Reportage / Society 06.07.2020

Ecuador: the Great Game

Writing about South America has often meant recounting the movements of the world with the almost certainty that every contraction, however slight and local, is actually the symptom of humanity’s cosmic malaise. If the South American continent is the face…

Giuseppe De Lauri

Margherita Teodori

Among them, President Lenin Moreno’s Decree 883, which put an end to ten years of state subsidies on fuel. This package followed the austerity requests of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) as a condition for repaying the loan of $4.2 billion, contracted by Moreno in 2018. Why is an oil-rich country forced to apply for a loan?

While international media praised the indigenous revolt as a class movement against the government of vested interests, there are those who tell a different story. According to some journalists, such as Álvaro Vargas Llosa, columnist for the Washington Post, the natives have been used. Under suspicion is Conaie, the largest association representing the indigenous people of Ecuador. It was the powerful Conaie that summoned the natives to Quito en masse. The increase in the price of fuel is said to be only a pretext to demonstrate against Moreno’s neoliberal turnaround and to ask for more rights. It is interesting at this point to report the Human Rights Watch data on personal freedom and rights in Ecuador, which indicates Moreno’s presidency as the turning point towards a freer and more independent society and press.

Miguel Ángel is an activist of Otavalos descent who took part in the October protests. “While the police officers were outside the government headquarters, less than two blocks away people were shopping in the mall, drinking coffee and smoking their pipes as if nothing was happening. That’s when we realised our problems did not interest our country.” There is a strong sense of frustration among the indigenous protesters, mainly due to the realisation that, suddenly, a game of Risk is being played over their heads. “Both presidents (Correa and Moreno) sold the country to foreigners. Our green gold was corn and now we find ourselves saddled with PetrolChina, which is exploiting our oil fields.”

From Coca you enter what is now Yasuní Park. Here tourism is gold, like oil. Via Auca runs perpendicularly through the jungle, like a scar in the green rainforest. The road is dotted with churches and small built-up areas where the oilfield workers live, almost all of the Shuar ethnic group. Tankers drive through continuously, creating a small passing economy. Tiny supermarkets selling Coca-Cola and other products imported from the United States have sprung up along the roadsides.

L'articolo Ecuador: the Great Game proviene da InsideOver.

South America has seen a sharp rise in the number of new COVID-19 cases for the past few weeks, even while countries in Europe and Asia have begun to relax their lockdown measures.

On Sunday June 28, Latin America and the Caribbean recorded 2,432,245 infections (1,319,274 of which are in Brazil) with 110,6821 deaths and 1,373,504 cases in recovery.

The surge in the COVID-19 figures is due to the loose lockdown, non-synchronized responses from governments and worsened by massive economic inequality.

Brazil Has the Second-Highest Number of COVID-19 Cases in the World

Brazil — the largest country in the region — has recorded the world’s second-highest numbers of COVID-19 infections behind the U.S. As of Monday, June 29, Brazil had 1,345,254 cases, with 733,848 cases in recovery and 57,658 deaths.

The alarming amount of COVID-19 cases in the country are at least partly due to the mishandling by President Jair Bolsonaro, who underestimated the virus from the beginning, claiming it was a “little flu”. COVID-19 has symptoms similar to common flu such as cough and sore throat but is potentially much more serious.

The former army captain also ignored health protocols by not wearing a face mask and shunning physical distancing while attending a mass rally. He opposes lockdown measures for the sake of sustaining economic activity. Bolsonaro’s responses to the pandemic led to the resignation of the country’s health minister, Nelson Teich, who served for just one month.

‘We’re Fighting Against the Coronavirus and Against the Bolsonaro Virus’

Teich replaced Luiz Henrique Mandetta, who was fired by the president after calling on all citizens to stay at home to prevent the further spread of the virus. Bolsonaro’s handling of the pandemic also triggered a stand-off with Brazil’s state governors, with one of them calling the president’s approach the “Bolsonaro virus”.

“We’re fighting against the coronavirus and against the Bolsonaro virus,” said Joao Doria, governor of Brazil’s densely-populated state Sao Paolo, adding that Bolsonaro’s has taken “incorrect, irresponsible positions,” in dealing with the pandemic.

Brazil’s states and cities have adopted their quarantine measures, different from the president’s policy. Also, there is a rising concern over the spread of the virus in slum areas, indigenous communities, and areas with a lack of testing capacity.

Research from The University of Washington’s Institute of Health Metrics and Evaluation estimated the death toll over COVID-19 in Brazil could exceed 125,000 in August.

Chile’s Health Minister Resigned Over COVID-19 Data Discrepancy

On Sunday, June 28, Chile’s total COVID-19 cases reached 271,982, with 232,210 cases in recovery and 5,509 deaths, according to official data.

Chile is one of the countries in the region that took early anticipatory measures to slow down the outbreak, such as the closure of borders and extensive testings. However, the quarantine policy did not help to control the number of new cases as the numbers of confirmed COVID-19 cases surged in May.

In the middle of June, Chile’s then-health minister Jaime Manalich resigned amid the controversy over the numbers of COVID-19-related deaths.

Previously, Chile’s Sebastian Pinera government informed the public that the COVID-19 had taken over 3,000 lives since the first case emerged for the first time on March 3.

However, a report from an investigative journalism organization (CIPER) exposed that the government informed the World Health Organization (WHO) that the COVID-19-related death toll had exceeded 5,000. The organization got a copy of the country’s health ministry document handed over to the United Nations (U.N) health body, CNA reported.

