Online Magazine NEW POLICY ISSN 2256-3172 Volume 2 Issue # 11 August 2011
WE are opening the doors
for higher education for GLOBAL LEADERS
PhD & Masters Political Engineering Civil Society Leadership City Government Enterpreneuship Energy Management 2
For the other
nd we go forward. Share our satisfaction. Each month we read more than 12 thousand intellectuals, democracy activists, senior public decision makers, people who exercise leadership in their communities and in our magazine are analyzing problems of the region treated with seriousness and responsibility. One of our editions was read by 18 thousand people, including all Heads of State and Foreign Ministers of the Americas, among which are: Hilary Clinton, Evo Morales, Laura Chinchilla, Otto Perez, Luis Almargo, Héctor Timerman, among others, by the results of the New Policy magazine. In the first 10 editions we almost have 160,000 readers in just eight months. Former President Alejandro Toledo of Peru has generously described us as one of the most important publications of political analysis in the region. Clara Dominguez, editor of the Voice of America, VOA, in Washington DC, says that we are doing in Latin America the equivalent of the prestigious journal “Foreign Affairs” in North America. Students of political science, international relations and communications in Mexico, Guatemala, Ecuador, Colombia and Argentina, have to NEW POLICY Magazine as a reference source. We are proud and we are committed. It has been a consolidation effort of a project that allows give voice in the region to new visions of political information and a permanent balance in the spread of ideas. In this issue, we try about Migration, issue that the media generally do not cover or analyze; it remains in closed studies of academic places or in annual reports of centers devoted to the subject. We can see a nodal issue in private and public relations of today and the future. To the extent that rich countries continue closing the access to talent and dynamism of third world Diasporas, in the medium and long term will lose its prime. Legal and physical barriers are just stumbles, which challenge the creativity and tenacity of those seeking opportunities for themselves and their families, to failure, exclusion, incompetence, corruption and persecution in their home countries. The physical and mental barriers contribute to exclusion, kill innovation and, of course, there is no progress without innovation. Interesting articles of renowned thinkers and analysts, give an overview of the topic. From the causes, myths, data and perspectives from here and “there”, from remittances, The NEW POLICY Magazine provides different views for discussion. Besides the subject of the cover, this issue brings important new features. The article “The Future of History” by renowned professor Francis Fukuyama,a member of our Editorial Board, which is published exclusively in Spanish for the first time, it will certainly be the subject of study and analysis by
observers, analysts, pundits, politicians, academics, governing people, and of course, students of different social disciplines. Agree or disagree with him, Professor Fukuyama offers interesting perspectives in its analysis. None other than the Nobel Peace Prize, former president of Costa Rica, Oscar Arias, has sent us an excellent and excited record on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of “Esquipulas II”, which brought peace to Central America. Thank you Mr. President. It’s an honor. Two well juicy interviews. To former Ecuadorian President Lucio Gutierrez, who now reveals aspects of the South American country. Imperdible. And for dessert, the interview with former Secretary executive Inter American Commission on Human Rights, IACHR, Santiago Canton, who reveals among other gems, the engagement of Mr. Insulza to cause its output in exchange of your choice at the General Secretariat of the OAS and a kind of conspiracy of Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador and Colombia coordinated by the same Insulza for virtually ending the IACHR. Well. We reiterate our commitment to democracy, freedom, human rights, participation, with the future. We don´t bet on the past. And we acknowledge the support of some members of Redlad, to the editorial team of Thomas More School, and to all the friends and intellectuals as Ricardo Angoso, Hassan Nassar, Carlos Alberto Montaner, Edmundo Jarquin, Miguel Benito, Clara Dominguez, Jose Brechner, among other, whose feather, our readers are enjoying satisfaction. And of course, we thank all the people who have subscribed and who support us in promoting it through social networks. We like the online format, as well as being environmentally responsible. We believe in the urgency to engage in reducing the impact on our common home, the Earth. We are not willing to compromise for anyone, not to the past, or to one side or the other. A reader wrote that we resemble to some ideological wing, in other, some “scolded us” by the hardness of the analysis about some government members, and others, due to the kind of items. Today the definitions are among the exercise of the public, from a democratic position, or the other, despotic. The open debate. And we are going for another 150 thousand readers with your support. Thanks for being part of New Policy Magazine.
Javier Loaiza, Carlos E. Ponce, Editors 3
Nueva Política - No. 11
International Digital Magazine for Political Analysis From the Americas to the World ISSN 2256-3172 Online Edition Free circulation Vol. 2 - No.11 Agosto/2012 Bogotá, D.C., Colombia revista.nuevapolitica.net Publishers: Javier Loaiza:. Carlos E. Ponce Consejo Editorial: Francis Fukuyama Alejandro Toledo Jorge Quiroga Ronald Scheman Edmundo Jarquin Mariclaire Acosta Pablo Izquierdo Eva Gustavson Carlos March Santiago Cantón Drafting Committee: Ricardo Angoso Carlos Ponce Marta Gaba Javier Loaiza Diego Sueiras Oscar Alvarez Journalists Eliana Jaimes Milena Pérez Redlad Asistent: Pablo Innecken Translation Spanish to English: Patricia Romero Design: Tatiana Pardo Cruz
Perverse Gameof Migrations
Global Vision Cyberactivism Regional Overview Special Tribute to Oswaldo Payà
firstname.lastname@example.org The articles are only responsability of their authors
If no need, please don´t print
12 Global Migration Discrimination
Gun Control: bipartisan consensus
OLYMPICS AND POLITICS
Obama & R
More O Same T
American Ethnic Neurosis
Migration Global Problem
Production: EGTM Editors New Policy Magazine is a project by Tomás Moro School and REDLAD. This version in English is possible with the support of the Jarl Hjalmarson Foundation
New Migration Latin Ame
Latin American Diaspora in USA
Migration and Human Rights
Who Killed Oswaldo Paya?
n in erica
Of The Thing
Payá Sardiñas and Latin American Hypocrisy
Portrait of Oswaldo Paya
Castro´s State Terrorism
“Brick by brick, we build peace”
Ecuador’s Foreign Policy towards violate Human Rights
28 IACHR Impunity, who seek to reform it
Migration Policy Changes in LAC
Mercosur has Died
The Future of History
The perverse game of migration The problem of migration on the global agenda seems a perverse game of children. The way this issue is addressed by public decision makers, media and the general public, verging on stupidity and ignorance if not cynicism. In the end, we are all guilty. It is a game where moves around 200 million people every year, the equivalent of almost the entire population of Brazil, almost twice of Mexico, six times of all Central American citizens or five times the population of Colombia or Argentina. It is a game in which every ruler, every party, everyone one wants to put its own rules. Almost all receivers play based on fear and distrust of newcomers as if they were aliens coming from other planets. Almost all receptors play a selfless and even irresponsible way. Migrants play the game of hopelessness in their homelands and play a lottery to seek a dream of Promised Lands and are willing to overcome all sorts of challenges, threats, dangers and contempt.
But at last, when migrants manage to get a space and work hard, it becomes a win-win business. Win the migrant family, the host country and the country that expelled him. However, the human and economic cost is extremely high due to lack of clear rules and consistent policies to international level. It operates more by intuition than rationality. It is after all the other phenomena of the society in which public decision makers are not prepared, nor supported in scientific tools, or on facts and real data, but they act more by opportunism and the more common government tool, trial and error. The debates on migration tend to focus on the impact that the newcomers exert on social cohesion. Those who advocate more open policies argue that increased immigration is required to maintain high living standards against the aging population (especially in Europe), and declining labor force. Opponents focus on alleged destructive effects of migration, particularly on the most vulnerable citizen in countries that
already have high unemployment rates. Migration almost always has financial motive, opportunity search and wellness, but in certain places happens to simply survive the abuses, violations and persecutions of tyrants and criminals in power. Those emigrants through legal or illegal are subject to the conditions of the new environment and should try to assimilate into the culture of their new home. Recipients usually treat them with suspicion, contempt and on many occasions with violence. There are politicians who take advantage, giving nationalists speeches of fear and of alleged defense that end up exacerbating racism, xenophobia, discrimination and hate and showing them as guilty of insecurity, unemployment and all evil that harasses society. It is easier to blame others to assume responsibility for the incompetence and lack of effective political action. Families, small and medium entrepreneurs and illegal business take
advantage of the need of immigrants, especially those “without papers” to exploit them turning them into slaves of the new times. Trade unions and governments attribute them the lack of employment. The police chase them, showing catches and harassment of immigrants as results in the fight against insecurity and crime. Trade unions and governments attribute them the lack of employment. The police pursued them and show catches and the harassment of immigrants as result in the fight against insecurity and crime. Youth gangs persecute to immigrants, trample and kill.
Governments and societies of countries supplying masses of immigrants are those of the “blind eye”. It seems pleased of taking off a problem, because of the inability to generate opportunities and expectations for the future, to meet the needs of their communities. Other countries with despotic systems expel its inhabitants and denied permission to return to his adversaries. When they are not criminal gangs that confront the state or is under its service, are police states, which pursue and harass opponents to drive them from their own country. For example: the president
of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, who last month from a military barracks in one of his huge speeches said “whoever is not Chavista, is not from Venezuela.” Thus, each playing their game while migrants trying to survive and accommodate doing all sorts of adventures. Migration policies are mostly a failure. It is a game in which the least important are human beings, especially if the rule applies in the countries of Eastern Europe in the days of socialism: “Never confess a failure.” Whenever you are not about to achieve a goal, you just have to postpone the deadline. Sooner or later.
Remittances of temporary Italian workers, coming from Argentina, prevented many rural towns of the country from falling into poverty. World markets were opened to exports of goods and European capitals. In the nineteenth century, millions
of Europeans a way to escape poverty and persecution, and contributed to the dynamism and developing of countries like the United States, the United Kingdom and various colonies. Today they have the luxury to pursue newcomers. In a time ago United States had its paradigm of “melting pot”. Today that situation has changed, because not all Americans are United States citizens. They appear with Composite names: Italian Americans, African Americans, and Hispanic Americans. The mix ingredients are separating. Israel and the U.S. have developed mechanisms to integrate new immigrants. Besides language, in Israel the army is present, in the U.S. the values contained in the Constitution. These mechanisms are weakening worldwide and virtually are non-existent in European countries. Mobility is and has been instrumental in achieving higher levels of social equality. Most developed countries have experienced great internal migrations as they were modernized, and eventually 80 percent of their populations moved to coastal regions.
Since the beginning of time Human migration is as old as history. Makes about 10,000 years, humans were not nomadic; they had not a fixed place and migrated according to the seasons for food. With the invention of agriculture, the first communities settled in specific territories and began to defend them from attacks by strangers. Concentrations were formed gradually to become towns and then cities. Now, since 2004 more than 50% of the human population, that is more than 3,500 million people live at the big cities or conurbations, which means a dramatic change in the configuration of human society, as there had never been in history. Between 1800 and 1950, Europe’s population increased from 203 million to 547 million people (269%). Emigration from Europe proved to be a critical safety valve for the continent, without which the pressure on stocks and States would have been unsustainable. During those 150 years, Europeans migrated en masse to Latin America, increasing its population by 50 million people, North America in more than 75 million and Oceania, where the population grew by 11 million.
of Europeans found freedom and prosperity in America, especially in the U.S. Africans crossing the Mediterranean Sea bound for any European country. Sometimes I even do not know where they want to go, the priority, escape the hopelessness of their home countries. Today happens to be the most serious social problem for Europe, because nobody has any idea of how to handle the “culture shock” resulting. The mass migration gave to million
Myths about migration One of the biggest myths about migration is that most immigrants enter illegally, or that immigration displaces existing workers. Immigration is necessary for prosperity and growth. The workforce in the EU will decrease by approximately 70 million workers over the next 40 years, and no significant net immigration (combined with a much higher retirement
age), the European economies and social safety nets will wither. Meanwhile, in the U.S., some as Samuel Huntington have expressed that Mexican immigration is the greatest threat to American identity coming to predict a “reconquest” of the giant American Southwest with the risk of creating divisive scenarios like Belgium or Canada, as an alleged
threat of “Balkanization”. Although others such as David Brooks claim that rejecting to new immigrants in a country forged by immigrants’ is the real threat to the American creed. “
Naturally, migration and urbanization create social problems and conflicts. And as in all spheres of life, the mess is not having problems but not be able to meet them and have no idea even how. Europe is losing the global competition for talent, and the global reces-
by 375%, from 1400 million to 5.300 million, and the Latin America, by 484%, from 167 to 809 millions. Faced with the uprisings of the Arab Spring, the Europeans were terrified by the supposed nightmare of a tsunami of immigrants that would sweep the coast of the continent, wave that never came. Instead came a anti-immigrant populism that concealed a real fact, it is that today there are more immigrants leaving that those who arrive, especially for the economic crisis that has reduced the number of jobs for immigrants. Western countries with rapidly aging populations are unable to attract migrants they need, while allowing that millions already are there, suffer discrimination and abuse. The arrests and deportations occur sometimes in terrible conditions. Just the previous week were reported cases of police chase in Greece, Italy and France. Political parties in France, Switzerland and the Netherlands, among others, have implemented campaigns that turn the immigrants into scapegoats. Worldwide “developed” laws are passed that restrict rights to immigrants.
The problem of migration The problem of migration, as never before is a problem of all, we are in the same boat ... and the boat is leaking. The priorities are clear. The globalize and interconnected world by advances in communications and transportation, require recognizing the need to redesign educational systems to identify the need of immigrants, who occupy labor spaces of rich countries, on the basis of welcome, integrate and protect them . Approximately one third of migrants today move between developed countries, a third among developing countries, and only a third, from developing countries to developed. Highly skilled workers, such as bankers and engineers, migrate en masse to China. Mexico, primarily identified as a country of emigration, is home of millions of Central American immigrants. Millions of people from Southeast Asia go to work to the Middle East, but more millions cross the border inside the region. In China, for example there is labor traffic that moves from West to East to the more developed coastal areas. The same could be said of the overall disparity North-South.
sion is creating an opportunity to redesign the geography of human capital endowments. There is a set of about 300 million graduates to reach them and there is a solid evidence that react to changes, to economic incentives and to decide on their relocation options. Between 1950 and 2050, is expected the Africa population will grow 800%from 221 million inhabitants to almost 1800 million, The Asia’s
Italy became the entry and the residence of undocumented in a criminal offense. Geert Wilders, a Dutch politician was accused of anti-Muslim hate speech. In the United States, the trenches filled with crocodiles and electric fences on the border are part of the presidential campaign. That fervor against immigrants in rich countries has become fever. All these attacks on immigration can provide some instant political reward, but the net result is to divide societies whose cohesion is already seriously threatened by the economic crisis. The increasing discrimination in employment, housing and education not only affects immigrants and their children, affects our society as a whole. Many traditional politicians have taken and converted the xenophobic parties adopting an anti-immigrant rhetoric to win the public based on fear, while those who were not born in those countries, are increasingly marginalized in schools, cities, and workplaces, when they get jobs. Europeans should recognize that
just as the United States, Canada and Australia, also theirs is land of immigrants. The percentage of foreign residents in countries like Spain, UK, Germany, Netherlands and Greece is similar to that of the U.S.A. However, it is clear that strict national restrictions, at the end, do not seem to prevent migration, only alter the geographical orientation of currents and contribute to increased illegal immigration, growing informal economy. In fact, there is more illegal immigration when restrictions to legal migration are strict. Restrictive rules at the end only serve to force the migrants and their prospective employers to find other ways of relating. All measures to impede the migration end looking like invitations to join the underground economy. In addition, according to studies in Europe, migrants change jobs twice a year on average while “They grease the wheels” of the target markets with their mobility, from some jobs less productive to other more productive. What politicians and rulers do not
see is that in the context of globalization will be less risks and costs to individuals moving from one country to another. The increase of the world population, reduced transportation costs, improves of connectivity and development of transnational social and economic networks can lead to greater movement of people. John Stuart Mill, saw it as something illogical from the economic point of view, as well as ethically unacceptable. Adam Smith objected to anything that would obstruct “the free movement of labor from one job to another.” Still, never before international migration had been subject to such tight control. Today, against the reduction of barriers to trade, finance and information, have risen even higher walls against free movement of people. Still, never before international migration had been subject to such tight control. Today, against the reduction of barriers to trade, finance and information, have risen even higher walls against free movement of people.
Benefits, entrepreneurship and remittances Currently, approximately 200 million people (3% of the world population) live outside their countries of birth. They’re kind of international system orphans. However, for example, immigrants in the United States account for more than half of the patents and new ventures in Silicon Valley, they deliver more in taxes than they receive in welfare benefits and other economic rewards. Migrants often represent a brain drain in their home countries. But throughout history, migration has been the most effective measure against poverty. In 2010, remittances sent by migrants to their homes exceeded 440 billion U.S. dollars, more than two thirds of these flows went to developing countries. In some small countries, remittances
represent more than a third of GDP (BIP), and larger ones are every year more than 50 billion U.S. dollars. In Latin America and the Caribbean, remittances serve to sustain more than 50 million people in Africa and Asia and these figures are even higher. It is estimated that growth of migration benefits the rich and poor countries, with greater advantage for developing countries. It is estimated that an increase of migration in developed countries equivalent to just 3% of the labor force between 2005 and 2025 would generate global gains of around 356 billion U.S. dollars, of which more than two-thirds would go to developing countries. If the borders are opened completely, the world economy could benefit
from the order of 39 billion dollars over 25 years. No country is an island when it comes to migration, and no one can solve the problem alone. There is a long road ahead, especially since today’s world indicates that there are at least four reasons why it is desirable to an overall increase of migration: 1. It is a source of innovation and dynamism. 2. It serves as a response to labor shortages. 3. It can meet the challenge of rapidly aging populations. 4. It offers a way to escape poverty and persecution; on the contrary, to limit migration is an obstacle to economic growth and, ultimately, a decline in the competitiveness of the
societies, which would create a less prosperous world, more divided and unequal. Rich countries should open more doors. It is not simply a matter of increasing the rate of legal immigration, but also to strengthen the quality of integration, because the
benefits, as mentioned above, are significant both for the developing world (higher remittances, but also more experiences and opportunities for learn) as for rich countries (a younger workforce, dynamic and often entrepreneurial) If Europe would be opened, would
be not only a kind of land redistribution. In the next decade the largest percentage of the migration will take place in the global south. “West” is not longer the Promised Land. Europe is taking the opposite tack and is tightening its borders.
of the origins of the people, but it is governed by agreed values, even a common language, while people’s private lives are transformed into a kind of ghettos following the doctrine of “separate but equal. “ There are other tools to further integration. Early childhood education and programs to reduce the gap between immigrant and native children. The importance of finding a job in the integration process. Recognize the skills of immigrants better, and provide the right kind of training. Much has been identified on how to prevent discrimination in hiring. Schools, police and courts should be redesigned to reflect and respond to the diversity of the communities. Countries must learn to work together to achieve these goals, because it is virtually impossible to achieve in isolation. All countries are affected by migration and, increasingly, they experience immigration and emigration simultaneously. Equally important is international cooperation on migration, which
has been in practice, quite scarce. Neither task will be easy, but it is imperative that world leaders undertake positive strategies and not myopic xenophobic policies, defensive and protectionist. They take the risk to throw their citizens to a period of violence, destruction and disintegration that could last several decades. Thus, migration is changing in fundamental ways, and is necessary that the authorities, employers, the media and civil society strive to design systems and approaches that respond to the new realities. The blind and stubborn game is over. If it did, the human mobility would become one of the greatest assets of the XXI century. Almost would change the structure of society again, returning to a kind of nomadism within the Global Village.
