There’s an AP story about President Calderón’s call for immigration reform in
Details have not been released, but experts expect an expansion of
Migration experts say Calderon wants to stop those abuses while also allowing Central Americans to work in the construction and service industries in the south.
I have to admit that I did not know
Fidel called in to Hugo Chávez’s radio show “Hello President.” The BBC has an edited (and translated) transcript. A big chunk involves praising each other (Castro tells Chávez, “you will be one of the greatest writers in this hemisphere”). They also debate who studies and reads more, and even who has partied the most (says Chávez, “I never partied as much as you”).
I couldn’t help get the sense that it was like two boys at a slumber party. I wonder how true that generally is of close allies. For example, it’s hard to picture Kim Il Sung and Mao hamming it up, or Reagan and Thatcher giggling with each other.
One further note. In the call, Castro also says, “I feel good and I’m happy.” In other words, it appears he’s still not dead.
Rubén Rumbaut and Walter Ewing have published a thought provoking study on immigrant assimilation in the U.S. Conventional wisdom suggests that recent immigrants are likely to commit crimes. They are young, predominantly male, poor, and not well educated, so we assume they are more dangerous.
Empirically, however, this is not true. As they demonstrate, crime rates have decreased even as immigration has increased (and the patterns hold over the last three censuses). In addition, the foreign born population is much less likely to commit crimes than the native born. In fact, the least likely groups from Latin America to commit crimes are foreign-born Mexicans, Salvadorans, and Guatemalans, who are precisely the people cited in the media as being more of a problem. They are the least educated, yet also the most law abiding.
One sad conclusion is that assimilation into U.S. culture entails becoming more violent, more likely to take drugs, drink, etc. In other words, we should all start acting a little bit more like recent immigrants…
The NYT reports on Hugo Chávez’s recent travels, as he attempts to become a major donor in the region and supplant the U.S. as the major influence.
I disagree with Steven Taylor at Poliblog about whether aid necessarily means that a country will act in accordance with Chávez’s will (he uses the term “client state"). Influence only goes so far, as the UN vote demonstrated, and in some cases (like Bolivia) Chávez is often facilitating rather than directing.
At the very least, we would need to see Chávez trying to get a president to do something he/she otherwise would not do to determine his independent influence. Along these lines, he has learned well from the United States. If you don’t like something another country is doing, then punish it by taking out your investment. Chávez did so with Costa Rica because President Arias criticized him. But would he threaten to turn off the oil spigot if Daniel Ortega does something he doesn’t like?
From Tim's El Salvador Blog: last year El Salvador passed an anti-terrorism law, and now it has been applied to arrest the leader of street vendors in San Salvador for his role in protests that turned violent. This means he will lose many normal rights, with anonymous witnesses, harsher prison sentence, etc. There's nothing like vague laws in the name of the "war on terror" that can be applied to anyone at anytime for any reason.
Read more...The NYT has an article on
Especially with the internet, there is more access to baseball statistics, and people are always finding new ways to manipulate them. A new one making its way through the blogosphere is pretty funny: the Suckage Index. It was created by Batter’s Box for pitchers, but now has been applied to hitters.
The Washington Post has an article about Hugo Chávez’s efforts to expand his influence in
In the face of proposals to open up more to
...the armored car industry in your country is having a record year.
"This country is already among the top three markets for armoring in North and South America. Armored cars are here to stay," said Esteban Hernandez, head of Mexico's association of armored vehicle producers.
With dozens killed in drug gang-related violence each month, the association predicted Tuesday that 2007 would be a record year, making Mexico one of the world's top markets for armor-plating cars.
Last month, Adam Isacson at Plan
I’ve often criticized the U.S. media for its portrayal of Latin America. I just read an article in Newsweek International, feeling the same general annoyance at the oversimplification and over-emphasis on the power of Hugo Chávez, then suddenly realized it was written by Jorge Castañeda. He is a very well known political science professor (I liked his book Utopia Unarmed) and former Foreign Minister of Mexico.
In short, the article attributes much of recent Latin American political change to Chávez in ways that defy common sense. The main hypothesis is that Chávez helps other countries, and as a result the presidents of those countries concentrate power and damage democracy. I’m always uncomfortable with analyses that ignore domestic politics this much—does someone like President Kirchner really just respond to Chávez? Further, does Chávez really wield that kind of power? Last year we saw the limitations of doling out oil money, as he could not garner the necessary votes to win the Security Council seat.
What I do agree with is Castañeda's argument that the Bush administration’s refusal to play a positive role in the region encourages Chávez and offers no alternative vision of the future. All the U.S. does is repeat the free trade mantra ad nauseam, while proclaiming the need to build a big wall to keep Latin Americans out.