Chileans took to the streets demanding food aid during the lockdown measures, which led to chaos. President Pinera promised to deliver support to the most vulnerable groups of people.

Peru Scrapped Lockdown Despite Rising Infection Numbers

As of Monday, June 29, Peru has 279,419 COVID-19 cases, with 9,317 deaths and 167,998 cases in recovery.

“Although the number of cases in the country is still high, there has been a decrease in infections in recent weeks,” the country’s health minister Victor Zamora said, cited in Menafn.

After imposing social restrictions for about three months, Peru decided to end the policy on June 30 despite the rising numbers of new COVID-19 cases. The Andean nation has gradually reopened its economy. The pandemic has worsened the economy as at the end of this year, Peru is estimated to lose 4.2 million of jobs.

Other Countries in South America are Performing Relatively Well

Uruguay, the tiny nation in the region, has successfully dealt with the pandemic as the country had only 847 COVID-19 cases, with 23 deaths as of June 14.

The country’s president Luis Alberto Lacalle Pou, never issued a lockdown measure, but Uruguay quickly imposed a social distancing policy and conducted a massive testing program, as BBC reported. Uruguay’s long history of less income inequality and trust in political institutions has been one of the most important keys to its successful tackling of the pandemic.

Uruguay’s larger neighbor Argentina slapped a quarantine on March 20, and citizens complied with the social restrictions. The Alberto Fernandez government provided financial aid to low-wage workers to help them survive the crisis, as Reuters reported. Even though the policy could trigger inflation and will increase the government’s debt, at least Argentina prioritizes its people during the health crisis.

Shining Star: Cuba

Cuba has been the leading example of how a country should deal with the pandemic. The communist state is widely known for its excellent healthcare and qualified medical workers, who have done extensive work to visit residents and interview them to discover and document new COVID-19 cases.

The country even sent its doctors to some of the hardest-hit nations around the world, such as Italy. Cuba guarantees that every citizen has access to healthcare. Despite people in the country making a monthly wage of around only $20 USD, the government works to ensure their wellbeing. 

The ratio is one doctor for ever 150 Cubans, which is an outstanding figure compared to other developed nations. The United States, for example, with its private healthcare system has only 0.4 doctors per 150 people. Therefore, Cuba’s success story during this pandemic — while richer nations are still struggling deeply — should come as no surprise.

L'articolo Latin America Sees Alarming Rise in COVID-19 Cases proviene da InsideOver.

US President Donald Trump denied that Washington had played a role in a recent failed coup attempt to oust Venezuela’s leader Nicolas Maduro. Trump’s denial followed the arrest of former American soldiers and other labeled as “terrorists” accused by Venezuela of trying to kidnap the incumbent socialist president.

In footage aired by Venezuela’s state TV station Wednesday, May 6, one of the US mercenaries, Luke Denman, revealed that he had been hired to train Venezuelans in Colombia before planning to seize the airport and take Maduro out of the country.

“I was helping Venezuelans take back control of their country,” Denman, an Iraq War veteran, admitted.

US Interventions in Latin America: a Brief Overview

The US involvement in Latin American’s regime change cannot be separated from the Monroe Doctrine, enacted in 1823 under the presidency of James Monroe. The policy was instituted after Monroe was pressured to recognize the independence of Latin American nations from Spain or Portugal, such as Argentina, Peru, and Mexico in 1822.

Previously, Russia, Austria, and Prussia formed a holy alliance after the defeat of Napoleon Bonaparte in 1815.

However, the U.S and Britain worried that Europe’s powers would exert their influence in the Western Hemisphere. In his speech, Monroe stressed that the American continent should be freed from Europe’s colonization.

“The American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for colonization by any European powers. Any attempt by a European power to exert its influence in the Western Hemisphere would, from then on, be seen by the United States as a threat to its security,” Monroe stated.

US-backed Regime Change in Latin America

Venezuela (2002)

Maduro’s accusation that the US tried to topple him sounds plausible, given that Washington orchestrated a coup to topple his predecessor Hugo Chavez in 2002.

The effort failed, and Chavez was back in power 48 hours after his temporary removal. Chavez, who was also a close friend of Cuba’s Fidel Castro, had been the most adored socialist leader in his home country and across Latin America due to his welfare program.

In 2004, a declassified document disclosed that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had known that Venezuelan opposition groups’ planned to assassinate Chavez, as the New York Times reported. However, The Bush administration snubbed the allegations and slammed the popular leftist figure for his downfall.

Chavez was known for his welfare policy, thanks to Venezuela’s oil revenue. However, the decline in global oil prices a year after his death plunged the country into serious crisis which was worsened by the political turmoil and a punishing US-backed embargo.

Maduro took office in 2013, replacing Chavez. In 2018, Maduro’s reelection sparked controversy from Venezuelan opposition backed by US and its Western allies due to the vote-rigging allegation. Such a political crisis has worsened the situation following the economic crisis caused by the decline in global oil prices in 2014.

The uncertainty in Venezuela has divided the world and Latin American in particular: The US and other right-wing governments in Latin America, such as Colombia, Brazil, Chile, and Peru supported self-proclaimed president Juan Guaido, while Russia, Turkey, and left-wing administrations such as (then) Bolivia, and Mexico backed Maduro, the former close aide of the late Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Chile (1973)

In 1970, socialist Salvador Allende was democratically elected as Chile’s president, supported by several leftist parties such as the Communist Party, the Social Democratic Party, and many more.

Allende’s victory was the victory of Chilean workers, indigenous communities, and farmers. His priorities focused on providing free healthcare and education to all, nationalization of large-scale industries, and land redistribution for farmers.