Nevertheless, there are enough examples of smart immigration practices. Canada and the Philippines, have an agreement that works properly and protects the rights of temporary workers. Sweden has developed legislation that minimizes bureaucracy for businesses that need foreign workers, measures that have drawn the attention of Australia and Canada, countries which could emulate them. The member States of the ILO approved the Domestic Workers Convention, which will significantly increase the protection for a vulnerable group of workers - mostly immigrants. Meanwhile, the Global Forum on Migration and Development, established in 2007, has quickly become an important means of promotion knowledge and partnerships. If, as some argue, the “salad” of multiculturalism is no longer a real alternative to assimilation, cases like London or New York have generated some response for coexistence. Public space is multicultural in terms
Global Migration Discrimination: Migrant Latins Exploited Nobody is willing to leave their families, friends, and the peace of their countries for the risk of the unknown or to live in another country. Economic circumstances are extreme, research opportunities / professional development or persecution, among many causes, which lead people to migrate. More than 215 million people, or 3% of the world population, live outside their home country. In the case of Latin America have seen how it went from a region receiving European migration, seeking better horizons, which was supported by our countries, to an area of internal and external migrations. It is estimated that 30.2 million Latin Americans are immigrants or 5.2% of the population of Latin America is immigrant. Large flows of workers have migrated from our countries to the United States, because of political persecution or seeking better economic opportunities. Another group has migrated to Europe by exploiting the pre-crisis and has been an increase in migration between countries of the region. While migration between neighboring countries has given, as it was in the case of Colombia to Venezuela, now there is a more extensive set of migratory movement between many countries. From Bolivia and Ecuador are mobilized
to Colombia and Chile, Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador to Costa Rica and Mexico, and in the case of Venezuela has invested as host to a professional exporter of Colombia, Canada, Europe and the United USA. Although it is thought that migration is a matter of south developing countries to Northern developed countries, World Bank studies show that the volume of South-South migration (migration between developing countries) is greater than the South migration to high-income countries belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development OECD. Unfortunately migration is frowned upon in many countries, even in those who have emerged thanks to migrants. The migratory discrimination is not a new fact, throughout history has frequently appeared in all societies. Despite the importance of migrant labor to the development of all economies, often they are stigmatized. From the worker who helps fulfill the tasks that nobody is willing to develop, such as pipe cleaning, many doctors and PhDs that help to develop technology or science, famous artists and writers, migrants contribute positively to the development of nations. We’ve written before on “New Policy” about the discrimination against im-
migrants, particularly in “Discriminated Latins in America: the hypocrisy of taxes without benefits” where we indicated the economic strength of the nearly 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States and the discrimination and double standards when “regarding the burden of Latin Americans in services”. We speak about a society and a government with a double standard and a high hypocrisy load; illegal Latins are criticized, because they use education and health system, or because they are “a burden” for the country, but they forget that 16 years ago (1996) established a Tax Identification Number (Single Taxpayer Identification Number, STIN) to facilitate payment of taxes to people without Social Security Number, no matter if was a legal or illegal resident. And is that approximately 40 million people are immigrants (legal or illegal) non-citizens, who actively contribute to the economy of a country created by immigrants. But it is easier for the Tea Party and other radical groups to attack the immigrant, because allegedly they are “stealing” the Americans jobs, than think in effective formulas to boost the economy, so that there is less protectionism and more and innovation in order to generate more jobs. If we remove legal or illegal
immigrants, residents, or those who have become Citizens the truth is that there would be no innovation or industry standing. But of course, there will always be discrimination. At the beginning of the century, after European migration flow to the United States, were discriminated newcomers but now they are considered part of the â€œCaucasianâ€?. Unfortunately that is not the case of Latin Americans, even those who come from Puerto Rico (Commonwealth). On the issue of illegal people, not
not the best, discrimination against immigrants is permanent, ranging from discrimination against Arab immigrants, Africans and of course against the Latin Americans. In Spain, where it receives the largest flow of Latin Americans, according to figures from INE 2011, there are 6.7 million immigrants, but a country that should be grateful with the international reception of millions of persecuted Spanish during the Franco era or fallen into poverty during the War and found fortune in Latin
general services and tourism, which make them easy victims of nationalist groups, conservatives and radicals. It is easier to blame the immigrant worker for job losses, that the corrupt government for bad economic policies, or economic power groups by a lack of social commitment, or to the banking systems by exploitation of markets, and abuse of power. According to Amnesty International (AI), in recent years, in Spain has been an increase in reports of abuse
that they want to stay out leaving their countries unable to return to visit their families and friends, but simply the system and immigration laws always favoring illegal immigration by not providing alternatives. At European level the situation is
America, is a country where there are high levels of persecution and racism against our region immigrants. And is that migrant workers are the groups most affected by economic downturns, partly because they often are employed in construction,
and discrimination against foreign and members of ethnic minorities, also detected a worrying increase of discrimination in employment, educational , in access to housing, entertainment, etc. All this is accompanied by an alarming increase in
cases of torture and ill-treatment to immigrants and ethnic minorities by agents of the state “. In its report “Stop racism, not to people: Racial profiling and immigration control in Spain” (December 2011) IA exposes discriminatory and illegal practice of applying racial profiling to identify irregular migrants, and shows its negative consequences for migrants in Spain. Are normal the persecutions news, beatings, rapes, denigration and murders against Latin American immigrants in Spain. And not only have the problem of discrimination against nationals but often among immigrant groups from each other, whether by racial conditions, time of arrival in the country or by many other reasons. Thus, immigrants only have the option of adapting to difficult scenarios and hope for the best for their descendants, who have the advantage of assimilation to the culture, but they have to take the tough decision
1995 2000 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2110 13,3 20,2 43,4 50,1 59,2 63,3 64,6 56,9* 58.1 55.2 81,3 159,3 191,1 226,7 278,5 324,8 307,1 325,5 1,1 2,0 2,1 2,3 2,7 3,6 4,3 3,8** 10,4 9,5 28,5 33,0 41,0 52,7 67,3 58,7
Cuadro: Flujo de remesas hacia países Latinoamericanos, Datos sobre Migración y Remesas, Banco Mundial 2011.
have the issue of human trafficking gangs exploiting their financial need, charging hefty fees to pass by migratory corridors (under subhuman conditions, deceiving them to introduce them into drugs or prostitution business, providing false legalization services (scammers lawyers) and service providers to benefit from illegal status to swindle or charge hefty fees for goods, services and of course for the sending remittances. and in recipient countries, banks are charging high commissions for the money received or the “Maras” and illegal groups who charge percentage of funds received directly to the family. We then
80% come from the U.S. Honduras receives about 2,900 million dollars from family remittances of the 1.6 million Hondurans living abroad, equivalent to 18% of GDP. Guatemala receives more than 4,300 million dollars a year in remittances. All these resources go through a chain of intermediaries, which many economic powers have taken advantage. Banking systems and governments at the end are the biggest beneficiaries, but also illegal mafias. Honduras receives about 2,900 million dollars from family remittances of the 1.6 million Hondurans living abroad, equivalent to 18% of GDP. Guatemala receives more than 4,300 million dollars a year in remittances. All these resources go through a chain of intermediaries, which many economic powers have taken advantage. Banking systems and governments at the end are the biggest beneficiaries, but also illegal mafias. Behind the issue of migration also
see that migrants are discriminated in the destination countries and exploited in their home countries. This is severe in the case of migration by the search of better economic situations, but it is very serious in cases of people who are persecuted in their home countries and that they have no choice but to emigrate, they are abused and discriminated against in their new country, not have the option of returning. Many of these are professionals who see their lives transformed by simply disagreeing with a regime or a specific situation. That’s why there is more to the issue of immigration that the simple conjectures of a few radicals
that make a lot of noise, with many hidden racism and xenophobia that is simply pure and clear discrimination. Finally, the lack of legislation to date, effective and humane, only benefit exploiters of immigrants groups, leaving millions of people in a situation of helplessness and violation of their human rights.
Remittances (Billion of US$) Remittance flows to inside All developing countries Remittance flows abroad All developing countries
of losing their roots to achieve lower discrimination. When we address the issue of migration, it is easy to see from the point of view of extreme nationalism, but leaves out all the political, economic, social and cultural factors that are linked with the issue of migration. On one hand migrant workers (at all levels) not only contribute to the economy of the countries where they work, but also generate flow redistribution through remittances to their countries of origin. It is estimated that in 2010, the flow of remittances worldwide exceeded US$440,000 million. In the case of Haiti is said to be US 2,100 million is the amount of remittances sent home by Haitians living abroad during 2011, which has been squandered. In other countries such as El Salvador, Honduras, Ecuador and Guatemala, remittances are the main driver of the economy. In El Salvador, from 15 to 20% of GDP depends on remittances, and
Dr. Carlos E. Ponce General Coordinator REDLAD
The American ethnic neurosis in the U.S. Constitution, nor in the 85 essays in The Federalist (where Madison, Hamilton and Jay explained the scope and meaning of the document), the slightest allusion to something other than the rules and institutions, by which the new republic would be governed. The uniqueness and greatness of America was precisely that; founding fathers invented constitutional patriotism. A good American was one who placed himself under the authority of the law. No need to have British or Dutch blood. At first, although they proclaimed the equality of all people, only included white owners males, but were gradually expanding circles of participation until to add women and African Americans. However, it is legitimate to consider, as did Huntington, the relationship that may exist between ethnia and development. If the performance of a company is the product of labor and the worldview of the mainstream or mainstreamque gives shape and meaning, ¿It is not accurate to think that an ethnic mass, in which different cultural values predominate, can substantially modify the overall of that society? In other words, if the United States is filled of Turkish or Chinese people, nation will eventually behave like Turkey or China. IT depends. More important than race or culture are the prevailing rules. The Hindus, who failed to thrive in India, are the more successful minority and polite in the United States, they work great under American
rules. The same is true of the Jews from the Slavic world. They were very poor and backward in Europe, but in United States had extraordinary success. There are many examples: Greeks Lebaneses, Barbadians, Iranians and a whole long list. The hypothetical Turkish and Chinese who were educated in the United States, will end up behaving differently than their did in their home countries. What is happening in America, is a global phenomenon, although it is much more visible in open democracies that in totalitarian states: we go slowly towards a healthy miscegenation. But the important thing is not to try to maintain the impossible purity ethnic, but to preserve the cultural traits that allow societies to be reasonably prosperous and happy. America became the leading power in the world by its institutions, its value structure, including meritocracy, for its ability to innovate, and its educational system. All these factors resulted in a formidable productive. What you need to do is enhance the integration of immigrants into the American way of doing things. Eventually, ethnic neurosis will disappear. It will confirm that, as was supposed by the founding fathers, all men are equal. The key is in the rules that govern their behavior. http://www.elblogdemontaner.com/la-neurosis-etnicanorteamericana/#more-1970
The New York Times announced on its front page that in the past year more than half of the children born in the United States (50.4%) were not white. Of that percentage, 26 were Hispanic (mostly Mexican), 15 black and 4 Asians. ¿Why the front page? It is ethnically pure neurosis. Fear of that which is different. For same reason that a few years ago, Sam Huntington caused a stir with the publication of “The Hispanic Challenge.” Such information causes some anxiety among “whites”. They think that they lose the control of the American nation. They are afraid of becoming a minority. The first folly is the classification. Hispanics are classified by the language they speak, or which is supposed they speak, regardless of the color of the skin. A Chilean from Basque origin or a Guatemalan Cakchiquel both are Hispanic, although the second one do not speak Spanish. Black people obviously are classified by race. In Asians, by geography, whether Chinese or Indian. I do not know, for example, if an Israeli- American of Sephardic origin, is Asian, white or Hispanic. Nor do I know if this brilliant engineer named Rafael Reif Venezuelan, son of Jewish emigrants from Eastern Europe, newly appointed president of MIT, is Hispanic, white, or if maybe the census recognized him simply as “maracucho”. The second folly is of moral and ideological origin. Nothing is more contrary to the nature of the American state that classifies people by race, culture, or gender. There exists
Carlos Alberto Montaner Journalist, writer and politician
The 858.259 GarcĂas Observation on the Latin American diaspora in the United States The Census Bureau of the United States announced in early August this year the analysis of a new methodology for counting Hispanics living in the United States with a view to census of 2020. To increase the reliability
of the r e sults on the national origin of this group is thought to develop a more precise questionnaire. Currently there are two questions on the census: One about race and another about the origin. In the new format there would be one question that would fit more to the way Latin Americans identify themselves. And this migration is not monolithic but diverse, with cultural nuances and differences in customs, language and also the music and food. This is not the first time that this issue is addressed. On April 2012 The Pew Research Center, based on Wash-
ington, noted that 51 percent of Hispanics recognize themselves according to the place where they was born, Peruvians, Venezuelans, etc. In the study entitled â€œWhen labels do not fit,â€? the 64 percent who were interviewed mentioned cultural differences
among Latin Americans, as the main connection is language. The 75 percent of Hispanics speak Spanish in the family environment. The Census Bureau data provide a detailed view about the Latin American diaspora. In 1970 it began using the term Hispanic in the census. The 16 percent of the U.S. population is Hispanic, about 50.5 million. This
makes it the second country with more people who speak Spanish. Only Mexico, with a population of around 112 million, exceede it. Most Latin Americans living in the United States are from Mexico, Puerto Rico and Cuba. New York and Los Angeles are the urban centers with the highest concentration of Spanish speakers. Half of the people living in the United States and who were born in another country have their origin in Latin America. This
diaspora has had a tangible evolution in the last 20 years. This diaspora has had a tangible evolution in the last 20 years. Its strength is paid with more political, economic and social power. Hispanics emerge as a group of influence, not only in the nation whom emigrated, but in his homeland. The official statics shows that the Hispanic businesses in the USA generated more than 350 billion dollars in 2007, representing an increase of 58 percent over 2002. The 23 percent of businesses in New Mexico are hispanic, followers Florida and Texas. The average in-
technology for quick transfer of money, increasing the number of highly skilled immigrant women-who send higher amounts than other sectors, and changes in the cost of living in nations where such transfers are sent. And in politics, although it is known that candidates for the White House are hunting the Hispanic vote, should be added the increase of Latin Americans in public office at the federal, state and local; there are now 31 in the U.S. Congress, two in the Senate and 29 in the With House. But theres is another element, the influence of Hispanic residents in the United States in political contests of their respective countries. In the article, May 2012: “¿Can the Diaspora’s vote influence the elections in Latin America?” The specialist Mark Keller from Americas Society Institution, establish in New York, stressed the importance of voting from Dominicans living in the United States in the presidential elections of the Caribbean nation. Applicants travel to cities like New York from Quisqueya, where their compatriots are gathered, to seek support The reason speaks in figures: the number of Dominicans living in the United States and who is entitled to vote in elections in their country is greater than the number of voters in 27 of the 31 provinces of the Dominican
Republic. Annually, the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development, sponsor a Global Forum of Diasporas in Washington. This year it will give strength to an initiative that the U.S. diplomacy head, Hillary Clinton had presented in November 2011 and that was reiterated last April by President Barack Obama during the Summit of the Americas in Cartagena. It is “Laidea”, a competition to stimulate and increase the exchange between U.S. Hispanic entrepreneurs and traders in Latin America. The presence of Latin American diaspora in the United States is obvious. A simple walk through any American city and its cultural richness splashes you. And are the surnames. Garcia is the eighth most common surname in the United States. There are 858,
come of a Hispanic family in 2010 was 37, 759 dollars a year. But not everything is rosy: 26.6 percent of this community lived in poverty. Also it has given that speak beyond the areas where they are concentrated. The government of the very northern Maine in 2007 published a detailed report on the economic contribution of Hispanics. The first “American Diaspora” in Maine-from which we have data, dating back to 1860. It consisted of 25 people from Mexico, Cuba and South America. In 2010 there were 16, 935. Over 2050 it is expected that 10 percent of the state’s population has its origins in Hispanic America. The purchasing power of this group in Maine increased 605 percent between 1990 and 2010. It is important to remember the economic contribution of the diaspora to their own people, left behind. The remittance is significant incomes for Latin America. Manuel Orozco, InterAmerican Dialogue researcher - a study center based in Washington, is dedicated to study this matter. In May 2012 published a report entitled: “Future trends of remittances in Latin America and the Caribbean. Colombia received most with 4.168 million dollars, followed by Republica Dominicana, Ecuador, Salvador y Guatemala. Orozco attributed the increase to three factors: access to
Clara Dominguez is Executive Editor of Latin American Service of the Voice of America.
