Juche in Venezuela

From the North Korean News Agency, exciting news about how Kim Il Sung's idea of Juche is being celebrated by some in Venezuela.

A professor of Bolivar University stressed that all the achievements made by the Korean people are a brilliant fruition of the Songun politics pursued by General Secretary Kim Jong Il. The cause of the Korean people facing down imperialism gives strength and courage to the world revolutionary peoples including the Venezuelan people and it has become a model of anti-imperialist struggle, he stressed.

Gotta love North Korea's brilliant fruition.

Read more...

Finding the disappeared in Chile

Human rights abuses are timeless. Urugayans recently voted not to rescind the 1986 amnesty, with the common argument of "looking to the future" rather than "focusing on the past." In Chile, the 1978 amnesty remains in place, though judges have found creative ways around it.

But trauma does not simply remain in the past. In Chile, former conscripts who were involved in torture and murder want to start talking.

Hundreds of former military draftees are making a provocative offer to Chile's government: They will reveal details of crimes committed by Gen. Augusto Pinochet's dictatorship — but only if their safety is guaranteed.

The draftees fear that if they reveal where the bodies are buried, they will face prosecution by the courts or retaliation by the superiors who ordered them decades ago to torture and kill political prisoners.

The information they once promised to carry to their graves has become both a heavy psychological burden and a bargaining chip. By offering confessions, the former draftees hope to improve their chances of securing benefits from pensions to psychological treatment.

"We were executors and witnesses of many brutalities and now we're willing to talk about them for our own personal redemption," said former soldier Fernando Mellado, who is organizing a Sunday gathering of draftees outside Chile's presidential palace.

These former soldiers know a lot, but this would involve giving them protection and benefits they otherwise might not receive. That is no easy decision.

In nearly two decades of democracy since then, less than 8 percent of the disappeared have been found, said Viviana Diaz of the Assembly of Family Members of the Disappeared Detainees.

Hundreds of recovered remains, some just bone fragments, have yet to be identified. Only those who buried the bodies know where other common graves lie.

You can claim to look forward, but when over 90% of the disappeared are still unfound, the past is always present.

Read more...

Informal contacts and the Honduran crisis

RAJ at Honduras Coup 2009 touched on something I had not thought about, but which in fact has been a source of considerable research (at least in political science) in the past decade or so. That is informal politics in Latin America:

In retrospect, the main problem with the attempt to negotiate the San Jose Accord may have been that taking place away from Honduras impeded the kind of informal contacts that clearly helped promote an agreement.

In 2003 I published a book on Chilean civil-military relations, and I argued that informal contacts were not conducive to civilian supremacy over the armed forces. The military was able to use informal contacts to get what it wanted, all the while circumventing legally established channels.

However, that cut against the grain of most analyses, which viewed informal channels as often positive for getting things done (e.g. see Helmke and Levitsky's Informal Institutions and Democracy: Lessons from Latin America). Informal contacts could reinforce formal institutions.

Since then, my research has evolved in other directions, but it would be very interesting to study the role of informal contacts in the Honduran crisis. What horse trading went on outside the formal negotiations? In what ways was physical presence in Honduras essential to informal contacts?

Read more...

Trust in the Latin American military

The Latin American Public Opinion Project does all sorts of fascinating work. The latest is about trust in the armed forces.

Daniel Montalvo, "Do You Trust Your Armed Forces?" AmericasBarometer Insights n. 27 (2009).

One key finding is that the level of trust has no relation to past repression. In Chile, for example, 65.2 percent trust the military, and 56.5 percent in El Salvador. Instead, it is correlated to economic growth.

I would like to this sort of analysis examined in more depth. Nicaragua and El Salvador rank high, but I would argue it is controversial to attribute that to economic growth. Mauricio Funes was elected in large part because of dissatisfaction with the economy. There is a cluster of countries around 2 percent growth (for 1990-2005), which is not very high. That cluster includes Argentina, which is at the opposite side of the trust spectrum from every other country.

Still, it is interesting that a majority of Latin Americans in every country but two--Paraguay and Argentina--trust their armed forces. It would also be interesting, however, to ask what they trust them to do or not to do. Do they trust them to protect the country from security threats? Do they trust them not to intervene in domestic politics?

But overall, this would be a great start to a more in-depth academic article.