My son Ben turned five today, and for the second year in row--at his request--we invited a bunch of his preschool friends to Chuck E. Cheese's. His face says it all.
Just the other day, I was joking about
Both Boz and Ka have noted the fact that a Saudi branch of Al Qaeda has called for attacks on suppliers of oil to the
It is currently 34 degrees here in Charlotte, but pitchers and catchers are reporting to spring training today. It's a more effective indicator than a groundhog that spring and baseball season are not too far off.
Read more...I read and recommend Gabriel Thompson’s There No José Here, and I’ve put it on my sidebar. I especially liked it because it offers a wide ranging, warts and all view of Mexican immigration to
The issue that caught my attention the most was how brazenly poor immigrants (and, certainly, native-born poor as well) are exploited in
Why does Cuba limit internet access to its citizens? Because of U.S. imperialism. Furthermore, says Cuba’s Communications Minister, we need to control “the wild colt of new technologies.” You know, that newfangled internet thing, which is just a series of tubes. He noted that the U.S. has blocked Cuba from connecting to fiber-optic networks, and that Google and Microsoft are tools of the empire anyway. To deal with the former, Hugo Chávez promised to lay a cable between Venezuela and Cuba. To deal with the latter (where he has a valid point in terms of giving the government information about what people do online), Chávez should use some oil money and create a Bolivarian Search Engine, which could prevent people from accessing counter-revolutionary sites or supporters of Mr. Danger.
Incidentaly, Granma covers the minister’s statements, but chooses not to include any of his statements about “control.”
I do wonder, though, why the U.S. wants to make it more difficult for Cubans to access the internet. Even if there is a risk of getting money into Cuba via electronic transactions, wouldn’t it make more sense to encourage savvy Cubans to get around government firewalls and communicate more with the outside world and even with each other? So much of our Cuba policy is based on the premise “we’ll try to hurt you as much as possible so that you’ll join us.”
The Chávez government is preparing a decree to give the government control over food distribution if shipments and sales of food halt. There have been serious problems with shortages and a thriving black market.
The L.A. Times has an intriguing story on a California town, Lindsay, that is struggling to persuade its Mexican immigrants—many of whom are undocumented—to stay. Desperate to have the necessary labor to pick and process oranges, the town is promoting local projects to provide employment when the season ends. The recent freeze meant fewer oranges and less work, thus putting pressure on those immigrants to find more stable jobs elsewhere.
The town’s elected officials are all Republican, but are promoting an FDR-inspired program to keep their illegal immigrants happy. The simple reason is that many local economies depend on immigrants:
"It helps all of us," said 71-year-old Bill Martin, who owns a tire shop in town. "I don't particularly care for illegal people in the U.S., but if they come in and want to buy a tire, I'll accommodate them. If you don't have people come, you won't get the fruit picked. And if the fruit doesn't get picked, nobody will have money to buy anything."
Not long ago, a high school student here recited the Pledge of Allegiance, then was asked if he would say it in Spanish. He did so, and a controversy was born. One parent in particular took up the English-only banner and today published an opinion piece in the Charlotte Observer. It really must be read to be believed. Here are some highlights, and rest assured I am not making this up.
--if the Pledge is spoken in another language, it hurts our war effort
--pluralism weakens us, which is why all pilots worldwide use English
--the American flag is a symbol of using English
--we must remain united, and using other languages at school functions weakens that unity, while criticizing those who say English unites us is just another way of weakening our unity, so the best plan is to use English, which will unite us
We ran the Homecoming 5K this morning, which was very cold. I won first place for male faculty/staff (it should be noted, however, that my time would've put me only fourth for female faculty/staff!). I am, in fact, not exactly sure how many other male faculty/staff participated. Thanks to several of my students who were volunteering on the course and cheering everyone on.
Read more...In anticipation of President Bush’s planned trip in March to Latin America, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns made some statements about
I had a nice lunch downtown today with Michelle, even though because of timing we were accompanied by my daughter, Julia. At least as two year olds go, she’s not too crazy. Aside from taking a packet of Splenda and asking me to pour it in her milk (which I refused) and eating primarily from my plate, she did OK.
Thanks to my friend Mike for pointing out this story, which actually ran in the travel section of the NYT. In central Mexico, at the “Parque Eco Alberto,” there is an illegal immigrant theme park. For $18, you pretend to be someone trying to cross into the United States. This means an actor playing the coyote, others as the Border Patrol (complete with guns shooting blanks), etc. It is run by the Hñahñus, a Mexican indigenous group (many of whom have emigrated themselves) and was started up with financing from the government. It attracts mostly Mexican tourists.