MIGRATION POLICY CHANGES
IN LATIN AMERICA While in the past century especially during the 70’s and 80, Latin American migration was generated by political problems, at present is derived from the economic crisis, according to the International Organization for Migration. For perspective today, Latin Americans are the largest group of immigrants in the United States. During the 1980s eight million immigrants came from Latin America, almost equal to the total number of European immigrants who came to the U.S. during the first decade of the twentieth century. According to the Census Bureau of the U.S., it is estimated that there are 54 million Latinos in the United States, comprising about 14 percent of the total population. Immigration
from Latin America has become the spread of immigration more important during the second half of the twentieth century with immigrants from all over the continent: “Of the ten countries “ senders “in the last decade, four are From Latin American and the Caribbean: Mexico, Dominican Republic, Cuba and Jamaica. In the next ten years will be Haiti, El Salvador, Colombia and Peru”. Let see interesting cases of migration by the countries of the region. Argentina is a country of immigration, especially from Europe, which gave it a europeizante identity, where are discriminatory tendencies manifesting toward Latin American populations. Between 1857 and 1958 the main source of immigrants to Argentina were Italy and Spain, for 46 and 33 percent respectively.. The rest of the immigrants were of different nationalities, including French, British, German and Irish. Bolivia and Paraguay recorded little migration. Meanwhile Colombia is a country with the largest number of forcibly displaced internally, and Costa Rica is a major recipient of Nicaragua. Ecuador receives Colombians fleeing internal conflict, El Salvador, Guatemala and Ecuador receives Colombians fleeing internal
conflict, El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua are countries of transit and origin, while in Panama there is the phenomenon of transient population are countries of transit and origin, while in Panama there is the phenomenon of transient population. Mexico was a country of open borders, but in the last 40 years it changed radically, the process was significantly restricted following the signing of the Free Trade Agreement of North America and its entry into force in 1994. By harsh immigration policies of the United States, Mexican migrants have sought clandestine routes through mountains and deserts with a high number of deaths, with an increase of 600 percent in the last 10 years. Peru is among the countries with permanent migration growth, with eight percent of the population residing abroad. Venezuela reports a major departure of its citizens, escaping the Chavez government and its economic policies. There are several key points to consider in the Latin American migration. For example, it is clear that has been lacking among our states update the legislation on migration laws,set up a comprehensive policy, ratify international laws and raise public awareness on the human rights of migrants.
to consider migration as a national security issue, which makes it increasingly difficult regional policies on the subject. While it is true that migration provides exits to unemployment, and the lack of prospects for job improvement, involves loss of human and social capital for countries. So it is so imperative that intergovernmental consultative forums advance in the constitution of institutional and stables frameworks of work in areas of specific coordination, making sure that agreements are not binding, but impose commitments consistent with the sovereignrights and responsibilities of each state about criteria, practices and migration policies. In general we can say that through dialogue and exchange of experiences are implemented concerted mechanisms to address shared problems such as migrant smuggling,
illegal migration, social integration, the repatriations and regulations on applications of refugee claims. Finally, efforts should be made for an extensive dialogue with other countries of Latin American migration as the European Union and Asia. Latin American migration has given us great results and must be promoted with guarantees and fundamental rights. The globalized world comes together through migration policies, and Latin America can not be left behind in this crucial issue. Comments
One of the big migratory problems today, is the â€œfeminizationâ€? of the problem and the children are their main victims, because they are used for prostitution or sex tourism. Among other obstacles to benefit migrants are: the delay to approve international treaties, reluctance to make a world conference on the subject, the explosive increase in human trafficking, discrimination and xenophobia. Unfortunately, it tends to toughen immigration measures, because of the displacement of criminals and terrorists. Serious are the problems due the lacks of equal rights, employment, restrictions on movement, difficulty to demand protection from courts and denial of social benefits. Although the continentâ€™s governments have agreed to increase cooperation to improve the rights of migrant workers, states still tend
Hassan Nassar Journalist, Political Scientist
Migration and Human Rights: Two Incompatible Realities?
officials of Latin American countries, and national Governments themselves, have done little to demand a decent treatment for these immigrants. It seems that being a migrant, specially illegal, means to be a criminal, losing all respect for their basic rights as human beings. The vulnerability of immigrants not only refers to the crossing of borders but also the conditions under which they work. A significant proportion of immigrants are employed in unskilled jobs, such as restaurants, shops, etc., where the hourly pay can be six dollars, compared to the 15 or 16 dollars they can make in some industrial jobs as in the automotive sector. The job insecurity is accentuated even to some enslavement of illegals working in the farms or in restaurants, who not only work with abuse and stress but with the fear of being deported, or even denounced at any moment by the same who hires them. The international labor bodies and national unions have also failed to promote measures for these workers, in order to being treated with respect and dignity. The vulnerability of Latin American immigrants increased in the eighties, when armed conflicts in Central America made thousands of people felt impelled of seeking refuge in the United States, using Mexico as a mandatory passageway to that country. The increased flow of Central American people –particularly along the east coast of Mexico, given the proximity to the United States– also enhanced the theft and exploitation they suffer from the hands of smugglers and criminals, and the harassment by immigration authorities during their crossing through Mexico, reaching condemnable and unfortunate events as the mass murder of migrants, both Mexican and American, registered in the year 2010. Despite these unfortunate events,
there has been no comprehensive coordination between the Mexican government and Central American authorities to build a protection belt for these migrants, except from churches of different denominations and few NGOs. Migrants, whether Mexican or Central Americans, remain in utter helplessness in their journeys to the United States. What has been referenced above, leads to a central question: Is there really a conflict between being a migrant and the respect of human rights? It seems so, regarding what is happening today. However, this has more relation with Latin American governments and, perhaps, civil society laziness itself; before they are unable to do anything to change the situation of abuse, they show little interest in this issue. As well as Latin American countries are concerned about promoting free trade agreements or economic integration, they could come together to create a Latin American organization that guarantees the respect for legal and illegal immigrants of all ages, and promotes the respect for human rights, punishing those individuals, authorities, organizations, etc. that does not respect it. Certainly, receiving countries like the United States or Spain, and cross countries, like Mexico, have the right to protect its national territory; but also its governments have the right –and the obligation– to guarantee its citizens’ human rights within and outside their country. Comments
Latin America immigration reality began in the early twentieth century, when the Mexicans, after losing almost half of their territory, arrived to the United States, seeking employment and attracted by the agricultural boom that appeared first in Texas and then in California. Subsequently, other Latin American immigrants would join the Mexicans, running away from dictatorships and guerrillas in their own countries, or seeking better opportunities. Mexico became the mandatory crossroad for those aspiring to enter into the United States. Mexicans not only began migrating to the United States but also showed the vulnerability of immigrants in a foreign country. In the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century, both legal and illegal immigrants who arrived in the United States were subject to many human rights violations. Legal immigrants from Europe and Asia –who came to the East Coast through New York– and those who came through the border with Mexico were disinfected and inspected like animals and not human beings, in order to be able to enter the United States. These migrants stoically endured these abuses, with the hope of being accepted in this land of opportunities. Immigrants with no identification papers increased their vulnerability to enter the United States; then, any punishment, ranging from physical abuse to imprisonment and even death, was justified for having entered the country illegally. Border and U.S. territory guards known as Rangers, a rural police from Texas specialized in arresting immigrants, and most recently the Border Patrol, have been granted with all the power to detain anyone they suspect is illegal, which is an open discrimination of human rights. However, diplomatic and consular
Cirila Quintero Ramírez Teacher-Researcher
MIGRATION TRENDS IN Latin American countries
The history of mankind is a history of migration. If we ever decide to find the origin of our surnames, probably we will realize that it comes from somewhere else. Migrant is a concept that describes the displacement of people through different regions. Migration not only responds to the need of finding better horizons, it is related to the human being’s own impulse to live around the world and discover new places. En el año 1951 se crea la Organización Internacional para las Migraciones, en un principio con el objetivo de dar ayuda a las personas refugiadas tras la Segunda Guerra Mundial, sin embargo su marco de acción ha crecido y actualmente es una organización mundial que trabaja en todos los Estados miembros (alrededor de 134 países), gestionando y organizando los desplazamientos de las mismas de la manera más humana, hoy en día junto con otras cientos de agrupaciones, prestan su servicio a las diásporas mundiales. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) was initially created in 1951 with the objective to give aid to refugees after World War II. However, its framework has grown and now is a global organization that works in all member States (about 134 countries), managing and organizing the displacement of people in the most human way. Today, with hundreds of other groups, it provides services to the global diasporas.
Globally: The IOM estimates that the number of migrants in the world by 2010 was 214 million, increasing considerably from 191 million in 2005. And, according to the United Nations Development Program, there were about one billion migrants (an average of
The current trend shows a reconfiguration of the Latin American migration map. Migrations are entering into a process of diversification(1). Regarding the countries of destination, we can see less migration to the north and more to the south and outside the continent, in addition to more displacements due to climate changes. The United States is still the top destination for regional migrants. According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean
one in seven people in the world population) in 2009. According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Latin America is the continent with the highest migration flows. In 2005, Latin American migra-
tion raises a 25%, while in other continents like Africa and Europe statistics revealed an 8.5% and 13.5% increase, respectively.
(ECLAC), by 2005 there were 19.3 million of migrants. 75% of Latin American migrants are concentrated in the U.S.; of this percentage, 71% (13.7 million) are Central Americans and Mexicans, 17% Caribbeans and the remaining 12% are South Americans. It should also be noted that Mexicans and Central Americans are the majority in the group. About 11.6 million immigrants come from Mexico, which means that almost one of three immigrants in the U.S. is Mexican; it should be emphasized that
this is the most important migration corridor globally. These studies point Spain as the second most important destination of regional migrants, followed by Canada and Japan. Since the 90’s decade, migration flows to Spain increased considerably. People born in Latin American countries surveyed in Spain passed from 210,000 in 1991 to 840,000 in 2001.
Changes in Migrations Patterns in Latin America: The IOM’s World Migration Report 2011 shows the emergence of other migration patterns in Latin America with new immigrants who don’t come from the region, but mainly from other Southern countries. These include the Sub-Saharan Africans who are heading to Brazil by sea, in order to move then to other South American countries; as well as some migrants who manage to travel by
sea directly to Argentina, Chile or Uruguay (2). These migrants are mostly natives of Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Ghana, Mali, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Senegal, Somalia and Zimbabwe. However in recent years their presence has become more visible (although in less considerably amounts) in Argentina and neighboring countries (such as Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Colombia,
Ecuador, Paraguay and Uruguay). For example, there are also migrants from South Asia in Ecuador, where the number of migrants from Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nepal and Sri Lanka has increased in the last three years by 300% (3). Therefore, Latin America and the Caribbean also receive Diasporas.
work in construction and other sectors such as industry and agriculture.
employment of Latino immigrants follows patterns of social exclusion, which in a possible crisis will be the first or the first to lose their jobs according to the International Labour Organization.
Job placement of migrants: The demand for migrant workers in developed countries exists, and it is increasing not only in low-skilled jobs such as agriculture, cleaning, maintenance, construction, domestic work, caregiving and military service (which regulates their immigration status) but also in positions that require highly specialized. Many migrants work in the informal economy, in poor conditions and without social protection. In Latin America more than 30% of men
In the United States the issue of work is tied to the level of education: South America and The Caribbean present the best indicators of employment, measured on the basis of professional and technical occupations. At the other extreme are Central Americans and Mexicans, the latter, with the lowest proportion of these occupations. Notably, the
In Spain in 2005, the Latin Americans without Spanish nationality received 51% of work permits granted by the government.
Public Opinion about Disporas: There are many opinions, negatives and positives in Latin America about moving people out of their home countries. Some interviews conducted by the Pew Global Attitudes, reveal in the “Report of the World Migration 2011” of IOM, that in several countries, especially in Latin America tend to believe that this phenomenon is a very big problem. And the media in most cases reproduce and accentuate these views. Although this, it is considered the need for greater restrictions on the
entry of foreigners to their countries. However, in several countries of origin, the perceptions of the public have registered a positive change in recognition of the potential benefits of migration; this has been achieved by creating links with the diaspora. The positive effects of migration are mostly cited regarding remittances. An economic issue of great impact on societies. According to the World Bank for 2011 remittances of migrants accounted 325,000 million
dollars, being generally above the volume of official development assistance and, on net, probably greater than foreign direct investment. In the United States between 2000 and 2007, immigrants accounted for nearly a third of GDP growth, therefore one of the good news is that migration can contribute to reducing global poverty.
New policy responses: In South America, some of the regional mechanisms such as MERCOSUR, UNASUR and CAN recognize the importance of the free movement of persons, and economic and trading cooperation in South America, this for the human value, but also the pursuit of institutional legitimacy of the regional entities by the part of the Citizen. This will promote the regularization of irregular migrants to facilitate mobility and support grea-
ter regional integration. The March 11, 2011 came into force the Treaty establishing the Union of South American Nations, which greatly improves the possibility of free movement in the South American region a reality soon. In the European Union one of the success factors has been the European passport. Another of those policies is given under the framework of the office of the UN High Commissioner for Hu-
man Rights, which has established global standards for the protection of the rights of all migrant workers. The table below shows the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean that have ratified such convention. It should be noted that when El Salvador and Guatemala in 2003 signed its incorporation, conditionality for the entry into force of the Convention was fulfilled.
Signature of the International Convention for the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and their families in Latin America
Argentina Belice Bolivia Chile Colombia Ecuador ElSalvador Guatemala Guyana
Ratifies 2007 2001 2000 2005 1995 2002 2003 2003 2010
Country Honduras Jamaica México Nicaragua Paraguay Perú San Vicente y Granadinas Uruguay
Ratifica 2005 2008 1999 2005 2009 2005 2010 2001
The states that have signed this Convention undertake to incorporate this convention as part of their national legislation.
The Gender in Latin America migrations:Género Women are certainly a key to migrations, their presence in migrant destination countries is equal to or greater than the male presence. According to ECLAC for over 40 years, migrant women have been almost as numerous as male migrants. In 1960 there were 35 million migrant women and 40 million migrant males. Currently as a new trend of migration in Latin America is that most intraregional migrants are women. The occupations (traditionally feminized) as domestic job and elder care remains the main niche of work. It is estimated that in the case of intra-re-
gional migration, more than a quarter of women migrants (27%) are employed in domestic service. In Spain, for example more than 40% of the foreign, born in Latin American countries and economically active, are employed in domestic service. Family reunification was the most common reason for which was the admission of women to the U.S. It is very important to note that according to the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), 80% of the 35 million refugees in the world by the middle of 2003, are women (of which 14 million are girls ). Facts are impor-
tant to address because of the lack of protection that migrant women have. According to ECLAC ( ECLAC), in almost most of the world recognizes that migrant women suffer more acutely the negative vicissitudes affecting migrants and they are victims of abuse, along with children. Regular or irregular migrant, that is the question! The documentation plays a central role for men or women, who feel casual eavesdroppers and accept unfavorable working conditions or feel part of a multicultural society where they can opt for equal rights and opportunities.
conclusions: destination, so that there is an effective social integration of immigrants. Some countries already have policies design to bring the diaspora, they organize events, festivals and cultural homelands and have websites to interact with these and even they give grants for creating partnerships and fund return trips to the home country. Undoubtedly, interact and coexist with diasporas in Latin America and elsewhere, we will bring the possibility of extending our own world-
view. It will always be an enriching experience for all society, for this reason, governments, international organizations and civil society organizations must to bet on to work together, defend and strengthen the human rights of the migrants, creating closer links with the towns and promote greater harmonization of immigration policies in order to facilitate the conditions of migrants, refugees and displaced, both in their journey, as in places of destination.
Regular or irregular migrant, that is the question! Documentation plays a central role for men or women feel like casual intruders and they accept unfavorable working conditions or feel part of a multicultural society where they can opt for equal rights. According to ECLAC, diasporas always maintain a connection to their homes of origin and also to the social environment of the country to which they have migrated, therefore it is necessary a shared responsibility between countries of origin and
Ă“scar Ă lvarez Araya Executive Director REDLAD
WE are opening the doors
for higher education for GLOBAL LEADERS
PhD & Masters Political Engineering Civil Society Leadership City Government Enterpreneuship Energy Management 25
MIGRATION, AN ISSUE OF GLOBAL IMPORTANCE A disturbing issue to the international scope has been international migration mainly from the early twentieth century, when economic borders between modern nations became more marked and the U.S. and European countries mainly-turned away from the now-called “underdeveloped”. These economic differences between nations, and even between continents along with large conflicts, has been the main triggers for the increased number of international migrants, mainly from the latter half of last century. According to UN figures, the number of permanent migrants increased from 75 million in 1965 to 175 million in 2002, and 215 million in 2010. being 3% of the world population. For many of the countries of the “first world”, immigrants, legal and illegal, have become the main issue of national politics and even after the economic crisis of recent years, have become a problem. Currently, in countries like the U.S., Spain and Greece, severely beaten by the economic crisis, have dictated rules that led to stigmatization and deportation of hundreds of thousands of
immigrants. The Obama government has expelled more than a million Latin American immigrants despite the offers and promises made during the campaign. In Greece the economic crisis that has made shake its presence in the European Union and has led to introduce measures as the recent Operation Zeus, threatening to deport thousands of immigrants. In Spain, where the crisis has created a dramatic increase in unemployment, which exceeds 20% of immigrants, have begun to reduce their income and remittances, and has made that national society stigmatize them, and the government implement measures as the recent health reform to make harder their permanence. One of the most relevant cases is of the United States, the country with most immigrants worldwide and which recently has started strong deportation policies that have even become major issue in the presidential campaign this year. According to World Bank figures, in 2010 the countries with most immigrants were United States with 43 million; f lowed by Russia with 12 million and Canada with 7.000.000.
Remittances, the big issue Remittances sent by migrants to their home countries have become major issue for the international economy. The figures increase on par with the number of migrants, and have reached numbers become substantial in the GDP of the countries receiving the money.
For 2010, of the 440 billion dollars in remittances, 325.000 were destined to developing countries, and the nations that received more foreign remittances were India with 55 billion dollar Another phenomenon concerning immigrants that attract attention in Latin America, is concerning the
refugees or exiles, who occupying 8 percent of all immigrants worldwide. Represent 67 percent of immigrants from Ecuador and 20% of Venezuela and China with 51 billion, in addition to countries like Tajikistan , Tonga and Lesotho among others, remittances meant almost 30 percent of total GDP.
Latin American migration Itâ€™s no secret that Latin Americans are a substantial part of the number of immigrants from Europe and North America. About 5.2 percent of the American population has emigrated to other countries, with figures comparable with the Middle East and North Africa, where 5.3 percent of the population has emigrated, but overtaken by Asia and Central Europe, where 10.7 percent of citizens is located in a foreign land. The most dramatic situation about migration on the continent is that of Mexico, which has a higher percentage of its population abroad -11.9 percent, followed by India. It is also third on the list of countries that receive more remittances with figures close to 22 billion dollars. Likewise, migration from Mexico to the United States has become the most dyna-
mic migration corridor in the world with nearly 12 million migrants. Only in three countries of the continent: Argentina, Costa Rica and Venezuela, the percentage of immigrants is higher than emigrants, in other Latin American nations are more those that are leaving, just over 5 percent of the total population, compared to 1 percent coming. The countries that have more emigration are along with Mexico: Colombia, Puerto Rico, Brazil, El Salvador, Cuba and Ecuador. In this sense, the parallel between emigrants and immigrants are becoming alarming in countries like Jamaica, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Cuba, Haiti and Guatemala, which have from 6% to 36% emigrants, but they maintain immigration rates by the order of 1 percent.