Read more...

Honduras timetable

La Prensa has a PDF of the final agreement in Honduras. The current timetable:

Oct 30 (yesterday): The agreement goes into effect and Congress formally receives point five regarding whether Mel Zelaya should become president again.

November 2 (Monday): Creation of the Commission of Verification.

By November 5 (Thursday): Installation of a unity government.

There is no timetable for the congressional vote. From the OAS: "Naturally, I am sure the members of Congress will fully realize the importance and political urgency of these matters, and I hope they will act as quickly as possible." Zelaya thinks it will happen within a week or so.

From the Micheletti side: "Zelaya won't be restored."

From Zelaya: "This signifies my return to power in the coming days, and peace for Honduras."

Members of Congress will have many factors to consider when casting their vote. At the very core of the decision, however, is the question of whether they prefer a November 29 election that is peaceful, or one that is marked by polarization.

Read more...

The end of the Honduran crisis?

Details remain sketchy, and may not be entirely ironed out. But the New York Times has the following:

“The accord allows a vote in Congress on Zelaya’s possible restitution with the prior approval of the Supreme Court,” Mr. Micheletti said in televised comments late Thursday. “This is a significant concession on the part of our government.” “We are satisfied,” Mr. Zelaya said, according to Reuters. “We are optimistic that my reinstatement is imminent.”

La Prensa reports that the agreement consists of the following points. Other outlets have said the negotiators will meet again today, but it is not clear if the points themselves are not set or if it is just a matter of settling the logistics. Here is a quick translation:

1- La creación de un gobierno de unidad y reconciliación nacional.

The creation of a national reconciliation and unity government.

2- Rechazo a la amnistía delitos políticos, y demoratoria de acciones procesos penales.

Rejection of an amnesty for political crimes, and delay for penal processes.

3- Renunciar a una convocatoria a una Asamblea Nacional Constituyente o a reformar la Constitución en los artículos constitucionales irreformables.

Reject the convocation of a National Constitutional Assembly or reform of the unreformable constitutional articles.

4. Reconocer y apoyar las elecciones generales y el traspaso de Gobierno.

Recognize and support the general elections and the transfer of Government.

5- La transferencia de autoridad sobre las Fuerzas Armadas al Tribunal Supremo Electoral.

Transfer of authority over the Armed Forces to the Supreme Electoral Tribunal.

6- La creación de una comisión de verificación para hacer cumplir los puntos del acuerdo.

Creation of a commission of verification to ensure compliance with the points of the accord.

7- La formación de una comisión de la verdad para investigar los sucesos antes, durante y después del 28 de junio de 2009.

The formation of a truth commission to investigate the events before, during, and after June 28, 2009.

8- Solicitar a la comunidad internacional la normalización de las relaciones internacionales con nuestro país.

Request from the international community normalization of international relations with our country.

9. Apoyar una propuesta que permite un voto en el Congreso Nacional con una previa opinión de la Corte Suprema de Justicia para retrotraer todo el Poder Ejecutivo previo al 28 de junio.

Support the proposal that permits a vote in the National Congress with previous judgment from the Supreme Court to make the Executive Power retroactive to before June 28.

This is obviously a huge breakthrough. By far the most important element is that both sides are claiming victory. I would really like to know what the U.S. delegation said.

Read more...

Cuban market reforms

Thanks to a student for pointing out this story on Cuban "agros," the capitalist farmers markets. When you allow people profit, they produce more. Since the produce is unavailable elsewhere, prices rise. When prices go up, the government comes in to announce price controls. Then when there are price controls, then sellers get angry and stop bothering (or just resort to the black market). That can make shoppers unhappy as well.

So when the Communist Party served notice that it plans to impose price controls at those agros — ending one of Cuba's few capitalist experiments — angry shoppers fearing yet more shortages turned on state inspectors in an unprecedented public rage.

Police were called to one farmers market this month when customers shouted and chanted at state workers conducting a routine inspection. Two Associated Press reporters were escorted out of the same market Tuesday after their questions about the changes caused another shouting match.

Read more...

Inside the Brazilian embassy

Journalist Esteban Felix is there.

Soldiers bark like dogs, meow like cats and crow like roosters just as my REM cycle gets going and I'm jolted awake almost nightly.