When the smell of gunfire dissipated, we sneaked away, crossing cornfields, passing drowsy mules and slipping under barbed-wire fences. Brown moths darted in and out of the flashlight beams, and the guides philosophized about the significance of the hike, the empathy it aims to teach.
The article points out that Doctors Without Borders has set up tent camps around the U.S. to show people what a refugee camp is like. But that example seems less participatory. In this park, you are pretending to be an immigrant, which is actually extremely dangerous in real life. Doctors Without Borders, for example, would not likely ask people to play the roles of Sudanese refugees. Is it really consciousness-raising, or just for tourists who believe it would be exciting to playact a dangerous situation without fear of real risk?
Despite its longevity, the Brazilian dictatorship (1964-1985) gets far less attention than its South American counterparts. In large part this is because fewer people were killed. An amnesty was put in place in 1979, but unlike
I just finished listening to Doris Kearns Goodwin’s Team of Rivals, which focuses on how Abraham Lincoln named political rivals to his cabinet after winning the presidential election. Salmon Chase, for example, believed—as did many others—that Lincoln didn’t have what it took to deal with the country splitting apart, but was still named Treasury Secretary. Chase even wanted to challenge Lincoln in 1864.
There’s nothing exactly “new” but the central theme is still interesting. Goodwin’s main focus is Lincoln’s amazing ability to manage his political team, and she does successfully convey how incredibly difficult the job was, and how he was able to engage people who were skeptical or even highly critical of him. Some, like Edwin Stanton, eventually became very close to him personally. Lincoln sought to balance different factions of the Republican party while also getting the most effective people for the cabinet positions.
The narrator is Thomas Richard, who also read Manhunt, and I think he did a better job with this book. I am fortunate to have a very short commute, but at times I’d get into it and wish it was a little longer. I added it to my sidebar.
I recommend the blog Global Baseball, which has reports from a guy who received a year-long fellowship to study baseball in the Dominican Republic, Mexico, Australia, Puerto Rico, Okinawa, and Venezuela. The fellowship is from the Thomas J. Watson Foundation, which I see provides a year long independent study for college seniors. The project sounds very cool--this info is from that site:
Jonathan Helfgott, Bard College
Baseball's Globalization: Economics, Culture, and Sport
Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Mexico, Puerto Rico, Australia, Japan
I want to use baseball as a medium for exploring the complex dynamics that accompany cultural exchange. For my project, I will immerse myself in various international baseball communities across Latin America and the Pacific Rim, where I will seek out, observe, and engage baseball players, fans, coaches, and scouts wherever I can find them. Baseball's expansion mirrors the process of economic globalization in many ways. The game of baseball is an accessible and meaningful way to examine the deeper cultural implications of this process.
The AP has a story about the
Over the past several years, both Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro have trumpeted the loan of Cuban doctors to treat the poor in Venezuela. The Associated Press has an article highlighting the plight of the doctors themselves.
In short, they are not treated very well:
The couple said they were forced to work seven days a week for little pay in the countryside near Caracas, and their relations with Venezuelans were tightly controlled.
'We couldn't call our families or go out after 5 p.m. The Venezuelan national guard and Cuban authorities watched our every move,' Viamonte said. 'We never planned on abandoning our duty, but we got tired of being treated like slaves.'
It’s estimated that some 500 Cuban doctors (out of a total of about 20,000) have defected from Venezuela in the past two years, and currently there are 38 stranded in Colombia, hoping to achieve refugee status in the U.S. Meanwhile, last year the Bush administration created a new policy--the Cuban Medical Professional Parole program—to facilitate the entrance of Cuban doctors. For reasons unknown, these doctors in Colombia have been denied entrance. This underlines how our immigration policy toward Cubans is ad hoc, bizarre and unpredictable. Actually, I suppose that describes our immigration policy toward most other other countries as well.
The next time you read about the Latin American left (most recently, we were informed that there is a "left-wing surge" in the region) consider Nicaragua. There it appears that being leftist means talking to the richest people in the Americas to get their investment while proclaiming your commitment to the business sector.
Read more...Much is being made of the so-called “enabling laws” (“leyes habilitantes”) being granted to Hugo Chávez. His defense of the laws is that they are constitutional. This is true, but in terms of whether it is democratic is also irrelevant. Here are the relevant parts of the Venezuelan constitution:
Article 203: “Son leyes habilitantes las sancionadas por la Asamblea Nacional por las tres quintas partes de sus integrantes, a fin de establecer las directrices, propósitos y el marco de las materias que se delegan al Presidente o Presidenta de la República, con rango y valor de ley. Las leyes de base deben fijar el plazo de su ejercicio.”