His populist policy succeeded in lifting the country’s economy and reducing the unemployment rate. However, Allende’s nationalization angered Washington. The then-Richard Nixon Administration reacted by lowering global copper’s prices and imposing an economic embargo on Chile.

The sanction crippled Chile’s economy, given that the country relied on copper export. The embargo also stopped investment and triggered a political crisis, deepening the country’s political division.

On September 11, 1973, Chile’s military launched a coup to overthrow Allende. Fire blanketed most parts of the La Moneda Palace. Allende was later found dead with his hand holding an automatic weapon.

Tens of thousands of Allende’s supporters were killed and kidnapped. The late CIA-backed General Augusto Pinochet took office until 1990. Under his rule, many activists were killed, kidnapped, and jailed without trial.

Former CIA agent in Chile, Jack Devine, admitted that all the coup instructions came from the White House. The operation to oust Allende was inspired by the mass killings president targeting leftist activists in Jakarta, Indonesia between 1965 and 1966, leading to the downfall of then-Indonesian-President Sukarno.

Argentina (1976)

The democratically-elected leader of Argentina Isabel Martinez de Peron was overthrown in a military coup in March 1976, leading to the disappearance of around 600 people. Eight days before the coup, Argentine Navy Chief, also the chief of the operation Emilio Eduarto Massero visited the US ambassador to Argentina, Robert Hill to discuss the coup plan.

Jorge Videla ruled the country with an iron fist. His anti-subversive policy led to the killing of Peron’s supporters. Around 30,000 Argentines had been killed, kidnapped, and died under his rule.

The Videla dictatorship triggered the establishment of a human rights organization called “Asociación Madres de Plaza de Mayo (AMPM)” or Mothers of Plaza del Mayo. The organization consisted of mothers who lost their children under the military regime.

However, massive corruption protests against human rights abuses, the loss to Britain in the Falkland War put the Videla regime in the worst crisis. In 1982, civil liberty was restored, and a year later, Raul Alfonsin was elected as the country’s president, marking the end of the darkest period under the military rule.

In April 2019, the U.S transferred thousands of files related to the Washington-backed military dictatorship to Argentina, the biggest-ever handover of documents ever to another administration, as France24 reported.

Brazil (1964)

The CIA played a significant role in the assassination of then-Brazil’s president Joao Goulart in March 1964, due to Goulart’s close ties with communist figures.

National Security Archive cables showed that the instructions to remove Goulart came directly from the then-US President Lyndon Jonhson.

“I’d put everybody that had any imagination or ingenuity…[CIA Director John] McCone…[Secretary of Defense Robert] McNamara” on making sure the coup went forward, Johnson was recorded giving instructions to the undersecretary of State George Ball.

Guatemala (1954)

Col. Jacobo Arbenz was the president of Guatemala in 1951. He was known for agricultural reform that demanded fair compensation to low-wage laborers. Such a policy posed a threat to the American firm United Fruit Company, which later lobbied the White House. In the CIA document published by the NSA, the US intelligence community arranged the plan to remove and kill Arbenz in 1952.

The CIA-backed coup succeeded in ousting Arbenz in 1954. Washington-backed Col. Carlos Castillo Armas replaced Arbenz, who once seized land controlled by United Fruit Company. Then-US Secretary of State John Foster Dulles and his brother Allan Dulles (former CIA director) were also investors in the United Fruit Company.

Bolivia (1971)

In 1971, a brutal CIA-backed military coup removed Bolivia’s leftist president Juan Torres, who only ruled the Andean country for a year. Torres was known for his anti-liberalism stance and nationalization policy. He was replaced by Gen.Hugo Banzer, trained at the pro-US School of the Americas.

Was the West Behind Evo Morales’ Resignation?

More than 40 years later, Evo Morales decided to resign after weeks of protest against his re-election in October 2019 due to the vote-manipulation allegation. Morales, who started taking office in 2005, was one of the most famous socialist leaders in Latin America, along with Hugo Chavez (Venezuela), Lula da Silva (Brazil) and Nestor Kirchner (Argentina) when the left gained popularity in the region in mid-2000.

Morales succeeded in reducing the poverty rate by around 25 percent during a decade. However, he then became unstoppable by refusing the referendum result on the limit of presidential terms in 2016.

Many left-wing figures raised suspicion that Morales had been ousted in a Western-backed coup. Morales accused the US of masterminding his downfall, adding that his removal was due to the lithium industry. Bolivia is the country with the most abundant lithium reserves in the world. Morales was sure that his plan to nationalize the sector was the motive behind the coup against him.

“That’s why I’m convinced it’s a coup against lithium,” Morales stated.

L'articolo List of US Interventions in Latin America proviene da InsideOver.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted life for nearly everyone, drug cartels included. A recent Foreign Policy report chronicled their plight as they face supply shortages and lower demand. While under normal circumstances a downturn in illicit drug markets would be welcome news, the crisis and desperation have driven drug lords to more extreme measures, resulting in a sharp uptick in violence in several states.

In Mexico, authorities reported 2,500 homicides in March, the state’s highest since record keeping began in 1997. Brazil has also experienced a rise in murders. Whereas it had previously experienced three years of decreases, coronavirus-related drug squabbles saw the tide turn upward 10%. In one Brazilian state, Ceará, the rate nearly doubled in 10 days during March.

The story is the same in El Salvador where a pre-virus decline was reversed due to increased gang violence, which led President Nayib Bukele to permit police to use lethal force.