Troops last week blasted us with music from 1:30 a.m. until 7 a.m. The playlist included the grating Spanish ballad "Two-legged Rat," an accordian-laced tirade against an ex-boyfriend made famous by Mexican singer Paquita La del Barrio. Its lyrics begin, "Filthy rat, crawling animal, scum of all life ..." and it got worse from there.

That was a rough night.

Read more...

Micheletti's last gambles

Roberto Micheletti has said that there is no more reason to talk until after the elections. The United States is sending a high-level delegation (including Tom Shannon) to Honduras to push for a solution, and obviously Micheletti is betting that they will not put sufficient pressure on him to change his mind.

So we are back to square one, really, where the coup government simply sits and waits for the elections. A new Gallup poll shows that 73 percent of Hondurans believe the presidential election will help pave the way for reconciliation. An important question, however, is how they will view those elections if there is more repression, which may well result for the next month.

Micheletti is gambling that a majority of Hondurans have crisis fatigue, and therefore will look to the elections as a solution just to end it in some way. It is not a bad gamble, I suppose, especially given the country's economic problems. But as always, there is just no way to predict the outcome.

Days since the coup: 122
Days until the scheduled presidential election: 32

Read more...

Elections in Uruguay: blasts from the past

The Uruguayan presidential election will go to a runoff because no candidate received a majority. However, Frente Amplio candidate José Mújica received just under 50% so will be the next president barring an utter collapse.

Much is being made of the fact that Mújica is an aged ex-Tupamaro guerrilla. Of more interest to me, however, is the generational angle and the fact that Luis Alberto Lacalle came in second. He is a former president (1990-1995), following that persistent pattern of Latin American presidents retiring for a while and then trying to come back (for example, right now we have Oscar Arias in Costa Rica and Alan García in Peru). The other candidate was Pedro Bordaberry, son of a former president and dictator.

A runoff between Mújica and Lacalle is a time warp. From a policy perspective, this is not likely to matter much. Either candidate would not change the popular policy direction of current president Vázquez (see Boz's discussion).

Lacalle is like Eduardo Frei in Chile, trying to convince voters why he is still relevant (and he convinced less than a third). And now he will be in a runoff with someone who became a guerrilla when the Cuban revolution was still new.

Not exactly inspiring.

Uruguayans did even more voting related the past, rejecting the repeal of the amnesty. That alone merits more attention than I have time to give it, since (also as in Chile) the dictatorship is now so far in the past but the amnesty remains.

Read more...

Jeane Kirkpatrick and the current crisis in Honduras

I had an email exchange with Russell Bither-Terry, who for a class was looking for links to two articles by Jeane Kirkpatrick, an ultra conservative foreign policy architect of the Reagan administration. [Note: this is not to implicate Russell in the content of my post! He works on hunger issues and you can read his own blog here]

These articles (published in the conservative Commentary magazine) are famous for their highly influential outline of how the U.S. should deal with Latin America, and explicitly argued that dictatorships were fine as long as they were pro-U.S. They are critical works for understanding Reagan-era policies (indeed, no matter which side you come down on).

Rereading them, I was struck by how amazingly (and depressingly) similar they are to the current arguments about how Honduras is a massive security issue. Take Kirkpatrick's "U.S. Security and Latin America," published in 1981 just as (not coincidentally) Reagan was taking office.

Here is the first paragraph, and just substitute "Hugo Chávez" for the Soviets:

While American attention in the past year has been focused on other matters, developments of great potential importance in Central America and the Caribbean have passed almost unnoticed. The deterioration of the U.S. position in the hemisphere has already created serious vulnerabilities where none previously existed, and threatens now to confront this country with the unprecedented need to defend itself against a ring of Soviet bases on and around our southern and eastern borders.

In other words, what happens in Central America could destroy us all. Therefore any talk about democracy must go out the window because it's all a ruse for our enemies.

American policies have not only proved incapable of dealing with the problems of Soviet/Cuban expansion in the area, they have positively contributed to them and to the alienation of major nations, the growth of neutralism, the destabilization of friendly governments, the spread of Cuban influence, and the decline of U.S. power in the region.

Uncanny.

