,” Castillo emphasized.
Noting that he is the first rural school teacher to ever lead Peru, Castillo stressed the need to eliminate extreme poverty and hunger, while reducing poverty and inequality.
He also prioritized protecting the environment, and said his government is going to declare a “climate emergency.”
Notably, there was a major issue completely absent from his speech: Castillo very clearly steered away from international affairs, and did not comment on any conflicts in Latin America.
His government’s foreign policy has been quite inconsistent, and Castillo’s anti-imperialist foreign minister, Héctor Béjar, was forced by the military to resign, mere weeks after being appointed.
Béjar warned the forced resignation was “a soft coup, or the beginning of it.” He added, ominously, “Castillo is an excellent person,” but “this is a weak government; I am not going to deny it.”
There are a lot of internal contradictions in Castillo’s government, and it is not very stable. The right-wing opposition still dominates many Peruvian state institutions, including the Congress, and is committed to impeaching him as soon as possible.
Castillo is also leading a country that has had five presidents in just five years, including three different heads of state in one chaotic week.
Nevertheless, his address at the UN gives us a glimpse into the social issues Castillo is prioritizing in his new government.
Translated highlights of the Peruvian president’s speech follow below.
Peru's new leftist President Pedro Castillo used his first ever speech at the United Nations to call for a "social transformation" that guarantees not just civil and political rights, but also economic and social rights to healthcare, education, housing, and dignified work pic.twitter.com/YZpbSbI7t6
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 24, 2021
“A social transformation is needed, which allows all Peruvians to enjoy their economic and social rights, in addition to fundamental freedom to civil and political rights — a transformation that takes place in the homes of every family.”
“Their rights to education, to health, to honest work, to a dignified salary, to social security, to housing, and to access to an individual, economic, and collective life, while respecting the rights of Mother Earth.”
“It is the first time in the history of my Peruvian people that a school teacher from a rural area is leading this country.”
“And that responsibility obligates me to serve the poor, the marginalized, the vulnerable populations, the small businesses, the middle classes who have suffered through the pandemic, and of course, all Peruvians without exclusions.”
“Peru is the cradle of many great civilizations that have contributed to the history of humanity. It is a multicultural and multiethnic country.”
“My government is counting on building a society and a state with popular roots, with social inclusion, which eliminates inequalities, injustices, the unfair distribution of wealth, to build a solid democratic society in which freedom and civil rights are guaranteed by a democratic and representative state that inspires the participation of the population and the sub-national, regional, and local governments in all of the processes of decision-making that concern their futures and lives.”
At the UN, Peru’s President Castillo insisted “health, education, water, and sanitation cannot be for-profit business. They are fundamental human rights that we must guarantee”
He also emphasized the need to eliminate extreme poverty and hunger, and reduce poverty and inequality pic.twitter.com/Hh54C28a1Z
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) September 24, 2021
“Health, education, access to water, and sanitation cannot be for-profit business. They are fundamental human rights that we must guarantee, assuring universal, high-quality access, without any kind of discrimination.”
“We are equally committed to a policy of social development that allows Peru to complete the goals of the millennium, especially concerning access to water, to health networks, reduction of poverty, elimination of extreme poverty, reduction of infant mortality, full access to the health system, guaranteeing inclusive high-quality education, attaining gender equality, and especially creating jobs and improving informal work. Dignified work is the only long-lasting antidote against poverty.”
“The goal of zero hunger must be what the international community focuses its resources on. It is imperative to double our actions to meet the immediate food needs of all vulnerable populations, to strengthen programs of social protection, to maintain and increase global trade of food.”
“A new social contract is being built in Peru, a new social contract that assures democratic governance with peace and social cohesion, and that is able to drastically reduce poverty and eliminate extreme poverty, that reduces inequalities and ends exclusion and racism as obstacles to equal treatment by the state and the market.”
|
Write an article about: China ‘counters US dollar hegemony’ with gold reserves, Argentina yuan currency swap deal. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alberto Fernández, Argentina, Brazil, China, currency swap, de-dollarization, gold, Lula da Silva | Advancing global de-dollarization, China’s central bank is boosting its gold reserves while signing currency swap deals in yuan with countries like Argentina, encouraging the use of renminbi instead of US dollars.
China’s central bank has taken a series of steps to accelerate the global drive toward de-dollarization, challenging the hegemony of the greenback.
The People’s Bank of China is increasing the share of gold in its foreign-exchange reserves, bucking the US dollar, which has for decades been dominant in international central bank holdings.
This January, China also signed an agreement with Argentina’s central bank for a currency swap deal, in which Beijing will provide 130 billion Chinese yuan (roughly $19 billion USD) to help Buenos Aires stabilize its currency and economy.
The South American nation said it is “committed to deepen the use of the RMB [renminbi] in the Argentine market for bilateral exchange”. (Renminbi is the official name of the Chinese currency, and is often used interchangeably with yuan, which is the unit of account of that currency.)
China’s semi-official newspaper Global Times commented that the deal makes it “likely that more Latin American countries will increase the use of Chinese yuan in order to counter the US dollar’s hegemony, and strengthen economic ties with China”.
These moves show how China is responding to the new cold war that the United States is waging against it.
Concerned that the aggressive sanctions that Washington has already imposed could expand into an all-out economic war, Beijing is decreasing its holdings of dollars in reserves and encouraging the use of its currency in trade with other nations – thereby chipping away at the global reserve currency.
Meanwhile, Russia’s central bank has pledged to buy yuan in the foreign-exchange market to hold in its reserves. And Beijing is already purchasing oil from Moscow in its national currency.
In December 2022, the People’s Bank of China publicly disclosed for the first time in three years that it was increasing the share of gold in its foreign-exchange reserves.
Bloomberg noted at the time that “China’s purchases may be part of a plan to diversify its reserves away from the dollar“.
In January 2023, Bloomberg followed up indicating that the People’s Bank of China had again boosted its gold reserves.
The media outlet speculated that Russia is filling its reserves with gold as well.
China and Russia are not alone. Bloomberg reported that central banks around the world are buying gold, reaching a record of close to 400 tons in the third fiscal quarter of 2022, compared to 241 tons in the same period in 2018.
Central banks in many countries are increasingly worried that they could be targeted by unilateral Western sanctions.
The United States and European Union have frozen or seized hundreds of billions of dollars and euros from the foreign reserves belonging to the central banks of Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and Afghanistan.
This has pushed many nations to look into diversifying their foreign reserves – not only governments targeted by the West for regime change, but even long-time allies such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Türkiye.
Central banks look to China’s renminbi to diversify foreign currency reserves https://t.co/skJm1aKmmW
— FT Economics (@fteconomics) July 1, 2022
The Financial Times reported in June 2022 that central banks across the planet “are looking towards the renminbi to diversify their foreign currency holdings, in a sign that geopolitical flare-ups could chip away at the dollar’s dominance”.
A staggering 85% of central bank reserve managers have expressed interest in investing or already are invested in renminbi, the newspaper noted.
It quoted the head of strategy for global sovereign markets at top Swiss bank UBS, Massimiliano Castelli, who said: “We’re seeing a gradual erosion of the dollar… The picture that emerges is one of a multipolar currency system”.
The newspaper added, “Four-fifths of the central bankers surveyed said they believed that a move towards a multipolar world — away from a US-centric system — would benefit the renminbi”.
The US-dominated International Monetary Fund (IMF) has made similar warnings. In March 2022, it published a research paper on the “stealth erosion of dollar dominance“.
The US-dominated International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned of an “erosion of dollar dominance”
Use of Chinese yuan in global central bank reserves is increasing
And Western sanctions on Russia could weaken the dollar, strengthening other currencieshttps://t.co/weF255asil
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) March 31, 2022
The financial institution observed a marked rise in the use of “nontraditional currencies” in global central bank reserves. The Chinese yuan has driven this increase.
From 2000 to 2021, the percentage of foreign reserves held in US dollars dropped from a bit over 70% to just under 60%.
Thus far, the shift has been slow. But as the United States escalates its new cold war on China, the ensuing geopolitical conflict is likely to accelerate the move toward de-dollarization.
Argentina has struggled for centuries with odious debt owed to colonial and neo-colonial powers.
Today, the South American nation is trapped in $44 billion in dollar-denominated debt with the IMF.
Seeking to fortify its sovereignty and weaken US control, Argentina has strengthened its relations with China and Russia.
China is already Argentina’s second-biggest trade partner, after Brazil, and the ties between the countries are growing.
In February 2022, Buenos Aires joined Beijing’s massive global infrastructure project, the Belt and Road Initiative.
Argentina has also applied to join the expanded BRICS+ bloc, alongside Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.
This January 8, the president of Argentina’s central bank met with his counterpart from China.
The Argentine central bank reported that the two countries “committed to deepen the use of the RMB [renminbi] in the Argentine market for bilateral exchange”.
The swap offers 130 billion in Chinese yuan (roughly $19 billion USD), with an additional “special activation” of 35 billion yuan (approximately $5 billion USD) for interventions in the foreign-exchange market.
The president of Argentina’s central bank, Miguel Pesce, meeting with his Chinese counterpart, Yi Gang
Argentine President Alberto Fernández had met with Chinese President Xi Jinping at the G20 summit in November 2022, where they discussed the currency swap.
The Argentine central bank has an account in its own currency, the peso, at the People’s Bank of China. China’s central bank has an account in yuan at Argentina’s central bank. Buenos Aires must pay Beijing back the 130 billion yuan, with interest. But the advantage is that dollars are not involved.
According to the Argentine central bank’s most recent report, from November 2022, its total reserves sum to $38 billion USD.
This means that the yuan currency swap represents roughly half of Argentina’s reserves. This will have a massive macroeconomic impact.
The newspaper Global Times, which is linked to the Communist Party of China and has a nationalist perspective, explained the thinking of some officials in Beijing, arguing that the currency swap deal “help the Latin American country hedge against shocks brought about by the US’ financial policy tightening while promoting its own industrial development”.
“It is likely that more Latin American countries will increase the use of Chinese yuan in order to counter the US dollar’s hegemony, and strengthen economic ties with China”, the semi-official media outlet added.
#China-Argentina currency swap expansion reflects Latin American country's determination to seek closer cooperation with China: experts say.https://t.co/gz1YAp9sn0 pic.twitter.com/g0Ra0XA1dn
— Global Times (@globaltimesnews) January 9, 2023
Argentina is a significant agricultural producer, and its top exports include corn, soy products, and wheat.
Two-thirds of Argentina’s exports to China consist of soy beans, with an additional 7% of soy oil. Argentina also exports to China smaller amounts of beef, crude petroleum, and shrimp and prawn.
Most of what China exports to Argentina is various forms of advanced technologies, including phones, TVs, and machines.
Exports, especially from the agricultural sector, are one of the only ways Argentina can get access to foreign currencies – or more specifically dollars, which it needs to service its dollar-denominated debt with the IMF.
Normally, if a company in a country like Argentina needs dollars, or if a bank needs foreign currency for a loan, these firms would buy it on the foreign-exchange market. In contrast, swap lines cut out the middleman and create direct relationships between the central banks of countries.
The Chinese swap line deal could help Argentina hold on to dollars to service its debt, while using yuan to buy products from China.
Perhaps even more importantly for Buenos Aires, which suffers with high rates of inflation, it could also use yuan instead of dollars to stabilize the ever-weakening Argentine peso by intervening in the foreign-exchange market.
China began conducted currency swaps with Argentina back in 2009, under left-wing President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. Deals have been repeatedly renewed since then.
But the South American nation is not the only country that has worked out a system like this with the East Asian giant.
In December, the Wall Street Journal reported that Beijing’s central bank is using an “unusual channel”: “currency-swap lines to support governments that borrowed heavily from Chinese banks”.
The People’s Bank of China (PBOC) has given hundreds of billions of dollars worth of yuan to dozens of countries in exchange for their domestic currencies, the newspaper reported.
Among these recipients are Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Argentina, and Laos — all nations that struggle with external debt, much of it denominated in US dollars.
Hungry for foreign currency to shore up their dwindling reserves, some countries have turned to an unusual source of funds: The People's Bank of China https://t.co/QgmRnRdewt
— WSJ China Real Time (@ChinaRealTime) December 12, 2022
The Wall Street Journal explained, “By replenishing other countries’ reserves, the PBOC may be helping some of the world’s most indebted countries avoid rising borrowing costs”.
While the newspaper portrayed this as a cynical effort by China to “prop up” members of its Belt and Road Initiative, the media outlet acknowledged that Beijing is also using the currency swaps to accelerate the de-dollarization of the international financial system.
“The PBOC says the swap lines are there to help grease the wheels of international trade, ensure financial stability and further the adoption of the yuan in a world where trade and finance are dominated by the U.S. dollar”, the Wall Street Journal wrote.
It added: “The PBOC’s swap network is the largest of its kind, according to the World Bank. The PBOC said in a 2021 report that it has swap facilities with 40 countries with a combined capacity of almost 4 trillion yuan, or about $570 billion”.
While Buenos Aires is collaborating more closely with Beijing (its second-largest trading partner), Argentina has simultaneously pushed for stronger ties with Brazil (its largest trading partner) and economic integration of Latin America.
Brazil’s left-wing President Lula da Silva returned to power on January 1.
Two days later, Argentina’s Ambassador Daniel Scioli met with Brazil’s Economic Minister Fernando Haddad.
Scioli said his government’s top priority was “the agreement on deep Argentina-Brazil integration” that the countries’ Presidents Alberto Fernández and Lula da Silva are due to sign at the summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) in Buenos Aires on January 24.
???? | Avanzamos con el nuevo ministro de Economía de Brasil, @Haddad_Fernando, en 3 temas prioritarios de la agenda bilateral:
1⃣ El acuerdo de integración profunda Argentina-Brasil que firmarán @alferdez y @LulaOficial en la próxima reunión de la CELAC en Buenos Aires. pic.twitter.com/T0ZbawtCnJ
— Daniel Scioli ?? (@danielscioli) January 3, 2023
The Argentine ambassador likewise revealed that his government is in talks with the state-owned Brazilian Development Bank to receive financing to advance construction of a pipeline, named after former President Néstor Kirchner, which will provide a steady supply of gas to Brazil.
Argentina has the world’s second-biggest reserves of shale gas and the forth-biggest of shale oil.
Scioli added that Argentina and Brazil look to increase their exports and trade with each other, “conserving the reserves of both countries in the framework of the system of local currencies”.
3⃣ El financiamiento del BNDES a las próximas etapas del gasoducto Néstor Kirchner, que permitirá el abastecimiento sustentable de gas a Brasil y equilibrar nuestra balanza comercial.
Más integración con Brasil es más crecimiento, trabajo y divisas para la Argentina.
— Daniel Scioli ?? (@danielscioli) January 3, 2023
Scioli’s hint that Argentine-Brazilian trade will be done with local currencies led to international speculation that the countries are moving forward with Lula’s proposed plan to create a sovereign Latin American currency for regional trade.
This frightened some foreign investors, and was reported in the financial press with a heavy dose of concern – and condescension.
Haddad downplayed the reports, saying, “There is no proposal for one currency for Mercosur”. But his words were careful: The Brazilian economic minister said there was not yet a proposal; he didn’t deny that the potential currency was discussed.
It was likely that Haddad was merely trying to reassure foreign investors.
In his inauguration speech, Lula pledged more robust social spending to fight poverty and hunger and vowed to reverse the privatizations carried out by previous far-right President Jair Bolsonaro.
These policies are overwhelmingly popular among the Brazilian people, but they scared some investors in Brazilian stocks, who sold off shares, leading to market instability and a slight drop in the value of the country’s currency, the real, against the dollar.
Recebi do vice-presidente China, Wang Qishan, uma carta do presidente Xi Jinping com seus cumprimentos e vontade de ampliarmos a cooperação. A China é nosso maior parceiro comercial e podemos ampliar ainda mais as relações entre nossos países ????
?: @ricardostuckert pic.twitter.com/Z8FAmn4yyW
— Lula (@LulaOficial) January 2, 2023
In the mean time, Brazil’s new government, like that of Argentina, has vowed to deepen its alliance with China.
On the day after his inauguration, Lula met with China’s Vice President Wang Qishan. The statesman gave the Brazilian leader a letter from President Xi Jinping, which called to boost Chinese-Brazilian ties.
Lula tweeted, “China is our biggest trading partner, and we can even further expand the relations between our countries”.
|
Write an article about: Judicial coup in Argentina: Corrupt judges conspire with media oligarchs to ban Cristina Kirchner from office. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Argentina, Brazil, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, debt, dollar, IMF, International Monetary Fund, lawfare, Marco Teruggi, Mauricio Macri, Néstor Kirchner, odious debt, Peronism | Leaked messages show Argentina’s corrupt judges and prosecutors conspired with right-wing media oligarchs to launch a judicial coup against left-wing ex President and current VP Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, sentencing her to six years in prison and banning her from running in the 2023 elections.
(Puedes leer esta nota en español aquí.)
Argentina’s notoriously corrupt and deeply politicized judicial system set off an international scandal on December 6, sentencing left-wing former President and current Vice President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner to six years in prison and banning her from future office based on highly dubious charges.
Prominent leaders across Latin America denounced the ruling as a “judicial coup.” It is eerily similar to the fraudulent case that led to the imprisonment of Brazil’s left-wing former President Lula da Silva in the lead-up to the 2018 elections, which the United Nations Human Rights Committee later denounced as an illegal show trial that lacked due process and violated his rights.
Leaked messages, photos, and videos show that corrupt Argentine prosecutors involved in the case conspired with right-wing opposition politicians, conservative media corporations, and former intelligence officers to wage lawfare (judicial warfare) against Kirchner and her progressive movement.
In a fiery speech following the sentence, Kirchner said the scandal proves that there is a “parallel mafia state” and “mafia judiciary” in Argentina “that is outside of the electoral results.”
She added that the legal decision had already been written back in 2019, and that the politically compromised judges were simply waiting for the right moment to use it to prevent her from running for president in the 2023 elections.
Kirchner had long been targeted in a campaign of systematic legal harassment by the right-wing opposition. She faced 654 legal complaints between 2004 and 2022. Six individuals charged her between 20 and 74 times each. Virtually all of these lawsuits were determined to be totally frivolous, but they drained her of valuable time, energy, and resources.
Multipolarista editor Ben Norton spoke with Argentine journalist Marco Teruggi about the judicial coup.
They also discussed the $44 billion of unpayable odious debt that Argentina is trapped in with the US-dominated International Monetary Fund.
(This interview was conducted in Spanish and was translated into English by Multipolarista.)
BEN NORTON: Hi, good morning to everyone, I’m Ben Norton, and today I have the privilege of speaking with the Argentine journalist Marco Teruggi. He is an independent journalist, and also a sociologist.
We are going to speak about the political and economic situation in Argentina.
On December 6, basically, we saw a judicial coup, a judicial coup d’etat, similar to the soft coup against Lula da Silva in Brazil in 2018.
In fact, the same corrupt judge, and ally of the US and CIA, Sergio Moro, who supervised the judicial coup against Lula, and imprisoned him in 2018, he praised the sentence against the vice president of Argentina, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, a sentence of six years in prison.
Julgar o poder quando é poder mostra a força do estado de Derecho. Gol da Argentina. https://t.co/ed8g0rKHz4
— Sergio Moro (@SF_Moro) December 7, 2022
And clearly, what Argentina’s corrupt and politicized judicial system is trying to ban her from public life, basically, to destroy her public life and her political life.
On September 1, there was an attempt to assassinate her, by a fascist, a gunman from the extreme right wing. That failed. And now there is an attempt to kill her politically.
And according to the sentence, Vice President Kirchner cannot hold public office.
So after the sentence, Vice President Kirchner gave a speech, and in that speech she said that the sentence was already written three years before, in 2019.
She also said that this shows that in Argentina, there is a “parallel mafia state”:
CRISTINA FERNÁNDEZ DE KIRCHNER: As we said on December 2, 2019, that is, exactly 3 years ago, the criminal sentence was already written.
This criminal sentence, this sentence, compatriots, is not a sentence according to the laws of the constitution, or according to the administrative laws, or the criminal code.
This is a sentence that has its origins in a system that I, somewhat naively, that time on December 2, 2019, discussed as lawfare
(judicial war). … But this is much simpler.
This is not just lawfare, or a politicized justice system; this is a parallel mafia state, a mafia judiciary.
And this is confirmation of the existence of a para-state system, of a system where decisions are made about life, and heritage, and the freedom of Argentines, and that is outside of the electoral results.
…
And they, the right-wingers, they left us with $45 billion in debt with the International Monetary Fund (IMF). They ride around in luxury in the planes of Clarín.
…
Well, I am not going to be a candidate. There’s more, very good news for you, Magnetto (director of the Grupo Clarín corporation). You know why? Because on the 10 of December, 2023, I’m not going to have exemptions; I’m not going to be vice president.
So you are going to be able to give the order to your henchmen on the courts and the Supreme Court, that they imprison me, yes. But I will never be your pet! Never, ever! You understand? Never, ever!
I will not be a candidate for anything, not to be president, not to be a senator. My name will not be on any ballot.
I finish the 10th of December, and I will return as I returned on December 10, 2015: to my home.
…
A mafia and parallel state. That is what is happening in Argentina, and that is what today sentenced me to 6 years in prison and a permanent ban from politics.
This is the real criminal sentence; this is what they wanted: a permanent ban from politics.
They will be able to imprison me after December 10, yes. Unless a powerful businessman decides to fund some criminals and, before December 10, 2023, they shoot me.
What do you want? Me as a prisoner, or dead?
BEN NORTON: So, Marco, we should begin with the most basic facts, because this case can be a little complicated. There are many names, there are many people involved.
Can you speak about what is the ‘Vialidad’ lawsuit? This case. And speak about the characters and people involved in this case, because we know that we are not only speaking about judges and prosecutors, but also the Grupo Clarín, one of the country’s most powerful media corporations.
And there is a network of corruption in this case of lawfare (judicial warfare) against Cristina.
MARCO TERUGGI: Let’s start from the beginning, as it should be done.
When Cristina left the presidency in 2015, they started to roll out against her, and against some of the main officials in her government, a series of lawsuits, for different reasons.
Some were clearly fabricated, and with barely any basis, if they even had any.
And there were other, more important public cases, central ones, like this one, which is known as the Vialidad lawsuit, which involves accusations of mismanagement, of diversion of funds for public projects, mainly in the province [Santa Cruz] where Néstor Kirchner, the former president and her husband, had been governor.
So from until today, we have seen a succession of lawsuits, investigations, calls that she appear in court, that perhaps were thought with a certain degree of optimism, that if a government rises to power, like the Frente de Todos government that took power in 2019, that that was going to make it milder, weaker, or at least that they could revert to this plan that was very clearly designed before, as a process of persecution, that they were making through their control of political power.
With the government of the [right-wing former] President Macri, through its control over the media, with a few emblematic groups, like the Grupo Clarín, but also other media outlets like Infobae and La Nación, through intelligence agencies, together with spying devices, wiretapping, monitoring, judicial operations, media operations, and of course powerful economic and media groups, which many times are overlapping.
When [current] President Alberto Fernández took power, that task of democratizing the justice system, that need to dismantle the mechanisms of persecution, well it was an urgent priority, but it was not really carried out.
There are multiple interpretations about that, about why it didn’t happen, why they weren’t able, because they tried to reach a reconciliation, and on the other side [in the opposition] there was no will, because in reality some actors in the Frente de Todos never really prioritized that agenda, because they have some links with the other side.
In any case, the structure of the judicial system was not touched. And what we are seeing now is that system, which was untouched, kept operating as before, as well as the powerful economic interests, mainly the Grupo Clarín, which is the most emblematic in this dispute.
This judicial system that is more and more taken over, from within, by those sectors allied with the opposition, in key places: the Supreme Court, the Council of Judges, the federal courts.
And in turn, there was always a series of underground intelligence operations, which is known as the “crypto-state,” which in this case is operating from outside, but keeps operating.
That kept being rolled out and advancing, until the (sentence on) 6th of December, which was the product of years of spreading the idea that Cristina Fernández de Kirchner was a corrupt president, as well as Néstor Kirchner, as the prosecutor claimed, that they were leading an illegal organization, that is to say, they were claiming that the constitutional governments of Argentina had been illegal organizations.
So what we have witnessed is the media headline that was long awaited by the opposition press, in collaboration with the political opposition, that says: “Cristina charged!”
And in turn, the path toward political banning, in this case it is her permanent prohibition from office, as the judge says.
Although, before entering the next electoral campaigns, according to time estimates, obviously this is going to be appealed by Cristina’s defense team, and that in reality means that she could run in the next elections. But she took the decision not to.
So I think we are at the highest point of a persecution campaign, through various means, against the main political figure of the Peronist movement and the recent history of the progressive movement in Argentina.
And this is proof that there exists something that was known, but which is now very clear: permanent powers that are not elected, which many times do not have recognizable faces, but which operate and shape the reality of countries: economic powers, judicial powers, underground powers, and in this case political powers, like the city government [of Buenos Aires], which is involved in these schemes.
BEN NORTON: Yes, the Latin American Strategic Center of Geopolitics (CELAG) published a graphic that shows that, between 2004 and 2022, there were 654 legal complaints filed against Cristina Fernández de Kirchner. And there are six people who have charged her between 20 and 74 times.
?? Hoy se conocerá el veredicto del juicio a @CFKArgentina por la causa Vialidad.
¿Quiénes son los denunciantes? CFK figura como denunciada-imputada en 654 expedientes entre 2004 y 2022.
? Hay al menos 6 personas que la han denunciado de modo sistemático, entre 20 y 74 veces pic.twitter.com/334YmiqhB0
— CELAG (@CELAGeopolitica) December 6, 2022
So we are talking about a campaign of judicial warfare, instrumentalizing the judicial system to attack a politician, a left-wing politician.
And Bolivia’s ex-President Evo Morales said it well. Obviously Evo Morales was the victim of another coup d’etat, a violent coup, another coup d’etat in 2019. And Evo wrote that what we are seeing is “a rigged judicial coup that seeks to take away the political rights of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.”
And he also said: “After failing in their attempt to assassinate her, today they try to politically eliminate her.”
Nuestro repudio y condena más vehemente contra el golpe judicial y amañado que intenta truncar los derechos políticos de nuestra hermana @CFKArgentina. Después de fallar en su intento de asesinarla, hoy tratan de eliminarla políticamente. Fuerza hermana Cristina.¡La lucha sigue! pic.twitter.com/v0y5rDhXdX
— Evo Morales Ayma (@evoespueblo) December 6, 2022
Well, a very important issue in this case, Marco, is that in her speech, following the sentence, the vice president showed leaked messages that show a conspiracy between the prosecutors, officials, and also those media outlets that you mentioned, right-wing outlets that belong to the Argentine oligarchy, in particular the Grupo Clarín.
And there are photos of various prosecutors and officials with members, and not only members but executives of the Grupo Clarín, in the airport.
We know that they flew in their planes, they enjoyed luxurious dinners, very luxurious houses.
Están todos.Los recibe en en el aeropuerto de Bariloche Jorge Rendo y Pablo Casey de @GrupoClarin :Los dos Mahiques, @MarceDaless , Ercolini, Cayssials etc.La fiscal de Bariloche los imputó. Esta página y foto corresponde al expediente ?? pic.twitter.com/RdRSojuNeG
— Cynthia García (@cyngarciaradio) December 7, 2022
So can you speak about the corruption of the judicial system and these prosecutors who are involved in the case against Cristina?
MARCO TERUGGI: The first thing to highlight is that, recently, a few days ago in Argentina, there was a leak. And we have to investigate where it came from, to see if it has any irregularities.
But at least what we see now, and that had not been seen before, is a mechanism by which federal judges work together with the Grupo Clarín, which is a powerful media and economic group, and political sectors, in this case, linked to the government of the city of Buenos Aires, which is the PRO, which is Macri’s party, and ex members of the intelligence services.
Together, in this case what the chats show, is that they were trying to hide the fact that they had met together in the south of Argentina, with the English billionaire Joe Lewis.
In the chat, they directly talk about how to fabricate evidence. It is striking, because it is a federal judge, Ercolini, who in fact is the judge who heard the ‘Vialidad’ lawsuit against Cristina, so we can see who the characters are, who are saying how to make false receipts, among many other things.
Or they talk about how to take down the chief of the airport police, because they think he is the one who leaked the information about them meeting in the south.
And there we see, without a doubt, that the Grupo Clarín is who pays; they organize the agenda; how close all of these actors are.
And therefore we discover the lack of independence of the judicial power, or at least its main actors. The same about the media power.
And the operation of these sectors of above-ground politics and underground politics.
That is a kind of window into what they call the “basements of democracy,” or the sewer, or the place where politics is made, which very few people learn about, and which after is presented by the media as a fact of how the justice system or media work.
So I think it has never been seen before in this way.
And it is an issue of extreme gravity. But it is happening at a moment when those sectors have a perception of themselves, and I think that, shamefully, they are right, of so much impunity.
All of this that has been happening has had a very low judicial and political cost, for actors who, in addition to having left the country trapped in debt, with irregular debts with the International Monetary Fund, some are fugitives, and others have been pardoned by these same judges in the lawsuits brought against them.
So we are seeing a window into real power, that which carries out lawfare operations, that which persecutes people, that which seeks to ban people.
That which raises the rather elementary question, but always necessary to refresh: How democratic is the democracy?
Or what remains of the democracy when the actors who decide a criminal sentence are actors who have not been elected by anyone, who conspire with others, who meet no minimum ethical requirements, or in terms of separation of powers or independence?
BEN NORTON: Yes Marco, you mentioned something very important, which is the subject of the odious debt with the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
In fact, in her speech after the sentence, Vice President Cristina mentioned this debt.
CRISTINA FERNÁNDEZ DE KIRCHNER: And they, the right-wingers, they left us with $45 billion in debt with the International Monetary Fund.
They ride around in luxury in the planes of Clarín.
BEN NORTON: So Marco, can you speak a bit about Argentina’s debt? The country owes more than $44 billion to the IMF. And this debt doesn’t come from the Kirchnerist governments; it comes from the government of the right-winger, Mauricio Macri, the last president.
MARCO TERUGGI: The government of Macri left two main unpayable debts: one with private creditors, which is larger than the debt with the IMF, and the other of $44 billion with the IMF.
First it was renegotiated with the private creditors, and later with the IMF. Now the main difference is that the debt lent by the IMF, whose main shareholder is the US government, is a debt with a political burden, which involves a mechanism to put a country in a situation of dependency.
That is to say, you don’t negotiate with the IMF only economic concerns, but rather, above all, political and economic ones.
The IMF only approves or rejects debts with economic conditions.
In the first place, we have to say, this debt, when it was given by the IMF, it was above what Argentina could receive. That is, it was irregular in how large it was.
And who was representing the United States? [White House advisor] Mauricio Claver Carbone, in the era of Donald Trump, who later was president of the Inter-American Development Bank.
He said that that debt was to support Mauricio Macri. So it was a political debt, so Macri could continue his government.
So it was always clear, the explicit political support that there was there.
But that is only on the surface, because it seems to me that deeper is precisely that it is debt that, in its essence, is unpayable.
Argentina does not have the capacity to pay $44 billion. So the question is, why would an organization lend a debt that can’t be repaid?
Well, because that debt makes the country enter into a mechanism of dependence, that makes its economic policies, its deficits, its spending, its investments, its social policies, contingent on what the IMF wants, primarily the United States.
So that has been the central part of the tension in the first two years, and in turn in the stronger divisions within the Frente de Todos, when it was announced what the renegotiation of the debt with the IMF consisted of.
Because renegotiating is in reality is a new debt. That is, today Argentina is receiving a new debt, from the IMF, to pay the old debt to the IMF.
That is to say, the IMF regularly supervises Argentina’s economic policies and if they like them, they give them the money, so that it can be returned to the IMF.
And if they don’t like them, they could refuse to give Argentina the money, and Argentina would default.
We are on that level. And it seems to me that we have to recognize that the mechanism worked.
Today it is a government that is conditioned, that in large part has its hands tied in its economic policy, with inflation that it can’t reduce, with a loss of purchasing power.
And there is a problem with the restriction of the entry of dollars into the reserves of the central bank, which among other things is largely because it has to regularly go to return the money to the IMF.
So I think that is a clear example of how these debts function, why they are made, how they force governments to make concessions.
BEN NORTON: You mentioned that there are economic problems; there is inflation. In fact, in her speech, following the sentence, the vice president said that, “They condemn me because they condemn a model of economic development.”
CRISTINA FERNÁNDEZ DE KIRCHNER: I speak fundamentally about us, from Peronism, those of us who are committed to the rights of the people, that is where they are sentencing me.
They condemn me because they condemn a model of economic development and of recognition of the rights of the people. That is why, that is why they condemn me.
But the sentencing is not only six years in prison. The real sentence against me is the permanent ban on holding elected public office.
When all of the positions that I held always were by popular vote. We won four governments in the name of Peronism, with the last name Kirchner, in 2003, in 2007, in 2011.
And I also contributed to the victory that we had in 2019, when no one would have bet on Peronism.
This is what they are making me pay. This is why they are banning me.
BEN NORTON: So can you speak about the economic situation, with the inflation, and why do you think there are so many economic problems?
MARCO TERUGGI: In the case of Argentina, we are in a situation of weakness. It is a government that has spent so much recent time trying to survive the crisis, that has implicitly or explicitly rejected the possibility of transformation.
It is in a sense the great loss of political, symbolic capital. Cristina is losing a lot of political, symbolic capital, because in her memory, her governments were different.
And the current situation, well, is of a country with a very high structural level of poverty, whose workers’ salaries are below the poverty line, and more and more difficulties.
But in economic terms, what are the concrete, material agreements that can be made to alleviate the political situation in Argentina, for example to give it more international reserves, greater capacity to strengthen its policies as it faces an election?
This is quite decisive. If a government arrives with inflation that is not significantly reduced, that arrives cutting social spending, the fiscal deficit, but it does it by cutting from below, it is very unlikely that it has the chance of electoral victory.
I think that, in a way, we are in a scenario that has the Latin American dynamic, when it seems that a majority group of progressive governments are finally going to be able to coordinate together, we see how some win while others are undone.
Peru’s President Pedro Castillo was just forced out, as the consequence of another very deep institutional crisis.
And finally, to conclude, one thing about the external restriction of dollars: There is the issue of the external debt, which effectively is a permanent drain of dollars.
Another debate is how Argentina can get dollars, through what economic mechanisms?
And there a lot has to do with the agricultural export sector, which is a sector that historically is opposed to the Peronist governments, or at least against Cristina’s governments, and this one.
And that is a sector that lobbies for the devaluation of the currency, which has a negative impact on the population.
Because a devaluation in the currency implies an increase in the prices, implies a loss of purchasing power.
So the government has been giving in, giving them a preferential dollar, as they say, so they have more incentives to bring their dollars to Argentina.
But we are on that level. And it also has to do with the economic structure of Argentina, with the conflicting models.
What is the model that they want to build in Argentina?
And there, Macrismo is very clear what its model is: it is a neoliberal model, financial, of opening up the economy, that has brought the catastrophic consequences that were produced in just four years, in which they were in power in the Pink House.
BEN NORTON: Thanks a lot. I have been speaking with the Argentine journalist Marco Teruggi. You can follow him on Twitter at @Marco_Teruggi. Marco, thanks so much, I’m always grateful for your journalistic work and analysis.
MARCO TERUGGI: Thank you, and I send a big hug from Buenos Aires.
|
Write an article about: Mexico’s President AMLO condemns US blockade of Cuba as ‘genocide’ and ‘tremendous violation of human rights’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, blockade, Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras, Joe Biden, Luis Arce, Mexico, sanctions, Summit of the Americas, Xiomara Castro | Mexico’s left-wing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) denounced the illegal US blockade of Cuba as a “type of genocide” and “tremendous violation of human rights.”
Mexico’s left-wing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has condemned the illegal US blockade of Cuba as a “type of genocide” and “tremendous violation of human rights.”
At his daily press briefing on the morning on June 6, López Obrador was asked about his decision to boycott the US government’s Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles, California.
The Mexican president, known popularly by the acronym AMLO, explained that he refused to attend in order to protest Washington’s exclusion of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
López Obrador denounced the blockade that the United States has imposed on Cuba for more than 60 years, in flagrant violation of international law.
Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) denounced the illegal US blockade of Cuba as a “type of genocide” and “tremendous violation of human rights.”
Read more here: https://t.co/SdjCfhBkyG pic.twitter.com/IP8z9gp4Gz
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) June 7, 2022
“How is it that a blockade is maintained that prevents food from arriving to the Cuban people, that prevents medicines from arriving?” he asked.