Remittances are also a phenomenon of wide importance in the region. The countries that receive the most are: Mexico, Brazil, Guatemala, Colombia and El Salvador; are also of great importance to the economies of countries like Honduras and El Salvador, where it represents the 19 and 16 percent of their GDP, respectively. Another phenomenon concerning immigrants that attract attention in Latin America, is concerning the refugees or exiles, who occupying 8 % of all immigrants worldwide. Represent 67% of immigrants from Ecuador and 20%t of Venezuela.
The difference between immigrants and emigrants in USA is 13.5% against 0.8% respectively, while in Spain immigrants are 15.2% of population against 3% of emigrants. Furthermore, of the ten countries with more emigrants in these two countries, half are Latin American. Many of the current immigration reforms in countries like the United States and Spain are due that to a large volume of low-skilled immigrants arrives illegally. Due to all these factors the stricter policy on immigration, as those have already begun to emerge in several nations, will continue to generate direct impact in countries with higher emigration rates,
including Latin America. An example of this in recent months is that Latin Americans living in Spain have started to decline remittances, and have been confronted with unemployment and further cuts in health. In the United States the recent mass deportation increased tension and fear between illegal immigrants to be deported and not having access to the benefits offered by the government.
According to the analysis of the Dutch sociologist Saskia Sassen, contemporary migration tends toward extremes. On the one hand there are highly skilled emigrants traveling to other countries due to higher job offers and, on the other hand, low-skilled workers who expect to play the most basic tasks, but they represent higher income abroad than in their home countries. North America is the main destination of Latin American emigrants, because of the ten main immigration runners of the continent; eight have as destination The United States. Moreover, emigration from Ecuador to Spain remains of a large magnitude.
New Policy Team
Mute the IACHR
Impunity, movil of those who seek to reform it Director of the program “ Partnersfor Human Rights” of Robert F. Kennedy Center (RFK) for Justice and Human Rights Former Executive Secretary of the IACHR Exclusive Interview of New Policy Team
Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, Venezuela and Colombia, are some cases of countries raising concrete reforms that weaken the IACHR Una de las promesas de Insulza para su elección como Secretario General de la OEA era el cambio del Secretario Ejecutivo y el control de la Comisión Es grave para el sistema interamericano y una ofensa para los Estados que la elección del secretario general de una organización como la OEA sea producto de ese tipo de acuerdos Para Venezuela era un punto de honor mi salida, pero ha demostrado con el anuncio de su retiro del Sistema Interamericano que yo no era realmente el problema sino el tema de la impunidad.
After 10 years as head of the Executive Secretary of the IACHR, what is the balance? I think we succeeded in giving more visibility to the work of the Commission. When I arrived there were only about 15 or 20 professionals. Now there are 70 who passed of handling fewer than 600 cases to 1700 cases, and growing. Thanks to important results and a substantial increase in its work, the Commission has strengthened. It is widely recognized today not only by states but by the Civil Society, in particular civil society, hundreds of organizations in the region that make life and strengthen the system. They managed to have a professional team and respond, within budgetary constraints, to hundreds of cases admitted to the Commission every year. These years have been complex in Human Rights and in democratic institutions, but I think we have advanced in order to protect victims of human rights violations, in protecting the rule of law and maintain the autonomy and independence of the Commission. The Commission has become more visible, which increased the volume of cases we received and as some people have pointed out, IACHR was a victim of its own success. To the extent that the Commission became more visible and began to have a clear impact on the defense of Human Rights, states began to look more carefully at their work. For me, the breakthrough of the last 15 years in the InterAmerican system, has been to assure that there are no laws of amnesty or impunity for the past violations. To avoid repeat them, I leave knowing that there are plenty of cases that were not resolved in the time that they must be resolved; although procedural delays has gone down, it is still unacceptable. From a substantive point of view, progress was made in the investigation of human rights violations committed by the dictatorships, as well as expanding the agenda to issues such as the situation of human rights defenders, rights women, Afro-descendants, indigenous people and sexual diversity or LGBT.
Much has been made about his departure from the Commission as part of a conspiracy of several factors. What motivated you to resign?
Really every organization needs a change of leadership and after 10 years as Executive Secretary and a total of almost 30 years in the Commission, it was necessary to be given one within the Commission. It is widely known that there was a good relationship with the Secretary General of the Organization of American States, and Venezuela has asked me out for years, and the Commission has ratified its confidence in me the whole time, so that did not was the reason for my retirement. My retirement was a personal decision. Undoubtedly there was the will of the Government of Venezuela, but my departure is for personal reasons. First, I do not
think that is right the excessive length of the mandate of a person in any institution. The changes are important because they strengthen the institutions. But as I have stated on other occasions, the Secretary General of the OAS, has been quite active against my management and as the same government of Venezuela has noted, one of the promises of Insulza for his election as SecretaryGeneral, was change to Executive Secretary and control of the Commission. It’s bad for the American system and an affront to states that the election of the Secretary General of the OAS as an organization is the product of such announcement of his retirement from the interAmerican system that I was not really the problem, but the issue of impunity. Unfortunately they want to press the Commission not to take actively take certain cases or simply fall within a game of blackmail of this country.
The Commission faces now one of its greatest challenges, it seems there is a strategy in Brazil, Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, among others, with the broad support for Insulza to destroy the IACHR. How do you see this stage of “Reform”?
When one speaks of reform one has to wonder: For what is it is, to strengthen or weaken? So far the discussions that have been place at the OAS General Assembly in Cochabamba, are not proposals to strengthen the inter-American system, because that would mean giving it tools to work it better, would Imply an adequate budget, a better operational capability, better endowments, and finally, a greater involvement of States in the allocated budget. But it seem that that isn´t what has been discussed, as they pose proposals that seem destined more to weaken than strengthen the Commission. There are characters inside governments who want to weaken it and subtract powers, that pose reforms, which will weaken the Inter-American system, or they would completely inoperative. There are three themes that have been central to some states. The Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, the precautionary measures and Chapter four (which evaluates performance in DD. HH. countries). Maybe some changes are required in these areas, but what I am sure of, is that there are not pose attributions to strengthen the protection of human rights. My impression is that there is a group of states whose interest is precisely the opposite and some have announced it so publicly. There are countries whose top officials, including presidents and chancellors, who have said with all words that they want to play down the IACHR functions, they consider that the Commission has exceeded.
Which countries are leading the attack, is spoken of Brazil, Venezuela and Insulza?
It’s hard to know who are decidedly against or in favor of the Commission. Ecuador, Bolivia, Brazil, Venezuela and Colombia are some cases of countries raising concrete reforms that weaken the IACHR. Colombia has ri-
Venezuela’s withdrawal of the Inter-American System and impact for the IACHR
The Government of Venezuela announced, and at other times, his retirement, this time it seems that if it’s a fact, it is seen that they are studying for a while. Unlike the announced withdrawal of Peru during the government of Alberto Fujimori, which was left to attend the hearings and of course all cases remained open and there was no problem when democratic normalcy returned to Peru, and resumed its participation in the hearings. In the case of Venezuela seem more oriented to the strategy followed by Trinidad and Tobago when the government denounced the Convention, on account of the interest of the State to continue to use the death penalty as a legal strategy. Unlike substantive judgments, seems that they
will follow that procedure to denounce the Convention and suspend the powers of the Court, but they should also expect a regulatory year, in which the government of Venezuela would still be responsible for cases pending the Court.
What is the future of the IACHR to these attacks, it will disappear?
The Commission has survived the attacks and attempts to control of some governments and has the credibility of the work performed, with the support of various academic sectors, civil society and many governments who quietly support the Inter-American System and that will defend the Commission from any reform that pretend to weaken it The same Commission will make proposals and it can get ahead strengthened. I worry a bit the issue of impunity for those who seek to reform it and they will try to silence it a bit, but surely that it will get ahead.
sen from other perspective more legal and professional, others have taken it to a more open control. Ecuador has been very active on the issue of Freedom of Expression, Colombia and Brazil have long ago expressed his disagreement with the subject of Chapter Four and the precautionary measures. The Secretary General of the OAS wanted that at least on certain issues, the Commission took into account his points of view and his vision; from the independence and autonomy of the Inter-American Commission, in my opinion, it is erroneous, because he leaves it tied to political criteria, and is different from the one had Cesar Gaviria when he took the OAS General Secretariat, at a time when was respected the complete independence of the IACHR.
" ”At the end of my term, I want to thank the State and civil society for their support over the years. This support has facilitated to American Commission fulfill the purpose of protecting and promoting human rights in the Americas “." (Farewell Letter to Santiago Canton IACHR)
New Policy Team
Ecuador’s Foreign Policy:
Oriented towards countries that violate human rights Interview with Lucio Gutierrez, Former President of Ecuador and Patriotic Society Member Destined to be the natural leader of the opposition in Ecuador and next opponent up against the president Rafael Correa, the ousted former President Lucio Gutierrez believes that the upcoming elections in his country will not be clean. He also denounced the infiltration of drug trafficking in Ecuador and increased insecurity in the streets of Ecuador.
Headlines “Drug trafficking is being introduced in the country and nobody does anything about it”; “Insecurity in Ecuador is increasing and each passing day there are more crimes that go unpunished”; “We believe that the next elections will not be clean and that there may be fraud”; “Chavez was involved in the coup that overthrew me”; “There are proof and evidences that Correa has agreed with the FARC.”
Ricardo Angoso: How do you see today`s Ecuador, whither the country goes? Lucio Gutiérrez: Ecuador has very serious problems in almost all areas of life. We have many challenges in the area of what is our foreign policy, since we have made many mistakes and Ecuador maintains relations with countries that have been questioned in the world, as Syria, for example, whose regime is accused of committing a series horrendous massacres against the civilian population, has deep relationships, commercial and political, with Iran, another country questioned worldwide for having relations with international terrorism and even has financed it ; Also The presidents of dictatorial regimes were received with honors in Ecuador, such as Belarus and Iran, it is a foreign policy oriented towards countries that violate human rights and subjected its people to degrading treatment. But President Rafael Correa also is dedicated to creating problems with friendly countries with which we have important trade relations, such as the United States, or for example Colombia and even Peru. These facts show that President Correa handles the economy and foreign relations under an ideological concept, and therefore we suffer these enormous difficulties. Let´s go to the domestic level: in the management of public safety has had a marked decline and we have never been as bad as with President Correa. Unemployment, by lack of legal certainty, but also because there is not a favorable environment for investment, as foreign investors do not come and nationals do not invest, because they have left the country and do not come new foreign capital. This explains the increase in unemployment, leading to a rise in poverty and consequently in insecurity. And crime, as part of a logical process, is one of its consequences. With that policy of our president, to leave open the borders, our neighbors take advantage, in many cases, for the entry of terrorists, drug dealers and people of the underworld to Ecuador. So it is possible that Ecuador is becoming one of the most important centers of international drug trafficking; Drugs have been sent from here to Italy through the Ecuadorian diplomatic bag, which is very serious, as was sent forty kilos of cocaine, but there have been other drug shipments to Hong Kong, France and other countries. Also have been detected in our country narco-planes, narcosubmarines, and laboratories for drug processing. And the most serious of the matter is that there is not a single detainee by this affair. It was said at the time that by sovereignty issues, President Correa did not extend the agreement with the Americans who had their military base in the city of Manta, broke that partnership agreement that ended in 2009. Apparently there was another purpose in breaking this agreement and we are now seeing the results: the city of Manta, which was one of the safest in the country when the Americans were helping in the fight against drug trafficking, is today one of the most unsafe of Ecuador. Almost every day there is crime and violence continues to increase in the nation. We have constantly news of crimes and murders and nothing happens, no one does anything to stop this scourge. All this is the result of the mistakes of the government, which even pulled between 2000 and 3000 offenders from prisons, more specifically “mules” who traded drugs and were not considered as
such by the executive. There are a number of considerations since the power in favor of criminals and against the victims; even were forbidden to carry weapons to decent people, something that before was possible and relatively easy. No one who is honest can bear arms, now the only ones who carry them are criminals, thugs and drug traffickers. Organized crime has become a nightmare for Ecuadorians. R.A.:And how is going the economy? L.G.:Then there is the management of the economy, where the government has failed miserably, we should not forget that Ecuador had never had so much money and had never wasted the high price of a barrel of oil. We are losing great opportunities; it’s getting a mishandling of the economy. In health we are equal or worse than before, as with the sorry state of our education. And unemployment goes beyond, as never seen before. Prices do not stop rising and inflation remains beating us. And finally, to finish my balance of Correa management, is the aggressive attitude of the President toward the media; he have been closed as twenty media and imposes a kind of selfcensorship among journalists, as they are afraid to speak out against the government or officials who have committed acts of corruption. Many journalists who have dared to speak of corruption involving officials and members of the government have been removed from their posts in various media; there is a clear political pressure from the government against the media, against press freedom. There are specific cases, such as videos that affect to foreign minister, Ricardo Patiño. Any complaint as there was against the president’s brother has
not generated a single arrest, not even an investigation by the government. When it comes to talking about these issues in a media, the journalist is removed from office, and even is fired. We know that the judgment against journalists, who criticized President, was written and edited by the president’s lawyer, not by the judge. Justice is not done, but it is in government hands. Justice is totally politicized. There is great uncertainty in the country, everyone is afraid and no one wants to talk or criticize power. If I a person is a public employee and speaks out against the government, is unceremoniously fired and loses his job. Justice is totally politicized. There is great uncertainty in the country, everyone is afraid and no one wants to talk or criticize power. If a person is a public employee and speaks out against the government, is unceremoniously fired and loses his job. There are over 6,000 people fired from their jobs for speaking out of power and it is estimated that another 6,000 waiting to be dismissed for the same reason. But if a small business owner criticizes something, even slightly, the government sends the SRI (Finance) and they close the business. You can not speak against the government, even ordinary people can go to jail for asking for work or criticize some aspect of daily life. It has happened; President Correa does not accept the criticism. And as we are close to the next election, and pun, has launched the machinery of fraud, which is not only alter the outcome on election day, but starts from when an unequal competition in a country where the President is permanently campaign and instead, potential competitors are prevented from participating in political life and find little space in the media to express their views.
Many public television channels don´t leave spaces for the members of the opposition, while these are used to slander and attack those who disagree with the government and the policies developed by the President. The president has almost absolute control of all media, there are no alternative Medias, there is no real freedom of speech and there is no equitable campaign, in which all candidates have equal opportunities. It has been allowed the president to commit all kinds of abuses and there is a clear an unequal competition faced to upcoming elections. As “final icing” for the President, they are trying to pass a law against publishing interviews to opposition candidates, while the President can keep talking and campaigning since the two functions, candidate and highest authority country. Against this entire adverse situation, but above all for love of country and because we do not want to implant communism, we have to fight against this and give the battle in the next elections. We have to prevent totalitarianism is installed in Ecuador, that the drug win the battle to the country and that organized crime installs its rules on the streets of Ecuador. We fight because theft does not succeed impunity and plunder of public coffers, something that is daily news; for all this, is that we should fight and return the peace and tranquility to the Ecuadorians they enjoyed a few years ago. R.A.:All this has to do with the relationship Correa has with Venezuela more specifically with Hugo Chavez? L.G.: Definitely, there are increasing indications that who financed Correa’s campaign was, on one hand, Chavez himself, moreover, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), which also contributed their share, as was revealed in the computers of the guerrilla leader Raul Reyes. These evidences were never investigated, but they are known and it is proved by the Wikileaks papers. Correa is a subject of Chavez, who is the real boss and gives the coordinates of what you have to do, as when he created artificial problems with Colombia and opened a crisis. And Correa only meets Chavez orders. Furthermore, the model that is being implemented in Ecuador is the same as that of Venezuela, perhaps with some changes and implementations, but that looks to the political system that was introduced in Cuba. Now both Correa as Chavez, as all who are in the wave of “socialism of the XXI century”, do the same as Fidel Castro, but changing the methods; They use democracy, unlike the Castro brothers, to get what they want and perpetuate in power. Once in power, they destroy the very essence of democracy with laws that restrict freedoms. They use artifices to be in power and leave the institutions without real contents. At the end, what happens is that there isn´t a system of counter powers and balances, democracy ceases to be effective and real. They are taking over the state, changing the constitution and become dictators, without anyone does something about it. R.A.:Do you think it is proven the relationship between government and the spread of drug trafficking in Ecuador? L.G.:The evidences are very serious, as has been reported even in a report published by the Armed Forces, in which was noted that if it did not initiated a determined fight against cartels, the consequences would be very serious for Ecuador. There are already cartels, such as the Sinaloa, the Gulf of Mexico, and Colombia, even linked to the FARC, whose are in Ecuador
that international observers observed a very superficial way, without having access to the true mechanisms that enable fraud through computers. But in addition, the president has lost many political and social support in the country, since a large part of society is now against his management. Civil society is now confronted with his project. What we are doing now is preparing a system and control mechanisms to prevent fraud, He created a parallel National Electoral Council; we have already the technology and now we are preparing people to prevent fraud throughout the country. We seek to create an army of 45,000 observers, one for each table, that write in the record what happens in each polling station and then enter the data to have the results at 10: p.m. If the president wins, as Democrats we are, we accept the outcome of the polls, but as we believe the Ecuadorian people voted for the change, we demand that these results are respected. We think that discontent is very large and we are on the threshold of a great change, we believe that the people suing you right now and that will come in the next election. R.A.: You suffered a coup and they took away the power of an illegally. Do you think that the forces that participated in this “operation” are still alive? L.G.: As reported in the international press, the coup against Lucio Gutierrez was an international ideological political plot hatched and financed by Hugo Chavez. When Chavez saw that he could not infiltrate inside my government and that I did not start to work in his project, to begin implementing his political, castrista and totalitarian model, he got to work in Ecuador to destabilize the country. He sought to take a coup and did it; a political judgment was required to destroy the president and that he could defend himself, but it did not happen in my case, he never allowed me to do it. Not met with the legal political elements to promote my dismissal. It was a fact irregular and the coup that I suffered was unconstitutional, I have said before, it was caused from the outside, and specifically inspired by Chavez and his support elements in the country. And in that coup was very active the Rafael Correa´s participation, is now tearing their hair out by the democratic exercise that has happened these days in Paraguay and has led to the ousting of President Lugo. There if there was a political trial and were met the legal standards that the political and constitutional Paraguayan order required; Lugo, even initially, accepted his dismissal and the legal process by which it occurred, but Chavez and Correa later advised him to go down in confrontation, as they did. Chavez and Correa participated in the coup against me, one as sponsor, as I said before, and the other as head of the plot in Ecuador.
