The latest on Venezuela and Mercosur
Venezuela has been waiting four years to be approved for entry into Mercosur. After considerable delay, Brazil approved it in December 2009 and is now lobbying Paraguay, which is the last remaining holdout. Mercopress has an interview with the leader of the Senate, who compares Hugo Chávez to Alfredo Stroessner:
“It is very difficult to dissociate Venezuela from Hugo Chavez. It makes us remember our own dictatorship: indefinite re-election, parental authority over children in the hands of the state, elections that are won with 90% of the vote. It all sounds too similar...”
Interestingly, President Fernando Lugo says he will not push the legislature:
The Paraguayan president said he would not lobby for such an initiative since “that is up to Congress and the people, but I have also stated and I told Senator Carrizosa that Paraguay must seriously address the issue of Venezuela’s Mercosur incorporation”.
Considering this is foreign policy, a president is front and center, though I could think of any number of reasons he does not want to stick his neck out. I went to see what the Paraguayan newspapers had to say, and found the lead story in one (La Nación) was that some opposition governor heard rumors that Lugo was gay. Not finding that too helpful, I moved on to Ultima Hora, where I found the Venezuelan Ambassador making diplomatic statements in favor of his country:
El embajador Arrúe de Pablo manifestó que fue sumamente positiva la reunión que mantuvo con el vicepresidente de la República Federico Franco, cuya posición personal no está a favor de que Venezuela ingrese al Mercosur porque cuestiona la falta de cumplimiento de las cláusulas democráticas.
El diplomático fue consultado sobre las críticas que existen contra las medidas tomadas por Chávez, como el cierre de medios de comunicación. Respondió que más allá de los cuestionamientos para conocer a fondo la realidad de su país hay que ir hasta allá.
"Lo importante es ir a comprobar; no puedo hablar y convencer estando a cuatro o cinco mil kilómetros de una realidad que se vive allá. Les invito a que vayan (a la prensa). El término de realidad es amplio. Yo no digo qué ocurre o qué no ocurre. Lo que quiero decir es que para saber lo que ocurre en Venezuela hay que estar en Venezuela y comprobar; hablar con la gente", insistió.
I apologize to non-Spanish speakers, as I don't feel like translating all that. The basic idea is that he met with critics in the Paraguayan legislature and invites them to come to Venezuela and see for themselves.
So this is still developing, with no obvious end in sight.
11 comments:
If Mercosur's democracy clause is to mean anything Venezuela can't be allowed to join. Incredible, no, that it's Paraguay of all countries that gives Mercosur a lesson in the importance of institutions?
If Mercosur's democracy clause is to mean anything Venezuela can't be allowed to join.
You and I know the Paraguayan Senate's position on Venezuela has absolutely nothing to do with democracy. It has to do with the fact that Chavez is a left-populist whose politics frightens Latin American elites.
Er, no.
Chavez frightens democrats, not elites.
Chavez frightens democrats, not elites.
Ah, yes. All those noble Chavez-bashing senators in Paraguay are just good democrats, not elites. That makes perfect sense. And almost all the major private media in the hemisphere bash Chavez because these media are owned by "democrats, not elites." That makes perfect sense too.
You like leftist dictator wannabes,
Most people in the region don't.
You like leftist dictator wannabes
You like pretending that Chavez-bashing Latin American elites are driven more by ethics than interests.
Who cares what their motivation is?
Chavez and the rest of the new radical left in Latin America (Ortega, Morales, Correa) are a bunch of authoritarian populists. You seem to like them. I suggest you finish your studies once in for all and join the real world.
Who cares what their motivation is?
Anyone with a basic sense of ethics cares. If the motivations of Chavez-bashing elites aren't generally ethical, it is doubtful that their policy prescriptions will be ethical.
It makes us remember our own dictatorship: indefinite re-election, parental authority over children in the hands of the state, elections that are won with 90% of the vote. It all sounds too similar...”
It'd be nice if this leader of the Senate knew what he was talking about.
No elections have even been won by Chavez with 90% of the vote, or anything close. Every election has been certified as free and fair.
I have no idea what he's talking about with regards to parental rights being given to the State. Perhaps he's talking about the guarantee of the right to education for all in the new Constitution? But the Consitution makes clear the role of parents, and that they can have any form of religious education they want...
And the Venezuelan people approved the removal of term limits, with 6 million in favor to 5 million against - in one of the most highly participated-in elections in hemisphere. How exactly is that anti-democratic?
Leftside,
You really don't have a clue, do you?
Anon, why don't you post something constructive and tell us why the Paraguayan Senate leader was correct in his facts. I'd love to hear it. Anonymous insults without any basis aren't very interesting.
Post a Comment