“That is a type of genocide,” the Mexican president declared, calling it “a tremendous violation of human rights.”
“When the subject of the blockade is addressed in the UN, every country votes to lift the blockade. One or two prevent it,” AMLO noted.
“It would be the peak [of hypocrisy] for us to attend the Summit [of Americas] in that context,” he added. “That violates the foreign policy of Mexico, which our constitution establishes, the non-intervention, the self-determination of peoples.”
AMLO reiterated his call for “the integration of all of the Americas,” but he emphasized that “that is going to mean a change in the policy, leaving behind confrontation, leaving behind hate, leaving behind the threats, the blockades, the meddling, and choosing brotherhood.”
Mexican President López Obrador took a historic trip to Cuba, where he called for an end to the US blockade and criticized right-wing “coup-plotters.”
He said Latin America should form a union, amid “the economic decline of the United States.”https://t.co/A4eGIhcRhO
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) May 11, 2022
In May, López Obrador took a historic trip to Cuba, where he called for an end to the US blockade and criticized right-wing “coup-plotters.”
“I will keep trying to get the United States to lift the blockade,” the Mexican president said.
The Summit of the Americas opened in Los Angeles, California on June 6.
Honduras’ new left-wing President Xiomara Castro and Bolivia’s socialist President Luis Arce joined AMLO in boycotting the summit in condemnation of the US government’s refusal to invite Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
Guatemala’s right-wing president, Alejandro Giammattei, likewise chose not to attend, in protest of the policies of the Joe Biden administration.
As the US government’s Summit of the Americas opens in Los Angeles, California, the presidents of Mexico, Bolivia, Honduras and Guatemala are boycotting in protest
Heads of state representing nations with over 200 million people combined are not attendinghttps://t.co/O7bOWe6W6N
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) June 6, 2022
|
Write an article about: Mexico’s AMLO announces campaign against US blockade of Cuba, denounces neoliberalism. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, blockade, Cuba, Cuban doctors, embargo, Fidel Castro, healthcare, Mexico, Miguel Díaz-Canel, public health, sanctions | President Andrés Manuel López Obrador announced Mexico will lead an international movement to end the US government’s “inhumane” blockade against Cuba. Praising Fidel Castro as a “visionary”, AMLO denounced neoliberalism and pledged support for universal public healthcare and education.
Mexico’s progressive President Andrés Manuel López Obrador announced that his country will lead an international movement to end the US government’s illegal blockade against Cuba.
The Mexican president, known popularly by his initials AMLO, condemned the six-decade US blockade of Cuba as “inhumane”. He said the global campaign to overturn it must be more “active”, complaining that, while the vast majority of countries on Earth vote against the US embargo every year at the United Nations General Assembly, nothing ever changes.
AMLO also praised the Cuban Revolution for creating “one of the best health systems in the world”. He thanked Cuba for sending doctors to provide medical attention to people in underserved rural areas in Mexico and other countries around the world.
Criticizing the “neoliberal oligarchy” who ruled before him and “the corrupt neoliberal privatizers” who sold off many of the Mexican state’s assets, López Obrador explained that his government’s goal “is to establish a system of public healthcare, to guarantee the people’s right to healthcare”.
“The right to healthcare is a fundamental human rights, and it cannot be treated like a market”, AMLO declared.
The Mexican leader made these comments in a February 11 press conference in the southern port city of Campeche, alongside Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel, who addressed the two countries’ collaboration in public health.
The event featured dozens of Cuban doctors who were sent to Mexico as part of a solidarity mission.
Mexico's President AMLO honored Fidel Castro as “a visionary, a giant to whom we pay tribute”
He added: “Conservatives in Mexico and around the world can say whatever they want, but they'll never, ever be able to counteract" Cuba's solidarity
More here: https://t.co/oInjQf5cSG pic.twitter.com/DDaDRQklBs
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) February 16, 2023
López Obrador has consistently spoken out against the US sanctions and embargo against Cuba, which violate international law.
In June 2022, the Mexican president denounced the US blockade as a “type of genocide” and “tremendous violation of human rights”.
At the February 2023 event, AMLO honored Cuban revolutionary Fidel Castro as “a visionary, a giant to whom we pay tribute”, adding, “Conservatives in Mexico and around the world can say whatever they want, but they will never, ever be able to counteract the teaching, the example of solidarity, of brotherhood that the revolutionary movement and its leaders have left Cuba”.
In the fiery speech, AMLO stated:
Such vision Commander Fidel Castro had! While the neoliberals [in Mexico] were preventing the training of doctors, in Cuba they were driving the training of doctors, and consolidating one of the best health systems in the world.
That is not done by a mere man of the state; that is done by a man of the nation, a visionary, a giant to whom we pay tribute for this great work that you all have continued (referring to the Cuban doctors in the audience).
Conservatives in Mexico and around the world can say whatever they want, but they will never, ever be able to counteract the teaching, the example of solidarity, of brotherhood that the revolutionary movement and its leaders have left Cuba.
For this, our respect, our gratitude, our support.
We are going to continue demanding that the blockade against Cuba be lifted, that it be eliminated. It is inhumane.
And not only when it comes to voting in the UN, where it is always only one or two countries who vote in support of it, while the vast majority of the countries in the world abstain or vote for the blockade to be eliminated. But when the [General] Assembly is over, it is back to the same old.
I offer to President Miguel Díaz-Canel that Mexico is going to lead a more active movement, so that all countries unite and defend the independence and sovereignty of Cuba, and never, ever treat it as a ‘terrorist’ country, or put its profoundly humane people and government on a blacklist of supposed ‘terrorists’.
Long live the dignified people of Cuba!
En Martí y en Fidel pienso al ver a nuestros médicos trabajando, con consagración y alegría, en #México, una tierra que jamás ha sido extranjera, siempre hermana, para todos los cubanos.
En Campeche nos reunimos con una representación de ellos. #CubaPorLaVida pic.twitter.com/IofL0ldTwm
— Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez (@DiazCanelB) February 11, 2023
In his remarks at the public health press conference, Cuban President Díaz-Canel stressed the “deep and historic ties” that his country has enjoyed with its “brothers” in Mexico.
He recalled that Castro and other Cuban leaders planned the revolution while living in exile in Mexico.
Díaz-Canel highlighted the medical support that Cuba and its doctors have provided to Mexico over the decades.
The Cuban leader also thanked Mexico, noting it “has supported us historically in the battle for the lifting of the blockade, which has done so much damage to our economy, and especially to the health sector”.
While Díaz-Canel was visiting, López Obrador gave the Cuban leader the prestigious Mexican Order of the Aztec Eagle, the highest state honors for a foreign national.
Entrega de la Condecoración Orden Mexicana del Águila Azteca al presidente de Cuba, Miguel Díaz-Canelhttps://t.co/WJtkhZdYea pic.twitter.com/V5SPfQJcMD
— Andrés Manuel (@lopezobrador_) February 12, 2023
López Obrador is one of the world’s most popular leaders, and has had a consistent approval rating of between 60 and 70% since he came to power in late 2018.
The main reason for this is that AMLO is the Mexico’s first left-wing president in decades, and he has reversed the neoliberal economic policies that dominated for so long, investing more money in social services and drastically increasing the minimum wage.
This incredible graph shows how much the real minimum wage (measured in purchasing power parity) has increased in Mexico under the left-wing government of President AMLO
Note how the minimum wage was totally stagnant in two decades of neoliberal governments
Credit: @mario_campa pic.twitter.com/ZlGxGvb5QF
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 25, 2022
In his February 11 speech in Campeche, AMLO denounced the “neoliberal period, which lasted 36 years in our country”.
The last Mexican head of state who pursued policies of economic nationalism was José López Portillo. In 1982, Miguel de la Madrid took power, and he began implementing neoliberal reforms – largely in response to a disastrous debt crisis and hyperinflation that were fueled by a skyrocketing increase in interest rates under US Federal Reserve chair Paul Volcker.
AMLO referred to this neoliberal period as the era of “Neo-Porfirismo”, referencing former military dictator Porfirio Díaz, who ruled from 1876 to 1911.
Díaz’s rule ended with the Mexican Revolution. AMLO invoked the historical legacy of this revolution to explain the “Fourth Transformation” that he is leading today.
In the neoliberal period, “Policies were applied to benefit the minority, the oligarchy. They talked about democracy, but in reality it was an oligarchy”, AMLO said.
“No one wanted to go and work in rural hospitals, where specialists were needed”, he added. “Because of that, we are very grateful for the doctors from the brotherly people of Cuba… for helping us, so that doctors and specialists could cover all of the country”.
“It is something truly terrible, even unbelievable”, AMLO continued. “In the 36 years of neoliberal politics, they sold off the public companies, the nation’s banks, the railroads, the mines, the ports, the airports. They also carried out privatization of the electricity and oil industries”.
“And they didn’t stop, not even in relation to education and healthcare. The so-called structural reforms aimed to put education and healthcare on the market, as if they were goods for sale, with the goal so that those who wanted to study or get medical attention had to pay”.
“Fortunately, the people said ‘Enough!’, and, in a democratic way, decided to change these politics and carry out a transformation”, AMLO said. “Also to confront the tremendous decay that we suffered. The corruption brought about a process of gradual degradation in all of the fields of public life”.
“And to confront decay, there is no alternative option other than a deep transformation, to pull out the roots of the regime of injustices, of corruption, of privileges. And that is what is being done in Mexico”, López Obrador declared.
“We are pushing forward on education, pushing forward with healthcare, so that they aren’t like what the corrupt neoliberal privatizers wanted, as privileges, but rather as rights for our people”.
“The state cannot fail in its social responsibility. The state is obligated to guarantee public education, free and of good quality, at all levels”.
Today, AMLO said, his government’s “goal is to establish a system of public health, to guarantee the people’s right to healthcare”.
He said his priority is also expanded access to inexpensive medicines. “Because, in the times of neoliberalism, the sale of medicines was a big business”, López Obrador recalled. He noted large pharmaceutical companies made huge profits through corruption, selling overpriced medicines to the government at unfair prices.
“Because the right to healthcare is a fundamental human right, and it cannot be treated like a market”, he added.
AMLO revealed that his government has opened nearly 100 medical schools to train doctors and nurses, and he plans on creating 55 more across the country before his term ends. His administration also doubled the number of scholarships available.
|
Write an article about: Sandinista Nicaragua allies with China, Russia, Iran against US imperialism. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | China, Covid-19, Daniel Ortega, Denis Moncada, Iran, Laureano Ortega, Nicaragua, Russia, vaccines | Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista government is forming a closer alliance with China, Russia, and Iran in a common struggle against US imperialism, jointly resisting Washington’s illegal sanctions, meddling, and coup attempts.
Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista government has formed a political and economic alliance with China, Russia, and Iran, as a counterbalance against constant US meddling in the Central American nation.
All four countries are targeted by illegal Western sanctions and coup attempts. So they have grown closer together in a common struggle against Washington’s aggression.
In December 2021, Nicaragua re-established relations with the People’s Republic of China, and on December 31, 2021, Beijing re-opened its embassy in Managua.
The People's Republic of China just reopened its embassy today in Nicaragua, a few weeks after the Sandinista government re-established relations.
Nicaragua's right-wing US-backed Chamorro oligarch government had broken ties with China back in 1990.pic.twitter.com/OZiSO8o9v7
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 31, 2021
Foreign Minister Denis Moncada said Nicaragua and China are “two peoples who have fought for their national liberation with perseverance,” seeking the “eradication of poverty.”
The Nicaraguan foreign minister said they seek to build a new world “that is multipolar.”
Nicaraguan presidential advisor Laureano Ortega praised China for eliminating extreme poverty and showing how “to advance toward the comprehensive construction of a modern socialist model.”
He also thanked Beijing for giving 2 billion Covid-19 vaccines to some 120 countries, including more than 1 million to Nicaragua.
Right-wing US government-funded media outlets have expressed extreme distress over this growing alliance.
Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega announced at his inauguration on January 10 that the country had signed a series of economic agreements with China.
The most important of these officially incorporates the Central American nation into Beijing’s global Belt and Road Initiative.
President Daniel Ortega said “the United States does not accept that the end of its hegemony is a fact.”
Breaking: At his inauguration tonight, President Daniel Ortega announced that Nicaragua and China just signed a series of strategic agreements, including officially incorporating Nicaragua into Beijing's global Belt and Road Initiative, as well as programs on housing and trade. pic.twitter.com/n9URPvkkO1
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 11, 2022
|
Write an article about: Bloqueo ilegal de EEUU contra Cuba sigue matando en su 60 aniversario. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | bloqueo, Cuba, Donald Trump, embargo, Joe Biden, ONU, sanciones | El 3 de febrero de 2022 es el 60 aniversario del bloqueo ilegal contra Cuba, que Estados Unidos admitió pretende “provocar hambre, desesperación y el derrocamiento del gobierno”. Cuba estima que el embargo le ha costado $144.410 millones.
(You can read this article in English here.)
El 3 de febrero de 2022 se cumplen 60 años desde que Estados Unidos declaró oficialmente un embargo económico contra Cuba.
Washington impuso este bloqueo para “provocar hambre, desesperación y el derrocamiento del gobierno”, como admitió un ex funcionario del Departamento de Estado estadounidense.
El gobierno de Cuba ha condenado el embargo ilegal de EEUU como “el acto de guerra económica más complejo, prolongado e inhumano cometido contra cualquier nación”, afirmando que “constituye una violación masiva, flagrante y sistemática de los derechos humanos de todas las cubanas y cubanos”.
Cuba estima que el bloqueo le ha costado a su economía al menos $144.413 millones de dólares estadounidenses.
Cuando el pueblo de Cuba derrocó la dictadura derechista de Fulgencio Batista en una revolución popular el 1 de enero de 1959, Estados Unidos respondió con medidas coercitivas, para castigar al país por derrocar a un régimen cliente leal de Washington.
El 3 de febrero de 1962, las sanciones estadounidenses ya existentes escalaron a un bloqueo total, cuando el presidente John F. Kennedy emitió la Proclamación 3447, declarando un “embargo a todo el comercio con Cuba”.
La Proclamación 3447 de Washington afirmó que el gobierno revolucionario de Cuba “es incompatible con los principios y objetivos del sistema interamericano”, debido a “la ofensiva subversiva del comunismo chino-soviético con la que el gobierno de Cuba se alinea públicamente”.
Este embargo estadounidense, que continúa hasta el día de hoy, es flagrantemente ilegal según el derecho internacional.
El Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Cuba publicó una denuncia del bloqueo en su 60 aniversario, afirmando que “la política de cerco y asfixia económica se consolidó como eje central de la estrategia dirigida a coartar el derecho legítimo de los cubanos a defender su soberanía y forjar un proyecto emancipador, ajeno a la dominación imperialista”.
“Aunque el bloqueo vs Cuba se decretó oficialmente en 1962, su aplicación se remonta al momento mismo del triunfo revolucionario”, agregó la Cancillería.
En abril de 1960, poco más de un año después de la revolución, el subsecretario de estado de EEUU para asuntos interamericanos, Lester Mallory, publicó un memorando titulado “The Decline and Fall of Castro” (“El declive y la caída de Castro”). Este documento es una pistola humeante, que revela claramente los objetivos detrás del bloqueo estadounidense: “hambre, desesperación y el derrocamiento del gobierno”.
Mallory admitió que la “mayoría de los cubanos apoya a Castro” y que “no existe una oposición política efectiva”.
El alto diplomático estadounidense escribió que “el único medio previsible de alienar el apoyo interno es a través del desencanto y la desafección basados en la insatisfacción y las dificultades económicas”.
El memorándum del Departamento de Estado de EEUU declaraba que deberían “debilitar la vida económica negándole a Cuba dinero y suministros con el fin de reducir los salarios nominales y reales, provocar hambre, desesperación y el derrocamiento del gobierno”.
La Cancillería de Cuba dijo que el embargo de EEUU ha “limitado las posibilidades de desarrollo económico, al estar diseñado para impedir las relaciones comerciales con terceros países, obstaculizar al máximo las operaciones bancario-financieras, frenar la inversión extranjera y cortar toda fuente de ingresos.”.
Violando flagrantemente el derecho internacional, el bloqueo estadounidense utiliza “presiones, chantajes y penalidades, [para] aislar a Cuba y castigar a quienes establezcan cualquier vínculo económico, comercial y financiero con el país”, dijo la Cancillería.
“Es la expresión práctica de la doctrina Monroe en el siglo XXI, que mira a América Latina y el Caribe desde posición de propietario, ya sea ‘patio trasero o delantero'” de EEUU, agregó el gobierno cubano.
Por 29 año consecutivo, básicamente todo el mundo votó en la ONU en contra del bloqueo ilegal y asesino de EEUU a Cuba.
184 países votaran en contra del bloqueo.Sólo 2 votaron a favor: Estados Unidos e Israel.3 títeres de EEUU se abstuvieron: Colombia, Ucrania y los EAU pic.twitter.com/Kac29gDOp9
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) June 23, 2021
Al bloqueo ilegal de Washington contra Cuba se opone casi toda la comunidad internacional.
En junio de 2021, 184 de los 193 estados miembros de las Naciones Unidas (95%) votaron en contra del embargo estadounidense a Cuba. Solo Estados Unidos e Israel votaron a favor del bloqueo, mientras que Colombia, Ucrania y Brasil se abstuvieron.
Este fue el 29 año consecutivo en que el bloqueo estadounidense fue condenado con la gran mayoría de votos en Naciones Unidas.
En la votación de la ONU de 2021, el canciller de Cuba, Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, calificó el bloqueo de “una violación masiva, flagrante y sistemática de los derechos humanos del pueblo cubano”, que constituye “una guerra económica de alcance extraterritorial contra un país pequeño país ya afectado en el periodo reciente por la recesión y la crisis económica global provocadas por la pandemia”.
“como el virus [del Covid-19], el bloqueo asfixia y mata, y debe cesar”, dijo Rodríguez.
El portavoz del imperio estadounidense, el New York Times, admite que Biden es "más duro con Cuba que" Trump
En cuanto al imperialismo asesino, no hay diferencia entre los demócratas y los republicanos. A los dos les encanta torturar al pueblo cubano
Es el sadismo bipartidista pic.twitter.com/sGFR2dQ4kc
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) August 10, 2021
Si bien el 95% de los países del mundo se oponen al bloqueo ilegal de EEUU por parte de Washington, este cuenta con apoyo bipartidista dentro de los Estados Unidos.
La administración de Donald Trump impuso cientos de nuevas sanciones económicas contra Cuba. La administración de Joe Biden se ha negado a levantar estas medidas coercitivas unilaterales y, en cambio, ha impuesto aún más.
The New York Times señaló que “Biden está implementando una línea más dura con Cuba que su predecesor, el expresidente Donald Trump”.
|
Write an article about: Lula wins Brazil election: Game-changer for BRICS and Latin America. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Brazil, Brian Mier, BRICS, Jair Bolsonaro, Lula da Silva | Leftist Lula da Silva defeated far-right incumbent Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil’s October 30 presidential election, vowing to strengthen Latin American regional integration, expand the BRICS system, and fight poverty and hunger at home.
Brazil’s left-wing former President Lula da Silva won round two of the election on October 30, despite blatant voter suppression by far-right incumbent Jair Bolsonaro.
Lula got 50.9% of the total, including over 2.1 million more votes than Bolsonaro.
In his victory speech, Lula said his top priority will be to ensure that no Brazilian goes hungry. He likewise pledged to provide housing for the homeless, jobs and opportunities for the poor, better education, and equality for women.
Results of Brazil’s October 30, 2022 presidential election round two
Lula was a co-founder of the BRICS system, which he has called to expand. He has similarly vowed to strengthen unity in Latin America and the Caribbean through institutions of regional integration like the CELAC, UNASUR, and MERCOSUR.
Before the election, Lula proposed creating a pan-Latin American currency, in order to “be freed of the dollar.”
Lula’s victory represents a reversal of two US-sponsored soft coups in 2016 and 2018, which overthrew the Workers’ Party (PT) government of former President Dilma Rousseff and subsequently imprisoned Lula on false charges, handing power to Bolsonaro.
In the interview below, Brazil-based journalist Brian Mier speaks with Multipolarista editor Ben Norton about the global significance of Lula’s historic victory.
Follow Brian Mier on Twitter at @BrianMteleSUR
Thousands of people have poured out onto Paulista Avenue to celebrate Lula's historic victory- the first time a challenger has ever beat an imcumbant since the return to democracy in 1985. pic.twitter.com/eU3wru2bOz
— BrianMier (@BrianMteleSUR) October 30, 2022
Read independent news website Brasil Wire at brasilwire.com.
Lula says the top priorities of his government will be eliminating hunger and fighting poverty. pic.twitter.com/1LS3lUxvOk
— BrianMier (@BrianMteleSUR) October 31, 2022
|
Write an article about: Latin America rejects coup in Peru, while US supports unelected regime killing protesters. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | ALBA, AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Antony Blinken, Argentina, Bolivarian Alliance, Bolivia, Caribbean, Colombia, Cuba, Dina Boluarte, Gustavo Petro, Honduras, Mexico, Ned Price, Nicaragua, Peru, Venezuela | At least 14 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have condemned the coup in Peru, backing President Pedro Castillo. The unelected regime, which has killed dozens of protesters, has the staunch support of the US and the region’s right wing.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
More than a dozen countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have condemned the coup in Peru and backed democratically elected President Pedro Castillo.
Meanwhile, the US government has staunchly supported the coup regime, which has suspended civil liberties, imprisoned Castillo for 18 months without trial, and unleashed extreme violence on Peruvian protesters, killing dozens and wounding hundreds.
At least 14 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean have publicly expressed support for Peru’s President Castillo, including:
On the other side, Peru’s unelected coup regime has the strong support of the United States and Canada, as well as Brazil’s far-right Jair Bolsonaro administration and the right-wing governments in Ecuador, Uruguay, and Costa Rica.
Chile, led by liberal President Gabriel Boric, is the only country with an ostensibly left-of-center government that has joined the US and the region’s right wing in backing the coup in Peru.
Peru’s coup regime also has the support of Washington’s Organization of American States (OAS), which acts as an instrument of US foreign policy.
Since Castillo was overthrown in the December 7 coup, Peru’s unelected de facto leader Dina Boluarte has cracked down harshly, sending the military and police to kill protesters.
State security services have raided the offices of social movements, labor unions, and left-wing political parties and arrested their leaders, targeting the Campesino Confederation of Peru, the Peruvian Socialist Party, and the leftist party Nuevo Perú.
Numerous activists have reported that the coup regime is planting weapons and other materials in order to falsely accuse protesters of “terrorism.”
This witness at Peru's Peasant Confederation says police raided their office, detained them, and planted weapons and other materials that do not belong to them
Peru's coup regime and oligarch-controlled media are trying to frame protesters as "terrorists"https://t.co/am8L9ztYiY
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 17, 2022
Peru’s US-backed coup regime has also brought back war criminals who worked in the far-right dictatorship of Alberto Fujimori in the 1990s.
The man appointed chief of Peru’s notorious National Directorate of Intelligence (DINI), Juan Carlos Liendo O’Connor, previously served in the feared National Intelligence Service (SIN) in the Fujimori dictatorship. Liendo O’Connor’s boss was sentenced to 35 years in prison for murdering and disappearing left-wing activists.
Today, Liendo O’Connor, the coup regime’s new intelligence chief, is borrowing the same tactics used by the Fujimorista dictatorship. He demonizes protesters as “terrorists,” thereby justifying the use of violence against them.
While Peru’s coup regime is killing protesters, suspending civil liberties, and bringing back war criminals from the Fujimori dictatorship, the United States is praising it for supposedly defending “democracy.”
Coup leader Boluarte held a friendly call with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken on December 16. Her office boasted that he “reiterated the support of the United States.”
La presidenta de la república, @DinaErcilia Boluarte, dialogó telefónicamente con el Secretario de Estado de @LaCasaBlanca, @SecBlinken, quien le reiteró el respaldo de los Estados Unidos al gobierno que lidera. pic.twitter.com/dMn11CInxv
— Presidencia del Perú ?? (@presidenciaperu) December 17, 2022
The State Department confirmed this call in a readout, stating, “The United States looks forward to working closely with President Boluarte on shared goals and values related to democracy, human rights, security, anti-corruption, and economic prosperity.”
Washington did not mention the dozens of protesters who have been killed and hundreds more who have been wounded by Boluarte’s unelected coup regime.
CIA agent turned State Department spokesman Ned Price said Washington spoke with the coup leader to “reinforce our partnership and emphasize U.S. support for a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous Peru.”
.@SecBlinken spoke with Peruvian President @DinaErcilia today to reinforce our partnership and emphasize U.S. support for a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous Peru. https://t.co/kdztJZjGw1
— Ned Price (@StateDeptSpox) December 18, 2022
Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, and Bolivia published a joint statement supporting President Castillo, who they recognized was democratically elected by the people of Peru.
“For the world, it is not news that President Castillo Terrones, since the day of his election, was victim of anti-democratic harassment,” they wrote.
The government of Mexico’s left-wing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) even announced a formal “pause” in its diplomatic relations with Peru’s unelected regime.
Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, and Bolivia released a joint statement supporting Peru’s elected President Pedro Castillo, saying he is victim of “anti-democratic harassment,” following a US-backed coup.
Gustavo Petro recognized it was a "parliamentary coup"https://t.co/pxyxM1hHpU
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 13, 2022
Colombia’s President Petro denounced the ouster of Castillo as a “parliamentary coup.” He added that the putsch is a warning for all elected left-wing leaders in Latin America.
Petro declared that “the Latin American oligarchy doesn’t want progressivism,” and “what they can’t win at the ballot box, they are trying to topple.”
Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro names some of the recent coups against democratically elected left-wing leaders in Latin America:-Honduras in 2009-Paraguay in 2012-Brazil in 2016-Bolivia in 2019-now Peru
Full transcript here: https://t.co/V3dPxph76s pic.twitter.com/lHx2r90syj
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 19, 2022
The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA), the left-wing economic and political bloc that consists of 10 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean, released a similar statement supporting Castillo.
“We reject the political trap created by the right-wing forces of that country against the Constitutional President Pedro Castillo, forcing him to take measures that were later used by his adversaries in parliament to oust him from office,” ALBA wrote.
“We repudiate the repression by the law enforcement agencies against the Peruvian people who are defending a government democratically elected at the polls,” they added.
ALBA members include Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and the Caribbean nations of Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
The Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA) uniting nations in Latin America & the Caribbean met for its 18th annual summit
They condemned the coup in Peru against constitutional President Pedro Castillo and denounced the lawfare in Argentina against Cristina Kirchnerhttps://t.co/ATSeNzLB37
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 16, 2022
Honduras also emphasized its “energetic condemnation of the coup d’etat” against Peruvian President Castillo, stating that he represents the “sovereign will of the people.”
“Coups d’etat should not be carried out,” declared the left-wing Honduran government of President Xiomara Castro, who restored democracy in 2021 after 12 years of right-wing coup regimes sponsored by the United States.
Honduras stressed its “energetic condemnation of the coup d’etat” in Peru, saying elected President Castillo represents “the sovereign will of the people”
Honduras was also victim of a US-sponsored coup in 2009. It didn't restore democracy until late 2021https://t.co/QLB8YjNYrc
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 13, 2022
Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro made a powerful speech denouncing the coup in Peru, stating:
One sees what the Peruvian people are suffering. They elect a teacher, President Pedro Castillo, and since the first moment of the election, they don’t want to recognize his victory, they ignore the victory.
And at the end they were forced by reality to recognize his victory as president, and once he was sworn in on July 28, 2021, they begin to conspire to launch a parliamentary coup.
And so begins the attack and the wearing away, votes of condemnation against his ministers, permanent harassment.
…
They led him to the extreme of trying to dissolve the congress of Peru.
And all the circumstances that we have seen are the oligarchic elites who don’t allow a humble teacher to rise to the presidency of Peru and try to govern for the people.
Maduro said this is a message “that the extreme right is sending to the popular and progressive movements: ‘We are not going to let them govern.'”
? #EsNoticia | Perú víctima del plan golpista de las oligarquías (+Detalles) ?https://t.co/Agbf9kP5Vs#NavidadEsAlegría pic.twitter.com/Bdjt8PURlr
— Cancillería Venezuela ?? (@CancilleriaVE) December 9, 2022
|
Write an article about: Europe and US meet with Venezuela’s real President Maduro – desperate for lower oil prices, their coup attempt falters. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Antony Blinken, Brian A Nichols, Donald Trump, Emmanuel Macron, France, Joe Biden, John Kerry, Juan Guaidó, Nicolás Maduro, oil, Venezuela, William Barr | After years backing a failed coup attempt, France’s Emmanuel Macron, US climate envoy John Kerry, and Portugal’s PM met with Venezuela’s elected President Nicolás Maduro at the UN COP27 conference. Desperate to lower oil prices, they dropped the pretense that Juan Guaidó controls anything.
After years backing a failed coup attempt, France’s leader Emmanuel Macron, US climate envoy John Kerry, and Portugal’s Prime Minister Antonio Costa held informal discussions with Venezuela’s constitutionally elected President Nicolás Maduro.
These meetings took place on November 7 at the United Nations climate change conference, COP27, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt.
The Joe Biden administration still technically recognizes unelected coup leader Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s supposed “interim president,” but Washington and Brussels are desperate to lower oil prices amid an energy crisis that has wreaked havoc on their economies.
Before the West imposed harsh sanctions on Russia over the proxy war in Ukraine, Moscow had been the largest supplier of both oil and gas to Europe.
December 5 marks the deadline by which the European Union pledged to cut off all imports of Russian crude. This means EU member states are desperately looking for alternative suppliers, as winter soon approaches.
President Biden visited Saudi Arabia in July and tried to pressure both the country and the OPEC+ alliance to boost production in order to drop the price of oil on the global market. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman refused, instead announcing that the oil producers would be cutting their production.
France’s President Emmanuel Macron may be a banker who is deeply motivated by neoliberal ideology, but he is also a bit of a pragmatist.
Realizing that he had few other choices, Macron approached Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro at the COP27 conference. A video that went viral on social media showed the French leader politely asking Maduro for a meeting and proposing dialogue.
French President Macron very respectfully spoke with Venezuelan President Maduro at UN climate conference COP27
Macron made it clear France recognizes Venezuela's constitutionally elected government, referring to Maduro as president and proposing dialoguepic.twitter.com/n3tZ2QutVe
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) November 8, 2022
On the same day, Maduro met with the Biden administration’s special climate envoy, John Kerry.
Kerry had harshly criticized Maduro back when he served as secretary of state under President Barack Obama. The Venezuelan leader had condemned Kerry as well, calling him “ridiculous” in a 2014 rally.
But today, reducing the price of oil is a more important priority for Washington. And Caracas is willing to negotiate in hopes of lifting some of the illegal unilateral sanctions that the United States imposed on it, which have crippled Venezuela’s oil sector and devastated the country’s export-dependent economy.
ÚLTIMA HORA | Maduro y John Kerry estrechan las manos en otro encuentro polémico en la COP27 (Video). https://t.co/xVb9PG4wxP pic.twitter.com/sfK2kYXN0U
— AlbertoRodNews (@AlbertoRodNews) November 8, 2022
At the COP27 conference, Portugal’s Prime Minister Antonio Costa likewise had a friendly chat with Maduro.
The Portuguese leader was the most open of all with his intentions, saying clearly that the economic situation in Europe has been difficult with high inflation and soaring costs of oil and gas.
– ¿Cómo está Portugal?– No es fácil, con la inflación, el costo del petróleo, el gas…
Así, como si nada hubiera pasado, el PM de Portugal, Antonio Costa, le deja caer a Nicolás Maduro sus problemas internos.
*** Costa fue otro de los que desconocía el gobierno de Maduro. ?♂️ pic.twitter.com/K8CF2Logk1
— Luis De Jesús ?? (@ldejesusreyes) November 8, 2022
These meetings represent quite a political reversal for the Western powers, which have spent years trying to overthrow Venezuela’s leftist Chavista government.
During a coup attempt in which right-wing extremists erected violent “guarimba” barricades to destabilize the country in 2014, the Obama administration began imposing sanctions on top Venezuelan officials.
In 2015, the White House released an executive order declaring Venezuela an “unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”
This opened the flood gates for illegal unilateral US sanctions, which increased by the year, seriously damaging Venezuela’s oil industry, restricting its exports, and thus starving the country of much needed foreign exchange reserves.
In January 2019, the Donald Trump administration initiated the biggest coup attempt yet, appointing little-known right-wing opposition politician Juan Guaidó as supposed “interim president,” despite the fact that he has never won a single vote in a presidential election.
Trump drastically expanded the sanctions into a full-on US embargo of Venezuela, similar to Washington’s six-decade blockade of Cuba. The South American nation’s oil production subsequently fell to the lowest levels since 2003 – when the US government sponsored another, briefly successful coup in Venezuela and a subsequent oil lockout and bosses’ strike by the right-wing opposition.
Trump and top US officials also repeatedly discussed launching military attacks on Venezuela. Neoconservative National Security Advisor John Bolton later boasted of the hard work it took to organize the coup.
At the beginning, France eagerly joined in the US-led regime-change operation. Macron declared that Paris recognized Guaidó as Venezuela’s “interim president.”
Los Venezolanos tienen el derecho de expresarse libremente y democráticamente. Francia reconoce a @jguaido como "presidente encargado" para implementar un proceso electoral. Apoyamos al Grupo de contacto, creado con la UE, en este período de transición. https://t.co/7cgpdgz7TN
— Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) February 4, 2019
As recently as 2020, Macron was still publicly maintaining this charade, tweeting smiling photos with Guaidó.
Échange constructif avec @jguaido réélu à la présidence de l’@AsambleaVE. pic.twitter.com/p0O0HOWCZt
— Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) January 24, 2020
Soon after the Biden administration came to power in January 2021, it made it clear that it was continuing Trump’s policy.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken had a friendly call with Guaidó on March 2, reaffirming Washington’s “unwavering support.”
Today Venezuelan Interim President @jguaido and I discussed our unwavering support for democracy in Venezuela and our efforts to improve the lives of the Venezuelan people.
— Secretary Antony Blinken (@SecBlinken) March 3, 2021
As recently as June 2022, the State Department was still describing Guaidó as so-called “interim president.”
For the second time in as many weeks, Interim President @jguaido was attacked in Venezuela. The United States is deeply concerned and condemns these escalating acts of violence, harassment, and intimidation against Interim President Guaidó and all those who stand for democracy.
— Secretary Antony Blinken (@SecBlinken) June 12, 2022
The US assistant secretary for western hemisphere affairs, Brian A. Nichols, even removed the word “interim” and referred to Guaidó simply as “president” on June 11.
We are deeply concerned by the unprovoked attack on President @jguaido and his colleagues. This egregious attack risked lives; those responsible for the assault should be brought to justice.
— Brian A. Nichols (@WHAAsstSecty) June 11, 2022
The West’s de facto reluctant admission in 2022 that Maduro is Venezuela’s constitutional president stands in stark contrast to a press conference given in April 2020, when the US Justice Department put a mafia-style $15 million bounty on the head of Maduro and other top Venezuelan government officials.
Donald Trump’s far-right attorney general, veteran CIA operative William Barr, levelled absurd accusations of “drug trafficking” and “narco-terrorism,” without a scintilla of evidence.
The Trump administration’s coup attempt in Venezuela culminated in a botched invasion in May 2020, featuring dozens of mercenaries and former US Army special operations forces.
Known as Operation Gideon, this failed terrorist operation was sponsored by the CIA and Colombian intelligence agencies, according to coup-plotters involved in the attack.
A Venezuelan army defector who helped plan a botched May 2020 invasion, Clíver Alcalá, said the coup-plotters were in touch with the CIA and other US government agencies
They had Washington's approval to try to violently overthrow President Nicolás Madurohttps://t.co/GHYCrcZnm8
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) February 2, 2022
|
Write an article about: No es Nicaragua la que está ‘aislada’; son EEUU y la UE. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | China, Corea, FSLN, Iran, Japón, Nicaragua, Palestina, Rusia, Sandinistas, Siria, Turquía, Vietnam, Yemen | Los medios occidentales dicen que el gobierno sandinista de Nicaragua está “aislado”, pero tiene el apoyo de países gigantes en Asia, África y Latinoamérica, mientras EEUU pelea con la UE
Éste 10 de enero fue la toma de posesión del Presidente Daniel Ortega de Nicaragua, el líder del Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional.
Hay mucha propaganda absurda en los medios comerciales, diciendo que Nicaragua supuestamente está “aislada de la comunidad internacional”. Pero cuando dicen la “comunidad internacional”, realmente significa “los imperialistas en Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea”.