working and operating. Here are captured tons of drugs and drug trafficking activity is increasingly growing. There is a clear aggression of drug trafficking into the country, the problem is increasing, and the problem is that no one does anything about it. R.A.: There is a connection of Correa government with the FARC? L.G.: I refer to documents, more specifically, the books he wrote Raul Reyes, where he speaks about engagement that had the government of Rafael Correa with FARC and in the statements of “Mono Jojoy”, where it is argued that the Colombian terrorist group not only financed Correa’s campaign, but also it had signed several commitments with this government. It seems that one of the agreements signed between Correa and the FARC was concerning the dismantling of the American base at Manta order to leave the field open to the drug trafficking operation. Unfortunately, as the justice is taken by President Correa, these facts were never sufficiently investigated, and remain serious doubts about these commitments between the FARC and President. There have been relationships, agreements, but never investigated, like the money that the terrorists put to Correa’s campaign. Nothing has been investigated and doubts remain in an issue in which is at stake not only the honor of President Correa, but the prestige of all Ecuadorians, and ultimately our country. Here never investigated anything waiting for people to forget things and that the impunity continues. There are numerous scandals that have never been investigated. What the government wants is that people forget things, as happened with the scandal of the forty kilos of cocaine shipped to Italy through the diplomatic bag. R.A.:However, economically hasn´t had big changes and the market economy has not been touched under the Correa government. Is not it? L.G.:There are laws like the last of urgent economic character and must be approved or denied by the National Assembly, in which it already could enter into private property to seize goods and this would be very serious. If so, there would still be less investment, both domestic and foreign, and economic recovery could be further. R.A.:Do you think the upcoming election scheduled for 2013 will be clean? L.G.: We are convinced that there will be fraud in the upcoming election, despite the president claims to have support of 80% of the country, I am sure that prepares the way for facilitating fraudulent reelection. He did the same last year for a query that said he would win four to one and it was not, but he lost and tried to hold a fraudulent result. We control and he had not won the “no” we asked on the referendum, but issued a result that was a technical draw: only 45% of votes in favor versus 43% of votes against government. But with that fact, was shown that the president had lied, because he assured that he had won with 69%, in an unfortunate, undemocratic fact. He was allotted 25 points more and that’s how it is preparing the electoral fraud. Always wins through fraud and trickery, as in the past in which he allegedly won with 51%. We denounce fraud and we have evidences, but the institutions under the control of President Correa denied us majority and legitimized the fraud. Then, observers of the European Union (EU) accepted it, even though we try to prove otherwise. And it is clear
Ricardo Angoso Sociologist, political analyst, journalist Cambio 16 Magazine
WE are opening the doors for higher education for GLOBAL LEADERS
PhD & Masters Political Engineering Civil Society Leadership City Government Enterpreneuship Energy Management 36
The Future of Histor y Can Liberal Democracy Survive the Decline of the Middle Class? Something strange is going on in the world today. The global financial crisis that began in 2008 and the ongoing crisis of the euro are both products of the model of lightly regulated financial capitalism that emerged over the past three decades. Yet despite widespread anger atWall Street bailouts, there has been no great upsurge of left-wingAmericanpopulisminresponse. It is conceivable that the Occupy Wall Street movement will gain traction, but the most dynamic recent populist movement to date has been the right-
wing Tea Party, whose main target is the regulatory state that seeks to protect ordinary people from financial speculators.Somethingsimilaristruein Europe as well, where the left is anemic and right-wing populist parties are on the move. There are several reasons for this lack of left-wingmobilization,butchiefamong them is a failure in the realm of ideas. For the past generation, the ideologicalhighgroundoneconomicissueshas been held by a libertarian right.The left has not been able to make a plausible
case for an agenda other than a return to an unaffordable form of old-fashioned social democracy. This absence of a plausible progressive counter-narrative is unhealthy, because competition is good for intellectual debate just as it is for economic activity. And serious intellectual debate is urgently needed, since the current form of globalized capitalism is eroding the middle-class socialbaseonwhichliberaldemocracy rests.
ideology to have a lasting worldwide effect was liberalism, a doctrine associated with the rise of first a commercial and then an industrial middle class in certain parts of Europe in the seventeenth century. (By“middle class,”I meanpeoplewhoareneitheratthetop nor at the bottom of their societies in terms of income, who have received at least a secondary education, and who own either real property, durable goods, or their own businesses.) As enunciated by classic thinkers such asLocke,Montesquieu,andMill,liberalism holds that the legitimacy of state authority‘ derives from the state’s ability to protect the individual rights of its citizens and that state power needs to be limited by the adherence to law.
One of the fundamental rights to be protected is that of private property; England’sGloriousRevolutionof168889 was critical to the development of modern liberalism because it first establishedtheconstitutionalprinciplethat the state could not legitimately tax its citizens without their consent. At first, liberalism did not necessarily imply democracy.TheWhigs who supportedtheconstitutionalsettlementof 1689 tended to be the wealthiest propertyownersinEngland;theparliament ofthatperiodrepresentedlessthanten percentofthewholepopulation.Many classicliberals,includingMill,werehighly skeptical of the virtues of democracy: theybelievedthatresponsiblepolitical participation required education and
THE DEMOCRATIC WAVE Social forces and conditions do not simply “determine” ideologies, as Karl Marxoncemaintained,butideasdonot become powerful unless they speak to the concerns of large numbers of ordinary people. Liberal democracy is the default ideology around much of the world today in part because it responds to and is facilitated by certain socioeconomic structures. Changes in those structures may have ideological consequences, just as ideological changes may have socioeconomic consequences. Almost all the powerful ideas that shaped human societies up until the past 300 years were religious in nature, with the important exception of Confucianism in China. The first major secular
a stake in society--that is, property ownership. Up through the end of the nineteenth century, the franchise was limited by property and educational requirements in virtually all parts of Europe. Andrew Jackson’s election as U.S. president in 1828 and his subsequent abolition of property requirements for voting, at least for white males, thus marked an important early victory for a more robust democratic principle. In Europe, the exclusion of the vast majority of the population from political power and the rise of an industrial working class paved the way for Marxism. The Communist Manifesto was published in 1848, the same year that revolutions spread to all the major European countries save the United Kingdom. And so began a century of competition for the leadership of the democratic movementbetweencommunists,who were willing to jettison procedural democracy(multipartyelections)infavor of what they believed was substantive democracy (economic redistribution), and liberal democrats, who believed in expanding political participation while maintaining a rule of law protecting individual rights, including property rights. At stake was the allegiance of the new industrial working class. Early Marxists believed they would win by sheer force of numbers: as the franchise was expanded in the late nineteenth century, parties such as the United Kingdom’s Labour and Germany’s Social Democrats grew by leaps and bounds and threatened the hegemony of both conservatives and traditional liberals. The rise of the working class was fiercely resisted, often by nondemocratic means; the communists and many socialists, in turn, abandoned formal democracy in favor of a direct seizure of power. Throughout the first half of the twentieth century, there was a strong consensus on the progressive left that some form of socialism--government control of the commanding heights of the economy in order to ensure an
egalitarian distribution of wealth--was unavoidableforalladvancedcountries. Even a conservative economist such as Joseph Schumpeter could write in his 1942 book, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, that socialism would emerge victorious because capitalist societywasculturallyself-undermining. Socialismwasbelievedtorepresentthe will and interests of the vast majority of people in modern societies. Yet even as the great ideological conflicts of the twentieth century played themselves out on a political and military level, critical changes were happening on a social level that undermined the Marxist scenario. First, the real living standards of the industrial working class kept rising, to the point where many workers or their children were able to join the middle class. Second, the relative size of the working class stopped growing and actually began to decline, particularly in the second half of the twentieth century, when services began
to displace manufacturing in what were labeled “postindustrial” economies. Finally, a new group of poor or disadvantaged people emerged below the industrial working class--a
heterogeneous mixture of racial and ethnic minorities, recent immigrants, and socially excluded groups, such as women, gays, and the disabled. As a result of these changes, in most industrialized societies, the old working class has become just another domestic interest group, one using the political power of trade unions to protect the hard-won gains of an earlier era. Economic class, moreover, turned out not to be a great banner under which to mobilize populations in advanced industrial countries for political action. The Second International got a rude wake-upcallin1914,whentheworking classes of Europe abandoned calls for class warfare and lined up behind conservativeleaderspreachingnationalist slogans, a pattern that persists to the present day. Many Marxists tried to explain this, according to the scholar Ernest Gellner, by what he dubbed the “wrong address theory”: Just as extremeShi’iteMuslimsholdthatArchangel Gabriel made a mistake, delivering the Message to Mohamed when it was intended for Ali, so Marxists basically like to think that the spirit of history or human consciousness made a terrible boob.The awakening message was intended for classes, but by some terrible postal error was delivered to nations. Gellner went on to argue that religion serves a function similar to nationalism in the contemporary Middle East: itmobilizespeopleeffectivelybecause it has a spiritual and emotional content that class consciousness does not. Just as European nationalism was driven by the shift of Europeans from the countryside to cities in the late nineteenth century, so, too, Islamism is a reaction to the urbanization and displacement taking place in contemporary Middle Eastern societies. Marx’s letter will never be delivered to the address marked “class.” Marx believed that the middle class, or at least the capital-owning slice of it that he called the bourgeoisie,
would always remain a small and privileged minority in modern societies. What happened instead was that the bourgeoisie and the middle class more generally ended up constituting the vast majority of the populations of most advanced countries, posing problems for socialism. From the days of Aristotle, thinkers have believed that stable democracy rests on a broad middle class and that societies with extremes of wealth and poverty are susceptible either to oligarchic domination or populist revolution. When much of the developed world succeeded in creating middle-class societies, the appeal of Marxism vanished. The only places where leftist radicalism persists as a powerful force are in highly unequal areas of the world, such as parts of
Latin America, Nepal, and the impoverished regions of eastern India. What the political scientist Samuel Huntington labeled the “third wave” of global democratization, which began in southern Europe in the 1970s and culminated in the fall of communism in Eastern Europe in 1989, increased the number of electoral democracies around the world from around 45 in 1970 to more than 120 by the late 1990s. Economic growth has led to the emergence of new middle classes in countries such as Brazil, India, Indonesia, South Africa, and Turkey. As the economist Moisés Naím has pointed out, these middle classes are relatively well educated, own property, and are technologically connected to the outside world. They are demanding
of their governments and mobilize easily as a result of their access to technology. It should not be surprising that the chief instigators of the Arab Spring uprisings were welleducated Tunisians and Egyptians whose expectations for jobs and political participation were stymied by the dictatorships under which they lived. Middle-class people do not necessarily support democracy in principle: like everyone else, they are self-interested actors who want to protect their property and position. In countries such as China and Thailand, many middle-class people feel threatened by the redistributive demands of the poor and hence have lined up in support of authoritarian governments that protect their class interests. Nor is it the case
THE LEAST BAD ALTERNATIVE? There is today a broad global consensus about the legitimacy, at least in principle, of liberal democracy. In the words of the economist Amartya Sen, “While democracy is not yet universally practiced, nor indeed uniformly accepted, in the general climate of world opinion, democratic governance has now achieved the status of being taken to be generally right.” It is most broadly accepted in countries that have reached a level of material prosperity sufficient to allow a majority of their citizens to think of themselves as middle class, which is why there tends to be a correlation between high levels of development and stable democracy. Some societies, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, reject liberal democracy in favor of a form of Islamic theocracy. Yet these regimes are developmental dead ends, kept alive only because
they sit atop vast pools of oil. There was at one time a large Arab exception to the third wave, but the Arab Spring has shown that Arab publics can be mobilized against dictatorship just as readily as those in Eastern Europe and Latin America were. This does not of course mean that the path to a wellfunctioning democracy will be easy or straightforward in Tunisia, Egypt, or Libya, but it does suggest that the desire for political freedom and participation is not a cultural peculiarity of Europeans and Americans. The single most serious challenge to liberal democracy in the world today comes from China, which has combined authoritarian government with a partially marketized economy. China is heir to a long and proud tradition of high quality bureaucratic government, one that stretches back over two
millennia. Its leaders have managed a hugely complex transition from a centralized, Soviet-style planned economy to a dynamic open one and have done so with remarkable competence--more competence, frankly, than U.S. leaders have shown in the management of their own macroeconomic policy recently. Many people currently admire the Chinese system not just for its economic record but also because it can make large, complex decisions quickly, compared with the agonizing policy paralysis that has struck both the United States and Europe in the past few years. Especially since the recent financial crisis, the Chinese themselves have begun touting the “China model” as an alternative to liberal democracy. This model is unlikely to ever become a serious alternative to liberal democracy in regions
outside East Asia, however. In the first place, the model is culturally specific: the Chinese government is built around a long tradition of meritocratic recruitment, civil service examinations, a high emphasis on education, and deference to technocratic authority. Few developing countries can hope to emulate this model; those that have, such as Singapore and South Korea (at least in an earlier period), were already within the Chinese cultural zone. The Chinese themselves are skeptical about whether their model can be exported; the so-called Beijing consensus is a Western invention, not a Chinese one. It is also unclear whether the model can be sustained. Neither export-driven growth nor the top-down approach to decisionmaking will continue to yield good results forever. The
fact that the Chinese government would not permit open discussion of the disastrous high-speed rail accident last summer and could not bring the Railway Ministry responsible for it to heel suggests that there are other time bombs hidden behind the facade of efficient decisionmaking. Finally, China faces a great moral vulnerability down the road. The Chinese government does not force its officials to respect the basic dignity of its citizens. Every week, there are new protests about land seizures, environmental violations, or gross corruption on the part of some official. While the country is growing rapidly, these abuses can be swept under the carpet. But rapid growth will not continue forever, and the government will have to pay a price in pent-up anger. The re-
gime no longer has any guiding ideal around which it is organized; it is run by a Communist Party supposedly committed to equality that presides over a society marked by dramatic and growing inequality. So the stability of the Chinese system can in no way be taken for granted. The Chinese government argues that its citizens are culturally different and will always prefer benevolent, growth-promoting dictatorship to a messy democracy that threatens social stability. But it is unlikely that a spreading middle class will behave all that differently in China from the way it has behaved in other parts of the world. Other authoritarian regimes may be trying to emulate China’s success, but there is little chance that much of the world will look like today’s China 50 years down the road.
middle-class societies, not working-class ones. But what if the further development of technology and globalization undermines the middle class and makes it impossible for more than a minority of citizens in an advanced society to achieve middle-class status? There are already abundant signs that such a phase of development has begun. Median incomes in the United States have been stagnating in real terms since the 1970s. The economic impact of this stagnation has been softened to some extent by the fact that most U.S. households have shifted to two income earners in
the past generation. Moreover, as the economist Raghuram Rajan has persuasively argued, since Americans are reluctant to engage in straightforward redistribution, the United States has instead attempted a highly dangerous and inefficient form of redistribution over the past generation by subsidizing mortgages for lowincome households. This trend, facilitated by a flood of liquidity pouring in from China and other countries, gave many ordinary Americans the illusion that their standards of living were rising steadily during the past decade. In this respect, the bursting of the housing
DEMOCRACY’S FUTURE There is a broad correlation among economic growth, social change, and the hegemony of liberal democratic ideology in the world today. And at the moment, no plausible rival ideology looms. But some very troubling economic and social trends, if they continue, will both threaten the stability of contemporary liberal democracies and dethrone democratic ideology as it is now understood. The sociologist Barrington Moore once flatly asserted, “No bourgeois, no democracy.” The Marxists didn’t get their communist Utopia because mature capitalism generated
bubble in 2008-9 was nothing more than a cruel reversion to the mean. Americans may today benefit from cheap cell phones, inexpensive clothing, and Facebook, but they increasingly cannot afford their own homes, or health insurance, or comfortable pensions when they retire. A more troubling phenomenon, identified by the venture capitalist Peter Thiel and the economist Tyler Cowen, is that the benefits of the most recent waves of technological innovation have accrued disproportionately to the most talented and well-educated members of society. This phenomenon helped cause the massive growth of inequality in the United States over the past generation. In 1974, the top one percent of families took home nine percent of GDP; by 2007, that share had increased to 23.5 percent. Trade and tax policies may have accelerated this trend, but the real villain here is technology. In earlier phases of industrialization--the ages of textiles, coal, steel, and the internal combustion engine-the benefits of technological changes almost always flowed down in significant ways to the rest of society in terms of employment. But this is not a law of nature. We are today living in what the scholar Shoshana Zuboff has labeled â€œthe age of the smart machine,â€? in which technology is increasingly able to substitute for more and higher human functions. Every great advance for Silicon Valley likely means a loss of lowskill jobs elsewhere in the eco-
nomy, a trend that is unlikely to end anytime soon. Inequality has always existed, as a result of natural differences in talent and character. But todayâ€™s technological world vastly magnifies those differences. In a nineteenth-century agrarian society, people with strong math skills did not have that many opportunities to capitalize on their talent. Today, they can become financial wizards or software engineers and take home ever-larger proportions of the national wealth. The other factor undermining middle-class incomes in developed countries is globalization. With the lowering of transportation and communications costs and the entry into the global work force of hundreds of millions of new workers in developing countries, the kind of work done by the old middle class in the developed world can now be performed much more cheaply elsewhere. Under an economic model that prioritizes the maximization of aggregate income, it is inevitable that jobs will be outsourced. Smarter ideas and policies could have contained the damage. Germany has succeeded in protecting a significant part of its manufacturing base and industrial labor force even as its companies have remained globally competitive. The United States and the United Kingdom, on the other hand, happily embraced the transition to the postindustrial service economy. Free trade became less a theory than an ideolo-
gy: when members of the U.S. Congress tried to retaliate with trade sanctions against China for keeping its currency undervalued, they were indignantly charged with protectionism, as if the playing field were already level. There was a lot of happy talk about the wonders of the knowledge economy, and how dirty, dangerous manufacturing jobs would inevitably be replaced by highly educated workers doing creative and interesting things. This was a gauzy veil placed over the hard facts of deindustrialization. It overlooked the fact that the benefits of the new order accrued disproportionately to a very small number of people in finance and high technology, interests that dominated the media and the general political conversation.
THE ABSENT LEFT One of the most puzzling features of the world in the aftermath of the financial crisis is that so far, populism has taken primarily a right-wing form, not a leftwing one. In the United States, for example, although the Tea Party is anti-elitist in its rhetoric, its members vote for conservative politicians who serve the interests of precisely those financiers and corporate elites they claim to despise. There are many explanations for this phenomenon. They include a deeply embedded belief in equality of opportunity rather than equality of outcome and the fact that cultural issues, such as abortion and gun rights, crosscut economic ones. But the deeper reason a broadbased populist left has failed to materialize is an intellectual one. It has been several decades since anyone on the left has been able to articulate, first, a coherent analysis of what happens to the structure of advanced societies as they undergo economic change and, second, a realistic agenda that has any hope of protecting a
middle-class society. The main trends in left-wing thought in the last two generations have been, frankly, disastrous as either conceptual frameworks or tools for mobilization. Marxism died many years ago, and the few old believers still around are ready for nursing homes. The academic left replaced it with postmodernism, multiculturalism, feminism, critical theory, and a host of other fragmented intellectual trends that are more cultural than economic in focus. Postmodernism begins with a denial of the possibility of any master narrative of history or society, undercutting its own authority as a voice for the majority of citizens who feel betrayed by their elites. Multiculturalism validates the victimhood of virtually every out-group. It is impossible to generate a mass progressive movement on the basis of such a motley coalition: most of the working- and lower-middle-class citizens victimized by the system are culturally conservative and would be embarrassed to be seen in the presence of allies like this.