Difficulties Abound

Challenges facing drug cartels are multifold and none of them are easy to overcome. First, there is a severe drought for ingredients used to cook methamphetamines, cocaine, and fentanyl. Chemicals necessary for their production typically are sourced from China, however the global shutdown has made their acquisition nearly impossible. Factories are closed, planes are grounded, and entire borders are locked shut. Ironically, Wuhan, the location of the initial COVID-19 outbreak, was one of the main suppliers for chemicals used in many illicit drugs.

“The main reason China has been the main supplier is the main reason China is the supplier of everything — it does it so cheaply. There was really no cost incentive for the cartels to develop this themselves,” said Ben Westoff, author of Fentanyl, Inc.

As a result, cartels have moved some production in-house, but basic chemicals are still needed from China, as Insider reported. Furthermore, if gangs manage to produce illicit drugs in the quantities they used to, they now lack the means to transport it to distributors in the US.

The US–Mexico remains closed for nonessential traffic until the end of the month. The reduced traffic flow makes it more difficult to smuggle contraband into America. For the small trickle that does make it across, buyers are now scarce, in part due to the closures of establishments that traditionally facilitated drug transactions — bars, clubs, and hotels — but also because of skyrocketing prices. 

“They are facing a supply problem and a demand problem,” said Alejandro Hope, a security analyst and former official with CISEN, the Mexican intelligence agency. “Once you get them to the market, who are you going to sell to?”

Trying Alternatives

Drug users across the world who would typically purchase hard drugs imported from Latin America are now trying a number of alternatives. Some are dialing back their choice of drug and opting for marijuana, which they can grow themselves, Foreign Policy reported. Others, such as heroine addicts in the UK, have turned to fentanyl, which is 50 to 100 times stronger and thus more deadly.

“While less drugs on the street may seem like a good thing, what replaces them is usually more dangerous. We know the purity of many drugs is decreasing as dealers cut them with different substances to increase their bulk. This means people often don’t know what they are taking, increasing the chance of overdose,” said Dr. Rachel Britton, directory of pharmacy at We Are With You, a British drug, alcohol, and mental health charity.

Fentanyl can be produced without a dependence on China, making it a lucrative alternative. Fentanyl also fetches a higher price than methamphetamine.

Different Tactics

Cartels have been raising prices and even hoarding drugs in this period of uncertainty. They’ve also turned to charity work in a bid to increase their soft power among local communities, much like how Pablo Escobar endeared himself with Colombians in the 1970s and ‘80s. 

Alejandrina Guzman, daughter of the infamous drug lord El Chapo, has led food drives for starving Mexicans, personally distributing care packages herself. Other cartels have seized the opportunity as well, thanks to the state’s inefficient social programs, as Deutsche Welle reported.

“Mexico isn’t facing a humanitarian crisis or a shortage of goods,” said Falko Ernst, an analyst with the Crisis Group which focuses on Mexico. “Mexican cartels are using the current situation to strengthen their social base.”

Other cartels are diversifying their talents by dabbling in cyber crime, which continues to increase. COVID-19 has forced them to generate new sources of income as traditional revenue streams dry up.

While they try and survive, violence will only increase, particularly as governments are locked down and preoccupied with the coronavirus pandemic. The opportunity is there for cartels to wreck more havoc than usual and the economic crisis gives them a compelling reason to do so. 

From manufacturing different types of drugs to hoarding supplies and fighting among one another, cartels are keeping busy. Ultimately, unless Latin American governments rededicate themselves to fighting drug syndicates, underground operations could become stronger when the pandemic ends. In a survival of the fittest, the ones who remain will be more deadly and efficient than cartels of the past. Thanks to their charitable outreach, they may even have more support among the general populace, and possibly even gain political power.

L'articolo Drug Cartels Become Deadlier Amid Pandemic Problems proviene da InsideOver.

Reportage / Society 06.05.2020

Acapulco, hell in paradise

In the crystal-clear waters of a bay in the Pacific Ocean, Elizabeth Taylor smiled ecstatically at the beauty of a city whose name to her and many other Hollywood celebrities was synonymous with Paradise: Acapulco. Today Acapulco, the most important…

Alfredo Bosco

But the dismembered bodies of victims not involved in criminal activities can also be found along the coast. “Things worsen over the weekend. We get more tourists, but we also receive more reports on shootings,” declares Paco, a photographer who has been witnessing this weekly massacre for years.
Justice is unable take its course, coming up against a wall of silence. It is extremely rare to find witnesses, even when a victim is found during afternoon hours in the middle of a crowded market. Local reporters themselves put themselves at great risk, rarely do they move autonomously and prefer to travel in groups. They fear trick calls and traps orchestrated by the city’s criminals. “We are constantly in danger, in July they fired at my car, it’s a miracle I’m alive,” Nelson Matus tells his colleagues after having suffered an attack in the neighbourhood he lives in.

Between 2017 and 2018, Mexico sustained a record number of victims due to the war on drug trafficking and criminal gangs. In the State of Guerrero alone there were over 2500 victims in 2018. However, the first months of 2020 appear to be more positive, possibly also thanks to the decision of Obrador’s government to establish a National Guard.  The president of Mexico’s aim was to send a strong signal and he obtained the absolute majority for the institution of a new security body, whose powers will surpass those of the police or the army. According to some, this could be a dangerous game: a democracy with an armed force which can operate through special laws could lead to the violation of human rights.  However president Obrador strongly rejects such accusations.
The ferociousness of the cartels and other groups is atrocious. They do not limit themselves to killing but go so far as to implement what is known as “necropolitics”: the use of power to induce fear in people and taking on the role of judge to decide who lives and who dies in their territory. Dismembered and mutilated bodies, cruel letters to relatives of the victims even going so far as to mock them.