Revisemos la narrativa de la guerra de la información en los grandes medios hegemónicos:
Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea rechazaron las elecciones en Nicaragua en noviembre, sosteniendo que supuestamente fueron “fraudulentas”, y respondieron con guerra económica. (Todavía espero las elecciones presidenciales en las monarquías autocráticas del Golfo Pérsico, que son aliados obedientes de EEUU y la UE.)
Subsecuentemente, la respuesta a la inauguración presidencial éste 10 de enero por parte de los imperialistas en EEUU y la UE fue más guerra económica. Coordinando sus acciones, las potencias occidentales impusieron más sanciones contra funcionarios del gobierno de Nicaragua, su ejército, su instituto de telecomunicaciones y una compañía estatal de minas.
Pero si miramos más allá de las distracciones en los medios comerciales, podemos ver muy claramente que, en realidad, Nicaragua tiene muchos aliados en Asia, África y Latinoamérica, representando a miles de millones de personas, incluyendo las naciones más grandes del mundo.
Representantes de los siguientes países saludaron la inauguración del Presidente Ortega:
Los propagandistas en los medios occidentales realmente creen que todo el mundo se centra en el 15% de la población mundial, aproximadamente, que vive en EEUU y la UE, y que constituyen su llamada “comunidad internacional”. Ignoran la gran mayoría de la humanidad en Asia, África y America Latina y el Caribe.
La verdad es que no es Nicaragua que esté aislada, sino Estados Unidos y la Unión Europea, quienes cada vez más están perdiendo sus aliados. Hasta Francia, una antigua potencia colonial, dice que Europea no puede confiar en EEUU. Y Washington amenazó a Alemania con sanciones por su gasoducto con Rusia, el Nord Stream 2.
Mientras los imperialistas occidentales imponen sanciones ilegales a pueblos a través del planeta — y mientras luchan entre ellos — Asia sigue avanzando muy rápidamente, América Latina y África están desarrollándose y los mecanismos de integración Sur-Sur se están fortaleciendo.
¿Quieres saber lo que realmente es el aislamiento? Cuando más de 95% de los 193 estados miembros de la ONU votan todos los años en la Asamblea General, por tres décadas, para condenar el bloqueo ilegal de EEUU a Cuba. Ése es el verdadero aislamiento internacional.
Por 29 año consecutivo, básicamente todo el mundo votó en la ONU en contra del bloqueo ilegal y asesino de EEUU a Cuba.
184 países votaran en contra del bloqueo.Sólo 2 votaron a favor: Estados Unidos e Israel.3 títeres de EEUU se abstuvieron: Colombia, Ucrania y los EAU pic.twitter.com/Kac29gDOp9
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) June 23, 2021
|
Write an article about: Honduras condemns coup in Peru, supports elected President Pedro Castillo. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | coup, Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, Pedro Castillo, Peru, Xiomara Castro | Honduras stressed its “energetic condemnation of the coup d’etat” in Peru, saying elected President Pedro Castillo represents “the sovereign will of the people.” Honduras was also the victim of a US-sponsored coup in 2009.
Honduras’ democratically elected left-wing government was overthrown in a military coup, sponsored by the US government, in 2009.
After restoring democracy in late 2021, Honduras’ new government has warned of a similar coup in South America.
On December 7, Peru’s right-wing-controlled congress, which is notorious for its blatant corruption and has an approval rating of between 7% and 11%, launched a coup against democratically elected left-wing President Pedro Castillo.
The US State Department publicly supported the coup.
Castillo was imprisoned, setting off huge protests around the country in which Peruvians are demanding his release, calling for new elections, and proposing a new constitution.
Honduras’ Foreign Ministry published a statement on the day of the coup, then republished it on December 12, communicating its “energetic condemnation of the coup d’etat that occurred in Peru, which is the result of a series of events to erode democracy and the sovereign will of the people represented by President Pedro Castillo.”
?COMUNICADO: Posición del Gobierno de Honduras en relación a los últimos acontecimientos ocurridos en el Perú. pic.twitter.com/C1sG2OY8Zv
— Cancillería Honduras (@CancilleriaHN) December 13, 2022
Honduras demanded that Castillo’s “physical integrity and human rights be respected.”
“The government of Honduras hopes that the democratic order and electoral sovereignty of Peru retake the rule of law and guarantees its rights, amid this grave constitutional violation,” it added.
“Coups d’etat should not be carried out,” the statement stressed.
Honduras’ former President Manuel Zelaya likewise said, “We energetically condemn the coup d’etat in Peru, violating the sovereign will of the people, represented by President Pedro Castillo.”
Condenamos enérgicamente el golpe de estado en Peru violentando la soberana voluntad del pueblo, representado por el Presidente Pedro Castillo. @PedroCastilloTe @int_antiimp
— Manuel Zelaya R. (@manuelzr) December 7, 2022
Zelaya today serves as an advisor to Honduras’ current President Xiomara Castro, who is his wife, and is a member of the leftist Libre Party, which Zelaya also leads.
Zelaya founded an organization called the Anti-Imperialist International of the Peoples in Defense of Humanity and Nature.
This Anti-Imperialist International has launched a campaign that “demands the immediate freedom of Pedro Castillo, Peru’s legitimate president.”
La internacional Antimperialista de los pueblos exige libertad inmediata para Pedro Castillo presidente legítimo de Perú. #LibertadPedroCastillo #Perú pic.twitter.com/HLg5c7q7kZ
— Internacional Antiimperialista de los Pueblos (@int_antiimp) December 12, 2022
Zelaya was himself overthrown in a US-backed military coup in 2009.
Honduras was ruled by a series of right-wing coup regimes that were deeply involved in drug trafficking and stole multiple elections, until the restoration of democracy in late 2021 with Xiomara Castro’s victory.
Xiomara Castro is Honduras’ first democratic leader since the 2009 coup.
US turns on Honduran narco-dictator Juan Orlando Hernández after long supporting him
|
Write an article about: US govt’s Summit of the Americas fails: Boycott by presidents of Mexico, Bolivia, Honduras, Guatemala. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Bolivia, Cuba, Guatemala, Honduras, Joe Biden, Luis Arce, Mexico, Nicaragua, Summit of the Americas, Venezuela, Xiomara Castro | As the US government’s Summit of the Americas opens in Los Angeles, California, the presidents of Mexico, Bolivia, Honduras, and Guatemala have refused to attend, protesting the exclusion of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
The US government’s Summit of the Americas started on June 6 in Los Angeles, California. And the event proved to be a major diplomatic failure for the Joe Biden administration.
Washington refused to invite the socialist governments of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.
So to protest this exclusion, the presidents of Mexico, Bolivia, and Honduras boycotted the summit. Guatemala’s president also chose to skip the conference.
This means heads of state representing Latin American countries with a total population of more than 200 million people – a significant percentage of the Americas – refused to attend Washington’s Summit of the Americas.
The most significant absence was Mexico’s left-wing president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, known popularly by the acronym AMLO.
“I am not going to the summit because not all of the countries of the Americas were invited,” AMLO explained in his morning press conference on June 6.
“I believe in the need to change the policy that has been imposed for centuries, the exclusion, the desire to dominate, the lack of respect for the sovereignty of the countries and the independence of every country,” the Mexican president explained.
Mexico's President AMLO said he refuses to attend the US government's Summit of the Americas, protesting the exclusion of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua
AMLO condemned US "hegemony" and its "old policy of interventionism," of "lack of respect"
Read more: https://t.co/O7bOWe6W6N pic.twitter.com/chPeIY46YD
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) June 6, 2022
“There cannot be a Summit of the Americas if all of the countries of the American continent do not participate,” López Obrador continued. “We consider that to be the old policy of interventionism, of a lack of respect for nations and their peoples.”
AMLO criticized the US Republican Party for its “extremist” positions against Cuba and racist policies against immigrants. But he also pointed out that some prominent figures in the Democratic Party, such as New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez, have also contributed to “hate” against Cuba and hawkish meddling in Latin America’s sovereign affairs.
“I don’t accept hegemonies,” AMLO added. “Not of China, not of Russia, not of the United States. All countries, no matter how small they are, are free and are independent.”
López Obrador said that Mexico’s foreign minister, Marcelo Ebrard, would instead attend the Summit of the Americas.
AMLO’s absence is especially significant given that, in addition to being neighbors with a 3,000-kilometer border, the United States and Mexico’s are each other’s top trading partners.
Mexico is the second-largest country in Latin America, in terms of population. It also has the second-biggest economy in the region.
Joining AMLO in condemning the US government’s policy of exclusion was Bolivia’s socialist President Luis Arce.
Bolivia’s foreign ministry confirmed on June 6 that Arce is not joining the summit either. Instead, the country’s ambassador to the Organization of American States (OAS), Héctor Arce, is attending.
In a Twitter thread the week before, Arce insisted that “it is time for the government of the United States to put an end to the senseless and criminal economic, commercial, and financial blockade that weighs on Cuba, as well as the more than 500 unilateral coercive sanctions imposed on Venezuela and Nicaragua.”
The Bolivian leader added, “With blockades and sanctions, a sustainable, resilient, and equitable future will never be able to be built in the hemisphere, as the next Summit of the Americas is proposing.”
¡Con bloqueos y sanciones no se podrá construir nunca un futuro sostenible, resiliente y equitativo en el Hemisferio, como se lo plantea la próxima Cumbre de las Américas!
— Luis Alberto Arce Catacora (Lucho Arce) (@LuchoXBolivia) May 27, 2022
Honduras’ new left-wing President Xiomara Castro is boycotting the Summit of the Americas as well.
On May 28, Castro tweeted, “I will only attend the summit if all of the countries of America are invited without exception.”
On June 6, the Honduran president made good on her promise, and her government confirmed that Foreign Minister Eduardo Enrique Reina would attend instead.
Asistiré a la Cumbre solo si están invitados todos los países de América sin excepción. “El estudio más digno de un americano es América”.
— Xiomara Castro de Zelaya (@XiomaraCastroZ) May 28, 2022
While the majority of the leaders not attending the Summit of the Americas are left-wing, even Guatemala’s right-wing president, Alejandro Giammattei, announced that he will not be present.
Several officials from Giammattei’s government have been sanctioned by the United States, and he is protesting the Biden administration’s policies with his absence.
The Caribbean Community (CARICOM), which represents 15 states, similarly threatened to boycott the summit if Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua were excluded.
Several countries in the Caribbean did confirm they are attending, however. It is not clear how many are boycotting.
Brazil’s far-right leader, Jair Bolsonaro, had initially threatened not to attend the summit. Washington responded by promising Bolsonaro that it would welcome him to the White House and give him one-on-one meetings with Biden.
The far-right Brazilian autocrat thus changed his mind and decided to attend.
Bolsonaro is joined by the right-wing leaders of Colombia and Ecuador, as well as the centrist leaders of Chile and Argentina. (The conservative president of Uruguay, Luis Lacalle Pou, had planned to join, but was ultimately unable to do so because he got Covid-19.)
The Summit of the Americas was first convened by the United States in 1994, after the end of the first cold war, as a way for Washington to expand its hegemony in Latin America and the Caribbean.
That same year, the US government signed the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), a neoliberal deal with Mexico and Canada, which devastated Mexico’s local economy and fueled a wave of mass migration.
Numerous grassroots organizations, left-wing social movements, and labor unions have organized an alternative People’s Summit for Democracy to protest the US government’s Summit of the Americas.
The People’s Summit is hosting a series of demonstrations, panels, concerts, and cultural activities in California from June 8 to 10.
|
Write an article about: Colombia’s President Petro denounces ‘parliamentary coup’ against Peru’s Castillo. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Colombia, coup, Gustavo Petro, Pedro Castillo, Peru, Semana, Vicky Dávila | Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro denounced the overthrow of Peru’s Pedro Castillo as a “parliamentary coup,” saying it is a warning for all democratically elected left-wing leaders in Latin America: “What they can’t win at the ballot box, they are trying to topple”
Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro has denounced the ouster of Peru’s President Pedro Castillo as a “parliamentary coup.”
Petro said the coup in Peru is a warning for all democratically elected left-wing leaders in Latin America.
Pointing to recent coups against left-wing governments, Petro recalled, “It happened in Paraguay [in 2012]; it happened in Honduras [in 2009]; it happened in Brazil [in 2016]. Imagine that! When they took out Dilma Rousseff. It happened in Bolivia [in 2019], with some deaths,”
“The message is clear: What they can’t win at the ballot box, they are trying to overthrow,” the Colombian president cautioned. He added, “That is what happened with [Salvador] Allende [in Chile in 1973].”
Petro argued Castillo was ousted because he represented the humble indigenous-descent majority of the country, who have not been represented by the political system.
“They overthrew him, among other reasons, because he is from the Andes, because he is poor,” he said.
Petro made these comments in an interview with Semana, a major media outlet that is closely associated with Colombia’s right wing. The interview was conducted by Semana’s director, Vicky Dávila, who is well known for her conservative sympathies.
Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro names some of the recent coups against democratically elected left-wing leaders in Latin America:-Honduras in 2009-Paraguay in 2012-Brazil in 2016-Bolivia in 2019-now Peru
Full transcript here: https://t.co/V3dPxph76s pic.twitter.com/lHx2r90syj
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 19, 2022
GUSTAVO PETRO: [In Peru] there is an emergency, with protests, above all in the Andes mountains, which is who voted for him [President Pedro Castillo].
Because, for a long time, Peru has had a social fracture between what Lima is, and what the Andes is, with very different political processes.
But here, that President (Castillo), elected by the people, is from the Andes.
And they overthrow him, among other reasons, because he is from the Andes, because he is poor.
…
You have a president who was elected by the people, who tries to use an article (134) of their constitution, which, yes, allows the closure of the congress. We don’t have that, but they do.
VICKY DÁVILA: But what happened is there were the circumstances, just let me say this to you, there was the circumstance in which they were about to order [presidential] vacancy.
GUSTAVO PETRO: Vacancy, which is a parliamentary coup. Vacancy means you leave —
VICKY DÁVILA: So he is a victim, Mr. President? You feel that way?
GUSTAVO PETRO: Yes, I feel that way.
VICKY DÁVILA: That statement has led to criticisms of you. You know that?
GUSTAVO PETRO: Yes, but —
VICKY DÁVILA: And you don’t care?
GUSTAVO PETRO: I can’t – tell me something, that they [Peru’s coup government] are killing people, because we’re talking about what had happened in Colombia, but it’s happening there.
There are deaths, [and many more since], a state of emergency, a president elected by the people who was not sentenced by any judge, and his own security and police capture him, and they imprison him.
Where was the legal sentence by a judge?
…
VICKY DÁVILA: But the IACHR [Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, an arm of the OAS] did not protect him.
GUSTAVO PETRO: Well, is the CIDH being consistent today with the American Convention [on Human Rights]? Or is it in a political game, involving the OAS?
Because if left-wing governments keep winning [elections], the OAS [Organization of American States] has to change. And what mechanism is easier for overthrowing left-wing governments? Which were legitimately elected by the people.
VICKY DÁVILA: Do you think that what is happening to Castillo is a warning for other left-wing governments?
GUSTAVO PETRO: For all of them.
VICKY DÁVILA: And that includes you?
GUSTAVO PETRO: Yes, all of them.
VICKY DÁVILA: You think that could happen to you? Could they try to do it against you?
GUSTAVO PETRO: It happened in Paraguay [in 2012]; it happened in Honduras [in 2009]; it happened in Brazil [in 2016]. Imagine that! When they took out Dilma Rousseff. It happened in Bolivia [in 2019], with some deaths. Among other cases, the ones which I remember.
The message is clear: What they can’t win at the ballot box, they are trying to overthrow. … That is what happened with [Salvador] Allende [in Chile in 1973].
When they overthrow Allende, who is a president who is elected by the people, when they overthrow him by force, what followed in Latin America? Dictatorships followed. Millions of people exiled, revolutionary wars, of which I was a child, in Central America, in Colombia.
The democratic pact was broken. There was nothing but violence.
Now years have passed, now once again the people are electing their leaders, for better or for worse, but it is the people electing their leaders.
Whey are they overthrowing them? Because the Latin American oligarchy doesn’t want progressivism? So win the elections then! Don’t overthrow presidents by force.
Because all this is doing is leading to levels of violence that can be very serious, if we are not able to respond. You are already seeing it.
|
Write an article about: USA vs the world: Blockade on Cuba opposed by 97% of countries at UN. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Cuba, Israel, sanctions, Ukraine, UN, United Nations | The world voted 187 to 2 at the United Nations General Assembly for an end to the illegal US embargo against Cuba. Only Israel supported Washington, while Ukraine abstained.
US officials frequently talk about the “rules-based international order”, and label other countries as “rogue states” if Washington doesn’t like their policies.
But a look at votes in the United Nations clearly shows that the United States consistently opposes the will of the entire international community.
The world saw a striking example of this on November 2, when almost every country on Earth supported a UN General Assembly resolution that called to end the US embargo against Cuba.
Only two countries voted against the measure: the United States and Israel.
Just one country abstained: Ukraine.
The world has for the most part voted the same way for 31 consecutive years.
In 2022, the vote was 185 to two, with two abstentions. At that time, Brazil was ruled by far-right, pro-US leader Jair Bolsonaro, who abstained. But now that Brazil’s left-wing President Lula da Silva is back in power, he has joined with the rest of the international community in opposing illegal US sanctions.
Entire world votes 185 to 2 against blockade of Cuba – US and Israel are rogue states at UN
Washington has maintained a suffocating blockade against Cuba for more than 60 years. This has starved the country of an estimated $159 billion, or approximately 150% of Cuba’s entire GDP.
The US embargo prevents Cuba from importing certain technologies, machine parts, medicines, and even foods, despite Washington’s misleading claim to have “humanitarian exemptions” – a rhetorical sleight of hand that in reality does not apply when foreign firms are afraid of secondary sanctions and therefore do not bother the risk of trading with Cuba.
Illegal US sanctions make it exceedingly difficult for Cuba to get access to international financing, and cut off communication with many risk-averse foreign banks.
The US blockade has directly contributed to many preventable deaths of Cubans, who have perished because their country was not able to import specific medicines, medical equipment, or machine parts that were needed to treat them.
Washington’s goal behind this criminal blockade is very clear: “to bring about hunger, desperation, and overthrow of government”.
In an internal State Department cable from 1960, the year after the triumph of the Cuban Revolution led by Fidel Castro, top US diplomats regretfully conceded that “the majority of Cubans support Castro” and “there is no effective political opposition”.
The US State Department therefore concluded:
The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship.
If the above are accepted or cannot be successfully countered, it follows that every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba. If such a policy is adopted, it should be the result of a positive decision which would call forth a line of action which, while as adroit and inconspicuous as possible, makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.
Cuba’s Foreign Ministry published a report for UN member states in July 2023, which detailed how illegal US sanctions have devastated the country.
In the year from March 1, 2022 to February 28, 2023, Cuba estimated that the US blockade caused losses of $4.87 billion, or around $13 million per day.
This is a massive economic blow for a small island nation whose GDP is just over $100 billion.
Cuba calculated that, “At current prices, the accumulated losses during the over 60 years of application of this policy amount to USD 159,084,300,000”, or roughly 150% of GDP.
Moreover, Havana said GDP growth in 2022 would have likely been 9%, were it not for the illegal US embargo.
“The blockade directly causes extreme harm through the combined effects of its various measures, pursuing its cruel, practical aim of depriving the country of the inflow of funds essential for the purchase of food, supplies, equipment, spare parts, technologies and software”, the report stated.
“No other nation has been obliged to take on a social and development program under such conditions of prolonged systematic
hostility on the part of the greatest power in human history”, the Cuban government wrote.
“The blockade constitutes a massive, flagrant and systematic violation of the human rights of all Cubans. By reason of its express purpose and the political, legal and administrative structures on which it is based, it constitutes an act of genocide under the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide”, Havana added.
Cuba noted that more than 80% of its current population has no idea what life is like without the US blockade.
|
Write an article about: US sanctions on Russia over Ukraine also target Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Cuba, Joe Biden, Juan Gonzalez, Nicaragua, Russia, sanctions, Ukraine, Venezuela | President Joe Biden’s top Latin America advisor, Juan S. Gonzalez, admitted that US sanctions against Russia aim to hurt Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba as well. The three socialist governments condemned NATO aggression for creating the crisis in Ukraine.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
President Joe Biden’s top Latin America advisor has admitted that US sanctions against Russia over Ukraine intentionally seek to hurt Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba as well.
The United States imposed a series of harsh sanctions on Russia following Moscow’s recognition of the independence of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region on February 21, and its subsequent military intervention in Ukraine on February 24.
Juan S. González, Biden’s special assistant for Latin America and the US National Security Council’s senior director for the Western Hemisphere, made it clear that these coercive measures against Russia are also aimed at damaging the economies of Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba.
Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba have socialist governments that Washington has long tried to overthrow. All three currently suffer under unilateral US sanctions, which are illegal according to international law.
Former US National Security Advisor John Bolton, an architect of the Iraq War, referred to these three Latin American nations as the so-called “Troika of Tyranny.”
Biden’s advisor González did an exclusive interview with Voz de América, the Spanish-language arm of the US government’s propaganda outlet Voice of America, on February 25.
Voz de América published his comments in a report titled “US sanctions on Russia will impact Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba, White House estimates.”
“The sanctions against Russia are so robust that they will have an impact on those governments that have economic affiliations with Russia, and that is by design,” González explained.
“So Venezuela is going to start feeling that pressure. Nicaragua is going to feel that pressure, along with Cuba,” he added.
Biden’s Latin America advisor noted that Washington has imposed sanctions on 13 top financial institutions in Russia, including some of the largest in the country. He proudly said that these coercive measures will, “by design,” harm other countries that do a lot of trade with the Eurasian power.
González also used his interview with the US-funded Voz de América to reiterate Washington’s call for regime change against these three socialist governments in Latin America.
His comments were reported by the independent Bolivia-based news website Kawsachun News.
Biden advisor: U.S. sanctions against Russia are 'designed' to impact Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. pic.twitter.com/Zbqg3mgB2N
— Kawsachun News (@KawsachunNews) February 26, 2022
Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba have stood with Russia against NATO expansion and Western military encirclement.
President Nicolás Maduro said that Venezuela “laments the mockery and breaking of the Minsk agreements by NATO, promoted by the United States of America.”
Maduro stressed that Washington and NATO bear responsibility for the conflict, and “have generated strong threats against the Russian Federation.”
Venezuela rechaza el agravamiento de la crisis en Ucrania producto del quebrantamiento de los acuerdos de Minsk por parte de la OTAN. Llamamos a la búsqueda de soluciones pacíficas para dirimir las diferencias entre las partes. El diálogo y la no injerencia, son garantías de Paz. pic.twitter.com/Y7N1lwZfpi
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) February 24, 2022
Cuba blamed Washington for the crisis as well. Its Foreign Ministry stated, “The U.S. determination to continue NATO’s progressive expansion towards the Russian Federation borders has brought about a scenario with implications of unpredictable scope, which could have been avoided.”
Denouncing Western governments for sending weapons to Ukraine, Cuba declared, “History will hold the United States accountable for the consequences of an increasingly offensive military doctrine outside NATO’s borders, which threatens international peace, security and stability.”
The U.S. determination to continue NATO’s progressive expansion towards the Russian Federation borders has brought about a scenario with implications of unpredictable scope, which could have been avoided.1/5
Statement by the Revolutionary Government:?https://t.co/3iBcPD9j8x pic.twitter.com/MRgwRCWSMV
— Bruno Rodríguez P (@BrunoRguezP) February 27, 2022
Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega condemned Washington for sponsoring a 2014 coup in Ukraine, and joined Russia in recognizing the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.
The chairman of Russia’s State Duma, Vyacheslav Volodin, traveled to Nicaragua to meet with top officials from the Sandinista government, and thanked them for their support against NATO expansion and US threats.
???? #Nicaragua recibió a una delegación de alto nivel de #Rusia, encabezada por el Presidente de la Duma Estatal de la Cámara Baja, Vyacheslav Volodín. La visita tiene por objetivo fortalecer la cooperación y la solidaridad bilateral. pic.twitter.com/BMY1AjnviF
— JP+ (@jpmasespanol) February 24, 2022
|
Write an article about: Analyst suffered 20 years in US prison for helping Cuba, still condemns ‘suffocating’ blockade. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Ana Belén Montes, blockade, Cuba, DIA, embargo, Puerto Rico | Former DIA analyst Ana Belén Montes was imprisoned for 20 years for sharing intelligence with Cuba that helped it prevent US attacks and sabotage. Upon being released, she condemned the “suffocating embargo” that makes Cubans “suffer.”
A former intelligence analyst who was imprisoned by the United States government for 20 years for sharing information with Cuba that helped it prevent US attacks against it was freed this January.
Upon leaving prison, she condemned the six-decade-long US blockade of Cuba and called for more attention to the hardships endured by the Puerto Rican people.
“Who in the last 60 years has asked the Cuban people if they want the United States to impose a suffocating embargo on them that makes them suffer?” she asked.
Ana Belén Montes had been an official at the US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). She worked her way up the ranks of the organization, becoming its top Cuba analyst, before she was arrested in 2001.
In 2002, Montes was sentenced to 25 years in prison.
She was convicted of secretly giving sensitive intelligence to Cuba, helping its revolutionary government prevent US terror attacks and disrupt US sabotage operations.
At her trial, Montes declared, “I obeyed my conscience rather than the law… giving the island [Cuba] classified information to help it defend itself.”
“I believe our government’s policy towards Cuba is cruel and unfair, profoundly unneighborly, and I felt morally obligated to help the island defend itself from our efforts to impose our values and our political system on it,” she said.
The US Department of Defense, where Montes worked, had a history of planning terror attacks on Cuba. In Operation Northwood in 1962, top US military officials discussed launching false-flag attacks on civilian targets in both Cuba and Florida and falsely blaming them on communists, to try to justify a US military invasion of the island.
Have you ever heard of Operation Northwood? It was a false flag operation concocted by the #US Joint Chiefs of Staff in March 1962, after the Chief of Operations of the ‘Cuba Project’, asked them for pretexts to justify #US military intervention in #Cuba. https://t.co/Gmg7LP1AzD pic.twitter.com/PPYpEj5P4m
— Helen Yaffe (@HelenYaffe) November 5, 2021
Montes is a national hero in Cuba, and many around the world considered her to be a prisoner of conscience.
On January 6, 2023, US authorities allowed Montes to leave prison, having served 20 or her 25 year-sentence. But she is not yet completely free; the US government is going to monitor Montes for the remaining five years, and all of her internet access will be closely followed.
Soon after her release, Montes published a statement stating, “I encourage those who want to focus on me to, instead, focus on important issues, such as the serious problems that the Puerto Rican people face, or the United States economic embargo against Cuba.”
“Who in the last 60 years has asked the Cuban people if they want the United States to impose a suffocating embargo on them that makes them suffer?” she added.
The international community overwhelmingly opposes the illegal US blockade against Cuba, and every year for decades more than 95% of member states at the United Nations have voted to condemn it.
The US State Department admitted in an internal cable in 1960 that its goal in imposing sanctions and eventually an embargo on Cuba was “to weaken the economic life of Cuba” and make “the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.”
Montes is Puerto Rican, and upon being released she moved back to her homeland. There, she delivered these remarks (emphasis added):
I am happier than ever to touch Boricuan soil again. After two quite exhausting decades, and with the need to go back to earning a living, I would like to dedicate myself to a quiet and private existence. Therefore, I will not participate in any media activities.
I encourage those who want to focus on me to, instead, focus on important issues, such as the serious problems that the Puerto Rican people face, or the United States economic embargo against Cuba.
Who in the last 60 years has asked the Cuban people if they want the United States to impose a suffocating embargo on them that makes them suffer?
What also deserves attention is the urgent need for global cooperation that stops and reverses the destruction of our environment.
I as a person am irrelevant. I am not important, while there exist grave problems in our world homeland that demand attention and a demonstration of brotherly love.
Her lawyer, Linda Backiel, said that this would be Montes’ only public statement and that she would not grant interviews, asking for her privacy to be respected.
Addressing the court at her trial in October 2002, Montes delivered a passionate speech (emphasis added):
An Italian proverb perhaps best describes the fundamental truth I believe in: “All the world is one country.”
In such a “world-country,” the principle of loving one’s neighbor as much as oneself seems, to me, to be the essential guide to harmonious relations between all of our “nation-neighborhoods.”
This principle urges tolerance and understanding for the different ways of others. It asks that we treat other nations the way we wish to be treated – with respect and compassion. It is a principle that, tragically, I believe we have never applied to Cuba.
Your honor, I engaged in the activity that brought me before you because I obeyed my conscience rather than the law.
I believe our government’s policy towards Cuba is cruel and unfair, profoundly unneighborly, and I felt morally obligated to help the island defend itself from our efforts to impose our values and our political system on it.
We have displayed intolerance and contempt towards Cuba for most of the last four decades. We have never respected Cuba’s right to make its own journey towards its own ideals of equality and justice.
I do not understand why we must continue to dictate how the Cubans should select their leaders, who their leaders cannot be, and what laws are appropriate in their land.
Why can’t we let Cuba pursue its own internal journey, as the United States has been doing for over two centuries?
My way of responding to our Cuba policy may have been morally wrong. Perhaps Cuba’s right to exist free of political and economic coercion did not justify giving the island classified information to help it defend itself. I can only say that I did what I thought right to counter a grave injustice.
My greatest desire is to see amicable relations emerge between the United States and Cuba. I hope my case in some way will encourage our government to abandon its hostility towards Cuba and to work with Havana in a spirit of tolerance, mutual respect, and understanding.
Today we see more clearly than ever that intolerance and hatred – by individuals or governments – spread only pain and suffering.
I hope for a U.S. policy that is based instead on neighborly love, a policy that recognizes that Cuba, like any nation, wants to be treated with dignity and not with contempt. Such a policy would bring our government back in harmony with the compassion and generosity of the American people.
It would allow Cubans and Americans to learn from and share with each other. It would enable Cuba to drop its defensive measures and experiment more easily with changes. And it would permit the two neighbors to work together and with other nations to promote tolerance and cooperation in our one “world-country,” in our only “world-homeland.”
|
Write an article about: Nicaragua expropriates OAS building, will replace it with ‘Museum of Shame’ documenting imperialist crimes. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Nicaragua, OAS, Organization of American States, Rosario Murillo | Nicaragua’s Sandinista government expelled the US-dominated OAS and expropriated its office building, where it will now create a public “Museum of Shame” to educate visitors about imperialist crimes committed against Latin America.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government expelled the US-dominated Organization of American States (OAS) on April 24.
Nicaragua’s Foreign Ministry denounced the Washington-based organization as a “deceitful agency of the State Department of yankee imperialism,” calling it the US “Ministry of the Colonies,” which exists to support “interventions and invasions, legitimizing coups d’etat in various forms and modes.”
On April 26, the Sandinista government further announced that it had expropriated the building where the OAS had offices in the Nicaraguan capital Managua.
This office was declared public property, and will now be used to build a “Museum of Shame” that documents imperialist crimes committed against Nicaragua and Latin America.
“The real estate that was occupied by the deplorable OAS, the disgraceful OAS, has been declared of public use and will belong to the state of Nicaragua,” Vice President Rosario Murillo revealed in a speech on April 26,
“The Institute of Culture is going to develop the Museum of Shame,” Murillo said.
“What is more shameful than that Ministry of the Colonies?” the vice president added.
As Multipolarista has previously reported, the OAS was created by the US government in 1948 as a coalition of right-wing anti-communist regimes in the Americas. It was one of the first alliances of the cold war, created even before NATO in 1949.
Nicaragua’s brutal US-backed right-wing military dictatorship of the Somoza family was one of the founding members of the OAS. This dynasty was overthrown by the Sandinista Revolution in 1979.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista gov’t expels OAS, calling it US ‘colonial instrument’ of coups and invasions
|
Write an article about: Peru coup: CIA agent turned US ambassador met with defense minister day before president overthrown. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | CIA, coup, Lisa Kenna, Mike Pompeo, Pedro Castillo, Peru | The US ambassador in Peru, Lisa Kenna, worked for the CIA for 9 years, as well as the Pentagon. One day before the coup against elected left-wing President Pedro Castillo, Kenna met with Peru’s defense minister, who then ordered the military to turn against Castillo.
(Se puede leer este informe en español aquí.)
The US ambassador in Peru, a veteran CIA agent named Lisa Kenna, met with the country’s defense minister just one day before democratically elected left-wing President Pedro Castillo was overthrown in a coup d’etat and imprisoned without trial.
Peru’s defense minister, a retired brigadier general, ordered the military to turn against Castillo.
The coup set off mass protests all across Peru. The unelected regime has unleashed brutal violence, and police have killed numerous demonstrators.
Meanwhile, the US government has staunchly supported Peru’s unelected coup regime, which declared a nation-wide “state of emergency” and deployed the military to the streets in an attempt to crush the protests.
Esto no es la Guerra de las Galaxias es Chorrillos, Lima pic.twitter.com/KFluRVJFAu
— HezSocial (@ZLaicos) December 15, 2022
Most governments in Latin America have criticized or even refused to recognize Peru’s unelected coup regime, including Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia, Colombia, Honduras, Venezuela, Cuba, and various Caribbean nations.
The CIA has organized many coups against democratically elected left-wing leaders in Latin America, from Guatemala’s President Jacobo Árbenz in 1954 to Chile’s President Salvador Allende in 1973.
When the Donald Trump administrated nominated Lisa Kenna to be ambassador to Peru in 2020, the State Department released a “certificate of competency” that revealed that, “Before joining the Foreign Service, she served for nine years as a Central Intelligence Agency officer.”
This important fact is curiously absent from most of Kenna’s bios, including her page on the US embassy’s official website.
Under Trump, Kenna also served as executive secretary of the State Department and was “senior aide” to Trump’s Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who previously headed the CIA.
In regard to his work for the notorious spy agency, Pompeo admitted in 2019, “I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole. We had entire training courses.”
At a Congressional nomination hearing in 2020, Kenna admitted that, as executive secretary, she saw “nearly all” of the memos that were sent to Pompeo, adding, “I am aware of the vast majority of” calls made to and by him.
Kenna also previously worked for the Defense Department and served State Department roles in Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, Swaziland, and Pakistan.
When President Joe Biden entered in January 2021, he kept Kenna as ambassador in Peru.
The current US Ambassador in Peru. pic.twitter.com/iUAbnR6Hzp
— Kawsachun News (@KawsachunNews) December 13, 2022
On December 6, 2022, Kenna met with Gustavo Bobbio Rosas, a retired brigadier general from the Peruvian military who had officially been appointed as defense minister the day before. (A local media outlet reported that the meeting was on December 5, but that appears to have been an error.)
Peru’s Ministry of Defense published a photo of their friendly chat.
At the time of this meeting, it was known in Peru that the notoriously corrupt, oligarch-controlled congress was preparing for a new vote to overthrow democratically elected left-wing President Pedro Castillo.
Ahora ? | Ministro de Defensa, Gustavo Bobbio, se reúne con la embajadora de @USEMBASSYPERU, Lisa Kenna, para abordar temas de interés bilateral. ???? pic.twitter.com/9p7JuKNx75
— Mindef Perú (@MindefPeru) December 6, 2022
Article 113 of Peru’s constitution allows the unicameral congress to remove presidents simply by voting to declare that they have a “moral incapacity,” in a process known as “vacancy.”
Peru’s congress is well known for its extreme corruption. In the infamous “Mamanivideos” scandal, congress members from the far-right Fuerza Popular party were filmed bribing other congress members to vote against impeaching previous right-wing President Pedro Pablo Kuczynski.
Fuerza Popular is run by the family members of Alberto Fujimori, the far-right dictator who ruled Peru with an iron fist from 1990 until 2000. With the support of the US government, Fujimori committed genocide, sterilizing approximately 300,000 Indigenous people, while killing, torturing, and disappearing large numbers of leftist dissidents.
The Mamanivideos scandal showed that it is quite easy for Peru’s rich oligarchs to buy votes in congress to overthrow democratically elected presidents.
And as soon as Castillo entered office on July 28, 2021, the congress tried to do exactly this.
Just one day after the US ambassador met with Peru’s defense minister, on December 7, 2022, the right-wing-dominated congress launched a parliamentary coup against Castillo, using article 113.
This was the third coup attempt in just over a year by Peru’s congress, which in September 2022 had a mere 7% approval rating.
Hoping to stop the coup, Castillo responded by trying to dissolve the congress. This is allowed in cases of obstructionism by article 134 of Peru’s constitution.
Defense Minister Bobbio immediately denounced the president’s actions. He published a video resigning from his position (that he had only held for three days).