Whatever the theoretical justifications underlying the leftâ€™s agenda, its biggest problem is a lack of credibility. Over the past two generations, the mainstream left has followed a social democratic program that centers on the state provision of a variety of services, such as pensions, health care, and education. That model is now exhausted: welfare states have become big, bureaucratic, and inflexible; they are often captured by the very organizations that administer them, through publicsector unions; and, most important, they are fiscally unsustainable given the aging of populations virtually everywhere in the developed world. Thus, when existing social democratic parties come to power, they no longer aspire to be more than custodians of a welfare state that was created decades ago; none has a new, exciting agenda around which to rally the masses.
AN IDEOLOGY OF THE FUTURE Imagine, for a moment, an obscure scribbler today in a garret somewhere trying to outline an ideology of the future that could provide a realistic path toward a world with healthy middle-class societies and robust democracies. What would that ideology look like? It would have to have at least two components, political and economic. Politically, the new ideology would need to reassert the supremacy of democratic politics over economics and legitimate anew government as an
expression of the public interest. But the agenda it put forward to protect middle-class life could not simply rely on the existing mechanisms of the welfare state. The ideology would need to somehow redesign the public sector, freeing it from its dependence on existing stakeholders and using new, technology-empowered approaches to delivering services. It would have to argue forth-rightly for more redistribution and present a realistic route to ending interest groupsâ€™ domination of politics.
Economically, the ideology could not begin with a denunciation of capitalism as such, as if oldfashioned socialism were still a viable alternative. It is more the variety of capitalism that is at stake and the degree to which governments should help societies adjust to change. Globalization need be seen not as an inexorable fact of life but rather as a challenge and an opportunity that must be carefully controlled politically. The new ideology would not see markets as an end in themselves;
critique of the elites that allowed the benefit of the many to be sacrificed to that of the few and a critique of the elites that allowed the benefit of the many to be sacrificed to that of the few and a critique of the money politics, especially in Washington, that overwhelmingly benefits the wealthy. The dangers inherent in such a movement are obvious: a pullback by the United States, in particular, from its advocacy of a more open global system could set off protectionist responses elsewhere. In many respects, the Reagan-Thatcher revolution succeeded just as its proponents hoped, bringing about an increasingly competitive, globalized, friction-free world. Along the way, it generated tremendous wealth and created rising middle classes all over the developing world, and the spread of democracy in their wake. It is possible that the developed world is on the cusp of a series of technological breakthroughs that will not only increase productivity but also provide meaningful’ employment to large numbers of middle-class people. But that is more a matter of faith than a reflection of the empirical reality of the last 30 years, which points in the opposite direction. Indeed, there are a lot of reasons to think that inequality will continue to worsen. more onerous forms of regulation.
The current concentration of wealth in the United States has already become self-reinforcing: as the economist Simon Johnson has argued, , the financial sector has used its lobbying clout to avoid more onerous forms of regulation. Schools for the well-off are better than ever; those for everyone else continue to deteriorate. Elites in all societies use their superior access to the political system to protect their interests, absent a countervailing democratic mobilization to rectify the situation. American elites are no exception to the rule. That mobilization will not happen, however, as long as the middle classes of the developed world remain enthralled by the narrative of the past generation: that their interests will be best served by ever-freer markets and smaller states. The alternative narrative is out there, waiting to be born.
instead, it would value global trade and investment to the extent that they contributed to a flourishing middle class, not just to greater aggregate national wealth. It is not possible to get to that point, however, without providing a serious and sustained critique of much of the edifice of modern neoclassical economics, beginning with fundamental assumptions such as the sovereignty of individual preferences and that aggregate income is an accurate measure of national well-being. This critique would have to note that people’s incomes do not necessarily represent their true contributions to society. It would have to go further, however, and recognize that even if labor markets were efficient, the natural distribution of talents is not necessarily fair and that individuals are not sovereign entities but beings heavily shaped by their surrounding societies. Most of these ideas have been around in bits and pieces for some time; the scribbler would have to put them into a coherent package. He or she would also have to avoid the “wrong address” problem. The critique of globalization, that is, would have to be tied to nationalism as a strategy for mobilization in a way that defined national interest in a more sophisticated way than, for example, the “Buy American” campaigns of unions in the United States. The product would be a synthesis of ideas from both the left and the right, detached from the agenda of the marginalized groups that constitute the existing progressive movement. The ideology would be populist; the message would begin with a critique of the elites that allowed the benefit of the many to be sacrificed to that of the few and a critique of the money politics, especially in Washington, that overwhelmingly benefits the wealthy. The dangers inherent in such a movement are obvious: a pullback by the United States, in particular, from its advocacy of a more open glo-
Prof. Francis Fukuyama Is a Senior Fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at Stanford University and the author, most recently, of The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution.
Obama And Romney: More Of The Same Elections are ahead in the United States in what looks like a tight end. Some polls show President Obama as favorite, while others put the Republican candidate Mitt Romney on top. A bad Obama’s administration prevents him to show tangible results; being the current President allows him to carry out a fresh campaign with promises of change. On the other hand, the Republican candidate’s absence of charisma does not let himtosellnewideasbeyondthecriticismofthecurrentadministration.Bothcandidates’campaignsarebasedonadirtywarandattacksagainst eachother,withapitifulexhaustionofideasandalackofnewpolicies.Here,atNuevaPolítica,weare interested in showing our readers the differences between the two candidates, in order that they can get an image of the possible results of the elections.
Variable Government Experience
Obama Being the current President of the US gives him the advantage of having learning a lot during his administration. Although he have been lost too much time learning and failing in many of his policies and through a poor selection of his officials, now he is truly a better candidate.
Romney He has a positive experience in the private sector and as the Governor of Massachusetts. Obama’s campaign attacks precisely his experience in the private sector for being close only to “interests of an economic minority
Winner OBAMA There is a tendency to prefer the current President. Although he came with no experience and has made many systematical mistakes, four years in the Government have taught him a lot of things.
Candidate for Vice Presidency
Size and efficiency of Government
Joe Biden, the Vice President, is virtually nonexistent; most people do not know he is the Vice President. His initial role was to established â€œgoodâ€? relations with the Congress, but he has not been able to perform this function. Obama lost the opportunity to select someone who gives him a major boost for his new campaign, someone as Hilary Clinton.
The lack of a clear ideology forces him to satisfy his radical voting population and the Tea Party needs, so he has chosen the Low Chamber Representative of Wisconsin, Paul Ryan. Ryan has an ultra conservative vision and he has been developing proposals
Unemployment remains above 8%, there is no greater job creation (if we include those who have stopped looking for work the unemployment numbers would be worse), the crisis in the real estate sector (Foreclosures) continues, and the economy has not revive yet. Economic growth is below 2%, and although the depression was superseded earlier than expected the macro economic numbers are not promising.
He publicized himself as a successful entrepreneur, promoting the private sector as a source of job creation and as a successful economic model. As Governor, he was not very efficient in generating jobs in Massachusetts or in improving its economy, but he still has a positive image in the economic field. He promises an economic recovery based on boosting the competitiveness and free enterprise.
The bureaucracy has grown and public expenditure has increased exponentially, but public services have become poorer. He has tried to revive the economy by generating public expenditure.
He promises to reduce bureaucracy and public expenditure through balanced budgets.
ROMNEY Although Obama is on the growth curve in terms of the experience gained in the initial four years of his term, there is a perception that, in an economical level, Romney could generate more jobs. Obama has failed in giving economically effective formulas, and that will influence his election.
ROMNEY Many people who do not agree with the idea of financing inefficient public officials with their taxes are joining the hard support base of the Republican party, which advocates the reduction of the size of the Government and the public expenditure.
Relations with the Congress
Finance and Campaign Funds
In four years, the tax reform of the Government has not been given. The Government has proposed to establish special taxes for those earning
Proposes the reduction of public expenditures and the Government size, and the establishment of a single tax regulation, that benefits the private investment.
There has been a political break in the U.S. and an excessive ideological politicization that has paralyzed the country several times. Congress is divided and thereÂ´s no room for agreement.
If he win, would not achieve a parliamentary majority, therefore divisions and clashes would continue.
Despite their tendency to use government as a mechanism, involvement in relations between employers and workers (Boeing case) and protectionism, we can say that is from center with social trends or left, but he has used people of Wall Street in his economic team.
Although their previous campaigns and his experience as governor of an open state placed him like a center person, his speech has become more intolerant, anti abortion, anti gay, antiimmigrant and very conservative.
He has to his advantage; he did not need money for primaries (savings for longer than 1 year). He has a significant and direct support under the CAP and Super CAP. As the most conservative support groups support Romney, many most liberal groups will support Obama. Many artists support Obama and entrepreneurs like George Soros and Warren Buffett. Has funding of unions
He needed the investment of millions of dollars to win his partyâ€™s primary election. He has a good personal fortune and economic groups supporting him. Many conservatives are investing millions directly and through the CAP, for example the conservative billionaire Sheldon Adelson announced he would spend $ 100 million against Obama. He has Wall Street and the Mormons.
BOTH POOR Clashes continue between the executive and the legislature no matter who wins. .
He has changed his strategy since his first campaign four years ago, which is a message of hope and change; now in the presidency, he based just in the attack to Romney candidate and the negative campaigning. He has been trying to improve relations with the private sector and makes few mistakes in
Instead of attacking the shortcomings of the government in economic matters, has recently defended against attacks on his past as an entrepreneur and attacks Obama for “liberal”. A change of message highlighting the economic problems and how to solve them could improve their profile. He makes several mistakes in his speeches.
Obama has better image handling and versatility. He still has some charisma despite the complicated governance
Romney has trouble winning the collective sympathy. He contradicts and becomes entangled in his speech and easily change of opinion.
There have been no major advances in terms of leveling, equality and improvement of women. It has been a process more over facts than of speeches.
Obama keeps the preferences of this segment of the population.
Latinos en EstadosUnidos
Obama has not been particularly beneficial to the Latino population in the United States that is at levels of 16% unemployment and despite a few appointments in the executive and a judge woman in the Supreme Court, has not increased positioning of Latinos in the administration.
There is a conservative voting population of women who could vote
ROMNEY As candidate, he can attack the government management and to promise changes.
It seems that there is no winning strategy for this segment
The laws in Arizona (partially annulled by the Supreme Court of Justice) and the aggressive rhetoric of many Republican leaders and especially the “Tea Party” anti-immigrant and anti Latino ,have made that after have 85% of the Latino population in the 80s, has reached only 15% currently
OBAMA The negative speeches against Latino Republicans have carried much of the Latino vote to support the Democratic Party.
Youth and Volunteers
Experience in Foreign Policy and International Perception
Despite the high motivation of the previous campaign and the use of social networks, in the exercise of the presidency has not been given greater access to young people and there is frustration in many former volunteers. It is no longer innovative nor the candidate nor the message.
There is a conservative religious group of volunteers who are supporting Romney but came to represent the difference that the youth sector gave Obama in the last election.
In his campaign promised comprehensive immigration reform and would allow that 12 or more million illegals could legalize their situation in the United States. In Congress not actively encouraged immigration reform and he introduced legislation (Dream Act) without giving much support to the children of college-age immigrants, which then he approves by decree. But during his administration has deported as many as in any previous government.
The Republican Party and in particular its fraction of “Tea Party” has been active opposition to any immigration law or that regularize the situation of immigrants in the United States and has led an active campaign of persecution against immigrants. Romney has had to support the position of his
Obama continues to be well perceived internationally (except in some Arab countries because of the use of unmanned aircraft (Drains). He has have an effective Secretary of State. Improved the flagging U.S. image abroad, except in the case of poor or nonexistent policies toward Latin America. Obama has more diplomatic experience, experience in Foreign Policy and International perception
Romney has shown complete ignorance of the global world. His recent tour of England, Israel and other countries showed incompetence and lack of diplomatic touch. It seems doesn´t have good team of advising on international affair
BOTH POOR There can be a major advantage for Obama to be more liberal and have more contemporary approaches.
OBAMA Although it has not fulfilled its promises, there is the perception that he is better than Romney and the Republicans.
Policy toward Latin America
From the selection of persons incapable in different positions related to Latin America in the State Department and the National Security Council, as speeches / untimely messages and the absence of clear and efficient policies, the Obama administration has been terrible over Latin America.
He has not offered something important and seems limited their experience on foreign policy
He has actively been promoting the reform of the health system. The Supreme Court has given to him a major victory to establish the constitutionality of the law that requires all U.S. citizens to have health insurance, among other provisions.
Despite having driven during his time as governor a health legislation similar to that promoted by Obama and passed by Congress, and be this a national model to implement , the pressures of the radical wing of his party forced him to contradict himself and reject the reforms to the health system.
After the slaughter of Tucson in 2011 (6 dead and 13 wounded) and the Aurora´s of 2012 (12 dead and 58 wounded) the arms control policy offered is “common sense.” Obama in his short time in the Illinois legislature and the U.S. Senate, opposed the counter-weapons, but once elected president has been bowing to pressure from powerful lobby group NRA (National Rifle Association) and has left prescribe laws that put limits on the purchase of arms and has even allowed carrying guns in national parks.
After the Slaughter of Aurora simply noted that the weapon free sale “is not to blame” for these events and openly supports the sale of arms. This has been a change, despite Republican Party politics is the purchase free of weapons of any kind. Romney was an active fighter for arms control. When he tried to go for the Senate in 1994 supported a bill to ban the free sale of assault weapons, and being governor, he promoted restrictions on carrying and sales of weapons in Massachusetts.
BOTH POOR No major changes are expected in strategy or policy in the next years towards Latin America. Expectations of Obama as best possible partner to the region have not been met. The region is looking for partners in Asia.
OBAMA Obama has had great success with the legislation, but this reform is far from providing immediate improvements to the problems of the health system of the United States, but will not appreciate this deficiency before the United States elections
BOTH POOR Although Obama seems more inclined to arms control and that the Republican Party has always been an active advocate of the free sale of any type of weapons, in practice, both candidates are financed directly or indirectly by the NRA.
First President that openly supports marriage for same-sex and has developed various initiatives of recognition of the rights of sexual diversity. President Obama has not had good relations with religious groups. The Catholic hierarchy and
The Republican party openly opposes the marriage between same sex and the Mormon Church has spent millions of dollars against sexual diversity movements.
He has against to be Mormon. Nevertheless Evangelicals and Catholics groups prefer the GOP for opposing issues like abortion, marriage of persons of diverse sexual and other conservative issues.
It has the advantage of various conservative groups.
Tiene la experiencia de unacampañapresidencial previa y el ejercicio de la presidencia por 4 años.
He has a little experience in public debates, except the internal ones within the Republican
OBAMA The Republican party openly opposes the marriage between same sex and the Mormon Church has spent millions of dollars against sexual diversity movements.
OBAMA He has experience and has a good public discussion.
New Policy Team
The Olympics and politics The Olympics are a scenario where the great powers have been measured and measure their forces. They are, in some way, a map of power relations in the world. We, the spectators, we look at the flags and hearthe anthems of the winners. And unlike what happens with the meetings of the Security Council of the United Nations or at the Summit of Presidents, all is happening live, televised to a global audience. Modern governments have known this well. Nazi Germany tried to prove their racist assumptions through the Olympics. The Cold War turned the Olympics into a stage which made it possible for the two superpowers, the United States and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, record their power and control over the international system. The mere aspiration to hold the Olympics is a right reserved to
the consolidated powers and emerging powers who want a place among the great ones. By simply submitting the application to host the Olympic Games, a country demonstrates its ability and resources to o it. For the emerging powers it has become a way of reclaiming recognition as relevant actors in the international system. Countries that wish to host the Games should make an effort to present an impressive candidature. Different factors count in the decision: investment, security, technology, economics, infrastructure, planning. They must design or redesign cities. Sports are also taken into account, for sure. Because if they do not win in the competitions, the effort will become a failure. Meanw h i l e ,
ambassadors, national and local political authorities, athletes, entrepreneurs, etc., are lobbying to convince the International Olympic Committee members. Therefore, the achievement to host the games is already a political success. Four years ago China demonstrated that hosting the Olympics was a public statement of their ability to compete for global hegemony. In four years, Brazil must show the world and the other powers that is readyto be a global player. But the Olympics are a titanic effort that does not always work. Greece began its collapsing after
the Athens Games, putting in evidence the inconsistencies of the Greek economy, and initiating the path to the current situation. And we have to see how Britain keeps its head up after the London Games, because no one expected or anticipated the crisis that Europe is suffering today. A first impression seems favorable and Britain has managed the challenge of organizing the Olympic Games on times of austerity and crisis. And it has taken the opportunity to send powerful messages about the triumph in adversity. Another element that makes the Olympics a political event of the first order is the ability to exalt nationalist sentiments –which in itself are not negative–, make a call for unit and promote national pride. Therefore, we can not ignore the domestic political effects. And the strength, the resolution, the strategy, the innova-
tion and the technology that the best representatives of each country are developing during the Olympics to win on the track
are tested. Because it’s not just the sweat after victories, is the effort of an individual or a team. Behind every athlete there are many professionals who put their effort to improve performance.