The Senate has been more open to the president’s immigration proposal, yet now has added an amendment to the minimum wage bill that is a) poorly thought out; and b) likely to make House-Senate negotiations on the bill more difficult. I suppose it was a way to get a few extra Senate votes.
As the food crisis—based on the high price of corn, which has raised the price of tortillas—escalates into protests in
There is yet another video of Fidel in the ubiquitous Adidas track suit, hanging out with Hugo Chávez, though the video I’ve seen stays on the waist up. My conclusion: he’s not dead yet.
Simultaneously, however, there is considerable discussion in Miami about his impending demise. More specifically, there were plans afoot to have a big celebration in the Orange Bowl, including specially made t-shirts. Only when public reaction made it clear that this was in terrible taste did the city start backing off. Of course, I am not living in exile and have never lived in a dictatorship, but still. A public celebration for death (which doesn't even mean the end of the regime) is too much.
This also makes me wonder what the reaction will be in the U.S. generally when Castro dies. Will the jubilation in Miami turn people off? Or will they just not care one way or the other?
So the Venezuelan National Assembly is soon expected to approve decree powers for Hugo Chávez, which would last 18 months. There are eleven different areas that will fall under this decree power:
One year ago today I started this blog, largely as a way to explore current events in
In response to yesterday’s blog about Venezuela, I was very pleased to receive an email from Rengaraj Viswanathan, who was India’s Ambassador to Venezuela from 2000 to 2003, and currently Head of the Latin America and Caribbean Division of India’s Ministry of External Affairs. For everyone interested in Latin America, I would recommend his blog Latin American Affairs. I’ll get it up on my blogroll when I get a chance. This is definitely one of the great aspects of blogging.
Read more...The NYT Magazine has a piece by David Rieff on Hugo Chávez, which is annoyingly bad. The primary problem many
I had written briefly a few weeks ago about the rise of tortilla prices in
A student, Mark Rowsey, had emailed me several days ago about the death of
I hadn’t had an opportunity to discuss President Bush’s mention of immigration reform in the SOTU. Here it is:
I had written (for example, here) about President Ahmadinejad’s recent mini-tour of Latin America, which was intended—in conjunction with Hugo Chávez—to rouse anti-imperialist sentiment against the United States. My own conclusion was that it had almost no effect at all.
There is much to blog about, but I've had a very nasty case of Strep Throat. Around here, January has been quite an active month for kid-induced illness.
Read more...In one the odder stories I've read in a while, police who patrol tourist areas in Tijuana were issued slingshots and bags of ball bearings. Their guns had been temporarily confiscated because of charges that corrupt officers were working with drug traffickers.
I'm trying to conjure up the image. Police have a slingshot hanging out their back pocket like Dennis the Menace, and if they see a problem, they yell, "Halt, or I'll shoot!" while they fumble with the thing, ball bearings flying every which way. Are there professional slingshot masters to teach them how to use it?
A quote from President Bush’s 60 Minutes interview a week or so ago has been percolating away in my mind, as I think about how in some ways little has changed in the last 80-100 years in U.S. policy. Here is the quote:
We liberated that country from a tyrant. I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude. That's the problem here in America: They wonder whether or not there is a gratitude level that's significant enough in Iraq.
In my U.S.-Latin American Relations class, just today we discussed U.S. intervention in the early twentieth century, which helps us understand the resentment that built up in a number of countries (most notably in Cuba and Nicaragua). A major theme at the time, which was bipartisan, was that Latin Americans should be grateful for our efforts, and we wondered why in the world they kept fighting against us. We had invaded and occupied for their own good to teach them how to run their countries, policy makers believed, so why can’t we convince them of that?
Secretary of War Elihu Root talking about Cubans in 1901: there would never be independence “if they continue to exhibit ingratitude and entire lack of appreciation of the expenditure of blood and treasure of the United States to secure their freedom from Spain.”
--Lars Schoultz, Beneath the United States, 1998, p. 150
A State Department official spoke in 1926 about Central America: “If the United States has received but little gratitude, this is only to be expected in a world where gratitude is rarely accorded to the teacher, the doctor, or the policeman, and we have been all three.”
--Walter LaFeber, Inevitable Revolutions, 1984, p. 301
It is widely argued (including by me) that although the U.S. embargo against Cuba damages the country economically, it bolsters the Castro regime politically. The Miami Herald has an article arguing that the embargo is also making it more difficult for the U.S. to get global support to condemn human rights abuses in Cuba.