Pronunciamiento| Presento mi renuncia de manera irrevocable a mi cargo de Ministro de Defensa. pic.twitter.com/efFC0cwZ34
— Gustavo Bobbio Rosas (@GustavoBobbio_) December 7, 2022
In the video, Bobbio told Peru’s armed forces not to support President Castillo and to oppose his attempt to dissolve the coup-plotting congress.
Bobbio claimed Castillo was launching a “coup attempt,” but in reality Bobbio was instructing the Peruvian military to support a coup against the democratically elected president, on behalf of a notoriously corrupt oligarch-controlled congress that had almost no support from the population.
While Bobbio ordered the military to rebel against the president, the US government promptly attacked Castillo.
Former CIA agent and current Ambassador Kenna tweeted, “The United States categorically rejects any extra-constitutional act by President Castillo to prevent the congress from fulfilling its mandate.”
Los Estados Unidos insta enfáticamente al presidente Castillo a revertir su intento de cerrar el Congreso y permitir que las instituciones democráticas de Perú funcionen según la Constitución. Alentamos al público peruano a mantener la calma durante este tiempo incierto.
— Lisa Kenna (@USAmbPeru) December 7, 2022
Kenna failed to mention article 134 of Peru’s constitution, which states:
The President of the Republic is authorized to dissolve the Congress if it has censured or denied its confidence to two Councils of Ministers [the official name of Peru’s cabinet]. The dissolution decree contains the call for elections for a new Congress.
When Castillo moved to dissolve the congress, he cited article 134 and he made it clear that it was only going to be a “temporary” closure. The president said new congressional elections would be held as soon as possible.
Kenna ignored all of this context. Instead, the ambassador declared, “The United States emphatically urges President Castillo to reverse his attempt to close the congress and allow the democratic institutions of Peru to function according to the constitution.”
By this, the CIA veteran meant that Castillo should simply allow the anti-democratic, oligarch-controlled congress to launch a coup against him.
The US embassy in Peru subsequently published an official statement echoing exactly what Kenna had said.
This was Washington’s green light for Peru’s corrupt, right-wing-dominated congress to overthrow President Castillo, and for the state security services to arrest him, without trial.
pic.twitter.com/cyDlKaxiC8
— Embajada EEUU Perú (@USEMBASSYPERU) December 7, 2022
Mere hours after Castillo was imprisoned, the oligarch-controlled congress appointed his vice president, Dina Boluarte, as leader of the country.
Boluarte promised on the floor of the congress that she would create “a political truce to install a government of national unity” – that is, a pact with the right wing.
Boluarte had been expelled in January 2022 from the leftist Perú Libre party that Castillo had campaigned with. She proudly declared that she “had never embraced the ideology” of the socialist political party.
The day after the coup, on December 8, the State Department gave its rubber stamp to Boluarte’s unelected regime.
“The United States welcomes President Boluarte and hopes to work with her administration to achieve a more democratic, prosperous, and secure region,” stated Brian A. Nichols, the US assistant secretary for western hemisphere affairs.
“We support her call for a government of national unity and we applaud Peruvians while they unite in their support of democracy,” the top State Department official added.
EE. UU. da la bienvenida a la presidenta Boluarte y espera trabajar con su administración para lograr una región más democrática, próspera y segura. Apoyamos su llamado a un gobierno de unidad nacional y aplaudimos a los peruanos mientras se unen en apoyo de su democracia. -BAN
— Brian A. Nichols (@WHAAsstSecty) December 8, 2022
In the mean time, the Peruvian people were filling the streets, condemning the coup against their elected president.
Peru’s police responded with violence, harshly cracking down, killing several protesters.
On December 14, the coup regime imposed a national “state of emergency” for 30 days, and said it might also declare a curfew.
At the same time, the coup regime also said it plans to sentence Castillo to 18 months in “preventative prison,” without a proper trial that resembles anything remotely like due process.
Just one day before the coup regime made these authoritarian announcements, former CIA agent and current US Ambassador met with Peru’s unelected leader, Dina Boluarte, and reiterated Washington’s wholehearted support.
La presidenta @DinaErcilia Boluarte recibió a la embajadora de @USEMBASSYPERU, Lisa Kenna, quien reiteró el pleno respaldo de su país a la institucionalidad democrática en el Perú y a las acciones del gobierno constitucional para estabilizar la situación social. ???? pic.twitter.com/30EqAa75lx
— Presidencia del Perú ?? (@presidenciaperu) December 13, 2022
Kenna praised the right-wing “unity government” that Boluarte pledged to form, adding, “We hope to strengthen our bilateral relationship.”
Me reuní con la presidenta Boluarte para reiterarle el compromiso de los EE.UU. con la defensa de la democracia y el respeto a las instituciones. Junto con la @presidenciaperu y el gobierno de unidad que se comprometió a formar, esperamos fortalecer nuestra relación bilateral.
— Lisa Kenna (@USAmbPeru) December 13, 2022
Brian Nichols, the top State Department official on Latin America, added with a touch of deep irony, “We support the Peruvian people and their constitutional democracy.” He urged protesters to “reject violence.”
On the same day, Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia, and Colombia released a joint diplomatic statement with a completely contrary message, supporting elected President Castillo, saying he was the victim of “anti-democratic harassment.”
Apoyamos al pueblo peruano y a su democracia constitucional. Alentamos a los Peruanos a juntarse pacificamente en apoyo a las reformas que Perú necesita y a rechazar la violencia. Trabajaremos con @presidenciaperu para avanzar estas metas. -BAN https://t.co/AnrrDnxUzi
— Brian A. Nichols (@WHAAsstSecty) December 13, 2022
In a press briefing on December 13, the State department was asked about the protests in Peru.
State Department spokesman Ned Price – who, like Lisa Kenna, was also a CIA agent – emphasized Washington’s steadfast support for Peru’s coup regime.
“We do commend Peruvian institutions and civil authorities for safeguarding democratic stability,” he said, as Peru’s repressive police killed protesters.
Just witnessed a protestor shot in head by police outside our hotel in #lima. Not sure he survived. Police response becoming more violent tonight #DinaBoluarte #sosperu #PedroCastillo #ProtestasContraElCongreso #protestasenlima #Peru #ahora pic.twitter.com/8HJe3cTxvC
— M M (@MMinperu) December 13, 2022
Instead of condemning the rampant police brutality, the US State Department blamed the protesters themselves. Price stated, “we are troubled by scattered reports of violent demonstrations and by reports of attacks on the press and private property, including businesses.”
“When it comes to Peruvian President Dina Boluarte, we of course do recognize her as such. We will continue to work with Peru’s democratic institutions, and we look forward to working closely with President Boluarte and all branches of the government in Peru,” the former CIA agent stressed.
State Department on Peru ?? (Tuesday's daily presser):
– Commends Peru's institutions and authorities "for safeguarding democratic stability"
– "troubled by (..) violent demonstrations" and "reports of attacks on the press and private property"
– recognizes Dina Boluarte pic.twitter.com/AVj3F1cOds
— Camila (@camilapress) December 15, 2022
In addition to serving as a CIA agent for nine years and current US ambassador to Peru, Lisa Kenna worked as a:
At a Congressional nomination hearing on July 23, 2020, Kenna boasted of her US-supremacist worldview, stating, “The longer I have been in public service, the more I am convinced that America is the world’s most exceptional nation.”
She also vowed, “I will maintain the United States’ vital relationship with Peru which has long been one of our closest partners in the region. Recently, Mission Peru has performed heroically to sustain our strong partnership and serve our fellow Americans in these challenging times.”
At the time of the hearing, Peru had a right-wing government, led by President Martín Vizcarra.
Kenna praised Peru’s conservative government, “as founder of the Lima Group,” for backing the United States in its right-wing coup attempt against Venezuela’s democratically elected President Nicolás Maduro, claiming, “The U.S. and Peru are also growing our shared support for a peaceful return to democracy in Venezuela.”
She also pledged in the hearing that, as US ambassador to Peru: “I commit to meet with democratically oriented opposition figures”; “We also commit to meet with independent, local press in Peru”; and “I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil society, and other non governmental organizations in the United States and in Peru.”
Clarification: This article originally reported that the meeting between the US ambassador and Peruvian defense minister was on December 5, two days before the coup, based on an article in a local newspaper, but that media outlet appears to have been mistaken, and the actual meeting was on December 6, the day before the coup.
|
Write an article about: China agrees to help Nicaragua develop infrastructure, hospitals, renewable energy. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Belt and Road Initiative, China, Nicaragua | Nicaragua’s Sandinista government and China signed a comprehensive agreement to develop hospitals, renewable energy, medical equipment, roads, railways, and ports, as well as the water and public health systems, all overseen by state-owned companies.
The People’s Republic of China has come to an agreement with Nicaragua’s Sandinista government to develop infrastructure projects in the Central American country.
Top Nicaraguan officials announced on February 9 that they had signed a comprehensive memorandum of understanding with representatives from Beijing.
Under the agreement, China will help Nicaragua develop hospitals, renewable energy, medical equipment, roads, railways, and ports, as well as its water system and public health sector.
All of these projects will be overseen by state-owned Chinese companies, including the China Communications Construction Company (CCCC), China CAMC Engineering (CAMCE), China State Construction Engineering (CSCEC), and Power Construction Corporation of China (PowerChina).
Numerous Nicaraguan governments institutions are participating in the projects, including the Energy and Mining Ministry (MEM), the Ministry of Health (MINSA), and the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MTI), along with the state-owned water company ENACAL.
A Chinese representative coming to an agreement with Nicaragua’s state-owned water company, ENACAL
This memorandum of understanding comes just weeks after Nicaragua officially joined China’s massive global infrastructure campaign, the Belt and Road Initiative, in January 2022.
In late January, Nicaragua also announced that China had agreed to help the Central American country build thousands of houses for poor and working families, bolstering the Sandinista government’s already existing public housing program.
China signed an agreement with Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista government to build tens of thousands of homes for poor and working families.
This is expanding Nicaragua's already existing Bismarck Martínez program, which has provided thousands of houseshttps://t.co/KsuhEH3XhP
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) January 29, 2022
|
Write an article about: How Nicaragua’s Sandinistas boosted women’s empowerment, achieving 5th-highest gender equality on Earth. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | FSLN, Nicaragua, Sandinistas, women's rights | The Sandinistas’ ambitious program of women’s liberation transformed Nicaragua from having the 90th to the fifth-highest gender equality in the world. This is how they did it.
Domestic work is absolutely necessary, but often made invisible. Caring for family members, maintaining the home, cooking the meals, washing the dishes and clothes, bathing children – these are difficult forms of labor that are crucial for society.
When traditional gender roles are imposed on women, this grueling and frequently thankless domestic work falls on their shoulders. And if they live in poverty in formerly colonized nations, it becomes unending manual labor when their households have no electricity (consequently, no lights, no refrigerator, no labor-saving electrical devices), and no running water.
The burden of this gendered work often impedes the social participation, political engagement, and education of women.
In Nicaragua, before the 1979 Sandinista Revolution, men typically left all of this domestic work to women. When the Central American country was ruled by the US-backed dictatorship of the right-wing Somoza dynasty, it was not uncommon to hear of rampant abuse of women, or to encounter orphaned children whose mothers died in childbirth, given maternal mortality was so high.
After the victory of the Sandinistas, living conditions for women drastically improved. They then faced a temporary setback during the period of neoliberal rule (from 1990 to 2006), until the Sandinistas returned to power again in 2007.
Throughout this second Sandinista period, women have made giant steps forward in their material and social position.
The greatest advance has been made by poor women in rural areas and urban barrios, which historically had little to no safety, electricity, water and sanitation services, health care, or paved roads.
The liberation that Nicaraguan women have attained during the Sandinista era cannot be measured by the exact same criteria applied in the imperialist First World, because women’s liberation in Third World countries often involves matters that may not appear on the surface as women’s rights issues.
These include the paving of roads, improving housing, legalized land tenure, school meal programs, new clinics and hospitals, electrification, plumbing, literacy campaigns, potable water, aid programs to campesinos, and crime reduction initiatives.
Because half of Nicaraguan families are headed by single mothers, this infrastructure development promotes the liberation and well-being of women.
Government programs that directly or indirectly shorten the hours of household drudgery free women to participate more in community life and politics.
A country can have no greater democratic achievement than bringing about full and equal participation of women.
The headway made in women’s liberation under the Sandinistas can be clearly seen in the Global Gender Gap Index. In 2007, Nicaragua ranked 90th on the index. By 2020, the country had jumped to fifth place, behind only Iceland, Norway, Finland, and Sweden.
How did the Sandinista Front make such enormous strides?
The progress women have made during the second FSLN era is reflected in their participation in government.
The 1980s Sandinista directorate contained no women. But in 2007, the second Sandinista government mandated equal representation for women, ensuring that at least 50% of public offices be filled by women, from the national level to the municipal.
Today, nine out of Nicaragua’s 16 national government cabinet ministers are women.
Women head the Supreme Electoral Council, the Supreme Court, the Attorney General’s office, and the Public Prosecutor’s Office. They account for 60% of judges.
Women make up half of Nicaragua’s National Assembly. They also represent half of mayors, of vice-mayors, and of municipal council members.
The vice president, Rosario Murillo, is also a woman, and has highly prioritized the empowerment and liberation of women.
Women in these high positions provide a model and inspire all women and girls to participate in building a new society with more humane relations.
After the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) returned to power in 2007, it launched many ambitious projects, including the Zero Hunger and Zero Usury programs. These have raised the socioeconomic position of women.
The Zero Hunger plan furnishes pigs, chickens, a pregnant cow, plants, seeds, fertilizers, and building materials to women in rural areas, to diversify their production, fortify the family diet, and strengthen women-run household economies.
The agricultural assets provided by the Nicaraguan government are put in the woman’s name, equipping women to become more self-sufficient producers. This gives them more direct control and security over food for their children, and breaks women’s historic dependency on male breadwinners.
The Zero Hunger program has aided 275,000 poor families, more than 1 million people (out of a total of 6.6 million Nicaraguans), increasing their own food security as well as the nation’s food sovereignty.
Nicaragua now produces roughly 90% of its own food, with most coming from small- and medium-scale farmers, many of them women.
Fausto Torrez, of the Nicaraguan Rural Workers Association (ATC), explained, “A nation that cannot feed itself is not free.”
The Zero Usury program is a Nicaraguan government-backed microcredit mechanism that now charges 0.5% annual interest, not the world microcredit average of 35%.
More than 445,000 women have received these low-interest loans, typically three loans each. The program not only empowers women but is also a key factor reducing poverty, unlocking pools of talent, and driving diversified and sustainable growth.
Some women receiving loans have turned their businesses into cooperatives, providing jobs to other women. Since 2007, about 5,900 cooperatives have formed, with 300 being women’s cooperatives.
Under the leadership of the Sandinistas, poverty in Nicaragua has been reduced from 48% in 2007 to 25%, and extreme poverty from 17.5% to 7%.
This tremendous decline in poverty has benefited women in particular, given that single mother households suffered more from poverty.
The Zero Hunger and Zero Usury programs have also helped decrease domestic violence, given that women in poverty suffer greater risk of violence.
Because most Nicaraguans live by small-scale farming or by small business, possessing the title of legal ownership is a major concern.
Between 2007 and 2021, the FSLN government gave out 451,250 land titles in the countryside and the city, with women making up 55% of the property-owners who benefited.
Providing women with the legal title to their own land is another important step toward their economic independence.
The Sandinista government funded the building or renovation of 290,000 homes since 2007, free of charge for those in extreme poverty, or with interest-free long-term loans. This aided more than 1 million Nicaraguans, particularly single mothers, who head half of all Nicaraguan families.
In 2006, only 65% of the urban population had potable drinking water; now 92% do. Access to potable water in rural areas has doubled, from 28% to 55%.
This frees women from the toilsome daily walk to the village well to carry buckets of water home to cook every meal, wash the dishes and clothes, and bathe the children.
Homes connected to sewage disposal systems have similarly grown from 30% in 2007 to 57% in 2021.
Today, 99% of the Nicaraguan population has electricity, compared to 54% at the end of the neoliberal era in 2006. Electricity significantly frees women’s lives from time-consuming tasks.
Street lighting in Nicaragua has more than doubled as well, increasing security for all.
Moreover, internet infrastructure now connects and unites most of the country, reducing people’s isolation and lack of access to information. Virtually everyone has a cell phone, and free internet is available in many public parks.
Nicaragua’s road system is now among the best in Latin America and the Caribbean. The Sandinista government has built more roads in the last 15 years than were built in the previous 200.
Outlying towns are now connected to the national network. Women in rural areas can now travel elsewhere to work, sell their products in nearby markets, attend events in other towns, and take themselves or their children to the hospital. This contributes to the fight against poverty and the fight for women’s liberation.
Better roads and housing, almost universal electrical and internet access, as well as indoor plumbing greatly lighten the burdens placed on women homemakers, and provide them with more freedom to participate in the world they live in.
The humanitarian nature of the FSLN governments, as opposed to the disregard by previous neoliberal regimes, is revealed by statistics on illiteracy.
When the Sandinistas revolution triumphed in 1979, illiteracy topped 56%. Within 10 years, they had reduced it to 12%.
Yet by the end of the 16-year neoliberal period in 2006, which dismantled the free education system, illiteracy had again risen to 23%.
Today, the FSLN government has cut illiteracy to under 4%.
The FSLN made education free, eliminating school fees. This, combined with the aid programs for poor women, has allowed 100,000 children to return to school.
The government launched a school lunch program, a meal of beans and rice for 1.5 million school and pre-school children every day.
Preschool, primary and secondary students are supplied with backpacks, and glasses when needed. Low-income students receive uniforms at no cost.
Now a much higher proportion of children are able to attend school, which provides more opportunities for mothers to work outside the home.
Nicaragua has established a nationwide free daycare system as well, now numbering 265 centers. Mothers can take their young children to daycare, freeing them from another of the major hurdles to entering the workforce.
Due to the vastly expanded and free medical system, the Zero Hunger, Zero Usury, and other programs, chronic malnutrition in children under age 5 has been cut in half, with chronic malnutrition in children 6 to 12 cut by two-thirds. Now it is rare to see kids with visible malnutrition, removing another preoccupation off the shoulders of mothers.
Nicaragua has also built a system of parks, playgrounds, and other free recreation where mothers can take their children.
Throughout the school system, the Ministry of Education promotes a culture of equal rights and non-discrimination. It has implemented the new subject “Women’s Rights and Dignities,” which teaches students about women’s right to a life without harassment and abuse and the injustices of the patriarchal system.
Campaigns were launched to promote the participation of both mother and father in a child’s education, such as emphasizing that attending school meetings or performances are shared responsibilities of both parents.
In stark contrast to Nicaragua’s neoliberal years, which oversaw a dismantling of the public medical system, and unlike other Central American countries and the United States, which have privatized healthcare for profit, the Sandinistas have established community-based, free, preventive health system.
Accordingly, life expectancy has risen from 72 years in 2006 to 77 years today – now equal to the US level.
Health care units in Nicaragua number more than 1700, including 1,259 health posts and 192 health centers, with one-third built since 2007.
The country has 77 hospitals, with 21 new hospitals built, and 46 existing hospitals remodeled and modernized.
Nicaragua also provides 178 maternity homes near medical centers for expectant mothers with high-risk pregnancies or from rural areas to stay during the last weeks of pregnancy.
The United States is the richest country in the Americas, while Nicaragua is the third poorest. Yet in the US, more than 100 rural hospitals have closed since 2010, and fewer than 50% of rural women have access to perinatal services within a 30-mile drive from their home. This has disproportionately affected low-income women, particularly Black and Latino ones.
Nicaragua has equipped 66 mobile clinics, which gave nearly 1.9 million consultations in 2020. These include cervical and breast cancer screenings, helping to cut the cervical cancer mortality rate by 34% since 2007. The number of women receiving Pap tests increased from 181,491 in 2007 to 880,907 in 2020.
In the pre-Sandinista era, one-fourth of pregnant women gave birth at home, with no doctor. There were few hospitals and pregnant women often had to travel rough dirt roads to reach a clinic or hospital.
Now women need not worry about reaching a distant hospital while in labor, because they can freely reside in a local maternity home for the last two weeks of their pregnancies, where they are monitored by doctors.
In 2020, 67,222 pregnant women roomed in one of these homes, and could be accompanied by their mothers or sisters. As a result, 99% of births today are in medical centers, and maternal mortality fell from 115 deaths per 100,000 births in 2006 to 36 in 2020.
These are giant steps forward in the liberation of women.
Contrary to the indifference to women in the US, Nicaraguan mothers also receive one month off work before their baby is born, and two months off after. Even men get five days off work when their baby is born.
Mothers likewise receive free milk for six months. And men and women get five days off work when they marry.
Nicaragua’s law making abortion illegal, removing the “life and health of the mother” exception, was passed in the National Assembly under right-wing President Enrique Bolaños in 2006.
Before the legislation was approved, there had been a pressure campaign that was highly organized and funded by Catholics all over Latin America, as well as large marches over the previous two years in Nicaragua in favor of the law.
The legislation was supported by 80% of Nicaraguans, many of whom are religious. And the law was proposed immediately before the 2006 presidential election, as a vote-getting ploy by Bolaños.
The Sandinistas were a minority in the National Assembly at the time, and the FSLN legislators were released from party discipline for the vote. The majority abstained, while several voted in favor. The law has never been implemented nor rescinded.
Since the return to power of the Sandinistas in 2007, no woman or governmental or private health professional has ever been prosecuted for any action related to abortion.
Any woman whose life is in danger can receive an abortion in government health centers or hospitals.
It is popularly known that there are places that exist for women to quietly get abortions, and none have been closed or attacked.
Moreover, the morning after pill and contraceptive services are widely and easily available across Nicaragua.
Nicaragua has created 102 women’s police stations, special units that include protecting women and children from sexual and domestic violence and abuse.
Now women can talk to women police officers about crimes committed against them, whether it be abuse or rape, making it easier and more comfortable for them to file complaints, receive counseling for trauma, and ensure that violent crimes against women are prosecuted in a thorough and timely manner.
Women make up 34.3% of Nicaragua’s 16,399 National Police officers, a high number for a police department. New York City and Los Angeles police, for instance, are 18% women, and Chicago is 23%.
The United Nations found Nicaragua to be the safest country in Central America, with the lowest homicide rate: 7.2 per 100,000. This is down from 13.4 in 2006, and is less than half the regional average of 19.
Nicaragua also has the lowest rate of femicides in Central America: 0.7 per 100,000. This is another testament to the Sandinista commitment to ending mistreatment of women.
The FSLN government organizes citizens’ security assemblies to raise consciousness concerning violence against women and to handle the vulnerabilities women face in the family and community.
Mifamilia, the Ministry of the Family, carries out house-to-house visits to stress prevention of violence against women and sexual abuse of children.
Nicaragua is likewise the most successful regional country in combating drug trafficking and organized crime, freeing women from the insecurity that plagues women in nearby nations such as Mexico, Honduras, or El Salvador.
Nicaragua is a country that has accomplished a lot in liberating women from household drudgery and domestic slavery, because of state-led policies favoring the social and political participation and economic advancement of poor women.
Women have gained a police commissariat, legal recognition of their property, new homes for abused women and for poor single mothers, and economic programs that empower poorer women.
Half of all political candidates and public office holders are women, abortion is not really criminalized in practice, and extreme poverty has been cut by half, mostly benefiting women and children.
Domestic toil has been greatly reduced because of modernized national infrastructure, and women have convenient and free health care.
In their liberation struggle, Nicaraguan women are becoming ever more self-sufficient and confident in enforcing their long-neglected human rights. They are revolutionizing their collective self-image and ensuring their central role in building a new society.
The progress of women helps the working class and campesinos as a whole by improving the quality of life of all, and is a vital weapon in combating US economic warfare.
As Lenin observed, “The experience of all liberation movements has shown that the success of a revolution depends on how much the women take part in it.”
Nicaragua is one more living example that a new world is possible.
|
Write an article about: US turns on Honduran narco-dictator Juan Orlando Hernández after long supporting him. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Barack Obama, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Iraq, Joe Biden, JOH, Juan Orlando Hernández, Manuel Noriega, Panama, Rafael Trujillo, Saddam Hussein | Washington ordered the extradition of Honduran ex-President Juan Orlando Hernández (JOH) for drug trafficking, but the Obama-Biden and Trump administrations spent years supporting him as he stole elections, and he rose to power thanks to a 2009 US-backed coup.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
The US government has turned on the right-wing former dictator of Honduras, Juan Orlando Hernández, after it spent years supporting him.
Hernández is the latest in a series of brutal authoritarians who were key US allies until they outlived their usefulness, from Iraq’s Saddam Hussein to the Dominican Republic’s Rafael Trujillo to Panama’s Manuel Noriega.
This February, the United States requested the extradition of Honduran ex-president Juan Orlando Hernández on charges of trafficking cocaine and guns. Local authorities arrested him on February 15.
Hernández, who is popularly known by his initials JOH, served two terms in office, from 2014 to 2022. It was widely known that JOH used drug money to fund his presidential campaigns, and blatantly stole the 2013 and 2017 elections in broad daylight.
But while he was committing these crimes, Hernández enjoyed staunch support from the Barack Obama and Donald Trump administrations.
In fact, JOH only came to power in the first place because a 2009 US-sponsored military coup removed Honduras’ democratically elected left-wing president, Manuel Zelaya.
Washington overthrew Zelaya because he had been friendly to Venezuela’s socialist President Hugo Chávez, and he had integrated Honduras into anti-imperialist regional bloc the Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA).
Following the 2009 coup, JOH’s right-wing National Party ruled the country with an iron fist. From 2010 to 2014, Hernández served as president of Congress. He was then catapulted to head of state through flagrant electoral fraud.
The 2013 Honduran elections were plagued by massive, systemic irregularities. And it was clear to the world that JOH stole the election in 2017, but the US State Department still congratulated him on his “victory.”
And the United States did more than just endorse JOH’s clearly fraudulent elections. Washington also approved billions of dollars of loans to his corrupt regime, which Hernández and his wealthy oligarchic backers promptly stole, trapping the country in unpayable odious debt.
Why? Because under JOH, Honduras was Washington’s closest ally in Central America. The country is home to the largest US military installation in Latin America, the Soto Cano base.
And, until his final few years, Hernández obediently served US foreign-policy interests, recognizing unelected coup leader Juan Guaidó as supposed “president” of Venezuela.
US President Barack Obama discusses the refugee crisis with Honduran narco-dictator Juan Orlando Hernández in 2014
After the US-backed 2009 coup, violence and organized crime skyrocketed. Honduras turned into one of the most dangerous countries on the planet.
As of 2021, Honduras still has the second-highest murder rate on Earth, surpassed only by its neighbor El Salvador.
Under JOH, Honduras also became the poorest country in Latin America. Poverty rose to a staggering 74% of the population.
This deadly combination of violence, organized crime, and poverty took a heavy toll on the Honduran people. It fueled large waves of migration north toward Mexico and the United States, unleashing a refugee crisis.
This Washington-created refugees crisis in turn provoked domestic problems in the United States. Politicians from both major parties recognized that something had to change.
US Vice President Joe Biden with Honduran narco-dictator Juan Orlando Hernández in 2016
By 2019, Juan Orlando Hernández became a further liability for Washington. His brother Juan Antonio “Tony” Hernández was convicted in a New York federal court for trafficking nearly 200,000 kilograms of cocaine and machine guns into the United States.
Tony Hernández had been a congressman in JOH’s National Party, and used drug money to fund the right-wing party and rig elections for his brother.
The imprisonment of Tony Hernández, along with the increased US pressure on Honduras to halt northern migration, created a conflict between JOH and his sponsors in Washington. The once loyal US ally began to implement independent policies.
Honduras started to vote against US interests in the Organization of American States (OAS). Looking for new allies, the JOH government even improved relations with its neighbor Nicaragua, whose leftist Sandinista government is Washington’s top target in Central America.
By 2021, top US politicians and corporate media outlets tried to distance JOH from the US government by depicting him simply as a “Trump ally.”
JOH certainly was a Trump ally, but he had long benefited from bipartisan support from Democrats as well.
Participé como invitado especial en la reunión organizada por el Presidente de #EEUU Donald J. Trump para abordar el tema “Un llamado global para proteger la libertad religiosa”#HondurasEnLaONU pic.twitter.com/nAOftBG0wb
— Juan Orlando H. (@JuanOrlandoH) September 23, 2019
The Obama administration enthusiastically supported the Honduran narco-dictator. In fact, as vice president under Obama, Joe Biden worked closely with JOH.
Biden oversaw the Obama administration’s Central America policy, and Honduras was crucial in its plans.
JOH praised Obama publicly for his neoliberal strategy to bring more corporate investment to the region, called the “Alliance for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle.”
Felicito al Pte. Obama y V. Biden su decisión recibir la propuesta de nuestros países (Alianza p Prosperidad) y compartir esfuerzo conjunto.
— Juan Orlando H. (@JuanOrlandoH) January 30, 2015
Biden repeatedly met with JOH, and the narco-dictator tweeted, “Thank you Vice President Joe Biden for supporting Honduras.”
Gracias Vice Pte. @JoeBiden por respaldar a Honduras. pic.twitter.com/xY6Yo9HNOk
— Juan Orlando H. (@JuanOrlandoH) June 17, 2015
When JOH’s right-wing National Party was overwhelmingly defeated by the left-wing Libre Party and its candidate Xiomara Castro in a November 2021 election – the first truly free and fair vote since the 2009 US-sponsored coup – Washington threw its former asset under the bus.
After JOH left office on January 27, 2022, the Biden administration saw an opportunity to make an example out of a former ally, to try to cynically show the world it is supposedly dedicated to fighting corruption.
This February, Washington officially turned on JOH, first revoking his visa and then ordering his extradition to the United States.
Juan Orlando Hernández is the latest in a long line of repressive dictators that the United States supported and cultivated, only to later throw under the bus.
His story echoes those of numerous right-wing Latin American autocrats, from the Dominican Republic to Panama.
Dominican dictator Rafael Trujillo oversaw one of the bloodiest regimes in the history of the region, killing, imprisoning, torturing, and disappearing tens of thousands of people, principally leftists and Haitians.
Trujillo enjoyed staunch US support for decades. But by 1961 he had outlived his usefulness, and the CIA was involved in assassinating him.
Closer to Honduras is the case of Panama’s former president Manuel Noriega, a former longtime CIA asset who was later overthrown in a murderous US invasion.
Noriega once collaborated with the CIA to help Washington fund its war on leftist revolutionaries in Nicaragua and El Salvador.
But he later became too independent from the United States. Noriega began to challenge Washington’s foreign-policy interests in the region, working with Libya and Cuba, and challenging US control over the geostrategic Panama Canal.
So Washington turned on its former ally. The United States invaded Panama in 1989, killing at least hundreds of civilians, with some estimates saying thousands lost their lives.
Over in West Asia, the history is very similar. Before he became public enemy number one in the 2003 invasion, or in the 1990 Gulf War, Iraq’s authoritarian leader Saddam Hussein was an erstwhile US ally.
The CIA helped orchestrate the Iraqi Baathist coup that Saddam later rode to power. After the putsch, the CIA even gave the aspiring dictator’s allies a list of Iraqi communists to kill. They were promptly murdered.
In the 1980s, the United States supported Saddam’s Iraq in its war on the new revolutionary government in neighboring Iran. The CIA even helped Saddam use chemical weapons on civilians.
Some of the world’s most notorious drug dealers have also benefited from the backing of US spy agencies.
Mexico’s infamous drug kingpin El Chapo Gúzman, the head of the feared Sinaloa Cartel, was reportedly protected by the CIA for years.
Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar collaborated with the CIA, too. His son Juan Pablo Escobar said the US spy agency used the cocaine smuggled by the leader of the Medellin Cartel in order to fund its war on socialists in Central America.
|
Write an article about: China is helping Nicaragua’s Sandinista gov’t build houses for poor people. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Belt and Road Initiative, Bismarck Martínez, Bismarck Martínez Program, China, Daniel Ortega, FSLN, Nicaragua, Rosario Murillo, Sandinistas | China signed an agreement with Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista government to build thousands of homes for poor and working families, expanding the already existing Bismarck Martínez public housing program.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
The leftist Sandinista government of Nicaragua has revealed that it signed an agreement with the People’s Republic of China to build thousands of houses for poor and working families.
Vice President Rosario Murillo announced the news on January 28.
China “has approved an important project of cooperation with our Nicaragua and the Nicaraguan people, a great housing program for families in all of the country,” Murillo said.
“The plan is for three years, benefiting tens of thousands of Nicaraguan families in 84 municipalities of the country, families that are going to receive a beautiful house, safe, dignified, with all of the basic services.”
The vice president said the designs for the houses are being developed in coordination with Nicaraguan ministries. She called them “works of brotherhood, solidarity, and common good.”
Murillo also announced other ongoing public infrastructure projects, including roads, sidewalks, and a new baseball stadium.
Houses built by the Nicaraguan government as part of its Bismarck Martínez Program
Although Nicaragua is a small country of roughly 6.5 million people, with very few resources as the second-least rich country in the western hemisphere, its leftist Sandinista government has dedicated itself to creating ambitious social programs, including free universal healthcare and education, jobs training, and poverty alleviation initiatives.
Nicaragua in fact already has a public housing campaign called the Bismarck Martínez Program. From the time it was launched in 2019 until 2021, the project delivered approximately 3,000 houses, as well as 30,000 land plots in urban areas.
In 2021, the government gave poor and working Nicaraguans another 3,000 houses as part of the Bismarck Martínez Program. This is in addition to granting land deeds to thousands of families, peasants, and farmers, so they cannot be displaced.
The man the program is named after, Bismarck Martínez, was a Sandinista activist who worked in the mayor’s office in the capital Managua. He was kidnapped, brutally tortured on camera, and killed by far-right extremists during a violent coup attempt in 2018, which was sponsored by the United States. The video of his gruesome murder went viral and inspired outrage across Nicaragua.
The Managua mayor’s office announced in September 2021 that it had plans to build 50,000 new homes in the following seven years as part of the Bismarck Martínez program. It also planned to distribute 50,000 more land plots to families.
But this was before the central government had restored relations with China and made plans to further expand this program with Beijing’s help.
Houses built by the Nicaraguan government as part of its Bismarck Martínez Program
The Nicaraguan government re-established official diplomatic relations with the People’s Republic of China in December 2021.
Nicaragua had first broken ties with Taiwan and recognized China in the 1980s, following the 1979 triumph of the Sandinista Revolution.
But when the Sandinistas lost power in 1990, in an election unfairly compromised by US meddling, the right-wing president who took power, Violeta Barrios de Chamorro, a representative of the most powerful oligarch family in the country, immediately cut ties with the PRC and recognized Taiwan again.
Since restoring ties in December 2021, Nicaragua and China have become close allies.
President Daniel Ortega revealed in a speech at his January 10 inauguration that Managua had signed agreements with Beijing to incorporate the Central American nation into the global Belt and Road Initiative.
Upon signing the deals with China, Ortega declared, “The United States does not accept that the end of its hegemony is a fact.”
|
Write an article about: Exposed: US DEA used criminals to spy on, destabilize Venezuela, Mexico, Bolivia. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Bolivia, CIA, DEA, drugs, Evo Morales, Mexico, Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela | Reports reveal that the US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) used known criminals to spy on and destabilize the left-wing governments in Venezuela, Mexico, and Bolivia.
Numerous reports in major media outlets have documented how the US government has used the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) in order to spy on and try to destabilize left-wing governments in Latin America.
DEA meddling schemes have targeted Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro, Bolivia’s former President Evo Morales, and Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
In these scandals, the DEA has collaborated with known criminals, including drug traffickers and money launderers, to launch sting operations against leftist politicians.
The Associated Press revealed this February that the DEA “sent undercover operatives into Venezuela to surreptitiously record and build drug-trafficking cases against the country’s leadership”.
Known as Operation Money Badger, it was launched in 2013 with the goal of ensnaring senior Venezuelan officials in corruption scandals.
The AP reported that the DEA “authorized otherwise illicit wire transfers through U.S.-based front companies and bank accounts”. It noted that “Colombian drug traffickers” were involved.
As its informants, the DEA recruited criminals. The AP wrote (emphasis added):
The DEA Miami Field Division’s Group 10 recruited a dream informant: a professional money launderer accused of fleecing $800 million from Venezuela’s foreign currency system through a fraudulent import scheme.
The informant’s illicit activity in Venezuela positioned him to help the DEA collect evidence against the chief target of the unilateral operation: Jose Vielma, an early acolyte of the late Hugo Chávez who in two decades of service to the Bolivarian revolution cycled through a number of top jobs, including trade minister and the head of Venezuela’s IRS.