U.S. policy, it was assumed, should be based on an understanding of “changed realities” and guided by an enlightened confidence that what was good for the world was good for the United States. Power was to be used to advance moral goals, not strategic or economic ones. Thus sanctions could be employed to punish human-rights violations, but not to aid American business; power could be used “to the full extent permitted by law” to prevent terrorist actions against Cuba, but not to protect U.S. corporations against expropriation. Nor was power to be a factor in designing or implementing economic aid or trade programs except where these were intended to promote human rights, disarmament, and nuclear non-proliferation.

Barack Obama is being excoriated from the right for even talking about "democracy" or other such disgusting moral goals instead of protecting strategic interests in Honduras.

Anastasio Somoza's Nicaragua had the bad luck to become the second demonstration area for the “fresh start” in Latin America. Just because the regime had been so close and so loyal to the U.S., its elimination would, in exactly the same fashion as the Panama Canal Treaties, dramatize the passing of the old era of “hegemony” in Central America and the arrival of anew era of equity and justice.

Poor Somoza! Poor Micheletti! They're the good guys, for Pete's sake. All that human rights abuse is a Communist plot.

And she ends with the idea that there is no point in trying to do much, because Latin Americans are screwed up anyway. No one says that now, but they're thinking it.

It requires thinking more realistically about the politics of Latin America, about the alternatives to existing governments, and about the amounts and kinds of aid and time that would be required to improve the lives and expand the liberties of the people of the area. The choices are frequently unattractive.

So don't bother with democracy, morality, or human rights. They won't happen anyway, so let's do what's best for us. Which is also good for "them," you know. Or at least good enough.

Read more...

Non-English speaking driver

Incredible. Over the last three years, Dallas police have ticketed 39 individuals for being a "non-English speaking driver." Obviously, these people were terrified of contesting an entirely fictitious infraction, even though they had to pay a $204 fine! Finally, one guy challenged it in court and won.

I am getting tired of repeating this, but the lack of action at the federal level is shifting way too much authority to local law enforcement, which is not equipped to deal with it. At the same time, some people will discriminate no matter what.

h/t ImmigrationProf Blog

Read more...

Liberals, conservatives, and Honduras

Abraham Lowenthal, a political scientist and long-time observer of U.S.-Latin American relations who is now at the University of Southern California, has a thought-provoking op-ed in the L.A. Times. His argument is that both liberals and conservatives in the United States have made the situation worse in Honduras, and have done so multiple times in the past as well:

What brings Honduras, and Central America more generally, back again and again to center stage in Washington debates on Latin America is not the strategic, security or economic importance of the region to the United States. On the contrary, it is precisely the minimal tangible significance of Central America to the United States in economic, political and military terms that allows U.S. policymakers of conflicting tendencies to indulge in grandstanding in framing policies toward that nearby and vulnerable region.

True enough. Where I disagree, however, is here:

Liberal activists inside and outside the Obama administration jumped at the opportunity to align the U.S. government against the forcible overthrow and deportation of President Manuel Zelaya. Many did so without knowing or caring much about Zelaya's erratic qualities, his interest in trying to prolong his term despite the Honduran constitutional ban on reelection or the considerable sentiment against him in the Honduran legislative and judicial branches.

One argument I've made over these past few months is that it doesn't matter if Zelaya was unpopular. We should not ever go down a slippery slope of justifying a coup just because a president was unpopular.

Overall, though, he has a good point. One reason why this crisis has been so prolonged is that people like Jim DeMint have given the coup government the confidence not to negotiate.

Days since the coup: 117
Days until the scheduled presidential election: 37

Read more...

Dialogue in Honduras

Nothing says "we are committed to negotiation" like a) blasting pig grunting noises; and b) saying the main sticking point remains non-negotiable. Not to mention possibly illegal restrictions on freedom of assembly.

Days since the coup: 116
Days until the scheduled presidential election: 38

Read more...

Political science and immigration

A lot of virtual ink is being spilled about political science as a discipline, particularly its relevance to policy. See Daniel Drezner for a good round-up. This is also a very important issue for political scientists (or anyone else) studying immigration. John Randolph at Feet in 2 Worlds notes a recent conference on undocumented immigration.

Aarti Kohli served in Washington, DC on the staff of the House Immigration Subcommittee ten years ago. Today she’s the director of immigration policy at the Warren Institute at UC Berkeley. Kohli said that a decade ago members of Congress didn’t pay much attention to immigration research.