L'articolo Acapulco, hell in paradise proviene da InsideOver.

For many economists and political commentators, Latin America was the utopia in the mid-2000s when the region was experiencing unprecedented growth and democracy seemed to have more or less consolidated in several countries. 

From Brazil – which saw its aggregate GDP grow by a multiple of over five to $2.616 trillion in 2011, from $508 billion in 2002 – to Venezuela that was cheerfully raking in hundreds of billions of dollars through oil exports, Latin America appeared to be the model continent on a first glance, at least economy-wise, for much of the 2000s and early 2010s as well. 

But cracks began to appear, especially over the past month or so, as the region saw protests erupting almost all across. Be it the socialist Bolivia under Evo Morales or the neoliberal Chile under Harvard-educated economist Sebastián Piñera, hardly anyone has been spared from the wave of angry citizens. 

What started as a brief trailer in Argentina against the food crisis this September eventually transformed into a full movie in other parts of the continent. In Ecuador, it was the government rolling back fuel subsidies as part of fiscal consolidation measures under the International Monetary Fund programme that brought people to the streets. This first forced President Moreno to flee the capital, Quito, before finally withdrawing from the multilateral bailout and restoring old prices. 

Similarly, Chile – often hailed as the free-market oasis in the desert of a socialistic continent – saw huge demonstrations, killing 20 people as per last count, after the government raised the subway fares in the capital by 30 pesos. The president, in response, initially declared a state of emergency and imposed curfew which agitated the public more, thus forcing him to adopt a more reconciliatory tone that has since seen a cabinet reshuffle. He has also promised to put in place social reforms including an increase in minimum wage and state pensions. 

Meanwhile, questions over the fairness of elections in Bolivia, which saw incumbent president winning yet another term, was the main cause behind the agitation. Other regional countries urged for an audit which was agreed upon, with a 30-member Organisation of American States delegation expected to do the review.  

From stability to chaos

The journey from rising living standards and an emerging middle class to being done with their respective governments hasn’t been as drastic as one would imagine even though some have been quick to blame Venezuela’s infamous Nicolas Maduro for exporting this unrest across the borders. The seeds of discontent were sown long ago and have just gotten ripe. 

As the fruits of the post-commodity boom – which saw economic growth thanks to significant investments – became scarcer, the region started showing early signs of a slowdown. Consequently, average per capita income in South America has fallen from $11,170 in 2011 to current levels of $8,160. 

A major chunk of this decrease has been led by Brazil where GDP in current dollar terms has contracted to $1.87 trillion. Likewise, Argentina – the second biggest country – witnessed growth rates alternating between negative and positive 2.5%, both leading to unpredictable developments in their respective elections.

However, an economy stumbling on aggregate basis doesn’t explain the case of individual countries well enough. After all, Bolivia is currently growing at 3.9% and Chile at 2.5%, which is not half bad in the backdrop of global recessionary fears. 

Considering two of the three protests had to do with price increases, one is naturally inclined to immediately seek the cause in inflation, but the data show that there has been a downward trend in consumer prices across the three states. 

Part of the explanation also lies in the growing inequality, an area in which the continent already fares the worst. The Gini coefficient for Latin America and Carribean countries was at 44.06 in 2015 – higher than other grouping – with Chile leading the charts consistently as it outperformed the regional average by 3.64 points. 

Some argue that this doesn’t go far enough, since all three countries have successfully reduced income inequality over the past decade, raising questions if this is the right place to look into. But citizens’ opinions are not perfectly aligned with data and just the perception of inequality is enough to cause unrest, and that seems to be the case as well. 

Any disaggregated analysis of different indicators is based on the assumption that individual parts combined must add to their sum, but the public sentiments work quite differently. Take Chile for example, where disenchantment over the country’s hardcore neoliberal policies had been brewing for a while. Its listed corporations had been doing well for several years while youth unemployment rates touched close to 19%, creating winners and losers of the system. Hence the increase in fares was the boiling point which took people out and as history tells us, the streets have no leader, but faceless voices. 

L'articolo Down With the System: Latin Americans Take to the Streets proviene da InsideOver.

At the start of March 2019, John Bolton, national security adviser to the President of the United States, declared that Donald Trump’s administration was not afraid to use the term “Monroe Doctrine” with reference to Venezuela: “This is a country in our hemisphere. It’s been the objective of American presidents going back to Ronald Reagan to have a completely democratic hemisphere.” These words represent a paradigm shift from the policy under Barack Obama. His vice president, John Kerry, gave a speech to the Organization of American States (OAS) in 2013, stating that “the era of the Monroe Doctrine is over. The relationship that we seek is not about how and when we will intervene in the affairs of other American states.”

Alfredo Bosco, Mexico, San Felipe del Ocote, 2018

Barely five years have elapsed between the two declarations, yet they reflect developments in Latin America and the way the United States relates to the whole region, which they have always seen as their “backyard.” The “Monroe Doctrine” is no ordinary policy. In 1823 it defined the vision that the United States had, and still has, of its role in the region and its relationship with the other countries of the continent. The 19th century was dominated by the clash between the US and the European colonial powers; the 20th, almost entirely by rivalry with the Soviet Union; and the 21st, apparently, by that with Russia and the People’s Republic of China. However, in the collective memory of Latin America, the doctrine is synonymous with direct or indirect North American military intervention that fuelled coups and set up dictatorships to serve Washington’s interests.