There is a high-tech scientific research to discover lighter materials, which offer less resistance to air orwater. Engineering studies are carried out to change the designs of each element an athlete is using. Research, sports and entertainment are three elements that are part of the “soft power”, and mobilized vigorously for Olympic competition. At the end of the Games, the medals have classified world powers. For a few days, people pay too much attention to the gold, silver and bronze won by major world powers, as well as the number of armored divisions. With these issues, it seems that the talent of the athletes and stories of personal growth are less important things. Even less, perhaps, for
Miguel M. Benito Political Analyst-Internationalist / Teacher-Externado de Colombia University
the problem is the lack of bipartisan consensus Amy Goodman is the host of Democracy Now!, An international news program which airs daily on over 550 radio and television stations in English and over 350 in Spanish. She is co-author of “Those fighting against the system: Ordinary Heroes in Extraordinary Times in The United Sates”, published by Le Monde Diplomatique Southern Cone. Another mass murder, another shooting in which many people are riddled with bullets from a gun legally acquired. This time it was in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, in a Sikh temple as worshipers gathered for weekly worship. President Barack Obama said on Monday: “I think we all recognize t h a t these kind of terrible and tragic events are happening so frequently that we must pause to reflect.” Empty words amidst the slaughter. Although 32 people die each day by guns in the United States, the equivalent of five massacres like Wisconsin, both Democrats and Republicans refuse to address a new law regulating the sale and possession of weapons. The problem is not the subject of political deadlock, but a lack of consensus. Press Secretary of the President, Jay Carney, said: “President Obama will continue ordering to his government that takes measures based on common
sense which protect the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment to the law-abiding citizens, but in turn, that make increasingly difficult obtaining weapons to certain people who should not use guns, according to the current laws”.” It is worth mentioning that in making this statement, Jay Carney, who was responding about the intransigence of the President with regard to strengthening the control laws and regulation of weapons, used the phrase “common sense” five times and called the ‘Second Amendment “eight times. Carney made the remarks in the press room James S. Brady
White House, which is named in honor of one of his predecessors, whom John Hinckley shot him in the head in the assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan in 1981. Brady survived and co-founded, with his wife, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Af-
ter each of these massacres, the Brady Campaign has called for strengthening gun control.” This latest mass murder has probably been a hate crime, perpetrated by Wade Michael Page, a veteran of the U.S. Army Caucasians who was 40 years old, was linked to white supremacist groups and was a member of skinhead rock bands. Page grew up in Littleton, Colorado, the city where, in 1999, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold plotted and carried out their plan of mass murder at Columbine High School. Page served in the U.S Army from 1992 to 1998, he repaired the missile systems and later specialized in the area of “psychological operations”, though it is unclear in what capacity, first in Fort Bliss, Texas and then in Fort Bragg, North Carolina. Page was discharged from the U.S. Army without honors, what is worse than being discharged with honors, but not as severe as the dishonorably conduct. Reports suggest that he had alcohol problems and was arrested several times for drunk driving. He had recently lost his job as a truck driver for the same reason, which may have accelerated the loss of their home to foreclosure. It is likely that Page was a troubled person, and the truth is that he was no stranger. After the slaughter,
Guns to demand President Obama and the Governor Romney devise a plan to address the problem of weapons in the country. The day after the slaughter of Wisconsin I spoke with Gucharan Grewal, president of the Sikh Religious Society of Wisconsin. He said: “The problem, in short has to do with the control of arms sales. I do not know when we will take this seriously; I do not know how many more lives have to be lost for that action is taken”. Neither Obama nor Romney consider that a greater regulation of trade and possession of arms is the answer.u will need a movement to make it happen.
the FBI special agent Teresa Carlson of Milwaukee told the press: “Maybe there are some references about him in many records, and that is being analyzed at this time. However, we have no reason to believe, as far as I know, no body of police had reason to believe, that he was planning or plotting something and that was capable of a so extreme violence Wade Page was a prominent member of the neo-Nazi music scene. The Southern Law Center against Poverty, relieving right-wing hate groups. The assistant professor of criminology at the University of Nebraska at Omaha,
Pete Simi met him between 2001 and 2003, and even interviewed him. Despite his arrest, despite his history as a member of hate group, Page was able to enter a gun shop and buy freely and legally a 9mm automatic pistol, according to said the shop owner. The problem here is that this is legal. As if the two events were coordinated, two days after the slaughter perpetrated by Page in Wisconsin, Jared Loughner appeared in court and pleaded guilty to murder for having carried out the shooting in 2011 in Tucson, Arizona, which left a balance of six people dead and many more injured, including former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. Loughner had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and would spend the rest of his life in prison. Patricia Maisch is one of the survivors of the shooting. When Loughner was reduced that day in January 2011, Maisch took the high capacity cartridge that Loughner was using to reload his weapon. Maisch and two survivors of the shooting launched a campaign together with the group of Mayors against Illegal
Amy Goodman Director of Democracy Now
advertising support and donors
m oglobal@g r o m s a m o t
Cyberfeminism comes after I am no specialist in gender issues, but I am interested in how women use technology. As an early user of computers and frequent user of innovations in this field, never cease to amaze the different attitudes of my peers in front of computers, cell phones and ICT. And this point is what gave rise to a series of documents. Many times, their relationship with technology has nothing to do with the social background or training they have received. Phrases like “Those are things for kids”, “It doesn´t attracts me”, “I have no time for that” they can heard in housewives, young professionals, middle-aged entrepreneurs, university, supermarket cashier. So the lack of use, the nonappropriation of technology does
not just about own a computer, or have facilitated access, or the possibility of connection. There’s something else, another variable that should be considered: the subjective representation of women about technology. How to interpret, but that women with computer at home, easy access to the Internet and frequently used programs installed, prefer to pay hefty sums to speak by phone with their children who reside in other countries, when they could used for example , Skype or any IM program, free of charge and with the possibility of using the video camera? How to understand that women’s organizations without economics resources to move and maintain contact with the nodes of other provinces, do not resort to the help of wikis, online networks, teleconferencing, all free? Why not use the benefits of blogs to spread their organizations, no charge and without requiring special knowledge to start the publication? What is subjective representation that women have (different women) about the ICT? What is their relationship with computers? How imagine themselves in relation to mobile devices and desktop? Did they find some meaning and utili-
ty? Do they see possible the step from “use” to “ownership”? What effects can have the use of ICT in the daily lives of women, in the organizations and groups that make up? I think we are putting the cart before the horse. We train women in the use of ICT without motivating them first, or to tell them so that they can use them. If given that it can work, inform, communicate, share ideas, organize groups, remote meetings, share and edit documents online, we are alerting on specific issues, we will be arousing interest to learn something new and alien to daily many women life. Working in raising awareness regarding the use and appropriation of new technologies is important for the further training is positive. But the cycle should not end there; there must be one more step: learn how to customize these technologies and give it productive use and according to the needs of women, the group to which she belongs, the community where she lives. Appropriating technology The suffering multidiscrimination women (gender, geographical location, economic, cultural, etc.) Attached to the digital divide, is creating a new form of illiteracy and unfortunately the statistics published about the fracture (or gap) digital, rarely provide information
The concept originated in the term digital divide, whose authorship is in dispute. Who used it first, if it was Simon Moores or Morriset Lloyd, is something that is not clear, but we know it was used during the administration of President Bill Clinton in a series of reports from the late nineties, entitled â€œFalling through the netâ€? It took a decade for researchers to reach the conclusion that the central issue was not so much access to digital technology and the benefits arising from such access. The technological divide exists, and here there is not only lack of training of the poorest women, older ones, those living far from major centers or do not have access to a PC. I know entrepreneurs women of excellent economic position, which have one or more PCs per
member of the family, with wireless, with mobile devices of next generation and possibilities to access all available courses and training, but who can not send mail mail or chat or search the Internet. So the issue is not just a matter of economic failure, also influences the subjective representation of women on technology. Sure, there are the women who have a computer at home and at work, that know how to use it, but that always are relegated to the time of use. If there are few machines in the office, it often happens that they are the last to access them. If at home there is a single machine, the order of priority is: the college kids, the teenagers, the school-age child and the husband who needs the PC to check work items, or relax playing around... There are women who have no PC at home or at work, but they learned to use it by taking courses or because someone taught them. There are women who have never had contact with a PC, that can not imagine what they are for, and do not see themselves learning to
about the gender digital divide. Basically, the term digital divide refers to differences between groups as their ability to use digital technologies effectively, taking into account the degree of literacy and technology training.
handle one. Some women are not even aware that there is something called a computer, that have not even seen in pictures, and it looks very difficult, in the present state of things, get to know one. So, the training can not be reduced to teaching tools, in isolation and abstract. And can not stay in the instruction on how to handle word processing, spreadsheets and databases. Thereâ€™s a whole universe resident in the web that can help women, considered individually or as members of groups, to enter the world of technology in an intuitive and designed to suit their needs. From RedLad we give our contribution with the workshops on Activism 2.0 and along with Thomas More School of Government we are implementing graduates on Cyberactivism and Defense of Civil Society, with a democratic and humanist vision. The technologies joined to sensitization may form a critical mass
Marta Gaba Trainner REDLAD
WE are opening the doors
for higher education
PhD & Masters Political Engineering Civil Society Leadership City Government Enterpreneuship Energy Management 57
Mercosur has died! Long live “microsur”
legally require compliance with the Democratic Clause, and thereby achieve increased protection of democracy and human rights as collateral for all Venezuelans. Similar arguments were used to convince the opposition MPs in Uruguay and Argentina to defend Venezuela’s entry into the Common Market of the South. The only parliament that continued demanding to Venezuela that demonstrates their willingness to comply with the obligation to respect the democratic institutions to reaffirm their income, was the Paraguay´s. With the recent decision of Mercosur-Political, the Mercosur legal and institutional weaken, because to open the door to Venezuela, it closed the door to Paraguay, removing it from the organization, in order to circumvent Article 20 of the Treaty of Asunción that requires the unanimity of the four parliaments originating for the entry of a new member. Were useless criticisms from figures such as Vice President Astori of Uruguay or ex canceller Lampreia from Brazil? Despite this bad start, hopefully the countries will request to the new partner, compliance of integrationist and democratic principles and is not to accommodate a new reality that will make governments of the region have to say in a short time “Mercosur has died. Viva Microsur” crosur!”
his return “triumphant” of Brasilia, where it was confirmed the final entry of Venezuela into MERCOSUR, the president Chavez held a press conference at Maiquetia, in which he devoted several hours to attack the institutions devoted to the defense of human rights , assaulting in a special way to the IACHR and throwing serious accusations against leaders of Paraguay. I’m always remember in his long speech, his satisfaction for being the only president who refused to sign the bases of the Democratic Interamerican Charter at The Hemispheric Summit in Quebec Given these statements, it is striking the silence of leaders like Lula, Dilma, Mujica, Kirschner, since when were opponents of military dictatorships in their countries, they recognized the importance of the defense of human rights. ¿What happened to them today that no react to the attacks against the system of human rights, which they defended in the past? ¿Perhaps the “Protocol of Mendoza” has buried at a stroke the beginning of the Democratic Clause adopted by the presidents of the South, enshrined in the Protocol of Ushuaia? I was present at several events in Brasilia where senior officials of Itamaraty managed to convince Brazilian parliamentarians not to hinder the entry of Venezuela into Mercosur, arguing that it was the entry of the Venezuelan state and not of the government of the day, and that it was the best guarantee about the doubts of Sarney, Collor de Melo, Fernando Henrique Cardoso and others, and with the incorporation of Venezuela to Mercosur, could
Milos Alcalay, Ambassador
“Brick by brick,
we build peace”
Today we commemorate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the signing of the Esquipulas II agreement. Against all odds and against the will of the two superpowers, the presidents Daniel Ortega of of Honduras and I signed the Plan peace presented by my government. That August 7, 1987, in Nicaragua, Jose Napoleon Duarte of El Salvador, Marco Vinicio Cerezo of Guatemala, Jose Azcona Guatemala City we signed a commitment to change history and we change it. Today we commemorate the twenty-fifth anniversary of the signing of the Esquipulas II, known as the Peace Plan. That human being shelter the prodigious memory, is much more than a whim poetic of the history. It is a sign of evolution and perhaps one of the most crucial skills of the specie that left the shelter of the caverns to undertake the wonder of civilization. We do not recall to fill the drawers of files, or to populate the stories of grandparents. We recall making possible a better life. That is, the memory makes sense with reference to the present: it gives us an advantage over the previous time. The memory is not scri-
be of the past, but aide to the future. This date may go unnoticed for millions of American youth. That, more than an oversight, is a privilege. Being unable to recognize the earth quake rocked by the passing of a tank, is a privilege. Never have smelled blood in the folds of the wind, is a privilege. Not knowing the taste of gunpowder, the color of death, the crying that is heard behind the neighbor’s wall, is a privilege. Perhaps the importance of this day can be understood only in terms of absences: the soldiers that do not longer die families that no longer flee ships that no longer bring shrapnel seedbeds.
Turbulent Period For those who only know the Central America of today, it would be difficult to believe the stories told about the millions of refugees who crossed the border in the mid-eighties. Peoples killed by sisters hands with U.S. or Soviet weapons. Secret training bases, where boys who barely understood the reasons for the war, were graduating in hatred and violence. A conflict become a race for military preeminence two superpowers whose ambitions exhaus-
ted peace efforts promoted in the framework of the Contadora Group and the Support Group. It was in the midst of this whirlwind of anguish when the people of Costa Rica cast his vote, in February 1986. The Central American war was a central theme of the election campaign. It was becoming clear that our country could not long remain out of the conflict in the region. The dilemma was as raw as honest: Costa Rica would take the weapons, or should
make efforts to reach peace. I insisted again and again that American peace was an essential part of Costa Rica’s development agenda. No initiative within the interior of country could offset the chaos in which we were immersed. This is something that is still difficult to understand for some: foreign policy is not a dress with which to adorn nations by convenience. Diplomacy is an essential part of a government effort to build a better future for their
people. This was understood by Costa Ricans and that was the mandate I received to win elections. The peace plan was drafted in January 1987, after the final failure of mediation processes of some Latin American governments. My intention was to propose a plan to restart the dialogue and promote a solution to the conflict in Central America. The document contained 10 priority actions, one of which literally reads, “with the beginning of the dialogue, the warring parties in each country have to suspend the military action simultaneously.” The global trend in conflict resolu-
tion, then and even now, pretends that the negotiations are carried out precisely to achieve a ceasefire. The peace plan, by contrast, proposed a cease-fire as one of the conditions necessary for dialogue without pressure, in a truly conducive environment to lasting peace. The ceasefire served then as opening of the peace plan. Su Leitmotiv, however, was the democratization of the region. That was the distinctive point of the agreement and, ultimately, the decisive feature. The U.S. government viewed with favor the establishment of a democratic regime as an indispensable condi-
tion for getting a lasting peace, but insisted that the only solution to the conflict would emanate from the armed conflict between the Nicaraguan Contras and the Sandinista government. The Government of the Soviet Union and the Cuban regime, however, rejected from the outset the Costa Rican proposal to include the establishment of democracy in the arrangement. There wasn´t a meeting point, because both Reagan and Gorbachev distrusted the diplomatic channel. For them, peace of Central waited behind a large battlefield.
Historical responsibility and respect. I do not know if the violence is a sign of human nature, what I do know, is that peace is a sign of its evolution, of the commendable aspiration to break off a barbaric impulse and to regulate through the reason the human coexistence. Today we celebrate a memory, but also we stoked the coals of a dream that even we build as specie. The claim made by the Greeks, which Robert Kennedy remembered on the day of the death of Martin Luther King Jr.:” Tame the savageness of man and make gentle the life of this world”.
of August 7, 1987, was only a step in the struggle for self-respecting Central American will. The implementation of the peace plan was stalked relentlessly by hawks in search of failure. But we had already laid the foundation stone, and we had the support of the international community. Brick by brick, we constructed a peace that still needs architects and builders. So I write today to those who in the new generations are ready to take over. I write for remembering that peace is achieved on their own; by dialogue and tolerance, by patience
How do we approve a plan that was objected by the most powerful nations of the world? If I had to name a single feature, that the five Central American presidents then shared, it would be a profound sense of historical responsibility. The ability to recognize that this was not a pulse of power, but an act of the most elemental humanity. The fate of millions of people depended on our willingness to dialogue, of our willingness to compromise, and of our belief in a future of peace in Central America. The agreement we reached in Guatemala City in the early morning hours
Dr. Óscar Arias Sánchez, Nobel Peace priece
Who Killed the Cuban dissident
Oswaldo Payá? With the death of Oswaldo Paya, a key leader of the democratic opposition in Cuba, the country has suffered what the writer Yoani Sanchez called “a dramatic loss for its present and an irreplaceable loss for its future”. The circumstances surrounding the death of Payá on last Sunday turned on a controversy similar to that caused in October with the death of Laura Pollan, the leader of the acclaimed Ladies in White, just weeks later after being attacked by supporters of government during a protest march. The Cuban government said Payá died in a traffic accident near the city of Bayamo, when his car crashed into a tree, causing his death and that of another passenger and injuring two others. But the daughter of Payá, Rosa Maria, immediately questioned that version claiming that the family had received information from survivors regarding the car had been hit repeatedly by another vehicle. “So we thought it was not an accident”, she said on CNN in Spanish. ”They
wanted to hurt him and ended up killing my father”. The family also said Oswaldo Payá had been in a similar incident two weeks ago in Havana. In retrospective, now we realize that the incident was a warning from the regime. Why the Cuban government would consider Payá a threat at the point of wanting to kill him? He was one of the most prominent opponents of Castro’s dictatorship, a Catholic activist who founded the Christian Liberation Movement in 1988. He was known for the Varela Project, a petition that promoted free elections and other rights in 2002. This situation makes the Cuban government furious, which responded through the National Assembly with a constitutional amendment, establishing that the communist system in Cuba was irrevocable. This was followed by “The “Black Spring”, in March of 2003, with the detention of 75 prominent Cuban activists. But the government did not arrest Payá, because he had achieved inter-
national recognition. The European Parliament awarded him with the Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Conscience in 2002; that year he was also nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by hundreds of parliamentarians in a campaign promoted by his friend Vaclav Havel, President of the Czech Republic. Unlike Aung San SuuKyi, from Burma, and LiuXiaobo, from China, who were also supported by Havel, Payá never received the Nobel Prize. But he was an activist of the same size, a centrist within the opposition, committed to nonviolence and reconciliation. Payá fought against the U.S. seizure on Cuba, for what he was criticized by many opponents of the Castro’s regime. While other activists had replaced Payá at the forefront of Cuban democracy movement in recent years , he has provoked the government on two issues of great sensitivity. In May, Payá broke a long silence when he criticized an article in a Catholic publication that advocated the dialogue between the Archbishop of
In a visit to Bayamo with foreigners -the two survivors of the crash were Spaniards and Swedish Catholics- he crossed another red line. The city was the center of an outbreak of cholera in the eastern part of Cuba; for the regime, the disease is not only a medical problem but also an economic and political threat. The leak of information about the outbreak threatened Cuba’s tourism, the main source of foreign exchange, which the regime desperately needs. The spread of the disease defies the image of Cuba as a medical power, and could increase the unrest among citizens who believe that sending Cuban doctors to Venezuela and other countries detriments their care on the island. The fact that Baya-
mo has experienced union riots over the past two years, and has been an insurgent stronghold during the war of independence against Spain and the Cuban uprising against Batista, further arouses the regime’s anxiety. It is likely that more information about Payá’s death emerge in the coming days. The testimony of the two survivors will be decisive. While the U.S. and other democratic governments lament the death of Payá, it is essential that they -and the world opinion- stay alert to the dangers that Democrats are facing in Cuba. It is probably that without international solidarity, more and more martyrs arise in the struggle for Cuban freedom.