Venezuela’s sovereign, democratically elected government had expelled the DEA, so this covert operation was a clear violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty. And the US government itself acknowledged that these activities violated international law, the AP reported.
The AP quoted a former DEA official who served in Venezuela who boasted, “We don’t like to say it publicly but we are, in fact, the police of the world”.
Operation Money Badger started under the Barack Obama administration, but was expanded under President Donald Trump.
The Trump administration launched a coup attempt in 2019, pressuring countries around the world to recognize US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó as the so-called “interim president” of Venezuela, despite the fact that he had never participated in a presidential election.
The US government imposed several rounds of crushing sanctions and an economic embargo on Venezuela, which devastated the country’s oil industry and starved Caracas of the export revenue it needed to fund social programs and the foreign currency it needed to stabilize its national currency, fueling hyper-inflation.
In 2020, the US government backed an attempted invasion of Venezuela. The attack, known as Operation Gideon, was led by two former US Army special operations commandos.
One of the top Venezuelan coup-plotters involved in the failed invasion later revealed that the putschists had been in touch with the CIA and other US government agencies.
CIA backed failed 2020 invasion of Venezuela, top coup-plotter says
The botched invasion was overseen by a US private security company called Silvercorp, which was based in Florida and run by a former U.S. Army Green Beret commando, Jordan Goudreau.
Goudreau had provided security for Donald Trump’s rallies. And he met with US government officials at Trump’s golf course in Doral, Florida to discuss the plans to invade Venezuela.
For his part, Trump boasted that he tried to “take over” Venezuela and pillage its massive oil reserves.
At a Republican Party convention in 2023, Trump stated, “When I left, Venezuela was ready to collapse. We would have taken it over; we would have gotten to all that oil; it would have been right next door”.
Trump boasts he wanted to take Venezuela’s oil after overthrowing its government
Trump’s neoconservative national security advisor, John Bolton, likewise bragged in a 2022 interview on CNN that he “helped plan coups d’etat” in Venezuela and “other places”.
Meanwhile, US-backed coup leader Juan Guaidó and his accomplices were widely accused of extreme corruption.
Even Guaidó’s erstwhile supporters in Venezuela’s right-wing opposition turned against him, accusing Guaidó and his allies of spending huge sums of humanitarian aid money on expensive nightclubs, hotels, cars, clothes, food, and alcohol.
Guaidó’s coup-plotting allies also used public assets that the US, UK, and EU stole from the Venezuelan government and people in order to pay their enormous legal fees.
Venezuela was by no means the only country in Latin America targeted by the DEA for destabilization.
In 2008, Bolivia’s democratically elected socialist president, Evo Morales, expelled the DEA.
Morales was the first ever Indigenous president of a country where the majority of the population is Indigenous.
He accused DEA agents of spying on his government and collaborating with violent right-wing opposition groups.
“There were DEA agents that were doing political espionage … financing criminal groups so that they could act against authorities, even the president”, Morales said, in comments reported by Reuters.
At the time, US officials rejected Morales’ accusations as a crazy conspiracy theory.
But in 2015, the Huffington Post revealed that DEA agents had in fact been spying on Morales and the Bolivian government, as part of an undercover sting called “Operation Naked King”.
To justify its meddling, the DEA misleadingly accused Morales of supporting the drug trade, because he legalized the production of coca, a plant that can be used for non-drug purposes, such as in teas and medicines.
Many poor farmers, especially in the Indigenous-majority areas that Morales was from and represented, relied on producing coca.
Vice News reported in 2016 that, after Morales legalized coca, “there is less violence, less cocaine, and even less coca in Bolivia than there was before”.
Morales blasted the DEA’s double standards, noting that it purchased 45,000 kilos of coca in 1992.
“During our government, the model of the fight against drug trafficking was applauded and recognized by the UN and EU”, Morales tweeted in 2020.
“Now, they submit themselves to the CIA and DEA to benefit the geopolitical interests of the US”, he added, condemning the then government of unelected far-right leader Jeanine Áñez of “submission” and “corruption”.
Durante nuestro gobierno, el modelo de lucha contra el narcotráfico era aplaudido y reconocido por la ONU y la UE. Ahora, se someten a la CIA y DEA para beneficiar a los intereses geopolíticos de EE.UU., y anuncian gastos millonarios sin fiscalización. Sometimiento y corrupción.
— Evo Morales Ayma (@evoespueblo) May 27, 2020
In 2019, Morales was overthrown in a violent coup d’etat. With US support, an unelected far-right regime came to power, which was led by Christian extremists who systematically discriminated against Bolivia’s Indigenous majority.
Bolivia’s US-backed coup regime also sought to privatize the South American nation’s massive lithium reserves. Bolivia is one of the world’s top producers of lithium, a crucial material needed for battery production.
When a Twitter user criticized billionaire Tesla CEO Elon Musk in 2020 over his support for the putsch in Bolivia, the oligarch responded, “We will coup whoever we want! Deal with it”.
In 2021, Morales stated that, “For the CIA and DEA the so-called ‘war against drugs’ is an excuse to attack progressive and anti-imperialist governments. It is a screen to cover their geopolitical interests”.
The former Bolivian leader, who was spied on and targeted in a sting operation by the DEA, pointed to a similar scandal that had been exposed in Mexico.
Para la CIA y la DEA la denominada "guerra contra las drogas" es una excusa para atacar a gobiernos progresistas y antiimperialistas. Es una pantalla para encubrir sus intereses geopolíticos. El caso denunciado por #México así lo demuestra.
— Evo Morales Ayma (@evoespueblo) January 16, 2021
Over decades, the DEA has repeatedly been implicated in illegal espionage operations in sovereign Mexican territory, targeting government officials and politicians, particularly those on the left.
This January, the US media outlet ProPublica published a thinly sourced article alleging, without concrete evidence, that allies of Mexico’s leading left-wing politician Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) took money from drug cartels to try to help him win the 2006 presidential election.
The report acknowledged, “The investigation did not establish whether López Obrador sanctioned or even knew of the traffickers’ reported donations”.
AMLO later won the 2018 election, and has since been one of the most popular presidents on Earth, governing for five years with consistent support from around two-thirds of the Mexican population, according to the US-based firm Morning Consult.
AMLO blasted the ProPublica article as “vile defamation” and “propaganda”, and he suggested that it sought to influence Mexico’s upcoming 2024 election. The candidate Claudia Sheinbaum, from AMLO’s left-wing Morena party, is leading in all of the polls, by a huge margin.
The ProPublica article offered no tangible evidence, just insinuations trying to link AMLO to organized crime. But it did disclose that, in 2011, on the eve of Mexico’s 2012 elections, “DEA agents proposed a sting in which they would offer $5 million in supposed drug money to operatives working on López Obrador’s second presidential campaign”.
That is to say, the DEA was blatantly meddling in Mexico’s internal politics to harm the left-wing candidate, as a presidential election soon approached.
ProPublica also admitted that US “Justice Department officials closed the investigation, in part over concerns that even a successful prosecution would be viewed by Mexicans as egregious American meddling in their politics”.
Mexico-based US journalist Kurt Hackbarth noted that the “only real revelation in this week’s ProPublica piece is the DEA’s plot to frame the AMLO campaign in the runup to the 2012 election”.
“Unlike Russiagate, here’s a bonafide attempt to intervene in a foreign election, freely admitted to”, he added.
The only real revelation in this week's @Propublica piece is the DEA's plot to frame the AMLO campaign in the runup to the 2012 election. Unlike Russiagate, here's a bonafide attempt to intervene in a foreign election, freely admitted to. Think it'll make headlines in the US? Na. pic.twitter.com/nJ261T3r3a
— Kurt Hackbarth ???? (@KurtHackbarth) February 2, 2024
In a follow-up Twitter thread, Hackbarth emphasized, “Let’s take a second and appreciate the implications of this. At the precise time Felipe Calderón’s Security Minister Genero García Luna was colluding with the Sinaloa Cartel – which the DEA saw and heard no evil about – they were instead focused on this stupid sting op on AMLO”.
Calderón, a conservative former president from Mexico’s right-wing PAN party, was a close US ally, so faced no serious consequences for his documented links to drug cartels.
????ANATOMY OF A HIT: Another clumsy attempt by the US to meddle in this year's Mexican presidential election. How does it work?
1.) THE SYNCHRONIZED SWIM: Spread your story at the same time across various media. (A little obvious, though, to do it at the exact same time, guys.) pic.twitter.com/t8jZMO2kh7
— Kurt Hackbarth ???? (@KurtHackbarth) January 31, 2024
AMLO, on the other hand, is an independent left-wing leader who has routinely criticized the US for violating his country’s sovereignty.
In 2023, the Mexican president sent the Joe Biden administration a letter formally condemning US “interventionism” in his country. Specifically, AMLO noted that USAID was funding right-wing opposition groups.
In another speech that year, AMLO condemned State Department criticism as hypocritical “meddling” and stated, “There is more democracy today in Mexico than in the United States… because here the people govern, and there the oligarchy govern”.
AMLO likewise held a huge rally in which he denounced Republicans Congress members who have called for the US military to invade their southern neighbor. While honoring the Mexican state’s nationalization of the country’s large oil and lithium reserves, AMLO declared, “Mexico is an independent and free country, not a US colony or protectorate!”
‘Mexico is not a US colony!’: AMLO condemns invasion threats, celebrates nationalization of oil, lithium
|
Write an article about: US meddling in Colombia’s election, warns left-wing vice presidential candidate Francia Márquez. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Álvaro Uribe, Colombia, drugs, Francia Márquez, Gustavo Petro, Venezuela, war on drugs | The top vice presidential candidate for Colombia’s May elections, Francia Márquez, called out the US government for meddling in the electoral process. The left-wing activist criticized the war on drugs, militarization, and “free trade,” calling for land reform and reparations.
The vice presidential candidate for the leading ticket in Colombia’s May elections has accused the US government of meddling in her country’s internal politics to hurt the left wing.
Francia Márquez is an activist from the grassroots social movements of the Afro-Colombian community. She is the vice presidential candidate for the left-wing Pacto Histórico (“Historic Pact”) coalition, whose presidential candidate Gustavo Petro is leading by double digits in major polls in the weeks before the May 29 vote.
Márquez criticized the US ambassador to Colombia for publicly claiming that Russia, Venezuela, and Cuba are trying to sabotage her country’s election.
“Although [the US ambassador] did not mention the Pacto Histórico, although he did not mention Gustavo Petro, it is obvious that he was referring to our candidacy and our political campaign,” Márquez said.
“This is a direct intervention by the government of the United States through the ambassador in the elections,” she stressed.
She also called out the US government’s double standards, noting that Washington maintained “absolute silence” when the top general in Colombia’s military violated his country’s constitution and meddled in its electoral process by openly attacking the leading presidential candidate, Petro.
“I think they keep silent on certain things, but they speak out and publish statements on others, and I think that is not an impartial attitude. I think that that is a very negative message for Colombian democracy,” Márquez said.
She called for the US government to show “respect” and “neutrality” to Colombia.
The top VP candidate for Colombia's May 29 elections, Francia Márquez, is a grassroots activist.
In the heart of Washington, she criticized US meddling and the "ultra-right-wing" lobby, stressing Colombian social leaders are killed every day.
Read more: https://t.co/XMLwCNs79L pic.twitter.com/OlLhgcpibz
— Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 29, 2022
Márquez made these comments in the heart of Washington, DC itself, at an event organized by the United States Institute of Peace, an influential US government-affiliated think tank.
The institute’s May 13 forum featured vice-presidential candidates for Colombia’s May elections, and was livestreamed on the organization’s YouTube channel.
The event also featured prominent figures from the Woodrow Wilson Center and Atlantic Council, two highly influential US government-funded think tanks in Washington.
Francia Márquez speaking in Washington at the US Institute of Peace
Because Francia Márquez was speaking in the heart of Washington, she made sure to reassure the audience many times that a Colombian government under her leadership would seek to maintain close relations with the United States.
But despite her diplomatic reassurances, Márquez was strikingly blunt about her vision for a much more progressive Colombia.
She proposed a political model directly opposed to what she called the “ultra-right-wing” Uribista movement, which has dominated Colombian politics for two decades, since the rise to power of former president Álvaro Uribe, who is deeply involved in drug trafficking and paramilitary groups.
Márquez even called out Washington’s double standards toward her country.
She criticized the free trade agreement signed between the US and Colombia, noting it has weakened the South American nation’s economic sovereignty, hurt domestic agriculture, and made it reliant on food imports.
“I think there is a need to de a bilateral review of the deal, and an evaluation of the impact in these 10 years since the signing of the free-trade agreement between Colombia and the United States,” she proposed.
Márquez pledged her government would prioritize strengthening Colombia’s sovereignty, especially its food sovereignty by boosting internal agricultural production.
Warning about the horrific rates of violence in Colombia, especially targeting grassroots activists, Márquez likewise denounced the militarization of her country via Plan Colombia.
The US-sponsored war on drugs has been a failure, she emphasized, that “has served in Colombia to leave dead people in our lands and economic resources in the banks of the financial system.”
She argued that organized crime and the drug trade must be treated as social problems, with roots in poverty and a lack of opportunities.
Márquez said the country should move toward the legalization and commercialization of drugs, to remove this key generator of violence, while also strengthening the economy and providing jobs for people in the countryside.
Colombia needs much more “social investment,” Márquez stressed. She promised to spend more money on public education, healthcare, and programs to combat climate change.
In her remarks, Márquez called for “distributive justice” and “historical reparations” for marginalized communities in the country, such as Afro-Colombians and Indigenous peoples.
The vice-presidential candidate pushed back against the idea that “polarization” is the problem in Colombia, arguing that this narrative was created by the people who have governed for decades. The real issue, she said, is that Colombians have been oppressed by the wealthy economic and political elites.
She even announced that Colombia would re-establish formal diplomatic relations with Venezuela, if the Pacto Histórico wins the election.
Her running mate, presidential candidate Gustavo Petro, has been extremely critical of Venezuela in his public statements and speeches. But Márquez made it clear that Colombia would still have formal diplomatic relations with its neighbor, stressing that this is necessary to stabilize the region and strengthen the economy.
Given the environment, at a US government-sponsored think tank in Washington, surrounded by US government operatives, Francia Márquez was careful to emphasize that her administration would maintain good relations with the United States. But she was also willing to criticize Washington.
“We know about lobbies created by the ultra-right-wing here in the United States to, first of all, disinform,” she said.
Márquez noted that this ultra-right-wing has spread numerous false claims about her, Gustavo Petro, and the Pacto Histórico.
Among them, she explained, is “the story of ‘Castrochavismo,’ and making the United States believe that Gustavo Petro and Francia Márquez coming to power is a threat for the United States and is a threat for Colombia.”
“I think that the real threat is in Uribismo, which has kept us subjugated for 20 years to an insecurity that has only resulted in deaths, that has only fueled the armed conflict,” Márquez argued.
“It was not Gustavo Petro, or Francia Márquez, or the Pacto Histórico that opposed peace in Colombia. It was not our movement that was opposed to peace in Colombia. Those who decided to tear peace to shreds in Colombia is this government.”
That government, led by current right-wing President Iván Duque, “comes here and speaks kindly in the United States. It comes here to push its politics,” she said.
But “the reality is that every day we are dealing with death in Colombia,” she contrasted. “The reality is that every day social leaders are buried. The reality is that every day youth are killed in Colombia. The reality is that femicide does not stop.”
Márquez continued: “And that is what has us worried, because that narrative has been echoed here. And we saw a statement by the ambassador of the United States government, of President Biden, say that they had information about possible funding and meddling by the governments of Russia and Venezuela in the elections in Colombia.”
The US ambassador, Philip Goldberg, warned in an interview on May 12 of potential “interference by Russians, Venezuelans, or Cubans in the elections.”
Márquez condemned these comments, stating, “Although [the US ambassador] did not mention the Pacto Histórico, although he did not mention Gustavo Petro, it is obvious that he was referring to our candidacy and our political campaign.”
“This is a direct intervention by the government of the United States through the ambassador in the elections,” she emphasized.
Márquez also criticized the US government’s double standards in its public comments on Colombian politics.
In April, the top general of Colombia’s military, Eduardo Zapateiro, who is closely affiliated with the right-wing, violated the neutrality that the armed forces are supposed to maintain by openly on Twitter attacking left-wing presidential candidate Gustavo Petro.
Márquez pointed out that the US embassy was silent about this flagrant military attack on the integrity of the elections.
I have “a worry about the US government’s silence about the armed forces in terms of the message sent by General Zapateiro, in the sense that that message violated the political constitution, in that military officers cannot participate in politics in Colombia,” she said.
“And there is absolute silence, no? I think they keep silent on certain things, but they speak out and publish statements on others, and I think that is not an impartial attitude. I think that that is a very negative message for Colombian democracy,” Márquez warned.
She then called for Washington to show more “respect” and “neutrality” in regard to Colombia.
“What are the values that I think should be strengthened in the relationship? First,” Márquez said, “is the value of respect, the value of recognition, the value of being able to build in the middle of difference.”
“For years in our country, difference was a reason to exterminate the other. Those who thought differently were killed. Those who raise their voice, in terms of difference as in opposition, are stigmatized, are threatened, are killed. That cannot be the logic of a democratic government,” she explained.
“I think that, on the contrary, democracy implies a discussion of difference and building with difference. And that I think is a value that must be rescued, that must be strengthened, in a relationship with the US government. I think it’s respect, no? And neutrality is important as well, in the sense of, if we don’t like views, well we have to build with diversity, with difference.”
Francia Márquez harshly criticized Colombia’s so-called war on drugs, which was sponsored by the United States.
“For years the relation” between the United States and Colombia “has been based more in terms of the war on drugs. And that I think has been a failed policy,” she said.
Márquez summarized the failure of this policy: “Drug trafficking, as we say colloquially, has served in Colombia to leave dead people in our lands and economic resources in the banks of the financial system.”
“I think a great challenge is first to recognize that the anti-drug policy has failed in Colombia,” she explained. “And strengthening that relation implies setting out another approach on how to deal with the problem of drugs in Colombia.”
“We have said, the approach is the path toward legalization, which involves changing the use of the coca leaf and marijuana in terms of industrial and pharmaceutical production, in food industry production, in textile industry production derived from the hemp of coca and marijuana.”
“And there is also the approach of racial justice, understanding that the profiling of the anti-drug policy, here in the United States, has been done from a racial perspective. It is black Americans who are put in prison here for consuming drugs. And in Colombia it is indigenous and black people, too, who are hurt by the anti-drug policy.”
“Having an approach of racial justice implies, in this path toward legalization, treating the problem of consumption as a public health problem, not as a problem of criminality. Because it is impoverished young people, who are racialized, who are stigmatized, who are targeted, who are persecuted for consumption, but it is not treated as a health problem.”
Part of the move toward legalization and formal commercialization of drugs would necessarily involve land reform, Márquez explained.
“We were talking about the need to move toward the legalization of drugs as a path to get rid of that incentive for violence, of drug trafficking as a motor that generates violence in Colombia, and creating economic conditions, strengthening the productivity of the Colombian countryside is a challenge.”
“That involves infrastructure. That involves recognizing the rights of the Colombian peasantry. That involves discussing the topic of land concentration.”
“I know there are sectors that don’t like that,” Márquez acknowledged. But she stressed that “the first point of the peace agreement about comprehensive agrarian reform, I think that will be a point that will help in terms of distributing the land for families to access it.”
“I think strengthening the productivity of the countryside, creating stabilization funds for the commercialization of products from the Colombian countryside, is going to contribute enormously to reducing the violence.”
“When there is more poverty and deprivation, there is more violence. People are not going to let themselves die; the people use what they have at hand. And sadly, the people who are more vulnerable end up in those dynamics of violence, as a form of survival in a country as unequal as ours.”
“So we need to deal with the structural situations that involve security, which is not simply an issue of a military perspective or police perspective.”
“For years the approach for how to deal with security in Colombia has been from a militarist perspective, from a policing perspective,” Francia Márquez explained. “So when they talk about insecurity, what they do is militarize the territories where that violence is generated.”
“And the experience has been that, with greater militarization there is greater violence, because of the corruption, because of the collusion between the armed elements of the state and organized crime,” she said.
“I think the main part of the question that we always ask is why, if there is such a militarized presence of the state, are these systematic and structural acts of violence committed all the time in those territories?”
What is needed is instead “an approach that understands calamities that generate the violence,” Márquez argued.
“For us, the violence cannot be stopped if hunger is not stopped. The violence cannot be stopped if there are not conditions of dignity for Colombians. And that involves strengthening production. That involves restoring national productivity, in both agriculture and nacional industry, the creation of jobs.”
“There are many youths who are being co-opted by armed groups, who first don’t have access to education, and second don’t have access to a dignified job in Colombia.”
Márquez named Colombian territories that she argued are “over-militarized,” where social movement leaders and youth are killed every day, such as Buenaventura and Cauca.
“We have major concerns about the security in our country, right now in the political struggle,” Márquez continued.
“Both Gustavo Petro and I have had our democratic rights limited in the campaign. At numerous times, we have had to stop the campaign, to not go to territories.”
The violence of paramilitary groups has affected “nearly all of the candidates,” she noted.
“Our country has suffered. We have enormous problems in our country. Our people are dying of hunger.”
She called for the Colombian government to abide by the peace agreement it signed with the former rebels of the revolutionary socialist group the FARC in 2016. The right-wing administration of current President Iván Duque has systematically violated the deal.
Márquez likewise said the government should have a peace dialogue with the ELN, another socialist guerrilla group.
She demanded an end to support for paramilitary groups, which have fueled the violence.
“Fear has silenced us in Colombia. It has not allowed us to express ourselves. It has not allowed us to participate,” Márquez said.
“We have had 213 years of a state that has served only the elites, who have governed us and excluded us, and not only excluded but have fueled a policy of violence against social leaders, against ethnic peoples, against the rights of women and youth.”
The first step toward transforming this political order “involves recognizing the historic structures of oppression and exclusion,” Márquez stressed.
“The moment has arrived for Colombia to be an autonomous people that can define itself.”
|
Write an article about: Nicaragua signs historic agreements with Iran, discusses bartering to evade illegal US sanctions. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | bartering, Daniel Ortega, Iran, Javad Owji, Nicaragua, oil, sanctions, Venezuela | Pledging anti-imperialist unity, Nicaragua’s Sandinista government signed economic agreements with Iran concerning oil, agriculture, trade, and technology. They discussed bartering to get around illegal US sanctions.
The Sandinista government of Nicaragua has signed a series of historic agreements with Iran, concerning oil, agriculture, trade, and technology.
The two countries also discussed ways to barter in order to exchange products without the need of the US-dominated financial system, thus circumventing Washington’s unilateral sanctions, which are illegal under international law.
A high-level Iranian delegation arrived to Nicaragua on May 4, led by the West Asian nation’s minister of petroleum, Javad Owji.
On May 6, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega and Vice President Rosario Murillo signed three memoranda of understanding with Iran.
President Ortega said the agreements involved trade, oil and petroleum products, petrochemicals, agriculture, livestock, construction and modernization, technology transfers, and engineering.
Ortega added that Tehran is helping Nicaragua boost its agriculture production, and there are plans to export food to Iran and other countries in West Asia.
Nicaragua’s President Daniel Ortega with Iran’s Petroleum Minister Javad Owji
Iran already cooperates closely with Venezuela, and Tehran’s petroleum minister, Owji, called for strengthening the collaboration between Iran, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.
Ortega condemned the US “persecution, blockade, siege, threats against” all three countries.
Highlighting “the great potential that Nicaragua has,” Owji said, “we can unite forces to neutralize the unjust sanctions that have been applied against both of our peoples.”
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government praised the people of Iran for resisting imperialism, referring to the nations’ two revolutions as “brotherly revolutions,” noting they both took place just a few months apart in the same year, 1979.
In his meeting with the senior Iranian officials, Ortega recounted the history of European and US colonialism in Nicaragua, noting how foreign imperialists long tried to build a canal through the Central American country, and now seek to prevent the Sandinista government from building its own sovereign canal.
Ortega thanked Iran for its solidarity with “a country like Nicaragua, a small people in its territory, which has been invaded since the Spanish colonizers to the yankee expansionists.”
“These are the times in which our peoples maintain that historical thread” with anti-imperialist revolutionaries like Augusto Sandino, Ortega said, with “that principle of defending sovereignty, self-determination, and security for the peace and well-being of our peoples.”
The meeting featured an Iranian diplomat responsible for bartering and obtaining basic products. Upon introducing him, Ortega commented, “Bartering was how our First Nations here in all of the regions of America, Latin America and the Caribbean, our First Nations, before the colonialists, the imperialists, the invaders arrived, their form of trade was bartering.”
Ortega said bartering was ideal because “on occasions there are no other options but to exchange resources for products, because there are blockades, sanctions, which are nothing more than aggression by the empire, and by NATO, which is part of the empire, which is blocking financial operations.”
“So an alternative that our peoples have, when they blockade us, and we cannot transfer the payment for a product that we would like to bring from Iran, well, we could pay for it with products that Iran is interested in that we produce here,” the Nicaraguan president added.
As part of the signed agreements, Iran will also provide technical support to expand Nicaragua’s refinery.
Nicaragua is not known to have sizeable hydrocarbons reserves. It does have a refinery on the Pacific coast, near Puerto Sandino – Port Sandino.
This Nicaraguan refinery was built by Venezuelan specialists in an act of solidarity between the two nations, as part of President Hugo Chávez’s Petrocaribe program.
Nicaragua’s refinery is called El Supremo Sueño de Bolívar – The Supreme Dream of Bolívar, dedicated to the 19th-century Venezuelan revolutionary who led a successful armed uprising against Spanish colonialism and united large parts of South America in an anti-imperialist republic.
The term Supreme Dream of Bolívar is a reference to a 1929 plan proposed by Nicaraguan revolutionary Augusto Sandino, who led a guerrilla war against US troops that were militarily occupying his country.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista movement is named after Sandino, who in the early 20th century called for Latin America to unite and expel the new US colonialists, just as they had expelled the previous Spanish colonialists.
Part of Nicaragua’s refinery, El Supremo Sueño de Bolívar (The Supreme Dream of Bolívar)
While visiting Nicaragua, the Iranian delegation met with the Central American nation’s Ministry of Energy and Mines and traveled to the refinery.
The coordinator of the refinery, Marco Centeno, said “the capacity of the plant is to store and distribute [oil] to the Nicaraguan market.”
Iran pledged to help grow the operations of the refinery, while strengthening economic ties between the two countries.
The agreements signed between Iran and Nicaragua follow a historic 25-year pact that Iran signed with China in 2021. As part of this deal, which has been estimated at $400 billion, Tehran will provide Beijing with oil and other resources and China will help develop infrastructure and technology in Iran.
|
Write an article about: Puerto Ricans rise up against US-imposed austerity, protest poverty wages. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | austerity, colonialism, neoliberalism, Puerto Rico | Puerto Rican public workers are protesting the neoliberal policies imposed by the US government’s unelected Financial Oversight and Management Board. A professor speaks about their demands for higher wages and better social programs.
This February, Puerto Rican public workers have been holding large protests against the neoliberal policies imposed by the US government’s unelected Financial Oversight and Management Board.
Multipolarista spoke with Ángel Rodríguez Rivera, president of the Puerto Rican Association of University Professors. He described how teachers are rising up, after the minimum wage has not increased in 13 years.
You can watch or listen to the interview below:
|
Write an article about: 2/3rds of Nicaraguans support leftist Sandinista Front: Poll debunks ‘dictatorship’ lie. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Daniel Ortega, FSLN, M&R Consultores, neoliberalism, Nicaragua, Sandinistas | While the US and EU absurdly smear Nicaragua as a “dictatorship” and impose sanctions on it, polls show 2/3rds of the population support the revolutionary Sandinista Front and President Daniel Ortega.
MANAGUA, NICARAGUA — If you only listened to corporate media reporting, you would think Nicaragua is a hellish dystopia. Western governments and their stenographers in the press preposterously claim that the country’s leftist Sandinista government is a “dictatorship,” and an “authoritarian regime.”
Of course, mainstream reporters never talk to average working-class Nicaraguans (as I do often in my reporting at The Grayzone). Instead, they act as mouthpieces for the Central American nation’s small class of wealthy oligarchs, who despise the socialist-oriented Sandinista National Liberation Front for taking away their unearned, inherited privileges.
Actual polling on the ground in Nicaragua, however, shows that the ruling Sandinista Front is quite popular, consistently enjoying the support of roughly two-thirds of the population.
The right-wing opposition, on the other hand, has the support of just around one-fifth of the population. This is the despite the fact that it receives tens of millions of dollars in funding from the United States and European Union, and dominates the media, business sector, academia, and NGOs.
The Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) overthrew Nicaragua’s US puppet dictatorship in 1979, and governed until 1990, when it lost power in an election that was essentially stolen by Washington. But the Sandinistas didn’t give up; they organized in poor and working-class barrios and came back to power through democratic elections in 2007, and have governed Nicaragua since.
The leading polling firm in Nicaragua, M&R Consultores, conducts regular studies that show the Sandinista Front to have a solid support base of 60-70%.
M&R Consultores is independent, not affiliated to any political party. It used to be regularly cited by mainstream media outlets like Reuters, but they began to ignore its polls when they became too inconvenient for Nicaragua’s US-backed right-wing opposition.
Between August 3 and 9, M&R conducted a comprehensive survey (PDF) in the departments across Nicaragua. The poll has a sample size of 2000 and a margin of error of +/- 2%.
It found that, in the lead-up to Nicaragua’s national election this November, a majority of people support the government, have confidence in the electoral process, and support the Sandinista Front.
66.6% of Nicaraguans say their country is better with a Sandinista government, whereas just 10.9% believe it is better with the right-wing opposition governing.
76.8% said the current government of President Daniel Ortega respects fundamental human rights and civil liberties.
When asked how they would rate the government on a scale from 1-100, where 1 is as bad as possible and 100 is as good as possible, Nicaraguans gave the Sandinista government a 70.2 rating.
The poll clearly debunks the claim that Nicaragua is a “dictatorship.”
Overall, 69.5% of Nicaraguans lean toward the Sandinista Front, and more than 69% have confidence and hope in the party.
On the other hand, just 26% lean toward the opposition and have confidence and hope in it.
In terms of the actual ballot box, 60% definitely plan to vote for the Sandinista Front this November, and 14.6% definitely plan to vote for the opposition.
One-fourth of participants were indecisive or did not disclose their voting intention.
The survey also studied the gray areas, of how strongly or softly Nicaraguans support these political factions.
It found that the Sandinistas can count on roughly 66.7% of the vote, with 42.4% staunch support, 17.4% soft support, and 6.9% that leans toward them.
The right-wing opposition, on the other hand, can count on around 20.5%, with 3.9% staunch support, 13.6% soft support, and 3% wiggle room.
As for how Nicaraguans politically identify, 57.9% openly call themselves Sandinistas, whereas just 7.5% identify with the right-wing opposition.
A solid one-third, 34.6%, consider themselves to be independents.
Of the 7.5% who identify with the opposition, just 2.9% align themselves with the right-wing Ciudadanos por la Libertad (Citizens for Freedom) party, 2.5% with the neoliberal Partido Liberal Constitucionalista (Constitutionalist Liberal Party), and a mere 0.4% with the ultra-elite Partido Liberal Independiente (Independent Liberal Party).
The survey also found that Nicaraguans have a high degree of confidence in their electoral system.
Despite claims by Global North governments and media outlets that Nicaragua is a “dictatorship,” 85.7% of Nicaraguans believe their vote is “very important” in elections. 6.4% say it is somewhat important, and a mere 7.9% believe it doesn’t matter.
Similarly, nearly 80% of Nicaraguans say they feel enthusiasm for the November election — 23.8% have a lot of enthusiasm, 41% have moderate enthusiasm, and 12.8% have some enthusiasm.
Just 10.8% have low enthusiasm, and 11.7% have zero enthusiasm.
What a strange “dictatorship.”
Moreover, 60.3% of Nicaraguans say they are satisfied with the functioning of their nation’s democracy, while 27.4% are not satisfied.
But I guess a bunch of coup-plotting bureaucrats in Western capitals who insist that Nicaragua is an “authoritarian regime” — and who studied at Ivy League universities, live in elite bubbles of privilege, and have often never even been to Latin America — know more Nicaragua’s democracy than the Nicaraguan people themselves.
The poll shows that 65.3 % of Nicaraguans believe the most important thing in a democracy is not that the people running the government regularly change, but rather that “the people have real opportunities to improve their quality of life.”
This shows that Nicaragua has a much more mature understanding of democracy than many Global North bourgeois societies, where democracy is taken to mean that you vote every four or five years for a new figurehead who implements the exact same policies in support of corporations, elites, war, and empire. In those “democracies,” the faces change but the anti-poor, pro-rich policies never do.
Finally, the survey asked Nicaraguans what kind of economic policies they support, divided between progressivism or neoliberalism.
85.3% support the government’s subsidies for people to buy houses, with 14.7% in opposition.
77.2% support taxes based on how much you earn, whereas 22.8% oppose them.
97.4% support the government’s electricity subsidies, with 2.6% opposition.
97.9% support the government’s water subsidies, with 2.1% opposition.
97.6% support the system of free universal education, while 2.4% want to re-privatize it.
And a whopping 98.6% support the system of free universal healthcare, whereas just 1.4% want to re-privatize it.
M&R Consultures concluded surveying electoral participation. 78.5% of Nicaraguans said they plan to vote in the November election, whereas 21.5% said they do not plan to vote.
That is significantly higher voter participation than in US elections, which are taken to be the world’s grand model of bourgeois democracy.
In short, this study has shown what poll after poll has consistently demonstrated for years: roughly two-thirds of Nicaraguans support the Sandinista Front, President Ortega, and the government’s leftist policies. On the other side, just around one-fifth of the population backs the right-wing opposition.
These two-thirds represent the main base of working-class and poor Nicaraguans, whereas the one-fifth represents the country’s wealthy elites.
The US government, the European Union, and their de facto spokespeople in the corporate media have tried to discredit Nicaragua’s November election months before it even takes place by falsely claiming that President Ortega imprisoned his opponents.
In reality, the government detained the leaders of a brutally violent coup attempt, who are now facing consequences for their crimes.
No other country on Earth could allow criminal coup-plotters to get away with zero consequences for trying to violently overthrow the government. But Nicaragua is expected to do so, because the United States funded and sponsored those coup leaders.
So Washington created an entirely new concept, claiming they were so-called “pre-candidates,” to falsely accuse Nicaragua of arresting presidential candidates.
In reality, there is no such thing as a “pre-candidate”; it does not exist as a legal category. The coup leaders arrested were not candidates.
But Washington and Brussels have been desperate to reassert control over Nicaragua ever since the Sandinista Front came back in 2007.
The United States has directly invaded Nicaragua three times, and endlessly meddled in the nation’s internal affairs. Washington will never be content until its neocolonial puppets are back in power.
It just has one small problem: polls like these show a majority of Nicaraguans support their Sandinista government and oppose these US puppets. And as history has shown, Nicaraguans are willing to fight to defend their sovereignty.
|
Write an article about: Colombia elections: Left wins historic victory against narco-regime. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Colombia, Federico Gutiérrez, Francia Márquez, Gustavo Petro, podcast, Rodolfo Hernández | Colombia’s left-wing presidential candidate Gustavo Petro won round one of the May 29 elections. He will compete against far-right hundred-millionaire real estate mogul Rodolfo Hernández in a runoff on June 19.
Colombia’s presidential candidate Gustavo Petro of the left-wing Pacto Histórico coalition won round one of the May 29 elections in a landslide. He will compete against a far-right hundred-millionaire real estate mogul, Rodolfo Hernández, in a runoff vote on June 19.
Multipolarista editor Benjamin Norton spoke with with members of the anti-imperialist Troika Kollective in Colombia to discuss the election and the political situation in the country.
Troika Kollective website: troikakollective.com
|
Write an article about: Media admits Venezuelan coup puppet Juan Guaidó has no real power – other than what US stole for him. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AFP, corporate media, Juan Guaidó, media, Nicolás Maduro, UN, United Nations, Venezuela | After years of promoting the US puppet, mainstream media outlets are finally admitting that Venezuelan coup leader Juan Guaidó is a fraud with no real power other than what Western governments stole for him.
Mainstream international newswire AFP has admitted that US coup puppet Juan Guaidó has no actual power in Venezuela – although like Donald Trump, Joe Biden still recognizes him.
Nearly three years after Trump initiated a coup attempt in Venezuela by appointing Guaidó so-called “interim president” in January 2019, AFP published an article titled “Venezuela’s Guaido digs in as ‘acting president’ without power.”