At the Summit of the Americas in 2005, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, Venezuela and Argentina, the country hosting the summit, sided against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the ambitious White House project for the creation of a trading bloc between the countries of the region with the exclusion of Cuba. Since then, US influence in the region has weakened due to the rise of various progressive governments that dispute the unipolar vision of the world promoted by the United States ever since the collapse of the Berlin wall and the Soviet Union. At the end of the summit, it was clear to everyone that a cluster of governments was emerging that were unwilling to submit to the White House’s economic, political and diplomatic projects, unlike other countries, including Mexico and Colombia, whose policies are closely aligned with Washington’s. Their challenge to the United States rested on two axes. On the one hand, the establishment of regional groupings without the participation of the leading world power, like the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). On the other, the urge to foster a multipolar world by strengthening ties with Russia and China and promoting initiatives such as the BRICS bloc (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), an organization without any formal weight, but which brought together some of the world’s most powerful countries.

The strengthening of the progressive current and the failure of the FTAA weakened the position of the United States in the region until the triumph of Maurizio Macri in Argentina in 2015 and the dismissal of Dilma Rousseff in Brazil in August 2016, influencing the rise of Jair Bolsonaro as president on 1st January 2019. The changes of government in these two countries and the radical line adopted by the president of Ecuador Lenin Moreno, implemented to distinguish himself from his predecessor Rafael Correa, have reconfigured the regional scenario between the “progressive” current, in the broadest sense of the term, and the right-wing neoliberal current, internally heterogeneous, which has been considerably strengthened. In this context, the US government has begun to openly demonstrate its opposition to the growing influence of Russia and China in the region.

Early in 2018, the then Secretary of State Rex Tillerson visited Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, Peru and Jamaica shortly after attending a conference at the University of Texas. His speech traced the lines of the policy of the Trump government towards Latin America and the Caribbean without sparing criticism of the presence of Russia and China, and warned the governments of the region that the presence of China involved “long-term dependence, very expensive loans and unsustainable debt”. Furthermore, he believed that China was exploiting its “state interference in the economy to attract the region into its own orbit,” and that “Latin America does not need new imperial powers that only aim to bring grist to their mill”. An unsuspecting reader might think that Tillerson was quoting the Latin American authors of the “theory of dependence” of the last century, which described US policy towards Latin America, to explain what the Russian and Chinese presence in the region entails. Without mentioning, it goes without saying, the conflict-ridden relations between his own country and the region itself. When Tillerson came to explain the intentions of the White House, he stated that “the United States clearly stands out” because “the U.S. approach is based on mutually beneficial goals to help both sides grow, develop and become more prosperous, and do so by respecting international law, prioritizing the interests of our partners, and protecting our values. With the United States, you have a multidimensional partner – one that benefits both sides with engagement to support economic growth, education, innovation, and security.” In simple and concise words, Tillerson claimed that the United States was helping the region in a disinterested way compared with the sinister aims of Russia and China.

The alarm that the White House feels about the presence of the two powers emerged clearly in September 2018, when the government of El Salvador decided to break off relations with Taiwan and forge them with China, as did most of the countries of the region, for many of whom the Asian giant has become the main trading partner, toppling the United States from its throne. Today, China imports almost 15% of its oil from Latin America, mainly Venezuela and Brazil. Since the United Nations welcomed China to its ranks in 1971, excluding Taiwan, the region has been a terrain of political, commercial and diplomatic struggle between China and Taiwan. For decades, Taiwan has supplied the region with technology, but the situation has changed with China’s entry into the capitalist world and its investments in the region.

The influential Republican senator for Florida, Marco Rubio, challenged the decision of the Salvadoran government and, on Twitter, claimed to have spoken with President Trump “to break off economic aid to the government of El Salvador.” He also threatened to suspend aid to the “Alliance for Prosperity,” a program established in 2014 to provide assistance to El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras through development projects. It is interesting to note that the United States does not take such an aggressive attitude towards the People’s Republic of China in Africa, where Chinese companies are competing against North American ones. This is because the central factor of the dispute is not the economy but world hegemony. On the African continent, few governments contest US policies, as do various Latin American governments. The international dimension of the rivalry between the great powers in the region is a crucial factor in understanding the importance that Washington attaches to the situation in Venezuela. Chavismo was a key political movement in the redefinition of regional structures and the development of the progressive current that is still fights for a multipolar world that has not disappeared, despite electoral shifts and the imprisonment of Lula da Silva in Brazil. And Moscow and Beijing are clearly aware of this

Cover photo by Marco Negri, Brazil, Rio de Janeiro,Rocinha favela, 2016

L'articolo The Global Competition for Latin America proviene da InsideOver.

When she was 6-years-old Gabriella Gillespie’s father murdered her mother. At 13, he took her and her sisters to his native country, Yemen, where he sold them as child brides.

Despairing the prospects of marrying the man in his 60s to whom she was promised, Gabriella’s 17-years-old sister, Issy, donned her wedding dress and flung herself off the roof. Issy plunged to her death while unwitting guests continued the festivities.

As told in The Independent, the remaining sisters, who spoke no Arabic, were resigned to living in a remote mountain village – a far cry from any modern comforts, in mud dwellings with no electricity.

In the rural community, girls are married as young as 8-years old; some die on their wedding night while some are horrifically torn. Consummation occurs on a throne swathed in white cloth, after which, the family displays the bloodied fabric like a prized trophy. The girl is well aware of her fate if she does not bleed – she will be returned to her family and murdered, hinging on the belief that she was not a virgin.