Havana, Cardinal Jaime Ortega, and the regime, attacking its opposition. Payá accused the authors of the article of creating “an artificial confrontation between the opposition and the church’’, calling them “political commissars” who were seeking “a vote of confidence for Raul Castro’s government”. Payá, the most prominent Catholic voice in the country, crossed a red line by challenging the government’s relations with the church, which had become a pillar of the government’s survival strategy. He also did it at a time when the regime, encouraged by the silence of the cardinal regarding the massive arrests during the Pope’s visit to Cuba in March, would not tolerate criticism.
Carl Gershman Presidentedel National Endowment for Democracy
Portrait of Oswaldo Payá Jose Oswaldo Payá Sardinas died as he lived seeking the release of an enslaved island of communist totalitarianism for more than 53 years. When asked in an interview whether Cuba was a dictatorship, his response showed his clarity of thought. He said that Cuba was not a dictatorship, but there was a dictatorship in Cuba that oppressed Cubans. He did not identify the Cuban nation with repression, as many do in the media and in the academia. He acknowledged the existence of the dictatorship and it was anaberration to overcome, not a permanent part of the Cuban identity. It is important to stress that Oswaldo Payá was never a supporter of the dictatorship. From his youth as a practicing Catholic was harassed and punished for their faith. Dagoberto Valdés in his essay, Oswaldo Payá:
EXAMPLE AND LEGACY explains:
freedom spaces. His candidacy for the Assembly of Popular Power in 1992 and VarelaProject in 2002, are the most prominent examples of this strategy nonviolent. He gave many positive fruits to the democratic opposition in Cuba and he showed the character of the tyrannical Castro dictatorship that broke its own law and that finally declared theCommunist Constitution as “untouchable” in response to the Varela Project. In his speech at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France, where he received theSakharov Prize on December 17th, 2002, Oswaldo Payá explained both the nature of the fight as the fighters in Cuba: “The Cuban civic fighter heroes”, people who signedthe Varela Project, have no weapons in their hands. We do not have an armed wing. We have both arms outstretched, offering our hands to all Cubans like brothers, and to all peoples of the world. The first victory that we can proclaim is that we have no hatred in our hearts. So we say to those who persecute and trying to dominate us: you are mybrother, I do not hate you, but you are not going to dominate me by fear, I will not impose my truth, nor impose yours on me, come together to seek the truth. That’s the release we are proclaiming. “ Oswaldo died with Harold Cepero Escalante, a young activist of the Christian Liberation Movement, who
was expelled from the University for having promoted and collected signatures for the Varela Project. They lived their lives resisting tyranny and promoting the liberation of Cuba. Oswald died at age 60 seeking nonviolent democraticchange for more than forty years of his life. The circumstances of their deaths, in anevent that has been called “Accident”, but there is not independent evidences and considering the history of the Castro dictatorship and its intelligence services, requiresa serious international investigation in search of the truth of the facts. For that reason I support Orlando Payás´s family and all the people of good will, to demand that an international organization transparently investigates the circumstances of the event that occurred on the afternoon of July 22, 2012 and ended with the death of these twoexemplary men for a free Cuba.
Payá, the young almost adolescent, I met him in one of the halls of the Hill´s, Parrish,Father Petit was then his pastor and mentor at a meeting of the few youths whoprofessed the Catholic faith in the hard years 70. Those were the days when we were discriminated only by going to church and declare in the forms of our schools if wewere believers or not. Whole Oswaldo´s life, like so many Cubans faithful to Christ and Cuba, is a daily offering of ordinary civil martyrdom of those who are treated as secondclass citizens, as “unreliable” by living in what became to call “a fantastic reflection of reality” by having religious believes. For his commitment Catholic, rejected communism and free conscience, he was sent toa labor camp in 1969. After being released, three years later, he entered the University of Havana to study physics but was expelled for being a practicing Christian. In 1980he had the opportunity to go into exile in the Mariel exodus but decided to stay andfight by nonviolently way for change in Cuba. He founded the Christian LiberationMovement in 1987.Though never was a supporter of the dictatorship, inspired by theexample of Eastern European dissidents, like Vaclav Havel and projects as Charter77, decided to use mechanisms and laws of the regime to demand rights, and search
John Suarez. Rights activist approach human on the situation in Cuba
Oswaldo Payá Sardiñas and Latin American Hypocrisy
is pathetic that Latin American nations shine by their absence. It is a form of collaboration with the dictatorship that human rights organizations or those who defend democracy in the region do not say anything about Cuba, or just change the subject to discuss the blockade. Blockade is bad, but that is a problem that has nothing to do with repression in Cuba, it would be a better position not only to criticize it but also actively condemn a criminal regime. The democratic struggle of many martyrs who daily resist the regime’s repression in Cuba ¬̶who are persecuted and tortured for simply wanting a better country, and that have nothing to do with the false ideologies circulating in our region ¬̶ as well as Paya’s and many Cuban activists’ cause, was, is and will remain an expression of freedom. Sadly, the left wing in Latin America has been unable to overcome the perverse worship of a criminal and chaotic regime, and it continues to show respect to the indefensible; at the same time, Cuba’s dictatorship remains protected by some sectors of the left wing, and some fascists are doing business at the expense of Cuban people. Can we talk about a progressive and modern socialism if we continue looking back at a bloody past with admiration? We can not speak of progress when we have one foot sunk in the past. Payá was killed three times: with his murder by the hands of the regime, with lies concealing his death and the repression at his funeral, and with the sum of our pseudoLatin American leaders’ hypocrisies, which shut for convenience. Here at Nueva Política we are open to a full discussion of ideas without censorship or bandages of any ideology. We have contributors with different ideologies, which gives us the strength to say that we will not remain silent with injustice. The veins of the region are still open, but in this case due to the injustices against the Cuban people. If the cause is real, fighting will not end in dead but in inspiring stories that strengthen and help us to follow the path of freedom. Comentarios
Oswaldo Paya’s death was a tragic event, not only for the loss of a democratic fighter, but because it reminds us of the great sorrow of false ideologies in our Latin America and the little solidarity with the people of Cuba. After more than 50 years of a terrible dictatorship that has systematically abused human rights, which has invaded other nations, and has abused of its power to consolidate a gerontocracy elitist autocracy, frankly, who can continue to doubt that what has existed in Cuba has been and remains a terrible dictatorship? When speaking about Cuba’s political issues, opinions against the blockade and old stories about a Cold War that ended 50 years ago arise. Many presidents and chancellors openly raised their voices for the entry of Cuba into the Organization of American States or for its participation in the autocratic government in the Summit of the Americas, or to any new formula of regional organization. But how sad that these same voices do not unite to denounce the perverse and systematic violation of human rights in Cuba, the persecution of dissidents, and the absence of any democratic form. It is understandable that young people of our region fall into the temptation of Cuban “revolutionary” marketing and continue using Cuban t-shirts with Che Guevara’s pictures, but it is a serious issue that Presidents and pseudo leaders of the region are still obsessed with the images of Fidel Castro old bloodthirsty dinosaur. It is also understandable that Dictators like Hugo Chavez and Rafael Correa are excited to see Fidel, but is sad to see that Democrats as Lula, Bachelet or Dilma make a line to take a picture with him. Democrats of heart remained speechless with the fact that Luis Ignacio da Silva (Lula) celebrates the signing of the agreement with Odebrecht at that very moment of the death of Zapata Tamayo in Cuba. It is quite understandable that Ollanta Humala decided to visit Castro on his first trip to Cuba, but that Felipe Calderon and Juan Manuel Santos fell in the same game is embarrassing. It is also sad that Pope Ratzinger’s visit to Cuba was a complete spectacle for the Castro brothers, and that he decided to meet with them but not with Cuban dissidents. It is a good thing that countries like the Czech Republic, Poland and Taiwan support democracy programs in Cuba, but it
Team New Policy
Rubble of wall demolished, Jorge Cervantes’ House, headquarters of Cuba’s Patriotic Union in Contramaestre. Santiago de Cuba.
Santiago de Cuba, July 29, 2012 (www.aplopress.com) Following the attack on the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001 in the United States, the terrorism took possession of the minds and hearts of many citizens of the world. Still, some people have been direct victims of terrorism, so it is a phenomenon that must be fought with all the strength. What catches the eye are that those who are supposedly to fight against it became real terrorists. Worse when it becomes state terrorism for political reasons as it happens in Cuba with the Castro brothers and their criminal mobs. An untethered characterization of social life and the Cuban government system for more than fifty years validate the above statement, where threats, sub-
version, guerrillas, blackmailing, sabotage, repression, fear and misery induced, as procedures of repressive methods, appeared before Fidel Castro took the power. It is enough to quote the summary trials, the smear campaigns against other fighters and commanders of his army, the sabotages to public facilities, the military attacks on the Batista government, among others. At present, the Cuban government repeatedly and publicly denies its rejection to the fact that Cuba was included in the list of terrorist countries. But if we go deeper into the archives and consider the thousands of international complaints and testimonies of victims of Castro’s communism, we will agree with the inclusion of the Cuban government on this list.
Unfortunately, this inclusion has two faces for the Cubans, not only for the fact of been cooperating with terrorist and contributing to commit acts of terror worldwide, but even worse, to standing against their own people, at the the point of accepting violence in their every day lives. Carlos Alberto Montaner defined this phenomenon as the “Anatomy of Terror”. Despite the country is living many years of terror, and even with the existence and disclosure of this testimonies, as well as many studies of the Cuban case, most people do not recognize or accept the truth, simply because they only know the official version of terrorism. In general, they only associate the concept of terrorism with the tactics of sabotage on large scales of the
Cuban government: car bombs, suicide men, etc., having as models events as the sabotage of a Cubana de Aviación airplane in Barbados in 1976. Moreover, the attitude of the people is a result of terror, and therefore it proved that was good for the government to keep it. Therefore, it is necessary that our people know and understand that despite that there is no a unique definition of terrorist, the phenomenon has specific featu-
res that match with the country’s situation. More than an expression of political violence it is a state terrorism in order to keep Castro’s power, using different tactics as kidnappings, sabotage, acts of repudiation, defamation, social and economic marginalization, blackmailing, harassment, intimidation, etc., with the facades of the Rapid Response Brigades (people manipulated) and the false opponents (undercover agents), respectively. This syste-
matic use of terror usually occurs under dictatorial and totalitarian regimes like ours. The application of these unlawful tactics are intended to induce fear in civilians, in order to achieve their goals and encourage behaviors against people’s freedom of speech and thinking, and their ability to do something that opposes the government, for instance. This behavior is induced because it would not occur without terror.
These government actions are often justified by “Reason of State”; in Cuba, for the “Revolution”, for socialism historical vanguard, as the only option, etc., etc. The use of police or paramilitary forces in the systematization of terror is common to the state terrorism and it is happening in the island. As well as the creation of real or simulated organizations that present themselves as antagonistic to the opposition forces, to justify and mask the promotion of this government practice
to national and international public opinion, as if it were a subject, and by their own choice, of the majority. They hide behind the Rapid Response Brigades and the Committees for the Defense of the Revolution (CDR), among others, which constitute the institutional instrument of terror.
civilian population, as well as the implementation of a migration policy by the use of restrictive, demotivating, or punishment methods as imprisonment for attempting to leave the country illegally. Although migration has become the best political ally of the regime, it controls and uses it to get the most out of it. If Cuban people are able to understand the general characteristics of terrorism, it would be possible that they assume that suffering what they live everyday,
The development of state security and military police forces operations it is also common, so they can cause terror and a serious state of insecurity and fear in the
and disease, including the current epidemic, as for members of the opposition and incipient civil society by the increased harassment, intimidation, physical violence, acts of vandalism against their families, and arbitrary detentions, directly into the hands of agents of State Security or indirectly through the Rapid Response Brigades, among others. The Cuban government is acting like a dying beast, for this reason is more violent and dangerous. Then, it is time that all Cubans, although giving thanks for the solidarity of many, we take our own defense, exposing and revealing against every outrage, tricks and unfair dependence and misery in which we have been submerged for too long and say: “STOP” or “DON’T STOP”. It does not matter, the thing here is to stand against any violation and or pain. Until we do not unite in real term, not as a slogan, but strategically, overcoming the terror (the fear in full scale), we won´t get rid of our executioners. Let us begin by condemning the people responsible, and then recognizing those who oppose Castro’s regime in Cuba and abroad as our best allies. Then, let´s continue calling actual terrorists. This is my conscious position, unpaid. As Cuban, I assume it from my daily experience, and I invite you to think about this serious problem, especially to Cubans, opponents or sympathizers, who are those who suffer directly.
along with the opposition, is terror: devoid of all commodities, deprived to the right of information and a liberating education, and unable to directly participate in the government of the country and in a sustainable personal and national project. The binding commitment to assume a historical hate to the United States and to thank forever to “the vanguards of the revolution”, like a cult, are among the many features of Castro’s nationalist terror, also known as Cultural Genocide. Additional difficulties of peaceful dissidents in Cuba, as the Ladies in White, members of the Patriotic Union of Cuba (UNPACU), independent journalists as Luis Felipe Rojas, bloggers like Yoani Sanchez, directors of the Municipalities of Opposition and Strategic Studies Centers for Democracy as Gerardo Paez, Antonio Suares Fonticiella and Hergues Frandín, among others, also show other methods of terror employed by the political police and some manipulated people. Thay have been subjected to genocidal attacks on their personal and family integrity for years, including subtle methods of psychological and moral attacks. The thousands of prisoners of conscience, the lives lost in the sinking of the tugboat on the 13th of March, the death of Wilman Villar Mendoza, Orlando Zapata, Laura Pollan, Pedro Luis Boitel and ultimately the deaths of Osvaldo Payá Sardinas and Ha-
rold Cepero in suspicious circumstances, sum to the long list of victims along the Castro process. One of the most recent examples of state terrorism was the attack to Jorge Cervantes Garcia’ house, a member of the Board of Coordinators of the UNPACU, whose images are displayed on this article and have been circulated through the web. Stoning, especially in the early morning hours, the water was contaminated with feces, there has been launch of mud and manure, also the demolition of the front wall, the upper room of the house and bars, physical injuries, children’s psychological trauma, collateral damage to neighbors, isolation created by a monitoring and preventing solidarity of neighbors and opponents, who were threatened, beaten and detained when they have assisted. Under such conditions we ask ourselves, what is the social purpose of the police so called revolutionary and of the security bodies representing the State? To protect the peace and safety of all people, doing preventive and educational work and ensuring the citizens’ and nation’s welfare, independently of the philosophy, or any political affiliation, of every individual or government in power. However, the Cuban government gets defensive against American congressmen and personalities that sympathize with the cause of the Cuban people and who seek sanctions or simply accuse the Cuban government of its terrorist practices. Withour regard to, the Cuban government ignores, and worse, continues to promote such practices of terrorism, hiding the people the truth, so you can not expect any “gesture” of benevolence. Although Cuban advocates have achieved some recognition, the situation in Cuba has worsened in general, both for the survival of children, youth, adults and seniors threatened by hunger
Ms. Reyna Yusmila Ferrera Director APLOPRESS
Observatorio y Fondo Latinoamericano de Defensores/as de Derechos Humanos, Democracia y Sociedad Civil Sistema integral de protección y promoción de los derechos humanos y la democracia en las Américas • • • • • • •
Defensores.net: ObservatorioLatinoamericanodeDemocraciayDerechos Humanos http://defensores.net/ Fondo de Defensores/as: Fondo de apoyo y asistencia directa a defensores/as de derechos humanos y democracia en las Américas (disponible 2013) Revista Nueva Política: Medio informativo en línea para la sociedad civil http://issuu.com/nuevapolitica.net CampusVirtualREDLAD:Plataformadeempoderamientoycapacitación en línea para OSC http://tomasmoro.net/campusVirtuales/course Talleres Presenciales en apoyo a grupos vulnerables: Talleres en Venezuela,Chile,Guatemala,Honduras,Nicaragua,ElSalvador,Cuba,Republica Dominicana, Colombia, Bolivia, Ecuador, México y Perú Redlad: Plataforma de intercambio y activismo de la sociedad civil en Latinoamérica y el caribe. http://www.redlad.org Actividades de Incidencia y cabildeo regional
Gracias al apoyo y financiamiento de la Unión Europea bajo Proyecto de la Comisión Europea“Fondo para defensores de DerechosHumanoseimpulsedeunaalianzaLatinoamericana para la promoción, defensa e impulso a la sociedad civil” EIDHR/2011/266-780 de la A.C. Consorcio Desarrollo y Justicia
1. Cover http://goo.gl/CuJ8e 2. global Map http://goo.gl/wC4Wj 3. Oswaldo Payá http://goo.gl/1wa69 4. Francis Fukuyama http://goo.gl/Ypdco 5. Oscar Arias http://goo.gl/ylbj9 6. Content Map http://goo.gl/33u0B 7. Wall migrations http://goo.gl/r6JrH 8. pre-history http://goo.gl/Hhd56 9. Rafting-car Inmigrants http://goo.gl/1eLgg 10. Inmigrantes on rail http://goo.gl/zicuu 11. Latinamérican map http://goo.gl/fF05f 12. Migrations map http://goo.gl/un4We 13. US Patrol http://goo.gl/6716m 14. Santiago Cantón http://goo.gl/nvGDz 15. CIDH http://goo.gl/CEf10 16. Lucio Gutiérrez http://goo.gl/ZE7Fa 17. J. Schumpeter cover book http://goo.gl/nQg8n 18. F. Fukuyama cover book http://goo.gl/5Z8GW 19. Obama, Romney http://goo.gl/ZevN3 20. Olympics http://goo.gl/HpYwW 21. London Olympics http://goo.gl/RV56g 22. Gun http://goo.gl/W8IAS 23. bipartys http://goo.gl/wEQTn 24. Inmigrants http://goo.gl/OkHB4 25. Mercosur http://goo.gl/JzoXT 26. Hand http://goo.gl/t9Ljg 27. Bricks http://goo.gl/ZfpJV 28. Oswaldo Paya http://goo.gl/ysSJe 29. Oswaldo Paya 2 http://goo.gl/Vj33c
WE are opening the doors
for higher education for GLOBAL LEADERS
PhD & Masters Political Engineering Civil Society Leadership City Government Enterpreneuship Energy Management 70