In short, our strong-arm tactics turn everyone off. Plus, Europe is annoyed by Helms-Burton, which is the U.S. effort to extend the effects of the embargo into other countries. Finally, a number of governments believe that U.S. tactics just don’t work:
European diplomats interviewed by The Miami Herald, many of whom declined to be identified because Cuba is a delicate subject, say all its members want democracy in Cuba. But some governments like those in Spain, France and England feel that condemning Havana at this time would prompt the communist government to dig its heels rather than embrace change.
I don’t think that positive statements about desiring democracy in Cuba (which, after all, is clearly a dictatorship) would have a negative effect. But at the very least, let’s admit that our Cuba policy has been a miserable failure and talk about what else might actually work.
Yesterday I had the very cool opportunity to meet and get the autograph of Larry LeGrande, a former Negro League baseball player who was Satchel Paige’s last catcher. For anyone who doesn’t know, Satchel Paige is in the baseball Hall of Fame and is one of the best pitchers of all time, in any league. LeGrande now sells memorabilia here in
Hugo Chávez says that Fidel Castro is "battling for his life." In itself, that's not terribly interesting. But recently I've been making fun of the U.S. media a lot, so I thought I would acknowledge when it does something right. In that article, the Associated Press does a nice job of summing up one of Chávez's defining characteristics:
Chavez is known for making bold statements without elaborating.
Last July, I wrote about the challenges Mercusor would face as a result of
From the
Ríos Montt said he would not run for the presidency -- he ran in 2004 and came in third -- but expressed confidence he would win a congressional seat. Members of the country's Congress enjoy immunity from prosecution unless they are suspended from office by a court.
It would be truly disgusting if he won. Coincidentally, I’ve been reading the book When States Kill to review it for a journal, and one of the chapters (by M. Gabriela Torres) is an interesting though very sobering analysis of cadaver reports in
Periodically I get annoyed with U.S. media portrayals of Latin America. I wrote yesterday about CNN, and here is another example, from someone who is labeled the “business and financial news anchor and reporter for CNN en Español.” The subject is Venezuela.
From him, we learn that Venezuela is following the “North Korean style” of communism. Readers of this blog know I am very skeptical of Hugo Chávez, but come on. He is not closing his borders, killing thousands of people, or getting a poofed-up hairdo and big sunglasses.
We also learn that “Nestor Kirchner in Argentina and Luis Inacio Lula da Silva in Brazil have similar ideologies to Chavez but don't share his statism.” His ideology is based on statism, so if they are not statist, what is their similar ideology?
Further, “like Cuba, Venezuela will remain an economic island, at least in the medium-term.” Countries that pump out large quantities of oil do not become economic islands without outside intervention (e.g. war with the U.S.). They have governments lining up to talk trade. Anyhow, Cuba’s problems with isolation stem from the U.S. embargo, not from anything intrinsic to the Cuban economy.
Rumors of Fidel Castro’s imminent demise are flying around once again. In this case, a Spanish doctor who came to
Rafael Correa’s inauguration was relatively tame, and Ahmadinejad’s mini-tour of
Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s current Latin American stop is Nicaragua to see Daniel Ortega. Although the two governments agreed to open embassies, the meeting fell very short of representing any sort of evil alliance. In fact, the two leaders spoke in very different terms.
Ahmadinejad: ''Our two countries have common interests, enemies and goals.”
Ortega: He spoke of ``constructive agreements to combat hunger, unemployment and poverty.''
Ortega avoided the “imperialist” rhetoric, and I think is perfectly willing to open an embassy in exchange for some sort of energy deal, while also working with the U.S.
Next stop: Ecuador's presidential inauguration. This will be a more interesting case, because Correa ran more toward the middle to win the runoff, so will he embrace the more radical rhetoric of Chávez or not?
Hugo Chávez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad are all hugs and have announced vague plans to fund unspecified projects around the world to counter U.S. imperialism. My best guess is this means free or heavily subsidized oil.
Chávez said the U.S. needs to accept the "new realities of Latin America," which suggests that once again he might be overplaying his hand, as he did when inserting himself into the Mexican and Peruvian presidential elections. The "new realities" will not likely include an enhanced role for Iran, as its role in funding terrorism in Argentina does not sit well with President Kirchner.
One reality in Latin America is that the Bush administration is exceedingly unpopular, but Chávez is mistaken if he thinks this automatically translates into his own popularity. He's dusting off some slogans that are oldies but goodies (e.g. "Death to U.S. imperialism!") but so far I'm not seeing this as a regional trend.
However, as long as U.S. policy is being made by Cold Warriors who believe it is still 1985, the U.S. will remain a legitimate target for complaint, and will be the perfect enemy for Chávez to use in speeches.