Now she sees signs of a more receptive attitude on Capitol Hill. She believes the debate over a possible guest worker program has been influenced by research documenting the abuses of the Bracero program of the 1940s through the 1960s that allowed Mexican men to work legally in the U.S. but denied adequate compensation to many.

But Kohli also argues that if academic researchers want their findings to be used by policy-makers they need to make some changes. Her suggestion, “translate the findings into concrete, easy-to-read language.”

What academic research has shown and what members of Congress are interested in “doesn’t always line up,” according to Kohli. But, she says, “its lining up more these days.”

Political science research matters, and will inform the debate over reform that will intensify next year.

Read more...

Hugo Chávez and Michael Moore

Eva Golinger is pretty darned entertaining in her combined denunciation of Michael Moore and lavish praise of Hugo Chávez. For example:

Moore’s declarations against President Chávez are offensive and insulting and a clear sign of his hipocresy and lack of ethic. How many times has we heard President Chávez acclaim Moore’s books and documentaries? And most recently, Chávez announced that Moore’s latest documentary, “Capitalism, a love story”, would premiere here in Venezuela.

If a president allows a film to premiere, then you need to show the proper respect!

Read more...

MEO's run

Citing a poll from El Mercurio that puts him tied (within the margin of error) with Eduardo Frei in a first round of December's election in large cities, Marco Enríquez-Ominami says he's the only one who can beat Sebastián Piñera in the second.

Robert Funk notes that MEO has been peeling off many young members of the Concertación, who are leaving in part because there is no room for them there. The coalition is stuck in a generational rut (as exemplified by the candidate himself). That gives MEO's campaign some energy but also a lot of inexperience.

He also points out that all three campaigns think they can win, and polls are certainly not proving any of them wrong. Barring something bizarre, no one will win in the first round. The fight for the second will be intense.

Read more...

Quote of the day: Venezuela

“Why not? Who can stop sovereign nations from forming a defensive military alliance and exchanging soldiers and officers and training and materiel and logistics?”

--Hugo Chávez, after criticizing the U.S. and Colombia for exchanging soldiers and officers and training and materiel and logistics.

Read more...

Honduras: Congress v. Supreme Court

Talks broke down in Honduras, and Monday is now the new new new deadline (the first deadline was sometime back in July, I think, but this time they mean it). Over at Honduras Coup 2009 they have the texts of the Zelaya and Micheletti camps.

It boils down to whether Congress (Zelaya) or the Supreme Court (Micheletti) should make a final determination about Zelaya's status as president.

Meanwhile, James Baker has an op-ed in the Washington Post and shows he is behind the times, choosing only to repeat most of Micheletti's argument without any idea that it a) represents a minority of opinion in Honduras and b) goes contrary to the San José Accord so is unacceptable to Zelaya. Further, he argues for an amnesty, which all sides have rejected, at least up to this point.

Read more...

The Honduran coup

For a well-written analysis centering on whether Mel Zelaya's removal was a coup, check out Max Cameron's article at The Mark.

What is a coup? I suggest a method for discerning coups, based on the theory that “if it waddles like a duck, flaps like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck.” Here are some of the quacks, flaps, and waddles that count as coups:

1. Arbitrary or illegal termination of the tenure in office of any democratically elected official by any other elected official.
2. Arbitrary or illegal appointment, removal, or interference in the appointment or deliberations of members of the judiciary or electoral bodies.
3. Interference by non-elected officials, such as military officers, in the jurisdiction of elected officials.
4. Use of public office to silence, harass, or disrupt the normal and legal activities of members of the political opposition, the press, or civil society.
5. Failure to hold elections that meet generally accepted international standards of freedom and fairness.
6. Violation of the integrity of central institutions, including constitutional checks and balances providing for the separation of powers.
7. Failure to hold periodic elections or to respect electoral outcomes.
8. Systematic violation of basic freedoms, including freedom of expression, freedom of association, or respect for minority rights.

The coup in Honduras fulfills conditions 1, 3, 4, 6, and 8; and 5 is imminent. Let’s call a duck a duck.

I would disagree slightly, in that I would argue that a "coup" refers only to the actual removal of democratically elected officials. The conditions occurring after the removal are referring more to authoritarianism than to a coup per se.

Days since the coup: 110
Days until the scheduled presidential election: 44

Read more...