The outlet snarkily noted that the US puppet’s online Zoom meetings are “as virtual as Guaido’s power.”
“What Guaido does have, though, thanks to backing from Washington, is control of millions of dollars worth of Venezuelan assets held outside the country, much to Maduro’s chagrin,” AFP added.
Western governments and the corporate media outlets that obediently echo them frequently claim that Venezuela’s real, elected President Nicolás Maduro is internationally “isolated,” but in reality it is Guaidó that has very little international support.
The United Nations General Assembly held a vote in December 2021 to see where the international community stands on Venezuela, and just 16 of the UN’s 193 member states (ie, 8%) voted against recognizing the constitutional government of Maduro.
|
Write an article about: Mexico’s President AMLO demands freedom for Julian Assange, ‘prisoner of conscience’ and ‘best journalist of our time’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Julian Assange, Mexico, WikiLeaks | Mexico’s left-wing President López Obrador denounced US hypocrisy and reiterated his call to free Julian Assange, calling him a “prisoner of conscience” and the “best journalist of our time, in the world.” At a press conference, AMLO played a WikiLeaks video showing the US military killing civilians in Iraq.
Mexico’s left-wing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador reiterated his call for the freedom of WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, whom he called a “prisoner of conscience” and the “best journalist of our time, in the world.”
In a fiery speech condemning the US government’s hypocrisy in its persecution of Assange, López Obrador asked, “Are we going to take the Statue of Liberty out of New York? Are we going to keep talking about democracy? Are we going to keep talking about the protection of human rights, of the freedom of expression?”
At the press conference in which Mexican President AMLO called for Julian Assange to be freed, he showed a clip of the "collateral murder" video published by @WikiLeaks, which exposed US war crimes and killing of journalists in Iraq.
Read more here: https://t.co/qtR2SIOX1j pic.twitter.com/lEQw6F9rrS
— Multipolarista (@Multipolarista) June 22, 2022
López Obrador, who is known popularly by the acronym AMLO, made these comments in a press conference on the morning of June 21.
AMLO called the imprisonment of Assange a “shame for the world.” He insisted, “The United Nations should take a stance” on behalf of Assange, along with “all organizations that defend human rights. There cannot be silence.”
“Mexico opens the doors to Assange,” the president declared, repeating his promise to give asylum to the imprisoned Australian journalist.
AMLO recalled that Assange “gathered cables, reports, from the embassies of the United States, in which they talked about acts of interventionism, and of crimes committed, of flagrant violations of human rights. Not only texts, but also images.”
At the press conference, AMLO played a clip of the scandalous 2007 video published by WikiLeaks, known as “collateral murder,” in which the US military can be seen killing civilians in Iraq, including a Reuters journalist.
“They are journalists, those who were targets,” López Obrador said, pointing to the screen. “This is what led to the persecution… This is why he is [in prison].”
Mexican President AMLO playing the WikiLeaks “collateral murder” video at a press conference on June 21, 2022
The Mexican president said he is going to pressure US leader Joe Biden to free Assange.
Assange is an Australian national. The US government has no legal jurisdiction over him.
Yet Washington has sought to extradite Assange over his journalistic work, threatening him with up to 175 years in prison.
Even mainstream NGOs like Amnesty International, which are deeply biased on behalf of Western governments, have called for the US government to drop its politically motivated charges against Assange, describing the case as “a full-scale assault on the right to freedom of expression.”
Unlike the Mexican president, however, Amnesty International has refused to designate Assange a prisoner of conscience.
AMLO has repeatedly called for the WikiLeaks journalist to be freed. In January 2021, López Obrador offered Assange asylum in Mexico.
In the final weeks of the Donald Trump administration, AMLO wrote his US counterpart a letter, urging him to free Assange.
The US president ignored AMLO’s letter. Instead of freeing Assange, who exposed US war crimes in Iraq, Trump pardoned convicted war criminals from the mercenary firm Blackwater, who massacred civilians in Iraq.
|
Write an article about: Guatemala blocks leftist Indigenous leader from presidential race, in ‘electoral coup’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Alejandro Giammattei, Guatemala, Jordán Rodas, MLP, Movement for the Liberation of the Peoples, Movimiento para la Liberación de los Pueblos, Thelma Cabrera | Guatemala’s notoriously corrupt right-wing government banned Indigenous leader Thelma Cabrera and her leftist Movement for the Liberation of the Peoples (MLP) party from running in the presidential election. International observers warn this is an “electoral coup”.
Guatemala’s notoriously corrupt right-wing government has blocked a prominent leftist Indigenous leader from running in the June 2023 presidential election, in a move that international observers have condemned as an “electoral coup”.
Nearly half of Guatemalans (44%) identify as Indigenous. The Movement for the Liberation of the Peoples (MLP) is a left-wing party that was created to represent the First Nations who have for so long been ignored by Guatemala’s political system.
The MLP is led by Thelma Cabrera, a social movement activist and human rights defender from the Maya Mam community. She has pledged to fight poverty in Guatemala (one of the poorest countries in the region), resist neoliberalism, and establish a plurinational state that gives full rights to Indigenous nations, like Bolivia.
The newly created MLP party ran for the first time in the 2019 presidential election. Cabrera came in fourth place, winning more than 10% of the vote in the first round, compared to just 14% for current right-wing President Alejandro Giammattei.
Since then, the MLP has only become more popular, gaining support across Guatemala. Giammattei, a staunch conservative and wealthy dual citizen of Italy, has seen the growth of the MLP as a threat.
The MLP’s vice-presidential candidate is Jordán Rodas Andrade. He was appointed Guatemala’s human rights ombudsman in 2017. Before his term ended in 2022, Rodas had become well known for his criticism of President Giammattei and the blatant corruption in his government.
Upon leaving the position, Rodas condemned Guatemala’s wealthy corporate oligarchs. “They think they are the plantation owners. They have done so much damage to this country”, he said.
Aceptamos el reto y la responsabilidad de los delegados/as del MLP. pic.twitter.com/BpKjFV42jQ
— Thelma Cabrera Pérez DD. HH. (@ThelmaCabreraP2) December 28, 2022
In late January 2023, Guatemala’s Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) blocked Cabrera and Rodas from participating in the upcoming election, which will be held on June 25.
Guatemalan social movement activists and international observers have reported that the TSE is deeply politicized and acts in the interests of Giammattei and the country’s powerful oligarchs.
Cabrera and her MLP party filed an appeal, but on February 2, the TSE ruled against them, officially banning them from the race.
The Guatemalan electoral authority claimed they cannot run because their application was “invalid”.
Cabrera shared the completed paperwork on Twitter, insisting that “we fulfilled all the legal requirements”. Rodas also explained that he submitted all the required paperwork, and a review of his record found no legal cases or complaints against him.
“Any additional requirement is not found in the law; it cannot be invoked to avoid my candidacy and violate my right to be elected”, he said.
Cualquier requisito adicional no se encuentra en ley, no puede ser invocado para evitar mi candidatura y violentar mi derecho a ser electo. La existencia de denuncias espurias no es impedimento para ser inscrito. Al revisar el QR de mi finiquito no registra ninguna denuncia. pic.twitter.com/eC5KcYEgpJ
— Jordán Rodas Andrade (@JordanRodas) January 29, 2023
Hundreds of activists protested at the TSE, condemning the electoral court’s decision. An MLP supporter said, “If you all don’t register our candidates, there won’t be elections”. Their movement has vowed to go on strike and hold large demonstrations until the decision is reversed.
Even Western government-funded organizations that are deeply biased against the Latin American left have warned that the Giammattei government is increasingly authoritarian.
The International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA), which is funded by the US government and multiple European states, has long shown prejudice in support of the Latin American right. But IDEA’s regional director, Daniel Zovatto, admitted that TSE’s ban of Cabrera and Rodas is a kind of “electoral coup”.
“The decision declaring inadmissible the appeal for annulment by the MLP, leaving the Cabrera-Rodas ticket out of the electoral contest, is an ‘electoral coup’ that corrupts the integrity and credibility of the elections”, Zovatto said.
Vicenta Jerónimo, the lone MLP representative in Guatemala’s congress, referred to the struggle as “a battle of the oligarchy against the peoples”.
“That is because we also know that all state institutions are co-opted in the hands of corrupt thieves in this country”, she said.
In one of the many demonstrations that have taken place throughout the country, Jerónimo stated, “We also see in the Supreme Electoral Tribunal that they have registered children of the genocide that murdered my parents, my grandparents, my uncles in the armed conflict”.
? #Ahora | La diputada del MLP, Vicenta Jerónimo, está frente al TSE acompañado a simpatizantes del partido que exigen la inscripción del binomio Thelma Cabrera y Jordán Rodas. pic.twitter.com/3G2aljhz37
— Plaza Pública (@PlazaPublicaGT) February 2, 2023
Jerónimo was alluding to Zury Ríos, a right-wing presidential candidate who is the daughter of Guatemala’s former dictator Efraín Ríos Montt.
The United States supported the Ríos Montt regime in the 1980s, as he massacred Indigenous communities. In 2013, he was sentenced for crimes against humanity and genocide.
An independent truth commission found that, during Guatemala’s civil war, the US-backed military carried out 93% of civilian killings, whereas socialist guerrillas were responsible for just 3%.
It is estimated that as a result of the genocide perpetrated by Ríos Montt, at least 200,000 children became orphans and around 5,000 more disappeared.
The vast majority of attacks perpetrated by the Guatemalan military against the population were against civilians who had no connection to the conflict.
Ironically, Zury Ríos launched her presidential campaign for the 2023 elections despite having a constitutional ban that kept her out of the race in 2019, due to her close ties with her father.
But the TSE is now allowing Zury Ríos to run. The same electoral body that once banned the proud, unapologetic daughter of a convicted war criminal is today blocking the candidacy of an Indigenous leader and prominent human rights defender.
Madre mía te recuerdo hoy desde tu tierra, esto es por ti, esto es por Guatemala ?. #Chimaltenango #Tecpán #AhoraSiElPuebloManda pic.twitter.com/W0DK86tL9s
— Zury Rios (@ZuryxGuate) February 4, 2023
Likewise, the TSE has allowed wealthy right-wing businessman Manuel Baldizón to run in the 2023 elections, despite the fact that he was imprisoned in the United States for laundering drug money, and deported to Guatemala in 2022.
Baldizón is running for congress, as part of the right-wing Cambio party. His son Jorge Eduardo Baldizón Vargas is also a congressional candidate, and their fellow family member Álvaro Manuel Trujillo Baldizón is running for president.
When Thelma Cabrera won more than 10% of the vote in the first round of the 2019 election, coming just a few points shy of making the run-off, she frightened Guatemala’s oligarchy.
Among the ideas she was advocating for included recovering territories exploited by agribusiness and extractive corporations, creating an anti-monopoly law, asserting collective rights of the lands of Indigenous peoples, and reducing poverty in one of the poorest countries in the region.
These proposals are very popular among working-class Guatemalans. This explains the large protests the country has seen in response to the TSE ban.
#Elecciones2023 ? Jordán Rodas: las “cortes deberán restaurar nuestros derechos”.
??Luego que el TSE rechazara la inscripción de Thelma Cabrera y Jordán Rodas, el ex PDH anunció que el proceso jurídico lo trasladarán a la CSJ.
✍?@iespinoza_gthttps://t.co/o4hGbZNjjw
— PrensaComunitaria (@PrensaComunitar) February 3, 2023
Cabrera is also a supporter of Latin American integration, and has praised other left-wing governments in the region.
Under Giammattei, Guatemala recognized US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó as supposed “interim president” of Venezuela. In 2019, he unsuccessfully tried to enter Venezuela using his Italian passport, hoping to meet with Guaidó.
Guatemala’s right-wing regime is one of the very few governments in Latin America that has supported Ukraine in the NATO proxy war against Russia. Cabrera criticized Giammattei for visiting Kiev and posing for photos with its Western-backed leader Volodymyr Zelensky.
?? #Guate El caporal del @CACIFGuatemala Candil en la calle, obscuridad en su casa… pic.twitter.com/Kz5zppDBuu
— Thelma Cabrera Pérez DD. HH. (@ThelmaCabreraP2) July 28, 2022
The next step for Cabrera and her running mate Jordán Rodas will be to appeal the TSE’s decision at Guatemala’s Supreme Court of Justice.
In the mean time, their Movement for the Liberation of the Peoples is organizing protests, demanding systemic change in the country.
|
Write an article about: From Canada to Brazil, rich right-wing elites are astroturfing ‘trucker’ protests. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Brazil, Canada, Covid-19, Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Justin Trudeau, pandemic, Steve Bannon | Supported by wealthy right-wing elites, so-called “trucker” protests (led by non-truckers) have paralyzed the capitals of Brazil and Canada in less than six months. The campaigns have many similarities – including some of the same well-funded conservative networks.
(Se puede leer este artículo en español aquí.)
Wealthy international right-wing networks have fueled a protest in Canada that paralyzed the capital Ottawa this January and February.
Many of the organizers of the demonstration, which they call a “freedom convoy,” are not truckers, and some have links to far-right groups and Canadian military intelligence and police agencies. But they have exploited the image of truck drivers to confuse observers into thinking it is a working-class movement.
With large sums of money and support from powerful right-wing leaders in Canada and abroad – especially from Donald Trump and his political network in the United States – the “freedom convoy” has used opposition to Covid-19 vaccine mandates as cover to launch an occupation of the capital.
This is despite the fact that nearly 90% of truckers in Canada are vaccinated, and the convoy has been condemned by major unions and organizations representing truck drivers, including the Canadian Labour Congress, Teamsters, and the Canadian Trucking Alliance.
Yet this is not the first time this “trucker convoy” tactic has been employed. It is the latest example of a strategy being developed by well-funded right-wing networks across the Americas, from as far north as Canada and as far south as Brazil.
The convoy in Ottawa is in fact eerily similar to an astroturfed campaign organized just a few months before in Brasilia by rich supporters of the South American nation’s far-right President Jair Bolsonaro.
A trucker protest in Brazil in 2018 paralyzed distribution networks for weeks. Initially rooted in legitimate complaints of unreasonable hikes to the cost of diesel caused by neoliberal economic policies imposed after a 2016 political coup against a democratically elected left-wing government, the trucker protest was soon hijacked by wealthy conservative elites.
2018 was a crucial election year, and Brazil’s media oligarchies turned the trucker protest into a giant campaign commercial for the most subservient politician to US interests in the country’s history: Bolsonaro – its first head of state to ever visit CIA headquarters.
International right-wing networks again resorted to the trucker tactic in 2021. In the first week of September, Brazil held a Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), starring Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo. (Donald Trump Jr. was supposed to attend in person, but he ended up speaking via video stream.)
CPAC Brazil also featured Jason Miller, a former Trump senior advisor and close ally of far-right political operative Steve Bannon.
Former senior advisor to Donald Trump, Jason Miller, with Jair Bolsonaro and his son Eduardo in Brazil
Just a few days after CPAC Brazil, on September 7, a group of truckers occupied the national esplanade, briefly paralyzing the capital Brasilia, leading thousands of Bolsonaro supporters in what initially appeared to be a planned storming of the Supreme Court building.
The Brazilian “trucker” protest was organized by a man who called himself Zé Trovão. It was later revealed that he was not really a trucker, and he didn’t even have a driver’s license – but he did receive thousands of dollars from Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo.
Furthemore, most of the truckers who showed up at the September 7 rally in Brasilia had actually been hired by a company, Pro Tork, whose wealthy owner, Marlon Bonilha, was one of Bolsonaro’s biggest campaign contributors.
Hours after the attempted insurgency fizzled out, Miller was detained at the Brasilia airport by federal police, who questioned him over his role in the destabilization of the country.
The clear parallels between these campaigns illustrate how powerful right-wing networks are developing a novel strategy to destabilize governments, under the cynical guise of “working-class” trucker protests.
Row of trucks at the September 7, 2021 protest in Brazil, all owned by Pro Tork, the company run by Bolsonaro campaign financer Marlon Bonilha
In January 2022, the Canadian government began requiring truckers crossing the border with the United States to be vaccinated against Covid-19. For the vast majority of truck drivers, almost 90% of whom are vaccinated, this was not a problem.
But right-wing networks both inside Canada and outside of the country seized on the new policy to protest and shut down the capital.
Numerous members of far-right groups, including white nationalists and Islamophobes, helped to organize what they called a “freedom convoy.” Many of the people involved were in fact not truckers, but they portrayed the demonstrations as a trucker protest.
Some of the leaders of the convoy have backgrounds in Canadian military intelligence and police departments, and appear to have close relationships with state security forces.
"Those involved with organizing protest include former RCMP and military officers," hardly the kind of people who get involved in organizing leftwing pro-labor movements.https://t.co/xeNqY3C5p0
— Stephen Gowans (@GowansStephen) February 11, 2022
Right-wing and xenophobic messaging was ubiquitous at the convoy, and a few protesters even showed up with Nazi and Confederate flags.
Countless photos and videos of the convoy show anti-communist signs, some bizarrely accusing Canada’s neoliberal centrist Prime Minister Trudeau of being a secret communist.
Many more attacked China, and blamed the Communist Party of China for the Covid-19 pandemic. Other protesters were seen with anti-Semitic signs blaming Jews for the crisis.
A website created by supporters of the convoy listed right-wing conspiracy theorist David Icke and anti-vax groups as “allies,” and encouraged readers to follow far-right outlets InfoWars and Rebel News.
Totally disgusted with the Sh.. Show called Freedom Trucker Convoy. Flying nazi and confederate flags, no one seemed bothered including conservative politicians who supported this gathering of white supremacy disguised as a truckers rally. My father a WWII vet would be appalled. pic.twitter.com/pvPVbX57YC
— Ted Williams (@TedWill44) January 31, 2022
As the convoy grew, two right-wing activists who are not truckers, named Tamara Lich, and B.J. Dichter, organized a crowd-funding campaign on the website GoFundMe.
Support poured in from national and international right-wing elites, and the GoFundMe campaign raised $10 million in just over two weeks, with individual donations as high as $215,000.
The fundraiser was supplemented by conservative investment bankers, real estate moguls, and wealthy businesspeople, until it was shut down on February 4.
Fundraising for the convoy had been boosted on social media by a suspicious coordinated campaign involving a hacked account.
Ottawa’s police chief said there was “a significant element from the U.S. that have been involved in the funding, the organizing and the demonstrating.”
Former US president Donald Trump openly promoted the convoy, at rallies and online, referring to Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a neoliberal centrist who has actively campaigned against the left, as a supposed “far-left lunatic.”
Donald Trump is endorsing the Ottawa convoy, calling Justin Trudeau a “far left lunatic who has destroyed Canada,” and backing an attempt to bring a similar truck protest to DC pic.twitter.com/RCyPCD6qwT
— Adrian Morrow (@AdrianMorrow) February 4, 2022
While right-wing groups threw their weight behind the convoy, left-wing groups in Canada came out firmly against the protest, including major labor unions, indigenous leaders, and socialist parties that are staunchly opposed to the Trudeau government.
The largest trucker union in Canada, Teamsters, openly condemned the convoy as a “despicable display of hate lead by the political Right,” lamenting that it “has served to delegitimize the real concerns of most truck drivers today.”
Teamsters Canada noted that 90% of its truckers are vaccinated.
When the convoy created a blockade at the Canada-US border, the union published another statement denouncing the protest “that continues to hurt workers and negatively impact our economy.”
“The livelihood of working Americans and Canadians in the automotive, agricultural, and manufacturing sectors is threatened by this blockade,” Teamsters said.
The Real Enemy for Truckers is Covid-19
Statement by François Laporte, President of Teamsters Canada, representing over 55,000 professional Drivers across Canada.#canlabhttps://t.co/scrrYeXa7x
— Teamsters Canada (@TeamstersCanada) February 7, 2022
The Canadian Labour Congress, the largest labor organization in the country, which represents dozens of unions and millions of workers, also came out firmly against the convoy.
“This is not a protest, it is an occupation by an angry mob trying to disguise itself as a peaceful protest,” the Labour Congress said.
“This occupation of Ottawa streets, on top of the latest wave of the pandemic, is having a devastating effect on the livelihood of already struggling workers and businesses,” it wrote. “Frontline workers, from retail to health workers, have been bullied and harassed.”
Canada’s unions stand together, unequivocally opposed to these vile & hateful messages and condemn the ongoing harassment & violence.Govts must act now to support workers & businesses affected and end the occupation.Our statement: https://t.co/IlOiYLYaoK #canlab #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/m3JH99WuQt
— Canadian Labour (@CanadianLabour) February 9, 2022
In addition to the biggest labor organization and the largest union of actual truck drivers condemning the convoy, the Canadian Trucking Alliance released a statement clearly stating that it “does not support and strongly disapproves of” the protests.
“The vast majority of the Canadian trucking industry is vaccinated,” and alliance said, adding that “most of our nation’s hard-working truck drivers are continuing to move cross-border and domestic freight to ensure our economy continues to function.”
In follow-up statements, the federation emphasized that “a great number of these protestors have no connection to the trucking industry and have a separate agenda beyond a disagreement over cross border vaccine requirements.”
The trucking alliance criticized the convoy for “impairing the hard work of truck drivers who continue to keep our essential goods moving throughout the supply chain during this critical time.”
“Drivers who are simply trying to make a living and get home to their families have been stuck at blocked border crossings for four to eight hours, many of whom have gone without access to washrooms or food,” the federation wrote.
Indigenous communities in Canada similarly denounced the convoy as a right-wing front.
The First Nations Leadership Council strongly condemned the protest for “its spread of misinformation, racism, and violence.”
First Nations Leadership Council Strongly Condemns “Freedom Convoy” Movement Across Canada and its Spread of Misinformation, Racism, and Violence: "The racist double-standard in policing in this country is on full display -" https://t.co/FrNCEF3ajB pic.twitter.com/ITb0z0QRI6
— UBCIC (@UBCIC) February 8, 2022
“In addition to dangerous public health and safety misinformation, the convoy is also amplifying hate speech and dangerous racist sentiments,” the indigenous community organization wrote, noting the presence of racist signs and flags at the protest.
The First Nations leaders pointed out the hypocrisy of the Canadian authorities, noting “the police response to the protest-turned-occupation in Ottawa has, up until recently, been almost non-existent and appalling in their unwillingness to intercede.”
“The racist double-standard in policing in this country is on full display — had these protesters been Indigenous, the police would have cleared them out in a heartbeat,” the council added.
Emphasizing this transparent double standard, Canadian journalist David Pugliese reported, “Police in Ottawa stood by and did nothing as protesters installed a hot tub in the middle of a downtown street. We have images of police fist bumping protesters.”
Police in Ottawa @OttawaPolice stood by and did nothing as protesters installed a hot tub in the middle of a downtown street. We have images of police fist bumping protesters…what next…police carrying their bath water or scrubbing their backs? pic.twitter.com/CWfcwRX3OW
— David Pugliese (@davidpugliese) February 13, 2022
Leftist parties that are very much opposed to Trudeau also came out firmly against the convoy.
The Communist Party of Canada denounced the demonstration as “a public expression of the increasingly organized and assertive far right,” noting “the strong support (ideologically and financially) from the US far right and circles close to Donald Trump” and the presence of “Nazi and Confederated flags, election signs for Bernier and all sorts of far-right symbols.”
Canadians frustrated at the weeks-long blockade of their capital even organized counter-protests against the convoy.
Ottawa residents, unions, and community organizations marching today against the far-right occupation of their city. pic.twitter.com/t87bUJu6cy
— Stephen Gowans (@GowansStephen) February 12, 2022
To the extent that actual truckers have participated in the Canada convoy, they represent a small percentage of workers in the industry, and most are in fact petit-bourgeois owner-operators and even company owners who exploit working-class drivers.
It is important to clarify the social position of truckers, because they aren’t all the same. The labor category of truck driver is made up of multiple social classes.
Hired hourly drivers are working class. The brother of the co-author of this article, Brian Mier, is in fact a working-class Teamsters union steward who has been a truck driver in Chicago for 30 years.
But not all truckers are working class. Drivers who have their own rigs are small business owners, or petit-bourgeois.
Then there are those who own multiple rigs, and run companies that hire drivers by the hour to drive them. They are bourgeois capitalists.
All three categories are often referred to simply as “truckers,” but they are from different classes and have antagonistic economic interests.
It is naïve or dishonest to present a protest in which all categories are present as a strictly working-class movement.
In Canada, the trucker protest has been heavily dominated by owner-operators and capitalists who have their own trucking companies, and who therefore exploit working-class truckers.
Ironically many of those participating in the convoy received money from the Canadian government they are now protesting, through its Covid-19 emergency funding program for employers, Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS).
ETS – Elite Transport SolutionsCapitalist / CEWS Collector. pic.twitter.com/4w2Hxu1Fny
— T?ri the Dumb Lefty Canadian Radical (@RodneyTori) February 8, 2022
It is lonely driving a truck. Like mail carriers, truck drivers don’t enjoy the same kind of constant interaction with other employees that people in the service sector do, for example.
This isolation makes it harder to organize unions and strikes, and it causes some truckers, who spend hours every day listening to radio talk shows and satellite podcasts as they drive, to gravitate towards conservative political viewpoints.
Nevertheless, as labor laws have been weakened in North America, and as domestic manufacturing has declined and robotization has decimated traditional labor sectors, transport logistics remains one of the only areas still capable of paralyzing the contemporary capitalist system.
The new just-in-time distribution model, which minimizes use of warehouses by relying on milimetrically precise transport logistics, is especially vulnerable to trucker strikes.
This explains why union-busting right-wing elites have put a special emphasis on trying to hijack trucker protests – and illustrates the importance of political work and labor organizing within this sector.
Journalist Seymour Hersh revealed that, in the year leading up to the 1973 coup against President Salvador Allende in Chile, the CIA spent millions of dollars financing a 26-day truckers strike.
This strike marked the beginning of a period of economic destabilization that weakened the democratically elected socialist government, and set the stage for far-right General Augusto Pinochet to seize power, with US support.
Canada’s centrist Justin Trudeau government has virtually nothing in common with Allende’s Chile, but Brazil’s left-wing Workers’ Party does. And a similar campaign used in Brazil shows how wealthy elites have a history of exploiting the name of truckers to push their reactionary interests.
Brazil’s democratically elected President Dilma Rousseff, of the Workers’ Party, was overthrown in 2016 in a political coup that, like the 1973 Chile coup, was led by right-wing networks with support from the US government.
Rousseff was replaced by her vice president, neoliberal technocrat Michel Temer. In 2017, his administration liberalized fuel pricing policy, linking prices in one of the countries with the world’s largest oil reserves to dollarized international rates. This caused daily price hikes, which were further exacerbated by plummeting exchange rates.
By mid-2018, diesel prices had risen by 56.5%. That May, the National Confederation of Autonomous Transport Workers, which represents tens of thousands of owner-operators, issued an ultimatum to the government: freeze all diesel prices until negotiations take place, or we will paralyze Brazil’s distribution networks. The Temer administration refused to respond.
On May 21, owner-operators all over the country began blocking off roads and ports. With the support of some of the biggest company owners, they were then joined by thousands of hired drivers.
Most of Brazil’s labor unions did not endorse the protest. Due to the participation of trucking company owners, they viewed it as more of a lock-down than a strike, and believed it did not clearly represent the demands of the working class.
However, the truckers quickly gained the support of much of the Brazilian middle class, who were nearly as fed up with rising gas prices as the truckers were with skyrocketing diesel costs.
A history professor named Larissa Jacheta Riberti, who worked her way through graduate school as the editor of the popular trucking industry trade journal Chico do Boleia, reported on the early days of the protest:
There is no unified set of demands. The movement is not hegemonic from a social or ideological point of view. There is a group of truckers who support Jair Bolsonaro, another group that is demanding a return to military dictatorship, and others who are asking for free elections now and freedom for Lula. In other words, it is a movement that is mainly centered around the issue of diesel prices.
Later she added, “There is a clear attempt being made by the business class, which is exerting a greater influence on negotiations with the government, to appropriate the truckers’ demands.”
At first, it looked like Riberti’s prediction of business-class appropriation was going to be a complete success.
Brazil’s conservative media oligarchies framed the strike to damage the reputation of the Workers’ Party (PT) by only filming the most reactionary elements – men dressed in the national colors of green and yellow, waving signs clamoring for return to the dictatorship and supporting the far-right presidential candidate, Jair Bolsonaro.
They associated the primary beneficiary of the US-backed 2016 coup, Temer, with the government that he helped remove from power. In the eyes of the media oligarchs, the 2017 liberalization of fuel prices was somehow caused by Rousseff, who had been illegally removed from office a year earlier.
2018 was an election year, and the media was doing everything it could to block a return to power by the PT, whose presidential candidate Lula da Silva was leading all polls, with more support than the sum of all other candidates combined – even though he was being held as a political prisoner and illegally barred from speaking with the press.
Amid the media circus, the Brazilian Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) swung into action. Groups of small farmers affiliated with Latin America’s largest peasant movement came out to dozens of locations across the country where truckers were camped out with their rigs and fed the hired drivers three meals a day, made from food produced on their farms.
The MST activists used political organizing tactics influenced by the revolutionary educator Paulo Freire to listen and learn from the truckers’ experiences. The MST organizers then explained why they believed diesel prices were so high, and how the solution suggested by the company owners – lowering taxes – would hurt them.
Little by little, this strategy began to accentuate the class differences between the company owners, the owner-operators, and the hired drivers, and chipped away at support for Bolsonaro.
The Landless Workers’ Movement (MST) distributed hundreds of tons of free meals to truckers across Brazil in 2018
But because Lula was illegally imprisoned and barred from running as a candidate, Bolsonaro ended up winning the 2018 election.
And after taking power, Bolsonaro made it clear that he was not going to undo Temer’s pricing policy liberalization. Instead, he offered a small tax break on diesel, using money appropriated from public health spending cuts (which would come back to haunt him in 2020, when the Covid-19 pandemic broke out).
By the time 2021 rolled around, most Brazilian truck drivers felt betrayed by the Bolsonaro administration’s broken promise about diesel prices, which rose a whopping 765% above the level of inflation that year alone.
Most of the big company owners, however, were laughing all the way to the bank. The decimation of labor rights that began in 2017 enabled them to treat workers like they were precarious Uber or Ifood delivery drivers.
Meanwhile, the Bolsonaro administration was engaged in a series of battles with the Supreme Court, which had opened an electoral fraud investigation against the president and his allies.
Bolsonaro’s popularity was nearing an all time low, but he still had a hyper-radicalized core group of supporters, estimated by UNIFESP professor Esther Solano to be around 11% of the electorate.
The problem was that Bolsonaro’s myth of ample support among the working class was crumbling. Polls were showing that even his most supportive electoral demographic in 2018, evangelical Christians, were now as likely to vote for Lula in the 2022 election as they were for him.
Bolsonaro had to do something big. So he decided to fabricate a new truckers’ insurrection.
In 2021, a series of YouTube videos began to spam social accounts connected to a network of right-wing allies of Bolsonaro’s son Carlos, known as the “hate cabinet.”
The videos were filmed inside a truck by a bearded man calling himself “Zé Trovão” – Joe Thunder (the name of the lead character in a popular 1990s soap opera).
Trovão was not actually a trucker, but he portrayed himself as one. And he announced that he was leading a convoy of hundreds of trucks to the presidential esplanade on Brazil’s independence day, September 7, with plans to storm the Supreme Court and make citizen’s arrests of all the ministers.
The non-trucker Trovão called on patriotic truckers in Brazil to join him – on the same day when Bolsonaro’s supporters were already planning a demonstration on Brasilia’s esplanade.
As he continued making videos, Zé Trovão made bigger and bigger claims. In addition to hundreds of truckers, there would be two helicopters providing aerial support, he insisted.
From behind the wheel of a big rig, Brazilian Bolsonaro supporter Zé Trovão calls on truckers to head to the capital
The Brazilian Supreme Court, which has the power to order arrests and investigations, decided Trovão had crossed the line. First it issued a restraining order barring him from entering the city of Brasilia on September 7. Then it issued an arrest warrant. Trovão fled the country.
The co-author of this article, Brian Mier, arrived in Brasilia on September 6 to cover the protest for TeleSur.
Mier stayed in a 2-star hotel built for conventioneers, which was full of people dressed in green and yellow arriving in bus caravans. It was immediately clear that many of them had never been in a big city before.
A nervous looking elderly couple asked Mier for help using the elevator. Another man said he had never seen a vending machine before, and asked for help purchasing a soft drink.
It appeared that a significant percentage of the protesters were bussed in from poor rural areas by rich Bolsonaro supporters.
A video later surfaced showing a wealthy businessman handing out 100 real bills and t-shirts to people as they boarded a bus heading out to the other September 7 pro-Bolsonaro rally in Sao Paulo.
On the night of September 6, Mier heard honking and screaming in the distance. News hit that a group of truckers had invaded the esplanade and, followed by hundreds of jubilant Bolsonaro supporters, driven up and parked in front of the security barrier protecting Congress and the Supreme Court.
Responding to the news, Workers’ Party President Gleisi Hoffman tweeted out reassuring words: “It’s true that tomorrow is September 7th,” she said, “but the next day is September 8th… Look at this video. Congress and the Supreme Court are completely secure. No one is coming anywhere near them. The truckers got onto the Esplanade because the police opened the barricade for them.”
Like the so-called “freedom convoy” in Canada, the trucks in Brasilia displayed large banners preaching anti-communism.
An anti-communist banner on the trucks at the pro-Bolsonaro rally in Brasilia
In the end, there was no storming of the Supreme Court. The real psyop had been to convince the media and the public that it was going to happen.
On September 7, the entire area was completely locked down. Police did their jobs and no one was allowed onto the esplanade without going through a metal detector and getting a pat down.
By the next day, most of the crowd was gone. But a line of trucks remained parked in front of the Supreme Court building. They constantly honked, and a blasted patriotic music.
Mier later confirmed that the entire line was made up of trucks owned by the same company, Pro Tork, whose owner, Marlon Bonilha, was one of Bolsonaro’s biggest campaign contributors.
Fascism and big business have walked hand in hand since the days of Mussolini. Meet Marlon Bonilha (l), the multimillionaire owner of the Pro-Tork trucking company, which still has a dozen trucks parked on Brasilia's Esplanade honking and intimidating the Supreme Court. pic.twitter.com/TJD3QShuq3
— BrianMier (@BrianMteleSUR) September 9, 2021
In short, most of the drivers who occupied the esplanade were hired hands, working for Pro-Tork or two other companies. There was nothing working class about it.
Here is Pro Tork owner Marlon Bonilha giving Jair Bolsonaro a motorcycle helmet. pic.twitter.com/uZzaYxPuNG
— BrianMier (@BrianMteleSUR) September 9, 2021
Days later it came out that the self-proclaimed leader of the trucker protest, Zé Trovão, was not really a truck driver. In fact, he didn’t even have a driver’s license.
Brazilian federal police caught up with Trovão in Mexico City. And one of the main figures in the 2018 strike, Plinio Dias, president of the National Highway Cargo Transport Council, commented, “This guy made a video inside of a truck… but we don’t know anything else about him. I’ve been in this business for 22 years. This guy just arrived by parachute.”
Trovão, whose real name is Marcos Antônio Pereira Gomes, was extradited, brought back to Brazil, and thrown in jail, pending trial due to flight risk.
It was also soon revealed that he had also ripped off Jair Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo, who apparently sent him thousands of dollars for fuel for his non-existent helicopters.
Plinio Dias, 2018 strike leader and President of the National Highway Cargo Transport Council, says, "this guy made a video inside of a truck […] but we don't know him. I've been in this business for 22 years. This guy just arrived by parachute." pic.twitter.com/eDkbFSRw1r
— BrianMier (@BrianMteleSUR) September 11, 2021
As Gomes spent his first week in jail, the actress Ingra Lyberato, who played Trovão’s sidekick Ana Raio (Ana Lightning) in the 1990s soap opera that Gomes had taken his nickname from, remarked on Twitter, “This young man is being manipulated by his own vanity, in a game of marked cards in which he will probably by the only victim.”
The wealthy right-wing networks supporting the “trucker” protests in Canada may have learned from this Brazilian game of marked cards.
Mier spoke to a friend whose brother has been a long-distance trucker in Canada for 20 years, and who asked him if anyone from his yard was participating in the Ottawa protest.
Not one of his colleagues was protesting. “Real truck drivers can’t afford to stop working for three weeks,” he said, “we have bills to pay.”
The hired truckers in Brazil made very similar comments during the September 7 protest.
|
Write an article about: Mexico’s AMLO sent Biden letter blasting US ‘interventionism’ and funding of opposition groups. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | AMLO, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, CIA, Claudio X González, Ford Foundation, Mexicanos Contra la Corrupción y la Impunidad, Mexico, NED, Nicaragua, USAID, Venezuela | Mexico’s President AMLO sent Joe Biden a letter condemning US “interventionism”, such as USAID funding of right-wing opposition groups that are trying to destabilize his elected government.
Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador sent US leader Joe Biden a letter criticizing Washington for meddling in his country’s internal affairs.
The document condemned funding that the US Agency for International Development (USAID) has given to right-wing opposition groups that have organized protests against Mexico’s elected government, seeking to destabilize it.
USAID is a notorious CIA cutout that has been used to finance opposition groups and regime-change attempts in countries that challenge Washington’s foreign-policy interests.
López Obrador, who is popularly referred to by his initials AMLO, is Mexico’s first left-wing president in decades.
AMLO came into office in December 2018 vowing to end the “long and dark neoliberal night”.
He has nationalized the country’s lithium reserves and electrical grid, reversed the partial privatization of the oil industry, boosted social spending, and significantly increased the minimum wage.
This incredible graph shows how much the real minimum wage (measured in purchasing power parity) has increased in Mexico under the left-wing government of President AMLO
Note how the minimum wage was totally stagnant in two decades of neoliberal governments
Credit: @mario_campa pic.twitter.com/ZlGxGvb5QF
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 25, 2022
On May 2, AMLO sent a letter to Biden. The Mexican president’s office made the document public on its official website.
“For a while, the government of the United States, in particular the US Agency for International Development (USAID) has funded groups openly opposed to the legal and legitimate government that I represent, which is without a doubt an act of interventionism, violating international law and the respect that there should be between free and sovereign states”, AMLO wrote.
“Moreover, a few days ago it was announced that said agency will increase the budget given to organizations opposed to our government, as appears published on the official website of the State Department”, he added.
The Mexican president read out the letter in his morning press conference on May 3. His office’s official YouTube channel even made a special video with the clip.
“I feel that it is very arrogant, very offensive, and I can’t remain quiet”, AMLO commented, in reference to the US meddling.
Mexico’s President AMLO sent Joe Biden a letter condemning US “interventionism”, specifically citing USAID funding of right-wing opposition groups that are trying to destabilize AMLO's elected government.
Full video here: https://t.co/LFwp7ZojCy pic.twitter.com/2JrCdI7zyx
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 9, 2023
USAID and other US government organizations, such as the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), have funded numerous right-wing opposition groups in Mexico, particularly media outlets and so-called “civil society” organizations.
A prominent example is Mexicanos Contra la Corrupción y la Impunidad (Mexicans Against Corruption and Impunity, or MCCI), a group founded by right-wing multimillionaire oligarch Claudio X. González, one of AMLO’s most fervent opponents.
MCCI disclosed on its website that it is financed by USAID and NED, as well as the notorious CIA-linked Ford Foundation.
This right-wing opposition leader in Mexico, rich businessman Claudio X. González, who leads a Pinochet-style neoliberal anti-AMLO alliance called Sí por México, is funded by the US government.
His "NGO" "Mexicanos contra la corrupción" is funded by USAID & NED, both CIA cutouts https://t.co/iIJpNQoj4o pic.twitter.com/Job07hxtKf
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) April 3, 2021
The CIA used USAID “humanitarian aid” flights to send weapons to the far-right Contra death squads in Nicaragua in the 1980s.
When the Sandinistas returned to power in 2007, through democratic elections, USAID spent billions of dollars funding right-wing opposition groups, which then played a key role in a violent coup attempt in 2018, which caused hundreds of deaths.
USAID collaborates closely with the US military, and frequently uses “humanitarian” cover to advance the interests of the Pentagon.
In a regime-change operation targeting Venezuela in 2019, USAID was used as a political weapon, working with the US Department of Defense to try to overthrow the leftist government of President Nicolás Maduro.
The United Nations and International Red Cross condemned USAID’s role in the attempted putsch in Venezuela, clearly stating that the US government organization was not providing humanitarian aid. An internal USAID audit even admitted in 2021 that the operation had violated humanitarian principles.
The NED has played an even more nefarious role in funding US meddling schemes and regime-change operations.
In a 1991 report boasting of the “spyless coups” that Washington had sponsored in the former Soviet Union, the Washington Post described the US government’s NED as “the sugar daddy of overt operations”, crediting it for “dispensing money to anti-communist forces behind the Iron Curtain”.
A co-founder of the NED, Allen Weinstein, told the Post, “A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA”.
US foundations like Ford and Rockefeller have historically played a similar role, working closely with the CIA to fund anti-communist groups, including violent ones.
In her book The Cultural Cold War, journalist Frances Stonor Saunders showed how the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations “were conscious instruments of covert US foreign policy, with directors and officers who were closely connected to, or even members of American intelligence”.
This extremely important book The Cultural Cold War documents how the Ford Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation have long been "conscious instruments of covert US foreign policy, with directors and officers who were closely connected to, or even members of American intelligence" pic.twitter.com/SxbBPSHhlM
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) July 13, 2020
In his May 3 press conference condemning Washington’s meddling, President López Obrador proposed that US-Mexico relations should be based on “cooperation and friendship”.
“Together we should confront problems, like the migration issue, like drug trafficking, especially fentanyl”, he stressed.
In Washington, however, far-right US politicians have called for the opposite.
Prominent Republican Congress members have urged the US military to invade Mexico to attack drug cartels, even proposing legislation to justify an intervention.
Hawkish US politicians have blamed Mexico and China for the opioid epidemic in the United States, while ignoring how large pharmaceutical corporations profited from creating the problem in the first place.
AMLO has repeatedly condemned the US threats against his country.
On March 18, he organized a massive rally in the heart of Mexico City, celebrating the anniversary of the expropriation of the country’s oil reserves and shouting, “We remind those hypocritical and irresponsible politicians that Mexico is an independent and free country, not a colony or a protectorate of the United States!”
In a tweet on April 1, AMLO fumed:
They threaten to invade; they sell high-powered weapons in their markets; they do nothing for their youth; they suffer – unfortunately – from the terrible and deadly fentanyl pandemic, but don’t address its causes.
They don’t care about welfare, only money.
Amenazan con invadir, venden armas de alto poder en sus tianguis, no hacen nada por sus jóvenes, padecen —lamentablemente— de la terrible y mortal pandemia del fentanilo, pero no atienden las causas. No les preocupa el bienestar, sólo el dinero, ni fortalecen valores morales,…
— Andrés Manuel (@lopezobrador_) April 1, 2023
While hawks in Washington have scapegoated foreign nations like Mexico and China for the opioid crisis at home, they have largely ignored billionaire oligarchs like those of the Sackler family, who made enormous profits on selling highly addictive drugs such as OxyContin.
In a blockbuster article in 2018, titled “Origins of an Epidemic: Purdue Pharma Knew Its Opioids Were Widely Abused“, the New York Times noted, “A confidential Justice Department report found the company was aware early on that OxyContin was being crushed and snorted for its powerful narcotic, but continued to promote it as less addictive”.
The Times wrote:
Purdue Pharma, the company that planted the seeds of the opioid epidemic through its aggressive marketing of OxyContin, has long claimed it was unaware of the powerful opioid painkiller’s growing abuse until years after it went on the market.
But a copy of a confidential Justice Department report shows that federal prosecutors investigating the company found that Purdue Pharma knew about “significant” abuse of OxyContin in the first years after the drug’s introduction in 1996 and concealed that information.
Company officials had received reports that the pills were being crushed and snorted; stolen from pharmacies; and that some doctors were being charged with selling prescriptions, according to dozens of previously undisclosed documents that offer a detailed look inside Purdue Pharma. But the drug maker continued “in the face of this knowledge” to market OxyContin as less prone to abuse and addiction than other prescription opioids, prosecutors wrote in 2006.
Based on their findings after a four-year investigation, the prosecutors recommended that three top Purdue Pharma executives be indicted on felony charges, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, that could have sent the men to prison if convicted.
But top Justice Department officials in the George W. Bush administration did not support the move, said four lawyers who took part in those discussions or were briefed about them. Instead, the government settled the case in 2007.
|
Write an article about: Latin America’s plan to challenge US dollar with new currency and ‘regional financial architecture’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | ALBA, Andrés Arauz, Argentina, Banco del Sur, Bank of the South, Bolivia, Brazil, dollar, Ecuador, Latin America, Lula da Silva, Mexico, Rafael Correa, Sucre, Sur, UNASUR, Venezuela | Advising Brazil’s President-elect Lula, Ecuadorian economist and leftist presidential candidate Andrés Arauz made a blueprint for a “new regional financial architecture” to unite Latin America, including an international currency to challenge the hegemony of the US dollar and IMF.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
The US dollar is used in the majority of international trade, and its status as the global reserve currency gives the United States an “exorbitant privilege” that underpins its geopolitical and economic dominance.
Yet opposition to Washington’s hegemony is growing around the world. Institutions of Eurasian integration are proposing their own currencies and payment systems. Latin America, too, has ambitious plans to end its dependence on the US dollar.
Prominent economist Andrés Arauz, a leftist leader who came close to winning Ecuador’s 2021 presidential elections, published a blueprint for a “new regional financial architecture” to unite Latin America, challenging the hegemony of the dollar and Washington-dominated institutions like the International Monetary Fund.
His plan centers around creating a new regional currency for international transactions, thereby bypassing the dollar.
The framework is based on a proposal made by Brazil’s President-elect Lula da Silva, who pledged before winning the October election that “we are going to create a currency in Latin America,” in order to “be freed of the dollar.”
The currency is expected to be called the Sur (“south” in Spanish), and would be overseen by a newly created Banco Central del Sur (Central Bank of the South).
To do all of this, Arauz has advised Lula to revive and strengthen existing institutions of regional integration like the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Banco del Sur (Bank of the South), which were undermined by US-backed coups and the rise of right-wing governments.
The goal is “to harmonize the payment systems of” the countries that make up UNASUR in order “to carry out inter-bank transfers to any bank inside of the region in real time and from a cellphone,” explained Arauz.
The Ecuadorian economist also insisted that Latin America should reject the US-dominated International Monetary Fund (IMF) and work with Africa to create debt relief and new economic opportunities.
Both Lula and Arauz have made it clear that the Sur would not replace local currencies, like the European Union’s euro. Countries in Latin America would still have their own national currencies, so they can pursue a sovereign monetary policy.
Rather, the idea is to use the Sur for bilateral trade between countries, in place of the dollar.
The proposal is very popular in Latin America, given that it is the world’s most dependent region on the US dollar.
The dollar was used in 96% of trade transactions between countries in the Americas from 1999-2019, according to the Federal Reserve.
The creation of the Sur currency could fundamentally change this.
Most trade in the Americas is dominated by the United States, which has the world’s second-largest economy (after the People’s Republic of China, when measured with purchasing power parity).
The GDP of the United States is roughly $23 trillion, while that of Canada is nearly $2 trillion.
It is often reported that the nominal GDP of Latin America and the Caribbean is around $5.5 trillion, according to World Bank data, and that the three largest economies in the region are Brazil ($1.6 trillion), Mexico ($1.3 trillion), and Argentina ($491 billion).
But nominal GDP measurements can be misleading, and only reinforce the hegemony of the US dollar. A much more accurate measurement of GDP, purchasing power parity (PPP), takes into account the cost of living in each respective country.
Adjusted accordingly with PPP measurements, the more precise estimate of the GDP of Latin America and the Caribbean is actually $11.4 trillion, with Brazil at $3.4 trillion, Mexico at $2.6 trillion, and Argentina at $1.1 trillion.
This shows that the combined economies of Latin America and the Caribbean make up nearly half of the size of the US economy.
The region is also very rich in natural resources, including oil, minerals, and agriculture.
If Latin America could unify with its own independent financial institutions, it has enormous economic potential.
Latin America’s vast economic potential has long been recognized by left-wing, anti-imperialist leaders in the region.
In the 2000s, the leftist presidents of Venezuela (Hugo Chávez), Brazil (Lula da Silva), Argentina (Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner), Bolivia (Evo Morales), Ecuador (Rafael Correa), and Paraguay (Fernando Lugo) made plans to create alternative financial institutions to challenge the US-dominated World Bank and IMF.
The World Bank and IMF have a history of trapping Global South countries in unpayable odious debt, and subsequently imposing neoliberal “structural adjustment” programs that force governments to implement suffocating austerity policies that benefit US corporations.
Following the vision of Venezuela’s revolutionary President Hugo Chávez, Latin America’s left-wing leaders agreed to create a bank aimed at regional unity, called the Banco del Sur (Bank of the South).
Chávez, Lula, the Kirchners, Morales, and Correa met in Argentina in 2007 and signed a treaty officially creating the bank.
The presidents of (Ecuador, Bolivia, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Venezuela (from left to right) meet in Argentina in 2007 to sign the treaty forming the Banco del Sur
But the launch of the Banco del Sur was delayed.
In 2009, the leaders of these countries met again for the Africa-South America Summit (ASA) in Venezuela, where they vowed a combined $20 billion in initial capital.
These plans were never realized, however.
Several leftist governments in Latin America were destabilized and overthrown in a series of brutal geopolitical attacks waged by the United States and right-wing oligarchies – namely several US-sponsored coups: a military coup in Honduras in 2009, judicial coup in Paraguay in 2012, internal coup in Ecuador in 2017, soft coups in Brazil in 2016 and 2018, and violent coup in Bolivia in 2019, as well as numerous failed coup attempts in Venezuela and Nicaragua.
These US attacks and the ensuing right-wing surge also led to the sabotage of another key instrument of regional integration, the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR).
While the Banco del Sur was meant to economically integrate the region, political integration was be overseen by UNASUR.
UNASUR was formally created in a 2008 treaty, and officially operational by 2011.
But as Washington prepared another coup attempt against Venezuela, in 2018 and 2019, the right-wing leaders of Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, Chile, Peru, and Paraguay coordinated together to withdraw from UNASUR, leaving the institution very weak.
Another important regional institution created in parallel to the Banco del Sur and UNASUR was the ALBA: the Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América (Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America).
Venezuela and Cuba formed the ALBA in 2004 as an economic alliance of left-wing governments in Latin America and the Caribbean.
The ALBA created its own currency for inter-state trade in the region. Adopted in 2009, it was called the Sucre: the “Unified System for Regional Compensation.” (This acronym also referenced the South American revolutionary Antonio José de Sucre, who joined General Simón Bolívar in the anti-colonialist struggle against the Spanish empire in the early 19th century.)
At its peak, the ALBA brought together Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Honduras in a trade bloc, and they used the Sucre in more than $1 billion in bilateral trade in 2012.
The symbol for the Sucre, used by the ALBA
Chávez’s dream of unifying the region was undermined by his untimely death in 2013, and what followed was a devastating US economic war waged against Venezuela, including an artificial US-orchestrated commodities crash in 2014, several violent Washington-backed coup attempts, the imposition of harsh sanctions that gradually escalated into a Cuba-style embargo, and the Donald Trump’s attempt to forcibly install unelected coup leader Juan Guaidó as supposed “interim president.”
Despite setbacks in the previous decade, by 2022, the left is back on the rise in Latin America.
For the first time in history, the region’s seven most-populated countries are governed by left-wing leaders (Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Peru, Venezuela, and Chile).
Colombia’s deeply pro-US right-wing governments were always a thorn in the side of the patria grande (the project of Latin American unity). But that changed with the election in June of Colombia’s first-ever left-wing president: Gustavo Petro.
Recognizing the potential of this historic moment to realize true regional unity, Ecuador’s leftist leader Andrés Arauz has laid out a blueprint for not only political but also economic integration.
Arauz has called for reviving both UNASUR and the Banco del Sur, and strengthening them further with a new Banco Central del Sur (Central Bank of the South).
Arauz is an accomplished economist. He spent more than a decade working at Ecuador’s central bank, eventually serving as its general director. He is currently completing his PhD in financial economics.
Under Ecuador’s former socialist President Rafael Correa, Arauz served as minister of knowledge and human talent.
Arauz has since become a leading figure in Ecuador’s leftist Correísta movement, continuing the “Citizens’ Revolution” launched by Correa.
Arauz was Correísmo’s candidate in the 2021 presidential elections. He won the first round in a landslide, but lost the second round with 47.6% of the vote compared to the 52.4% of Ecuador’s current President Guillermo Lasso, a right-wing multi-millionaire banker notorious for his corruption.
Ecuador’s Andres Arauz (right) with former President Rafael Correa (left) in a campaign ad for the 2021 elections
Although he is not formally in office, Arauz has served as an economic advisor for left-wing politicians in the region.
Arauz is a co-founder of the Grupo de Puebla, a political forum bringing together progressive forces in Latin America. He is also a member of the council of the Progressive International.
Lula da Silva, who governed Brazil from 2003 to 2010, is closely allied with both of these organizations. This makes it likely that Arauz will serve in some capacity as an advisor for the new Brazilian government.
In 2020, Lula published an article at the Progressive International website, titled “For a Multipolar World.” In it, the Brazilian left-wing leader said he seeks “the creation of a multipolar world, free from unilateral hegemony and from sterile bipolar confrontation.”
During his presidential campaign, at a rally in May 2022, Lula promised, “We are going to create a currency in Latin America, because we can’t keep depending on the dollar.”
Lula won the October 30 presidential election and will once again become head of state of the largest country in Latin America on January 1, 2023.
In response to Lula’s electoral victory, Arauz wrote a blueprint outlining steps that Brazil can take to help develop “a new regional financial architecture.”
The article, published at the pan-Latin American website NODAL, is a guide that Lula can follow when he becomes president.
“The goal: that on January 1, 2023, in the inauguration of Lula, the treaties are signed for the new UNASUR,” Arauz wrote.
“We must put in operation the Bank of the South and sign the founding treaty of the Central Bank of the South and the Sur, the regional currency – in addition to national currencies – that President Lula proposed,” he added.
“The initial step should be immediate,” Arauz stressed.
The system will seek “to harmonize the payment systems of UNASUR to carry out inter-bank transfers to any bank inside of the region in real time and from a cellphone,” he explained.
Arauz cautioned that these actions must be taken soon and quickly, because “the political window of opportunity is between January and September 2023, the date of primary elections in Argentina.”
Argentina’s right-wing opposition, which is much more pro-US and supportive of dollar hegemony and neoliberal economics, could win these elections, throwing a wrench into the project of regional unity.
Arauz warned, “We can’t give up this historic window of opportunity to the slow inertia of the foreign ministries and the backwardness of malinchismo” – a pejorative term that refers to people in Latin America who feel self-hate toward their own societies and have internalized the inferiority complex of cultural imperialism.
“Progressive presidents must create an immediate channel of communication between each other,” he emphasized. “The political will is there, there is no time to lose.”
If Latin America manages to create this “new regional financial architecture,” the Ecuadorian economist argued, it could “allow a breather for Argentina.”
Argentina has faced a deep economic crisis, caused largely by unpayable odious debt owed to the IMF, after the previous right-wing government in Buenos Aires took the largest loan in the fund’s history.
Arauz has been a vocal critic of the IMF. In his article, he said Latin America should take “collective action to retroactively nullify the illegal surcharges of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).”
IMF surcharges are extra interest payments that the US-dominated financial institution imposes on borrowing countries that owe it large debts.
The Bretton Woods Project noted that “civil society organisations, human rights experts and others have argued that surcharges effectively discriminate against and punish countries that are most in need of IMF assistance.”
Arauz proposed that, in order to annul these IMF surcharges, “if necessary,” Latin America and Africa should propose a resolution in the United Nations General Assembly.
He added that Latin America should work together with Africa to demand that the United States issue them IMF special drawing rights to help their economies.
The region could then “recycle” these special drawing rights to help Argentina, Arauz said.
The Ecuadorian economist also wrote that UNASUR could try to make some of the capital fleeing the region to the United States instead return to its countries of origin, by invoking article VIII.2.b of the founding articles of agreement of the IMF.
Arauz offered economic advice for Brazil’s domestic affairs as well.
Lula should “undo the de facto privatization of the Central Bank of Brazil that was implemented” by current far-right President Jair Bolsonaro, and “rearticulate the Central Bank of Brazil in the line of development, integration, and democracy,” he wrote.
“It is very difficult to be able to meet the goals of eradicating hunger and the reindustrialization the Brazilian people need if he has a central bank permanently boycotting it,” Arauz added.
He noted that Colombia’s central bank has already taken actions to oppose the proposed reforms of new left-wing President Gustavo Petro.
But Arauz pointed out that “this wave of regional integration cannot remain only at the level of presidents; it should be a true integration of the peoples.”
“That implies profound participation of the social movements of all of the region, but above all, immediate and tangible benefits for the citizenry,” he stressed.
“It also implies giving preferential treatment to the smallest countries,” Arauz added. “The leadership of President Lula is crucial to join together the countries with distinct ideological orientations.”
In the article, the Ecuadorian economist proposed another idea: creating a “massive program of student exchange,” so that “the youth of Latin American public education are able to study a semester or a year in another country in the region.”
The goal should be “a million youths in student exchange in” 2023, Arauz wrote. “This will be the motor of integration.”
He called for forms of cultural integration as well, proposing a regional contest inviting musicians, writers, and poets to make a hymn for UNASUR.
Arauz concluded the blueprint suggesting that Lula should create a “plenipotentiary ambassador for regional integration.”
The Ecuadorian leftist leader made it clear that he has major ambitions for the region.
It’s not enough for Latin America only to unite, Arauz argued. It needs more representation in international institutions.
“The countries of UNASUR should demand a collective position at the table of the G20, which the African Union is about to obtain,” he wrote.
|
Write an article about: Brazil’s Lula travels to China and calls to end US dollar dominance. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Brazil, BRIC, BRICS, China, de-dollarization, Dilma Rousseff, economics, iron, Jair Bolsonaro, Lava Jato, Lula da Silva, NDB, New Development Bank, oil, Operation Car Wash, trade, Xi Jinping | Brazil’s President Lula da Silva took a historic trip to China, where he signed many cooperation agreements and pledged to challenge the dominance of the US dollar.
Brazil’s left-wing President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, known popularly as Lula, took a historic trip to China this April.
There, the two countries deepened their comprehensive strategic partnership, signing 15 agreements involving trade, scientific research, technology, renewable energy, agriculture, meat production, finance, the digital economy, communications, the media, the fight against poverty and hunger, and even the joint development of satellites and space cooperation.
China pledged investments estimated at around $50 billion Brazilian reais. Symbolically, under one of the deals, a Brazilian factory previously run by US automaker Ford will instead by operated by the Chinese electric car manufacturer BYD.
Lula’s meeting with President Xi Jinping in Beijing came just weeks after China and Brazil reached a deal to use their local currencies in bilateral trade, excluding the US dollar.
While visiting China, Lula made it clear that de-dollarization is a top priority for his country.
“Every night I ask myself why all countries have to base their trade on the dollar”, Lula said, according to a report in the Financial Times.
“Why can’t we do trade based on our own currencies?” the Brazilian leader asked. “Who was it that decided that the dollar was the currency after the disappearance of the gold standard?”
Many US politicians were outraged by the historic de-dollarization agreement between China and Brazil.
Neoconservative Republican Senator Marco Rubio fumed on Fox News:
Today, Brazil – in our hemisphere, the largest country in the western hemisphere south of us – cut a trade deal with China. They’re going to, from now on, do trade in their own currencies, and get right around the dollar.
They’re creating a secondary economy in the world, totally independent of the United States.
We won’t have to talk sanctions in five years, because there will be so many countries transacting in currencies other than the dollar, that we won’t have the ability to sanction them.
China and Brazil signed an agreement to de-dollarize their trade and use local currencies.
US politicians like Republican Senator Marco Rubio are furious, because it means they can no longer destroy countries' economies with illegal sanctions.
More here: https://t.co/9IO1KsEVMo pic.twitter.com/4k8H3GLdqo
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) April 16, 2023
Lula, now in his third term as president, was unfazed by the criticism in Washington.
The Brazilian leftist leader has already publicly pledged to create a new currency for trade in Latin America. He stated clearly that the goal is to weaken the region’s “dependence on the US dollar”.
Brazil and Argentina preparing new Latin American currency to ‘reduce reliance on US dollar’
“Who decided that our currencies were weak, that they didn’t have value in other countries?” Lula asked while in China.
“Why can’t a bank like that of the BRICS have a currency to finance trade relations between Brazil and China, between Brazil and other countries?” he continued. “It’s difficult because we are unaccustomed [to the idea]. Everyone depends on just one currency”.
Lula made these remarks criticizing US dollar hegemony in a speech for the New Development Bank (NDB), the financial institution birthed by the BRICS bloc of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.
Lula was one of the creators of the BRICS, back when it was previously just the BRIC. He co-founded the group during his first two terms in office, which ran from the beginning of 2003 to the end of 2010.
The leftist Brazilian president has been an outspoken advocate for a multipolar world.
Lula among the founding members of the BRIC
The NDB was meant as an alternative to the US-dominated World Bank, which is notorious for imposing devastating austerity measures and neoliberal economic reforms on countries in the Global South.
On April 12, Lula flew into Shanghai, where the NDB is located. He was the first foreign head of state to visit the BRICS bank’s headquarters.
There, Lula was greeted by his successor, Brazil’s former President Dilma Rousseff, a fellow member of the left-wing Workers’ Party.
Dilma is now president of the New Development Bank. There, she has pledged to use the institution to fund high-quality “sustainable development” to fight climate change and “promote social inclusion”.
Dilma said the NDB plans to finance “critical and strategic infrastructure projects” like ports, airports, and highways, as well as “more modern models of transportation”, such as high-speed trains, in underdeveloped countries in the Global South.
Um grande dia para o Brasil e os Brics. Participando da posse da querida amiga @dilmabr como presidenta do Novo Banco de Desenvolvimento.
?: @ricardostuckert pic.twitter.com/u6fAiCVFbd
— Lula (@LulaOficial) April 13, 2023
Lula’s trip to China was his first state visit outside of the Americas in his third term.
The Brazilian president traveled to the United States in February, but only for one day. In contrast, Lula spent four days in China – a symbol of how important their alliance is.
“No one will prohibit Brazil from improving its relationship with China”, Lula said during his trip, in a clear message to the United States.
Lula also visited the research center of China’s tech giant Huawei, which has been unilaterally sanctioned by the US – another message to Washington.
Brazilian’s Minister of Finance Fernando Haddad, who joined Lula in China, explained that their goal is “reindustrializing Brazil in partnership with Chinese capital”.
Reporting on the historic trip, S&P Global Market Intelligence noted (emphasis added):
The 20 new agreements have a broad scope, indicating that the Lula administration is looking to prioritize deepening economic ties with China. Lula’s visit to mainland China, which was postponed due to illness, had been planned to last five days and would have included a delegation of around 200 business representatives, compared with the one day that Lula spent in the United States in February, with no clear agreements reached.
When Lula ended his second term at the end of 2010, he was one of the most popular leaders in world history, with a staggering 87% approval rating.
Lula and his successor Dilma transformed the country. In a speech in China, Lula boasted that their Workers’ Party-led governments helped lift 36 million Brazilians out of extreme poverty, taking Brazil off of the UN Hunger Map for the first time in history.
In 2002, the year before Lula entered office, Brazil’s GDP PPP was $1.72 trillion; when he left, it was $2.8 trillion.
Today, Brazil has the eighth-biggest economy on Earth, when measured with purchasing power parity (PPP). It is even bigger than the economies of France and Britain.
When Lula was previously president, Brazil had become the sixth largest, but following a US-backed political coup, Brazil’s economy suffered from years of right-wing rule and aggressive neoliberal policies that devastated the country and fueled deindustrialization.
The biggest economies in the world by GDP (PPP), according to 2023 IMF data
China has the world’s largest economy, when measured with purchasing power parity. It is also among the top two most populous countries (India’s population is expected to overtake China’s in 2023).
For its part, Brazil is the most populous country in Latin America, and the seventh-most populous on Earth.
China has been Brazil’s top trading partner since 2009. Commercial exchange between the two giants has skyrocketed in the past two decades.
The Brazilian government boasted that their bilateral trade increased by a staggering 21 times since Lula’s first visit to China in 2004.
In 2022, China and Brazil did US$150.4 billion in trade. From 2021 to 2022 alone, their bilateral trade grew by 10.1%.
What is unique about this relationship is that Brazil has a significant trade surplus with China, exporting roughly $90 billion in 2022 while importing approximately $60 billion.
In fact, Brazil exports three times more to China what it sells to the United States. (Brazil has a trade deficit with the US.)
Brazil is a commodities powerhouse.
The South American nation is the world’s second-biggest exporter of iron ore.
Brazil is also among the top 10 biggest oil producers. As of 2021, it produced more oil even than Iran, representing roughly 4% of global output.
Under the rule of the Workers’ Party, Brazil had established itself as the sixth-largest economy on Earth.
But years of US meddling pushed the South American giant into recession and stagnation.
A huge drop in commodities prices in 2014 caused significant economic problems. This crash was intentionally pushed by the United States, which massively expanded its own shale production while pressuring Saudi Arabia to overproduce oil to collapse crude prices on the global market, in an effort to hurt the economies of major oil producers Russia, Iran, and Venezuela.
‘Oil war’: How US and Saudi crashed crude prices to hurt Russia, Iran, Venezuela in 2014
Dilma governed from 2011 until 2016, when she was overthrown in a political coup backed by the United States, impeached on an absurd budgetary technicality that far-right leader Jair Bolsonaro regularly engaged in.
Lula was subsequently imprisoned in 2018, on fraudulent charges overseen by the corrupt judge Sergio Moro, as part of the lawfare (judicial warfare) campaign known as Lava Jato (Operation Car Wash), which was closely supported by the US Justice Department and State Department.
Brazil’s top court later dropped all charges against Lula. Even the United Nations Human Rights Committee determined that Lula’s civil rights and due process guarantees had been violated.
But the imprisonment of Lula on false pretenses, under Washington’s watch, essentially handed the 2018 election to the fascistic Bolsonaro, who openly praised Brazil’s previous extreme-right, US-backed dictatorship, as well as the fascist junta of Augusto Pinochet in Chile.
Bolsonaro rewarded Moro, the judge who jailed Lula, by appointing him as his “super justice minister”. Bolsonaro and Moro then promptly visited CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, to thank the notorious US spy agency.
The US supported the soft coup against Brazil's President Dilma in 2016
Then Lula was imprisoned on fake charges before the 2018 election
Lula was sentenced by corrupt judge and US asset Sergio Moro
Bolsonaro and Moro then visited CIA headquartershttps://t.co/FY8bV1Bebr
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) January 2, 2023
Under Bolsonaro, Brazil’s foreign policy was totally subordinated to Washington. He eagerly recognized US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó as the so-called “interim president” of Venezuela, and even supported cross-border terror attacks on the country’s leftist Chavista government.
Donald Trump’s former CIA director turned secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, admitted that Washington tried to use Bolsonaro and his far-right counterpart in India, Narendra Modi, to divide and destabilize the BRICS system.
Remember BRICS? Well, thanks to @jairbolsonaro and @narendramodi the B and the I both get that the C and the R are threats to their people. pic.twitter.com/JwL8E0uJte
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) January 19, 2021
The geopolitically motivated 2014 commodities crash, US-backed political coups in 2016 and 2018, and six subsequent years of right-wing rule devastated Brazil’s economy.
Brazil-based journalist Brian Mier also explained to Geopolitical Economy Report that “Lava Jato sabotaged the economy, causing a 2.5% drop in GDP by paralyzing and bankrupting Brazil’s five largest construction and engineering companies”.
He pointed to studies that found that the US-backed Lava Jato lawfare led to the loss of 4.4 million jobs.
“Lula and Dilma had quintupled the foreign reserves, and Brazil was prepared for a commodities bust cycle, so Lava Jato had a bigger effect on the recession than the commodities bust”, Mier said.
All of this led to what was essentially a lost decade. The country is only recovering today.
On April 13, Lula met with New Development Bank officials in Shanghai. The Brazilian government published an official transcript of his remarks.
Lula recalled that the 2008 financial crash was caused by “greed” and risky financial speculation. Today the crises continue, Lula noted, with large banks like Credit Suisse collapsing.
“I think the world has never needed an instrument to help in the world’s development as much as it needs it now”, he said of the NDB.
In light of this instability, the NDB offers “extraordinary hope”, Lula argued.
“We have to be more concerned with serving the countries that are most in need of money”, the Brazilian president said. He argued that their goal should be to “help the neediest and poorest countries”.
“I hope that this bank is able to lend money for the development of the African continent. I hope that this bank is able to have money to lend to the poorest countries in Latin America”, he urged.
Bom dia no Brasil! Em Xangai, participei da posse de @dilmabr como presidenta do Novo Banco de Desenvolvimento dos Brics e visitei a fábrica da Huawei. O NBD é uma grande iniciativa para um desenvolvimento mais equilibrado do mundo.
?: @ricardostuckert pic.twitter.com/VhUc4qNLfr
— Lula (@LulaOficial) April 13, 2023
While in China, Lula tweeted:
It is a dream of developing countries to have an instrument that invests in their development.
During the 8 years I was in the presidency, I tried to create a Bank in the South, which would allow investment in the necessary things in our region, without submitting to the rules of the IMF.
He added:
The BRICS Bank represents a lot for those who dream of a new world.
The dream of creating the BRICS was for an instrument of development, which will certainly be strong, with the goal of benefiting countries. If not, we will never have the poorest countries be able to develop themselves.
It would not be fair if we ended the 21st century as we started the 20th century, with those who were rich getting richer and those who were poor getting poorer.
Se não, nunca teremos os países mais pobres conseguindo se desenvolver. Não é justo terminarmos o século XXI como começamos o século XX, com quem era rico ficando mais rico e quem era pobre mais pobre.
— Lula (@LulaOficial) April 13, 2023
As Dilma Rousseff was officially sworn in as director of the New Development Bank, Lula delivered another speech.
He said the NDB has potential to “become the great bank of the Global South”, praising it as a “tool for reducing inequalities between rich countries and emerging countries”, which could help prevent “social exclusion, hunger, extreme poverty, and forced migration”.
“Many developing countries are accumulating unpayable debts”, Lula warned
“The unmet financing needs of developing countries were and remain enormous”, he added.
Lula called the NDB a “milestone” in South-South cooperation.
“For the first time, a development bank with global reach was established without the participation of developed countries in its initial phase”, the Brazilian leader said.
The NDB is “free, therefore, from the shackles of conditionalities imposed by traditional institutions on emerging economies. And more: with the possibility of financing projects in local currency”, he continued.
Lula explained, “The creation of this Bank shows that the union of emerging countries is capable of generating relevant social and economic changes for the world. We don’t want to be better than anyone else. We want opportunities to expand our potential and guarantee dignity, citizenship and quality of life to our peoples”.
“The New Development Bank has great transformative potential, as it frees emerging countries from submission to traditional financial institutions, which try to govern us, without having a mandate to do so”, he added.
Lula noted that, in Brazil, the NDB has helped finance infrastructure projects, income support programs, sustainable transportation, climate change adaptation, sanitation services, and renewable energies.
Referring to the former Brazilian president affectionately as “comrade Dilma”, Lula emphasized that her new global leadership role is an important accomplishment for women’s representation.
He also noted Dilma’s revolutionary struggles in the 1970s “to put into practice the dream of a better world”. Dilma had been part of the leftist resistance against Brazil’s US-backed fascist dictatorship, and she was imprisoned and tortured.
Lula explained:
“The time when Brazil was absent from major world decisions is in the past. We are back on the international stage, after an inexplicable absence. We have a lot to contribute to key issues of our time, such as mitigating the climate crisis and fighting hunger and inequality.”
“It is intolerable that, on a planet that produces enough food to meet the needs of all humanity, hundreds of millions of men, women and children have nothing to eat.
It is inadmissible that the irresponsibility and greed of a small minority put the survival of the planet and of all humanity at risk.
Brazil is back. With the willingness to contribute again to the construction of a more developed, fairer and environmentally sustainable world.
In another Brazilian government statement, Lula stated:
We want the Brazil-China relationship to transcend the trade issue; we want to have a deep relationship in science and technology; partnerships between universities to have more Brazilian students in China, and more Chinese students in Brazil.
We count on China in our fight for the preservation of planet earth, defending a healthier climate policy. That is why an energy transition is extremely important, so that we can produce cleaner energy, especially wind, solar, and biomass energy.
Brazil is committed to achieving, by 2030, zero deforestation in the Amazon, and to making our contribution to preserving the planet.
We are convinced that the development of Brazilian agriculture does not need irresponsible deforestation, let alone fires. Brazil can practically double its agricultural production by recovering degraded land, without having to cut down a single tree.
For his part, Chinese President Xi said:
China has a strategic and far-reaching relationship with Brazil, which has a place of priority in our foreign relations. You are our longtime friend.