The NYT has a small note about how the Mexican government is concerned about the rising cost of tortillas, and will end tariffs on imported corn to keep them affordable (though I must say I thought NAFTA was ending them anyway). This is caused in part by high demand for ethanol made from corn. So there is a chain reaction: instability in the Middle East, the invasion of Iraq, development in China, etc. lead to high oil prices, which lead to demand for alternative fuels, which leads to corn demand, which leads to higher prices for tortillas.
Stephen Dubner at Freakonomics Blog recently crafted a related hypothesis. Given rising prices for corn, some food manufacturers were looking to replace high fructose corn syrup, which is associated with obesity. Therefore, high oil prices spark a chain reaction that might ultimately lead to Americans losing weight.
Steven at Poliblog has been following the story of a Texas pizza chain that is under fire for accepting Mexican pesos. I agree with his assessment that this is good old fashioned American capitalism at work. In fact, mega-corporations on the border—even Wal-Mart—already accept pesos at some stores.
What strikes me is that for being such a rich, powerful, and swaggering country, we often show a tremendous insecurity. Hearing Spanish or reading it in official documents makes us afraid. If you accept pesos, then you’re “unpatriotic.” I’m still trying to figure that out. You do a legal transaction, receiving money you wouldn’t otherwise get because it was stuck in a drawer, in a capitalist transaction on the basis of supply and demand. Isn’t that the American Way?
Racism is certainly part of it, but alone does not explain it. We proclaim diversity but don’t like the change that accompanies it. We keep up a blind insistence that we’ve done things the same way for years, and this is why we’re successful, so we shouldn’t change, ignoring the fact that it’s all a myth. For example, we want to believe (a la Samuel Huntington) that WASP ingenuity makes the country go ‘round, willfully ignoring the fact that the economy would come to a standstill if the immigrant population stopped working for us.
In my previous post, Ka asked about the potential OAS role in the Venezuela saga. OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza (a well known Chilean politico) criticized Chávez for denying the opposition TV license (again, see previous post) and in return Chávez called him a “pendejo.” In the mainstream U.S. press it was translated as “idiot” but “asshole” is a closer translation. In a rare move, he admitted the statement was “imprudent” though said he did not regret saying it.
Chávez said Insulza had no business poking his nose into Venezuelan affairs. Given that the OAS is committed to promoting democracy, I believe he did. I think the OAS can play a positive role in Venezuela and elsewhere by publicizing/criticizing practices that are clearly undemocratic. The fact that Insulza struck such a nerve demonstrates that the OAS is not simply powerless. I certainly do not want to overstate its importance, but at the very least it can contradict autocratic rhetoric. Plus, you can’t call Insulza a lackey of the U.S., because he was elected in the face of U.S. opposition. The OAS constitutes a uniquely Latin American voice.
I’ve been asked my opinion about all the news in Venezuela. The big news, of course, was President Chávez’s announcement that telecommunications and electricity would be nationalized. Despite the NYT’s emphasis on investor concerns, we have to wait and see—I think investors are perfectly willing to keep bringing their money as long as the government ensures some profit (e.g. in Bolivia). Let’s see how much of the profit Chávez takes for himself, not to mention what kind of compensation he offers.
Having said that, though, nationalization does not tend to produce the desired results because all too often the businesses become bloated, corrupt, politicized and unaccountable. I am not sure how to avoid that. No one in Venezuelan history has done so.
On the political side, Chávez says he’s a Trotskyist, without explaining how he interprets that. When you hear Trotsky, you might think immediately of ice pick to the head. Other than that, I guess Chávez means that socialism in Venezuela requires the promotion of socialism abroad, without cooperating with capitalists. Again, let’s see—so far, he has talked socialism while happily promoting capitalist relationships.
He says he wants to change the “geometry of power.” What does this mean? Is it different from the algebra of power? I guess it is an indirect way of saying he wants to change “the ways in which other people besides me have power.” He wants to bypass the legislature with decree power, allow himself permanent re-election, and eliminate the independence of the Central Bank. He already refused to renew the license of a TV station he considered “counter-revolutionary.” I consider myself an open-minded person, but for the life of me I can’t see how this leads to anything but autocracy. He uses Fidel’s language of “the people” but, like Fidel, conflates himself with the people.
The general plan of state control over the economy combined with autocracy has not been a successful combination in Latin American history, or elsewhere for that matter. I don’t see how this will turn out any different.