Following years of a physically, sexually, emotionally, and mentally abusive marriage, Gabriella eventually fled to the UK with her five children.

Macabre stories like these are not reserved just for those from developing countries. Gabriella is British-born – like her English mother. And according to Unchained At Last, in the US alone, over 200,000 minors have been legally married between 2000 and 2015. The harrowing reality is that 12 million girls are married all around the world every year, which means it is happening to one girl every two seconds.

Rachel Yates, Interim Executive Director at Girls Not Brides, the global partnership to end child marriage said: “Child brides can be found in every region in the world, from the Middle East to Latin America, South Asia to Europe. At its heart, child marriage is rooted in gender inequality and the belief that girls and women are somehow inferior to boys and men. Poverty, lack of education, cultural practices, and insecurity fuel and sustain the practice. These girls are neither physically nor emotionally ready to become wives and mothers. They are usually put under huge pressure to have children before their bodies are ready, and to have lots of them. They face more risks of experiencing dangerous complications in pregnancy and childbirth, contracting HIV/AIDS and suffering domestic violence. It also doesn’t only harm the girls themselves. Research shows that it is costing the world trillions of dollars. If we end child marriage then girls, their families, communities, and countries will all be healthier and wealthier.”

“Caroline” from Kenya told Equality Now, a charity dedicated to improving the human rights of women and girls, that she was just 7-years-old when her mother orchestrated her circumcision in preparation for marriage. The indelible incident proved to be brutal, excruciating, and traumatic.

Soon after, Caroline discovered that her mother had planned to marry her to a man who was aged between 50 and 60. She fled before daybreak one day to a TNI centre, where she was given the opportunity to start rebuilding her life and going to school again.

“In the first instance, there are girls whose families enter into agreements with other families to marry a boy or a man,” Jean-Paul Murunga, a Program Officer from Equality Now explained.

“The next case is where the age of marriage is defined by religion. In Islam, for example, the religious texts state that a girl should marry when she reaches puberty. Because it is such an ambiguous term, there is no clear definition of what age puberty is according to Islam. In places like Sudan where Sharia Law exists, girls are being married between 10 and 12-years-old. You also see a lot of child brides in patriarchal societies. Girls there are viewed as subordinates and need to conform to what men dictate. A lot of times, they are married between the ages of 16 and 18-years old because their parents or guardians give consent. Another major factor is poverty. Poor families can improve their finances by giving the girl away as a bride. When she is younger and a virgin, she is considered to be pure and as such, her dowry will be higher. Families want to give the girl away before puberty due to the concern that if she passes that age, there is a higher chance she will engage in sexual activities, spoil the family name, or affect her dowry price. And the last scenario occurs in countries that experience political conflict where people are being displaced. Families give their daughters away to richer families in the hopes that she will be safe and better off. Yet, the reality is that it opens her to a web of violence, sexual abuse, and child marriage.”

Child marriage remains a complex issue, and there is no silver bullet solution. Experts believe that education is the key – not just academically but also for the extended community of those most affected.

UNICEF published a report earlier this year, which showed some decreases in child marriage around the globe. But unless social norms and gender inequalities are properly addressed, these girls will continue to not receive the 21st century emancipation that they rightfully deserve.

L'articolo 12 Million Underage Girls Married Yearly Worldwide proviene da InsideOver.

The United States and its relationship with Latin America is best described as dysfunctional, at best. Imperialistic at worst.

At the onset of the Cold War Harry Truman enacted the Truman Doctrine. Its sole purpose was to combat Russian communist expansion. This was done not through military action but by “allowing Congress to appropriate finances to support the economies and militaries under the threat of communism.”

While the doctrine was first used to combat Russian influence in Greece and Turkey it quickly moved to Latin America. As a result, the US has been involved in regime change in every country in Latin America except Colombia, Paraguay and Venezuela. Until 2002.

That’s when the Bush administration tacitly began calling for regime change in Venezuela. Recently declassified documents revealed that the US had knowledge of a coup attempt against then President Hugo Chavez but decided not to notify him. The coup was successful… for 48 hours. Chavez returned to power by popular support from both the people and the military.

There may have been other reasons, but you can’t help but wonder if this didn’t influence Hugo Chavez decision to refer to George W. Bush as “the devil”. Which is exactly what Chavez did when he called President Bush “el diablo” in a 2006 speech to the United Nations.

Hugo Chavez died in 2013 and succeeded by Nicholas Maduro. While the country enjoyed tremendous economic growth under Chavez, it was beginning to turn as he was dying and then turned even quicker as Maduro took office.

The wave of Chavez’s popularity that Maduro rode in on came crashing down. As the Chavez/Maduro policies caused the Venezuelan economy to collapse, the country saw an uptick in crime, poverty, hunger and inflation. Since then there have been daily protests calling for changes to the system. Protests that have killed and hurt many.

In May of 2018, Nicolas Maduro was elected for a second six-year term as president in what was thought to be a “show election”. Many have refused to recognize the elections legitimacy based on a series of criminal charges and irregularities. Once Maduro was sworn in as president in January of 2019, the Venezuelan National Assembly declared he had no national mandate to govern.

According to the Venezuelan constitution, this threw the country into a presidential crisis and in such circumstances, the President of the National Assembly, Juan Guaidó, would be sworn in as President until a new election can be held.

With a limitless distaste for Nicholas Maduro, most of the America’s and Europe recognized Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s president while others remain neutral on the matter.

It’s no great shock that Maduro has the support of China, Russia, Iran, Cuba and Turkey.

Cue the Truman Doctrine.