The Brazil-China relationship, in healthy and stable development, will play an important role for peace, stability, and mutual development, for both countries and the world.
|
Write an article about: China deepens ties with Venezuela, challenging US ‘hegemonic mindset’. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | BRICS, China, gas, Iran, Nicolás Maduro, oil, sanctions, Venezuela, Xi Jinping | Condemning Washington’s “hegemonic mindset” and sanctions, China strengthened its strategic partnership with Venezuela. The oil-rich South American nation’s President Nicolás Maduro took a historic trip to Beijing, and applied to join BRICS.
Venezuela’s President Nicolás Maduro took a historic trip to China this September. There, the two nations signed 31 comprehensive agreements and formally “upgraded” their relations to an “all-weather strategic partnership”, one of Beijing’s highest designations.
China and Venezuela jointly blasted the “hegemonism” of the Western powers. Beijing formally condemned the illegal sanctions that Washington has imposed on Caracas.
Chinese President Xi Jinping emphasized this his government will “firmly support” Venezuela’s “just cause against external interference”.
The global political and economic order is changing rapidly.
One of the biggest shifts the world has seen in the past 20 years is in relations between China and Latin America.
At the beginning of the 21st century, there was not much trade between China and Latin America. But in the past two decades, their economic relations have skyrocketed.
Today, China is the second-largest trading partner of the region, after the United States. There are nine countries in Latin America that trade more with China than any other nation. (The United States is Mexico’s biggest trading partner, and Mexico has the second-biggest economy in Latin America. But if Mexico is excluded from the data, China becomes Latin America’s top trading partner.)
Among the Latin American nations that already trade more with China than the United States are the largest economy in the region, Brazil; as well as the third biggest, Argentina; along with one of the world’s top lithium producers, Bolivia; the second-largest copper producer, Peru; and the country with the biggest known oil reserves: Venezuela.
Venezuela has a lot of economic potential, but has suffered for years under a brutal economic war waged by the United States.
In 2019, the Donald Trump administration launched a coup attempt. Washington claimed a little-known right-wing opposition politician, Juan Guaidó, was the supposed “interim president” of the country, despite the fact that he had never participated in a presidential election.
The United States pressured countries around the world to recognize Guaidó as the supposed leader of Venezuela.
At the same time, the United States imposed upon Venezuela one of the most grueling sanctions regimes in history.
Washington’s goal was clear: to destroy Venezuela’s oil sector, thus starving the leftist government of revenue and leading to its overthrow.
For a century, ever since oil was discovered in Venezuela, the South American nation’s economy has been extremely reliant on one industry: oil.
This over-dependency is a problem that predates the Bolivarian Revolution declared by revolutionary socialist President Hugo Chávez at the turn of the 21st century.
Long before Chávez was born, Venezuela has been a petrostate. The government has historically relied on exporting oil to get revenue to fund social programs. This was the case even when the state was controlled by right-wing political parties.
The US sanctions on Venezuela began in 2015, when the Barack Obama White House issued a bizarre executive order “declaring a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States posed by the situation in Venezuela”.
When Trump entered office in 2017, he drastically escalated the economic war on Venezuela that Obama had started into a full-on embargo (like the blockade Washington has illegally imposed on Cuba for more than six decades).
US sanctions have devastated the Venezuelan economy. According to the top United Nations expert on the issue, special rapporteur Alena Douhan, Washington’s unilateral coercive measures, which are illegal under international law, resulted in the Venezuelan government losing 99% of its revenue.
Independent experts have reported that US sanctions have caused at least tens of thousands of civilian deaths in Venezuela, perhaps more than 100,000.
While it is widely known that Venezuela has the world’s largest oil reserves, what is much less known is that the South American nation’s crude is very heavy.
Venezuela’s oil needs a lot more processing than the lighter crude of other countries. It must be diluted, blended with lighter crude or liquids like naphtha.
US sanctions have aimed expressly at trying to prevent Venezuela from importing the diluents it needs to process its oil. This was yet another part of Washington’s strategy to destroy Venezuelan oil production, to starve the government of revenue.
However, the numerous US coup attempts have failed. Still today, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro is firmly in power. He continues the legacy of the Bolivarian Revolution that was initiated by his predecessor, Chávez.
Maduro is also deepening Caracas’ alliance with Beijing.
This September, the Venezuelan leader took a seven-day trip to China, which both Beijing and Caracas described as “historic”.
Maduro met with Chinese President Xi Jinping and signed 31 comprehensive agreements, involving collaboration in a wide array of areas, including economic integration and trade, geology and mining, health, technology transfer, construction of public housing, energy, infrastructure, telecommunications, and even outer space.
During Maduro’s trip, Xi also announced that China had “elevated” its diplomatic relationship with Venezuela.
Beijing previously considered its ties with Caracas to be part of a “comprehensive strategic partnership”. Now, China calls it an “all-weather strategic partnership”.
This means that Venezuela is among China’s closest allies, at the same level as Pakistan, which is one of China’s neighbors and plays an important role in the Belt and Road Initiative, Beijing’s global infrastructure project.
In his remarks upon meeting with Maduro, President Xi said that “China will continue to firmly support Venezuela’s efforts to safeguard national sovereignty, dignity and social stability, as well as its just cause against external interference”.
China and Venezuela released a joint statement calling to “oppose all forms of hegemonism and power politics, oppose all forms of unilateralism”.
Beijing-based newspaper the Global Times, which is close to the government, described Maduro’s trip writing: “The further consolidation and elevation of bilateral relations also suggests the irreversible momentum of South-South cooperation, which leads to win-win results and unity among the developing world rather than certain Western countries wrestling for power out of a hegemonic mindset”.
For his part, Maduro said the two nations’ growing relations are part of a “new era”. He added, “We have a relation of deep friendship, of successful cooperation. Our relations have been a model for the Global South”.
The Venezuelan president added that China has been the “great motor of development in a new era of a multipolar and pluricentric world”.
Maduro emphasized that the partnership between Venezuela and China is “not about dominating countries, much less taking their resources or wealth. On the contrary, we are working for the development of industry, agriculture, technology, the capacity to make jobs and satisfy the needs of the peoples. It is the century of a different world, pluripolar and pluricentric”.
La asociación estratégica entre Venezuela y China no es para ir contra nadie, ni dominar países, ni mucho menos para quitarle los recursos o riquezas a las naciones. ¡Al contrario! Trabajamos para desarrollar la industria, la agricultura, la tecnología, la capacidad de generación… pic.twitter.com/hduaDl9IBa
— Nicolás Maduro (@NicolasMaduro) September 14, 2023
China has the world’s largest economy, when its GDP is measured at purchasing power parity.
China is also the world’s biggest importer of both oil and gas. It needs stable, reliable energy partners, particularly as Washington pressures countries to minimize their relations with Beijing.
Venezuela not only has massive oil reserves, but also very significant gas deposits.
BP reported in 2021 that Venezuela has proven gas reserves amounting to a staggering 6.3 trillion cubic meters, larger than those in Saudi Arabia (6 trillion), the United Arab Emirates (5.9 trillion), and Iraq (3.5 trillion).
In recent years, the Venezuelan government has slowly expanded exploration, looking for more gas fields.
China is slowly trying to end its reliance on fossil fuels. Beijing recognizes that climate change is a very serious threat, not only to the planet, but to its own national security.
In fact, China is the world’s leader in renewable energy, representing more than 80% of global clean energy manufacturing investment.
Beijing is on the path to install more solar panels in 2023 than the United States has installed in the history of the technology.
But, in the short- to medium-term, China still needs a lot of oil and gas, and Venezuela is a natural energy partner, with a government that Beijing can rely on not to betray it and ally with Washington.
China installed 96.6 GW of solar power capacity in 2022: 42% of the entire planet (231 GW)
China had a total of 462 GW of solar photovoltaic (PV) power installed as of 2022: 37.5% of the global total of 1233 GW
China has more solar power installed than these countries COMBINED:… pic.twitter.com/tL81uR0nOZ
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) July 18, 2023
Maduro’s trip to China came just a few weeks after a historic summit of the BRICS, in which the bloc founded by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa formally invited six countries to become new members: Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.
Venezuela has formally applied to join the extended BRICS+ bloc as well.
China has publicly endorsed Venezuela for membership. Brazil, under President Lula da Silva, has also made it clear that it supports Venezuela joining BRICS.
The fact that Iran is now integrating into the bloc shows that countries in the Global South are increasingly willing to challenge the illegal unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States.
In fact, in July, Iran also became a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an important institution for security policy in Eurasia. Other members include China, Russia, India, Pakistan, and numerous Central Asian nations.
China has deepened its alliance with Venezuela mere months after helping to broker a historic peace breakthrough between Iran and Saudi Arabia.
For decades, the United States pressured Riyadh to wage a proxy war against Tehran, in hopes of weakening and eventually toppling Iran’s post-revolutionary government.
Today, Iran and Saudi Arabia certainly are not allies, but they have normal diplomatic relations and will work alongside each other members of BRICS.
Developments like these show that, while the United States wages wars and seeks to overthrow governments across the planet, China encourages peace, diplomacy, and stability, in the name of “win-win cooperation” and mutually beneficial economic development.
|
Write an article about: Corruption exposed: US meddled in Ecuador’s election, using Julian Assange as bargaining chip. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Carlos Pareja Yannuzzelli, Correísmo, Ecuador, Fernando Villavicencio, Julian Assange, Lenín Moreno, Rafael Correa, WikiLeaks | A former minister of Ecuador testified that the US government conspired with a right-wing political party to run a disinformation campaign against the leftist Correísta movement, backing a millionaire banker for president in exchange for giving up journalist Julian Assange, who had asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy.
Ecuador’s former energy minister testified that the US government conspired with a right-wing political party to run a disinformation campaign against the leftist Correísta movement of ex President Rafael Correa.
He said that US “federal agents” pledged to help “influence” the 2017 presidential elections and support the candidacy of conservative millionaire banker Guillermo Lasso in exchange for the promise to turn over journalist Julian Assange, who had been given asylum by Correa and was stuck living for years in Ecuador’s embassy in London.
The former energy minister, Carlos Pareja Yannuzzelli, had fled a corruption investigation in Ecuador and was living as a fugitive from justice in the United States in late 2016 when he was offered large sums of money and US government protection in return for reading a carefully prepared “script” that made false accusations of corruption against Correa and his Vice President Jorge Glas, who was later imprisoned on highly dubious charges.
Pareja testified that the federal agents also coerced him into making false accusations against a US citizen, so they could justify their involvement in the Ecuadorian case. This led to the US national being arrested and imprisoned for three-and-a-half years.
Lasso ended up losing the 2017 election (before going on to win the 2021 election), but his victorious opponent, Lenín Moreno, later betrayed Assange anyway, letting British authorities raid the embassy, imprison the WikiLeaks journalist, and prepare to extradite him to the United States.
Ecuador’s former energy minister, Carlos Pareja Yannuzzelli, in 2016
The revelation of this extraordinary example of Washington meddling in another country’s election came from one of the top officials in Ecuador’s oil industry.
Carlos Pareja Yannuzzelli had served as head of the state-owned oil company Petroecuador, and later became Correa’s minister of hydrocarbons.
In 2016, Pareja was named in the Panama Papers leak of offshore bank accounts, and he was forced to step down as energy minister. In 2017, he was sentenced to several years in prison on charges that he used his position in the state oil industry to enrich himself and his friends.
The name Carlos Pareja Yannuzzelli has become practically synonymous with corruption in Ecuador, so much so that he is commonly referred to as “Capaya” (an abbreviation of his name).
On November 9, 2022, Correa published on Twitter a written testimony that Pareja had provided from prison in May 2019. The affidavit, which is signed by Pareja and includes his thumbprint, exposes the scandalous US government-backed plot to meddle in Ecuador’s 2017 presidential elections to hurt the left wing.
La única organización criminal que se puede probar es entre Villavicencio y Pareja.¿También en esta ocasión Villavicencio le pasó los guiones??#LosCorruptosSiempreFueronEllos pic.twitter.com/FEbUwsZdlj
— Rafael Correa (@MashiRafael) November 10, 2022
Rafael Correa shared the scandalous 2019 testimony in response to evidence-free accusations of corruption that Pareja Yannuzzelli made against the former president in a politicized hearing organized by the National Assembly’s auditing committee on November 9, 2022.
This committee is run by Fernando Villavicencio, a notorious right-wing Ecuadorian political operative who is closely linked to US intelligence agencies.
Today Villavicencio is a member of the National Assembly, but he first made his name as a high-profile opposition activist during Correa’s two presidential terms from 2007 to 2017.
Villavicencio was a key figure in the lawfare (judicial warfare) campaign against Correa. He ran a viciously anti-Correísta media outlet, which – with funding from the US government – consistently spread thinly sourced rumors of corruption about the leftist president.
In 2010, Villavicencio even played an important role in a failed coup attempt against Correa.
Villavicencio enjoyed a brief moment in the limelight in 2018, when he collaborated with British newspaper The Guardian in co-authoring a highly dubious smear piece against Julian Assange.
WikiLeaks adamantly insisted the article was false and created a legal fund to sue The Guardian.
In the tweet below, Villavicencio (on the right, with the glasses) boasts of working with The Guardian reporters Luke Harding and Dan Collins on the allegedly fake story:
Una de mis mayores experiencias periodísticas fue trabajar durante meses la investigación sobre Assange con los colegas del diario británico The Guardian, Luke Harding, Dan Collins y con la joven periodista Cristina Solórzano de @somos_lafuente pic.twitter.com/IQbZwAkKNx
— Fernando Villavicencio Valencia (@VillaFernando_) December 2, 2018
By sharing Pareja’s incriminating 2019 affidavit on Twitter, Correa was highlighting Villavicencio’s hand behind the November 9, 2022 hearing, which clearly aimed to demonize the leftist former president and disparage Correísmo, which still remains the most popular political movement in Ecuador.
The devastating May 2019 affidavit demonstrates that Carlos Pareja Yannuzzelli (Capaya), who is still in prison on corruption charges, is a hired gun who will happily spread false claims to undermine Correísmo.
Capaya became a household name in Ecuador back in 2016, when he was serving as minister of hydrocarbons. In April of that year, international media outlets published the Panama Papers, a massive leak of information about offshore bank accounts.
Pareja Yannuzzelli’s name appeared in the Panama Papers, setting off a scandal in Ecuador. Correa was still president at the time, and in May, Capaya was forced to resign and was replaced with a new energy minister.
The Correa government immediately began investigating Capaya’s web of corruption, and found his family had stashed millions of dollars in bank accounts in Panama.
Yet while he was being investigated, Capaya managed to flee Ecuador in September.
Capaya opened his testimony noting that, by December 2016, he “was in the United States in a complicated situation.”
While in Miami, Florida, the Ecuadorian fugitive from justice was contacted by César Monge Ortega, the president of the right-wing political party CREO.
Ecuador’s current president, the conservative multimillionaire banker Guillermo Lasso, is a leader of CREO. Monge was one of Lasso’s closest allies, referred to in the Ecuadorian media as “the right hand of Guillermo Lasso.” He served as the president’s minister of government until Monge died from cancer in July 2021.
Ecuador’s minister of government and former CREO leader, César Monge Ortega, before his death in May 2021
Back in 2016, Monge asked Capaya to join a smear campaign against the presidential candidate who would represent the leftist Alianza País party in the upcoming 2017 elections, Correa’s former Vice President Lenín Moreno.
“He offered me an important sum of money and federal North American protection,” Capaya wrote.
At the time it was widely assumed, even by Correa himself, that Moreno would continue his socialist political program.
Moreno did run on a left-wing presidential campaign, but after entering office, he did a political 180. Moreno turned hard to the right, repressing, imprisoning, and exiling Correísta politicians.
He also stabbed Julian Assange in the back, reversing Correa’s pledge to protect the WikiLeaks publisher. The Moreno government had given the Australian journalist Ecuadorian citizenship in 2017, but in April 2019 it issued a “temporary suspension” of Assange’s new nationality – an action that Ecuadorian experts say had no legal basis.
Then, Moreno even let British authorities violate his own country’s sovereignty by storming the embassy – which constitutes Ecuadorian territory under the Vienna Convention in international law – in order to arrest Assange.
Correísta politicians have alleged that Moreno was bribed and/or blackmailed by the US government, as he obediently fulfilled all of Washington’s foreign-policy goals, collaborating closely with the Donald Trump administration, removing Ecuador from the Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA) and Union of South American Nations (UNASUR), and even recognizing US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó in Venezuela.
Hoy hablé con el Presidente @Lenin Moreno: #Ecuador respalda la necesidad de conformar un Gobierno de Emergencia Nacional en Venezuela para salvar a nuestra gente.
Abordamos también la situación de nuestros migrantes en ese país y las acciones que estamos tomando para apoyarlos. pic.twitter.com/zqdWFIxzDD
— Juan Guaidó (@jguaido) May 20, 2020
Few people would have expected back during Ecuador’s presidential election in 2017 that Moreno would go on to govern like this. The country’s right-wing opposition was concerned that Lenín Moreno (who, after all, was named after the Russian revolutionary) would continue Correa’s leftist program.
So in December 2016, César Monge Ortega, the leader of Lasso’s right-wing CREO party, tried to recruit Carlos Pareja Yannuzzelli (Capaya) for the disinformation campaign against Correa, Moreno, and their Alianza País party.
Capaya wrote in his 2019 testimony that he initially declined the offer, but that Monge was persistent.
“Monge insisted to me that I could contact North American federal agents that were working with CREO for a long time, and they would provide me with protection and stability in the United States,” Capaya said.
“He assured me that the American Democratic Party was committed to backing Lasso’s presidential candidacy in exchange for Julian Assange, to expose his link with the current president of the United States,” Capaya continued.
This comment suggests that Democratic Party leadership had been convinced that US President Donald Trump was somehow connected to Assange, a baseless conspiracy theory that was fueled by Fernando Villavicencio’s extremely questionable report in The Guardian.
Capaya went on: “Finally, one day Monge visited me with [US] federal agents and together they guaranteed me protection in the United States in exchange for my participation in the smear campaign against Alianza País in order to influence the presidential elections in Ecuador in 2017.”
Ecuador’s current president, Guillermo Lasso
Capaya said that, after this in-person meeting with the US federal agents, he accepted their offer.
His role was to make outlandish accusations Correa (who was still president at the time), his government, and his party.
“They gave me a script created and prepared by Fernando Villavicencio, who according to Monge had been contracted by the party CREO,” Capaya said.
He continued: “They told me that in order for there to be an agreement, I had to follow the script to a T. To this end, we met various times in Miami between December 2016 and January 2017. These videos subsequently were made public on social media after February 2017.”
Capaya stressed that “a big part of the script” was dedicated to accusing Correa and his other Vice President Jorge Glas of corruption.
“They made me name third parties that I don’t know,” Capaya recalled. He wrote that the US “federal agents” heavily pressured him to name people such as Frank Roberto Chatburn Ripalda, a Miami-based financial advisor with dual US and Ecuadorian citizenship.
“Despite that I told them on more than one occasion that I never had any relation with him and that he was not being investigated or processed in Ecuador, they expressly told me that in order for there to be an agreement it was required to mention Chatburn, because he had US nationality and with that the federal agents could justify their participation and initiate actions against him in the United States,” Capaya said.
The US Justice Department subsequently charged Chatburn with money laundering and imprisoned him for three-and-a-half years.
Chatburn was not the only one who ended up burned by Washington.
Capaya concluded his testimony lamenting that Monge, his CREO party, and the US federal agents later abandoned him when Moreno won the presidential election.
They failed to fulfill their side of the promise. Capaya was later captured in Ecuador, and put behind bars, where he remains today.
Yet the scandal goes even deeper. Monge was not the only right-wing opposition figures whom Capaya was conspiring with.
As a fugitive from justice living in Miami in late 2016 and early 2017, Capaya also met with right-wing multimillionaire bankers from Ecuador’s notorious Isaías family.
The Isaías Brothers, William and Roberto, are ferociously anti-Correa oligarchs who fled their country of birth and moved to the United States, with millions of dollars of stolen money, during Ecuador’s economic crash of 1998 and 1999.
This massive crisis, known as the infamous “feriado bancario,” bankrupted millions of working-class Ecuadorians, depleting their savings by devaluing the national currency, the sucre, with runaway hyperinflation.
The banker who helped cause this meltdown had been affectionately known as Ecuador’s “super minister of the economy,” and had been lauded by the international financial press: none other than Guillermo Lasso, an ardent neoliberal Chicago Boy who now serves as president.
Lasso and his banker friends, who had held their illicit wealth in dollars, became millionaires thanks to the feriado bancario. Meanwhile, the sucre became so worthless that Ecuador surrendered its monetary sovereignty and adopted the US dollar as its official currency. This remains the case today.
From Miami, the Isaías Brothers have also used their stolen money to fund the campaigns of US politicians – both Republicans and Democrats – including Senators Marco Rubio and Bob Menendez, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, and even former President Barack Obama.
|
Write an article about: Brazil’s ex-president Dilma Rousseff: US-China conflict is neoliberalism vs socialism. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Brazil, BRICS, China, Dilma Rousseff, economics, neoliberalism, Russia, Ukraine | Former Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff analyzes the US-China conflict as “a rivalry of two systems,” a struggle between neoliberalism and socialism. Condemning US sanctions and “dollar hegemony,” she called for Latin America “to break with the Monroe Doctrine.”
Brazil’s former president Dilma Rousseff has condemned US meddling and “hybrid war” in Latin America, while simultaneously praising China for creating a new model of economic development that challenges US-led neoliberal capitalism and the “Washington Consensus” imposed on the world.
“We want, basically, to be able to break with the Monroe Doctrine,” Rousseff said, referring to the nearly 200-year-old colonial doctrine in which the US government claims Latin America as its geopolitical “backyard.”
“We want Latin America to be for the Latin Americans, and not as the US wants it, in the Monroe Doctrine, which means Latin America for the North Americans, precisely the opposite,” the former Brazilian head of state added.
“The so-called hybrid war unleashed by the US through second-generation coups, lawfare processes, and sanctions against Cuba and Venezuela led to a great setback, returning to the continent the inequality, misery, and hunger that had been overcome, or that it was about to get over,” she lamented.
A leader of the left-wing Workers’ Party, Rousseff served as president of Brazil from 2011 until August 2016, when she was overthrown in a soft coup backed by the US government and her country’s powerful right-wing corporate oligarchy.
Rousseff spoke about the increasing conflict between the United States and China not as a mere interstate dispute, but rather the result of “a rivalry of two systems”: US-led neoliberal capitalism versus socialism with Chinese characteristics.
“The so-called Washington Consensus, a concept adopted by conservative Latin American governments, imposed the deregulation of the economy, the drastic reduction of the role of the state, and the abandonment of social and development policies,” she said.
These neoliberal capitalists “condemned Latin America to be the most unequal continent in the world, with reduced economic growth, concentration of wealth and income, and specialization in the production of raw materials,” Rousseff commented.
The former Brazilian president praised China for creating a “new development paradigm” based on “shared development” and “common prosperity.”
China and Russia are also leading the development of a “new geopolitical pole,” she said, and this offers opportunities for Latin America to be more independent.
Rousseff made these comments in a panel event on March 19, a virtual conference titled “21st Century Socialism: China and Latin America on the Frontline,” organized by the group Friends of Socialist China.
Geopolitical Economy Report obtained a copy of Rousseff’s Portuguese-language prepared speech, and has translated some of her key points into English below.
“Brazil always had a position of absolute independence with regard to international relations, with all countries in the world,” Dilma Rousseff emphasized at the beginning of her talk.
“Latin America wants to have an autonomous and independent position,” she said. “It is not possible to continue reproducing the inferiority complex of the conservative elites and oligarchies that have done nothing but submit to the United States in a shameful way.”
Rousseff argued that China has played an important role in balancing Latin America’s political and economic relationships, so the region is not so dominated by Washington. In this sense, Beijing has helped the region maintain independence and strategic autonomy.
China is Brazil’s largest trade partner, and the largest trade partner for many other countries in the region, she noted.
“Latin America’s position is not with the United States,” she stressed. “Latin America’s position affirms sovereignty, our position is independence, at the side of China. And this independence is not just for individual countries; it’s for the region.”
Rousseff emphasized the importance of institutions like the BRICS, the framework integrating Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.
The BRICS “sought to reduce this unfair asymmetry” represented by institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, which are dominated by the United States and Global North countries, she noted.
“Compared to the US, China has more respect for the role played by international organizations,” Rousseff added. Beijing defends multilateralism while Washington has attacked the United Nations and withdrew unilaterally from the Paris Agreement, she recalled.
Unlike the United States, Rousseff argued, China has been a more equitable partner. And leaders in the Global South are increasingly looking to Beijing for lessons on how to develop their own countries.
Dilma Rousseff applauded China for its “extraordinary development,” and for lifting more than 800 million people out of absolute poverty.
She noted how China was an exemplary model for managing the Covid-19 pandemic, juxtaposing it against the public health disaster in the United States, where nearly 1 million people have died.
China’s success in the pandemic, and its leading role in sending vaccines and protective equipment around the world, reflects its relative rise, whereas Washington’s failure shows its comparative decline, Rousseff argued.
The former Brazilian president traced the beginning of Washington’s new cold war on Beijing back to the 2008 financial crisis. While the West was suffering, the crash did not significantly affect China, Rousseff noted. This led US elites to decide that China had to be contained; its economy had to stop growing so rapidly.
The Barack Obama administration’s attempt to create a Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was aimed at economically isolating China, she stated.
Rousseff called this part of a larger US “containment policy,” and argued it is “extremely flawed and harmful to everyone.”
US policy toward China subsequently “became very aggressive” under Donald Trump, and while the Joe Biden administration has tried to portray itself as more “diplomatic,” she noted, Washington has still pushed a needlessly hard line against China.
Speaking of the US “prejudice” toward China, Dilma Rousseff noted that Western politicians have espoused chauvinistic views that China, or any other nation, could not develop without adopting their own model based on the free market and liberal democracy.
Although she refrained from referring to the conflict as a new cold war, the former Brazilian leader stipulated that the crisis in US-China relations is a result of their two contrasting economic systems.
“China has become a kind of factory for the world, while the US has de-industrialized, losing economic muscle and transforming itself into a kingdom of finance, with a fantastic concentration of income and wealth.”
Neoliberalism is specifically what “laid the foundations for the decline of the US,” Rousseff said.
There are three serious problems caused by neoliberalism, she argued: “the financialization of the economy, the increase in income and wealth inequality, and the erosion of democracy.” And these ills “are prevalent in all capitalist countries.”
“The biggest problem with this system is the widening gap between rich and poor,” Rousseff cautioned. She cited Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, who “admitted that 40 years of neoliberal practices have severely weakened the role of the state and public health policies, rendering the West helpless in the face of the pandemic.”
“China is accelerating its policy toward a society where equity prevails,” she said, “while in capitalist countries, including the US, per capita income has concentrated and jobs have stagnated or shrunk. Social wealth is rapidly concentrated and the richest 1% is getting even richer.”
“The financialization of the economy as a result of neoliberalism is the culprit that kills the dynamism of the capitalist system itself. Credit and finance gradually become obstacles rather than driving forces of production.”
“The pursuit of limited government, uncontrolled labor market liberalization and the pursuit of profits lead to a rapid accumulation of financial wealth for those at the top of the social pyramid and de-industrializes the economy.”
Rousseff contrasted these systemic problems of neoliberal capitalism with the alternative proposed by Beijing.
“China’s strength lies in its pursuit of the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics,” she argued. “This path follows the law of the market, but attaches strategic importance to the role of the state.”
“The market mechanism and macro-regulation complement each other in China. Open to domestic and foreign private investment, it has increasingly controlled the distortions of oligopoly and speculation.”
Chinese “regulation of economic activity acts to preserve competition and avoid financial bubbles and market distortions,” while the state ensures stability with “tighter control over real estate and tutorial services.”
Rousseff praised China for creating a “new development paradigm” based on “shared development,” and commended Beijing for its idea of common prosperity.
The United States has historically had excellent systems of education, science, and technological development, but this intellectual infrastructure has been in decline since the emergence of neoliberalism in the 1980s, and is at threat because the ultra-capitalist model has led to a massive disinvestment, Dilma Rousseff argued.
On the other hand, China has become the world’s new leader in science and technology, thanks to its heavy public investment and state leadership, she said.
China’s progress led Washington to launch a “technological lockdown” on Beijing, she noted, pointing to the ongoing “chip war” over control of semiconductors.
The world knows that the Chinese company Huawei has the best 5G technology, and it is also cheaper than its US competitors, Rousseff stated. But “the US tries to prevent other countries from using Chinese 5G technology, even if they don’t have alternatives of their own to offer.”
Meanwhile, neoliberalism has led to technological stagnation, the former Brazilian leader stated, because “companies only want and can only make money quickly, bringing limits to R&D activities.”
China’s historic development, economic growth, and scientific and technological advancement have created opportunities to challenge “US dollar hegemony,” Dilma Rousseff argued.
“In the financial sector, US dollar hegemony faces new challenges. As a global currency, the US dollar holds an irreplaceable position in international trade and payments. This has made the dollar a weapon of retaliation and a tool of extortion against other countries.”
“Here in Latin America, we have two terrible examples: 60 years of blockade against Cuba, and now more recently the blockade on Venezuela, at a time of pandemic.”
“The US government has been imposing far-reaching sanctions on foreign banks and companies that do business against the US’s wishes with countries like Iran, Venezuela, Cuba and now Russia. They use their national jurisdiction as an international weapon. Given this, it is unlikely that the dollar will remain irreplaceable forever.”
Dollar hegemony is also based on the SWIFT inter-bank messaging system, Rousseff said, which Washington has turned into a financial weapon.
China began testing its own alternative to SWIFT as far back as 2015, she noted, and it is still being developed, but this process has been accelerated by the war in Ukraine.
The People’s Bank of China has been testing digital currencies, including its own sovereign digital renminbi, Rousseff added.
She criticized the US strategy of “decoupling” from China, calling it “absurd,” because Beijing is thoroughly integrated into the world economy, in complex webs that involve many nations.
“In 2019, around 100 countries around the world traded and invested more with China than the US, and that number is still growing,” Rousseff said.
China signed the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in 2020, she noted. This free trade agreement in the Asia-Pacific region involves nearly one-third of the global population and 30% of the global economy, making it larger than the European Union.
The global political and economic system is in a process of fundamental change, Dilma Rousseff said. And “there is no more significant geopolitical consequence today than the growing strategic partnership between China and Russia.”
“Ironically, it is precisely the maximum US pressure on Russia and the containment of China that played a key role in bringing the two countries closer together,” she added.
“The economic sanctions stemming from Russia’s annexation of Crimea and now the war in Ukraine are strengthening a new geopolitical pole, and accelerating changes that would only come slowly.”
In regard to the war in Ukraine, Rousseff complimented China for maintaining a neutral policy. The former Brazilian president called for peace while emphasizing how NATO helped to create the conflict in the first place.
She emphasized that Latin America must unite and maintain an independent foreign policy, while seeking opportunities with this new geopolitical pole.
Latin America needs to adapt to the changing economic order, she argued, to reduce its dependency on export of commodities, and “seek re-industrialization with new characteristics,” to partake in the new “technological revolution.”
“Whoever remains as a mere importer of this technology,” she said, “will remain on the periphery, submitted and subordinated to foreign interests and policies.”
“The transformation of the productive model is the main challenge for Latin Americans, to recover a path that allows them to achieve considerable economic growth with social justice.”
“Producing and exporting mineral or agricultural commodities alone does not support equitable growth. Another model is needed for our region to reach high levels of industrialization and have a great capacity to add value to production based on the quality of education and work and scientific-technological innovation with the generation of better jobs.”
Regional integration is a key part of this process, Rousseff stressed.
“A true integration of Latin America is essential,” she said, noting the region has nearly 1 billion people, with “fantastic natural resources,” including oil, minerals, agricultural products, and water reserves.
“The creation of UNASUR and CELAC was the political-institutional framework needed to ensure our autonomy and independence and enable an integration that would not only be commercial, but also productive, industrial, and educational, in order to reduce asymmetries and inequalities between countries and regions.”
Progressive governments in Latin America need to increase the “presence of the state in the economy, the defense of the sovereignty of nations and democracy, and an open geopolitical relationship,” she added.
China’s economic partnership and its Belt and Road Initiative offer many possibilities for the region, presenting an opportunity to be more independent, Rousseff argued.
What “is wanted is Latin America for Latin Americans,” she said, “to be able to break with the Monroe Doctrine.”
|
Write an article about: Nicaragua is world’s #1 country where citizens feel at peace, Gallup poll shows. Use the themes and topics represented by the tags provided as guidance for the content. It's not necessary to include the exact tag words in the article, but the article should reflect the essence and context of these tags. | Gallup, Latin America, Nicaragua | A poll by mainstream firm Gallup found that Nicaragua is the No. 1 country in the world where citizens feel at peace. Nine of the top 14 countries are in Latin America. But the US constantly attacks the Sandinista government and imposes sanctions on it.
(Se puede leer esta nota en español aquí.)
A poll found that Nicaragua is the top country in the world where citizens feel at peace.
The United States and Western media outlets have long demonized Nicaragua’s Sandinista government and its President Daniel Ortega, sponsoring violent coup attempts against him and imposing illegal unilateral sanctions aimed at hurting the Central American nation’s economy.
But studies show that the Sandinista Front is very popular among the Nicaraguan people, who enjoy a high quality of life compared to their neighbors.
CNBC reported this January that Nicaragua is the “No. 1 country where people say they are ‘always’ at peace“.
Of the top 10 countries where people said they always feel at peace, seven of them are in Latin America. https://t.co/15DiFGkkBu
— CNBC Make It (@CNBCMakeIt) January 8, 2023
This is based on a survey conducted by the mainstream firm Gallup.
Gallup interviewed adults in 122 countries across the planet. They found that 34% of people on Earth “always” feel at peace, while 39% “often” do, 17% “rarely” do, and 5% “never” do.
Nicaragua came in first place, with 73% of its population reporting it “always” feels at peace.
Gallup noted that “Latin American countries dominate the ‘always at peace’ list worldwide”.
There are 14 countries in the world where the majority of the population “always” feels at peace. A staggering nine of these 14 are in Latin America.
Nicaragua is No. 1, followed by El Salvador at No. 3, Panama at No. 4, Honduras at No. 5, Paraguay at No. 6, Dominican Republic at No. 7, Uruguay at No. 8, Colombia at No. 12, and Mexico at No. 14.
Gallup wrote:
The plethora of Latin American countries that top this list may not be entirely surprising: Many of these same countries regularly rank among the most likely in the world to report experiencing positive emotions each day, such as feeling well-rested, smiling or laughing, learning something interesting, feeling treated with respect, and experiencing enjoyment.
Compared with their counterparts in Latin America, people in countries in Northern America — including the U.S. (28%) and Canada (26%) — are significantly less likely to say they always feel at peace with their thoughts and feelings.
Nicaragua is also the No. 7 in the world in terms of gender equality. It has the highest level of women’s representation in all of the Americas.
While Nicaraguans are nearly three times as likely to feel at peace than North Americans, the US government has frequently attacked the nation’s Sandinista government, claiming democratically elected President Daniel Ortega is “authoritarian”.
This is despite the fact that 77.4% of Nicaraguans support Ortega, according to a late 2022 study conducted by one of the leading polling firms in Central America, M&R Consultores. (US President Joe Biden had just a 37% approval rating in the same period.)
Ortega is consistently one of the most popular leaders in Latin America.
In 2018, the United States supported a violent coup attempt in Nicaragua. In this rare moment of instability in an otherwise very safe country, right-wing extremists backed by Washington used bloody tactics to try to overthrow President Ortega.
When the coup failed, the US and European Union imposed several rounds of devastating unilateral sanctions on Nicaragua, which are illegal under international law.
Despite the fact that numerous polls like these show that Nicaraguans feel very safe, the US State Department has since 2018 issued an annual travel advisory, discouraging tourists to visit the country.
Washington claims the Central American nation is dangerous, suffers from supposed “arbitrary enforcement of laws”, and has “limited healthcare ability”.
Nicaragua’s Sandinista government created a system of free universal healthcare for everyone. The United States, on the other hand, has one of the most expensive and inefficient healthcare systems on Earth, and medical expenses are the cause of two-thirds of US household bankruptcies.
As part of its hybrid war on Nicaragua's Sandinista gov't, the US State Department renewed its travel advisory, to discourage tourism and hurt the economy
The reasons given are absurd. Nicaragua is the safest country in Central America and has free healthcare (even for tourists) pic.twitter.com/r7YndbwVob
— Ben Norton (@BenjaminNorton) December 5, 2022
|