Tony Gwynn was elected to the Hall of Fame along with Cal Ripken. There was never any doubt, but it is still very cool. He is the only Hall of Famer I got to watch on a constant basis, and has always been one of the class acts of baseball. At 97.61% He received the 7th highest voting percentage ever (Ripken's 98.53% was third behind Tom Seaver and Nolan Ryan). At least two voters said they'd never vote for anyone from that era because of the possibility of steroid use (though Tony's gut seemed to reflect pizza more than steroids) but who were the people who chose not to vote for Tony or Ripken?
Goose Gossage narrowly missed making it in. Even more than today's closers, he deserves it. He dominated even while going 2-3 innings, without an obsession with number of saves. His vote total went way up from last year (52 votes) and so he may look good for next year. I think that after Bruce Sutter got in last year, there was a re-examination of the older relievers.
The Bolivian army is getting into the news more these days, which is never a good sign. About three weeks ago, it reiterated that it had the right to intervene in domestic affairs, in the context of the Venezuelan ambassador saying Venezuela might send troops if the Morales government were threatened. Now we also learn that more than two dozen uniformed Venezuelan officers came to Bolivia without congressional approval.
These political developments have angered dissident members of the military, but the NYT article also reveals the racial side of the issue. Morales has pushed for the ascent of indigenous officers, and to some extent (how much I don’t know) this is also responsible for some discontent:
Gen. Marcelo Antezana, who was fired by Mr. Morales as army commander, said in September that there was discontent in the armed forces over what was viewed as subjugation to “Caribbean mulattoes” of a “Cuba-Venezuela axis.”
I find it quite telling that the opposition openly uses the word “mulatto” in a derogatory manner. There are, certainly, many Bolivians who oppose Evo Morales for perfectly logical reasons, generally based on his economic policies. But I wonder how many are angry because these darker skinned upstarts are taking over.
The Washington Post offers up a solid analysis of how the implementation of NAFTA has spurred emigration from Mexico. The agreement has different phases, and the final protections are gradually being removed.
In particular, agribusiness (especially in the U.S., but also in Mexico) has made it difficult for small producers to compete. In an interesting twist, even Mexican farms aimed at export have hurt local farmers. Since we in the U.S. are obsessed with how produce looks, perfectly edible but imperfect looking food is rejected, and therefore is sold locally in Mexico for greatly reduced prices.
The article does mention demography, but only in passing, arguing that a Mexican baby boom outpaced job creation. This is true, but it fails to note the subsequent significant decrease in the average number of babies being born to Mexican mothers. Therefore, the rapid population growth is not so indefinite as the article suggests.
The NYT has an interesting look at Chile’s copper windfall, which is bringing in greater than expected revenue, largely because of very high demand in China. Although it doesn’t mention the issue explicitly, it highlights the fact that “socialist” in Chile doesn’t mean much anymore, and so the government cannot be lumped together with Venezuela or Bolivia. The Bachelet administration is talking only about responsible spending and putting money away for a rainy day.
The article also brings up the infamous Copper Law, whereby the military gets a 10 percent cut of copper revenue for acquisitions. This blatantly undemocratic law has been a bone of contention for years, with constant rumors of getting rid of it. Bachelet brought it up and then dropped it as Defense Minister, and now her own Defense Minister is mentioning it again. Politically, the timing could be right as the armed forces are weakened after all the Pinochet scandals as well as serious fatal accidents involving conscripts.
A U.S.-owned hotel in Norway told a group of Cubans that they could not stay there because of the U.S. embargo. In early 2006, a Cuban delegate was kicked out of a Mexico City Sheraton for the same reason. They were actually talking to U.S. oil executives about exploration possibilities.
They fall under the Helms-Burton law, which focuses on punishing activity in other countries. Of course, this puts any company in the difficult position of sometimes being forced to break national laws in order to comply with U.S. law. The Sheraton, for example, had to pay $112,000 in Mexican fines.
The embargo (the term used to refer to all the laws restricting economic interaction with Cuba) is intended to put such tremendous pressure on the Cuban people that they will reject Fidel Castro. At the very least, it is supposed to hurt Fidel Castro and his cadre of leaders.
These moves, on the contrary, will:
1. Preserve Fidel’s international image as a martyr to U.S. hegemony
2. Reinforce the notion of U.S. policy being utterly petty
3. Bolster the sentiment of Cubans that they are under attack and that the U.S. is not interested in their well-being
It seems to me that the Cuban government benefits from these actions, while the loser is the Hilton Hotel Corporation. Nice policy.
If immigration reform is going to work, then the U.S. government must have a sophisticated computer system to keep track of everyone and to avoid the massive backlog currently in evidence. It’s depressing to read in the Washington Post, therefore, that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officials themselves say their computer system is totally inadequate even for the current workload.