The modus operandi of the Truman Doctrine is that through financial and military support, the US will train and strategize with the opposition. And whenever possible, the US will apply economic warfare for good measure through sanctions and blockade’s, in order to strangle the population. Done in hopes the citizens will revolt against the current government.

And of course, the US will globally apply its gold standard Public Relations against the offending government.

Now because the Truman Doctrine is anti-communist, there is also free-market element to this playbook as well.

For example, in 1970, Salvador Allende was democratically elected as the President of Chile. Allende immediately nationalized copper mining in Chile. Thereby revoking a convoluted scheme agreed by his predecessor, President Eduardo Frei Montalva, which allowed the US to maintain some control of the lucrative Chilean copper industry.

Allende also nationalized the banking and health care industries. He also established free school meals, rent reductions, the construction of a subway system, increased social security payments, expanded a public works program, eliminated taxes on the middle-class, etc. That there is too close to socialism!

Cue the Truman Doctrine.

Just as Allende’s policies were being enacted and Chile was turning around, ominous graffiti began to appear around Santiago, Chile plaintively stating “Jakarta is coming.” This is a nod to the US backed coup of Indonesia that took place in 1965/66 that left up to one million people dead during a coup that left authoritarian President Suharto in charge for 30 years.

Then on September 11, 1973, a coup, backed by the U.S. Government and the CIA, was led by General Augusto Pinochet. The coup led to Allende’s suicide and Pinochet’s rule over Chile for 17 years. During his reign, tens of thousands of Chileans were murdered, tortured, kicked out of the country or just “disappeared” while hundreds of thousands were forced into exile.

Seems an extreme reaction to something that saw every measurable socio-economic sector in Chile grow positively during Allede’s short time in office.

There is also the case of the 12-year civil war in El Salvador (1979-1992). This had the government of El Salvador fighting against the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN), a group of agricultural cooperatives and labor leaders who advocated for land reform and better working conditions.

Cue the Truman Doctrine.

By the third year of the conflict, US officers had taken over positions in the top levels of the Salvadoran military and were making critical decisions that would ultimately lead to the death of 75,000 civilians. Seems an extreme reaction to land reform and better working conditions. Which brings us to Venezuela.

It can’t be ignored that Venezuela has the largest proven oil reserves in the world. Now currently, that oil is nationalized and the driving factor in its economy. And wouldn’t some of the world’s publicly traded oil companies love to get their cloven hoofs on that nationalized oil? And could the US help? With both Chevron and Exxon each having spent upwards of 2.5 million dollars in lobbying to date in 2019, I think the answer would be yes.

Sanctions against Venezuela tepidly began in 2014, but under the more than current corporate friendly Washing D.C. atmosphere, have accelerated under the Trump Administration. Of course, the stated goal of the administration is not to hurt the people of Venezuela. All evidence, and U.S. history in Latin America, tells a different story. It may be true, but as is always the case, an average citizens life is the cost in the ponzi scheme of regime change.

It goes without saying that overthrowing a government is no easy task. Historically, the US protocol has been to act covertly, or at least making the attempt. In Venezuela, either the US is having a very hard time keeping their desire hidden or the Trump administration simply doesn’t understand the definition of “covert”.

This regime change is made more complicated by the fact that, as of now, Maduro appears to have the support of the military. In early May, Juan Guaidó led a failed attempt to turn the military against Maduro. Which may explain why Juan Guaidó has recently begun considering asking the U.S. government to take military action. When it comes to U.S. involvement in overthrowing a government in Latin America, tertiary or full-on, the odds are against Maduro.

However, to date, that’s one thing President Trump has not yet bumbled his way into. It may also explain why Erik Prince, the American military equivalent of Ace Ventura, Pet Detective, has been in Washington D.C. trying to gin up the privatization of a Venezuelan coup.

To be honest though, if Erik Prince could find a way to get money out of overthrowing a condominium association, he’d just as readily do that.

Oh, and there’s also 48 billion dollars on the line. The Intercept recently published an article detailing that the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) was “quietly circulating an analysis that foresees an up to 48-billion-dollar infusion of capital into the Venezuelan economy should President Nicolas Maduro be removed from office.” The independence of the IDB is questionable, at best, considering that the US has roughly 1/3 of the voting shares.

This analysis and presentation were to be given at the IDB’s annual meeting in March of 2019 in China. The US had invited Guaidó’s economic coordinator, Harvard University economist Ricardo Hausmann. However, the meeting was in China and since they’re a shareholder in the IDB, to the tune of .004% (seriously) and China doesn’t recognize Guaidó, Hausmann was denied a visa.

Remember that gold standard Public Relations machine I mentioned? The NYTimes recently received information that Tareck El Aissami, one of Mr. Maduro’s closest confidants and industry minister, has recently been indicted in the United States on drug trafficking. And if there is one thing the US hates more than communism or socialism, it’s drugs.

The Truman Doctrine playbook remains an active part of American policy in Latin America and now it appears as though the DEA may be able to step in and contribute.

I think it’s safe to presume it’s only a matter of time before the walls come down, in Venezuela. But at what cost? Given how seen this always plays out, it’s not just the billions of dollars, political structure or future of the country at stake. It’s the Venezuelan people. They’ll be the ones who will bear the ultimate burden.

It won’t be the Venezuelan political or military leadership who suffer. It will be the average citizen who suffers now for the change, who will suffer during the change, and as history has shown time after time in Latin America, it’s the ordinary citizen who will suffer after the change.

L'articolo American Interests in Latin America: a Long History proviene da InsideOver.