A report released Dec. 20 by Homeland Security Inspector General Richard L. Skinner cited a long list of setbacks and concurred with internal USCIS reviews that the bureau "lacks the processing capacity, systems integration and project management resources needed to manage a potential increase in workloads."
A project to replace the nationwide computer network has been halted because the agency lacks $72 million to complete it. A staff reorganization was frozen because of deficiencies "that hinder day-to-day IT operations," according to the report.
This is one of many reasons it will be tempting for Democrats to avoid the issue. Immigration policy is so broken, and has been so neglected, that only a politically risky, Herculean effort can really begin to fix it.
Of all the many aspects of parenting, there is nothing quite like being vomited on. My two year old daughter has a stomach bug, and I’ve been puked on multiple times in the past 24 hours or so. When they don’t feel well, children want reassurance, so they get extremely close to you when they’re ready.
It’s like the movie Parenthood, where Steve Martin’s character asks his sick daughter if she feels like she wants to throw up. She says, “OK” and then boots all over him.
I am following up on a post by Boz, as he wonders about the role of the military as security issues become more important in Latin America, especially in light of recent stories about Mexico sending soldiers to Tijuana and Brazil to Rio. A few thoughts.
First, military politicization in Latin America has never turned out well for democracy. This doesn’t necessarily mean a coup, but can come in the form of intimidating elected officials, human rights abuses (as soldiers seek out the “enemy”), mission creep, and the like. Plus, it will almost certainly entail the shift of scarce resources to military budgets.
Second, in almost every Latin American country, the military has a legally established domestic role, and utilizing soldiers only reinforces the military’s notion that it is the rightful protector of la Patria, and that it is being called upon because civilian governments are failing to do so.
Third, the dynamics of this domestic role are different. In the past, the military became involved in political and/or ideological conflicts. It would support a government against opposition, or vice versa. Gang-based violence and organized crime isn’t the same, as they are well-armed but socially and politically isolated phenomena. It may well mean that there is greater popular support for military action (as there is in Colombia) because the targets are widely viewed as illegitimate. There was widespread support for Marxism, but not for drug trafficking and kidnapping.
Boz brings up some other pertinent questions, such as how different governments will respond. How do security and populism work together? Will we see more presidents elected on a security platform?
Ricardo Carreon of Ricardo's Blog is starting up a "Latin America Blogroll" to connect bloggers who cover the region. I now have it on my sidebar. From the comments, it looks like at some point there will also be links to people who cover specific countries, perhaps as some sort of megablog.
If you have a Latin America blog and want to have it listed, just click on the link above and let Ricardo know.
President-elect Rafael Correa named a woman as his new Defense Minister. This makes Ecuador the third country to do so, behind Chile and Colombia. In general, it is becoming more commonplace for Latin American women to obtain positions of political power, either elected or appointed. More so, I would say, than in the United States, where the process is much slower.
It is also positive to break the traditional mold of a defense minister as a male, either active-duty or retired military. The armed forces of Latin America have been so insular for so long that any change is welcome. Naming a woman to this post will not prompt earth shattering changes, but can contribute in its own small way to bringing the armed forces into a more democratic 21st century. This is especially important in Ecuador, where the military has been very active politically in recent years.
The first baby born in Charlotte in 2007 was Latino: Josue Eduardo Martínez Calleja. His parents had to respond through an interpreter. These days, about 1 in 5 babies born here are Latino.
My Dad and I just signed a book contract with the University of New Mexico Press to write a book on Latino immigration, focusing on the South, based on the political demography work we've already been doing. I've found this endlessly fascinating.
The Cuban government has denounced the execution of Saddam Hussein, calling it an “illegal act” and “assassination.” You can also check out Human Rights Watch’s analysis of the problems with the trial.
The problem, though, is that the Cuban government found itself compelled to acknowledge that it also uses the death penalty. You can also see Human Rights Watch’s discussion of how political prisoners do not receive fair trials in Cuba.
If you accuse another country of manipulating trials and killing people for political reasons while you do so yourself, how do you justify it? Easy. Blame someone else for your own laws:
The statement acknowledged that Cuba ''has not yet abolished the death penalty because of the brutal war imposed on it by the United States,'' referring to the U.S. government's policy to undermine the communist country, including trade and travel sanctions.
How much brutality around the world centers on blaming others for your own actions? The Bush administration ignores the constitution and blames Al Qaeda. The Cuban government ignores due process and blames the U.S.
For the past several days, I've been out of town with no internet access, but I'll be resuming blogging today.
Read more...
© Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008
Back to TOP
