Accomplices of the Americas’ Narco-tyranny 

Published January 08, 2012 / Fox News Latino


What happens when a president appoints as Minister of Defense a General who has been included in several international terrorist lists as well as been placed on the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) list for his connection with drug cartels? 

Further making this case, President Chávez secured the election of another suspect of connections with drug trafficking, former Vice President and Miranda State governor Captain Diosdado Cabello. Cabello is a former military official who was involved with Chávez’s conspiracies starting with the guerilla group Revolutionary Bolivarian Movement and some says that he is the key element in the connection among the military and illegal business. His new position as the president of the parliament gives more power to the corrupt military faction of Chávez’s movement in the country. Cabello’s position at the head of Chávez’s United Socialist Party (PSUV) cements the military takeover.

Unfortunately, the bad news does not stop here. This week the Iranian dictator Mahmud Ahmadinejad is visiting Venezuela, Nicaragua, Cuba and Ecuador to “strengthen” the economic, political, energy and military “brotherhood” with Latin America, in particular with the “Bolivarian” countries in the region. Hugo Chávez has been an active promoter of Iran in Latin America and other regional leaders due to receive Ahmadinejad, such as Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega and Ecuador's Rafael Correa, have a similar ideological-authoritarian stance to Chávez. Despite fewer resources than Chávez, they can assist Mr. Chávez in his attempts to triangulate Iran’s banking, commercial and energy operations worldwide to counter effect the imminent international economic sanctions against Ahmadinejad and Ali Khamenei regime.

There is increasing evidence of the Iranian regime using Latin America to launder sanctionable money. For example, several oil and gas experts have been claiming that Venezuela’s oil production has been less than 2 million barrels per day for the last decade, at the same time that Petroleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) - the government oil company - reports more than 3 million barrels per day of production. This difference of more than 1 million barrels per day could be the use of the oil company to launder Iranian and drug trafficking money.

If we add other countries to the equation, what we are witnessing could be one of the largest mafia cartels in the world; assisting not only the FARC and Hezbollah, but Iran and Russian and Chinese mafias as well. Their constant protests aside; this cartel called ALBA cares less for social justice and equality than they do about power and money. Hugo Chávez has carefully crafted for himself the image of a great Latin American “libertator”, but as the reality emerges from his “Bolivarian Revolution”, he ceases to amuse, he is more a dangerous clown or sadistic buffoon than a social champion. What he has been doing has been consolidating a major challenge for the democratic world.

To obtain diplomatic cover, Chávez has also gone about buying support from other Latin American leaders anxious to assuage their energy needs for a reduced price. The “see no evil, hear no evil” presidents of Latin America have become accomplices in the destruction of democracy in Nicaragua, Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela; and are morally responsible for the continued tragedy that is Cuba. And the charade just keep growing, as Fox News article “Is Ollanta Humala the New Autocrat Apprentice?” predicted months ago, the Peru’s president, Ollanta Humala, has been getting rid of democratic elements in his cabinet and he is building a stronger alliance with Mr. Chávez.

The sad demonstration from the MERCOSUR country presidents two weeks ago, seeking a way to modify then statues of the organization just to satisfy Hugo Chávez; or the regional support for the electoral fraud in Nicaragua; or turning their backs on drug-running through the ALBA triangle; it has been sad to watch the lack of leadership in the region.

It is sad to see democratic countries become accomplices of a major crime against democracy, allowing criminals to literally get away with murder. It is at long last time for principled people to see the plight of the poor and oppressed within the ALBA triangle and for presidents across the hemisphere to finally offer their support – not to the governments but to the citizens. A people who are governed by drug runners, like Henry Rangél Silva, cannot expect from their own governments a redress of grievances or their right that their governments be for the people and by the people.

Read more: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/01/09/carlos-ponce-accomplices-to-americas-narco-tyranny/#ixzz1j0Azy400

Effective South-South Diplomacy against Authoritarians

This piece originally appeared in the Latin American Herald Tribune on April 19.

Numerous Latin Americans have developed a bizarre love-hate relationship with the United States, most of them populists who tend to blame the American government for all that is wrong with their lives, even if these faults are the product of their own mistakes. As a result, the United States has become an easy excuse for bad government, repression, and restrictions on freedom of expression and association in recent years.

In some cases, actions taken by the United States that are intended to sanction repressive regimes actually have the opposite effect — for example, the American embargo on Cuba. Similarly, the confrontational rhetoric exchanged between former President Bush and President Chavez allowed the latter international leverage to persecute civil society activists and curtail fundamental freedoms.

The United States’ reciprocal response to the expulsion of American ambassadors to Bolivia, Venezuela, and most recently, Ecuador, has unfairly provided populist authoritarian leaders valuable political capital. It is all too easy to just blame the United States. It is also too easy to keep old memories of the cold war alive for “ideological” reasons.

And, it is not just the authoritarians who blame the United States. Extremists in the opposition, those who have campaigned for the United States to more actively involve itself in Latin American regime change á la military intervention, also s blame the US for being too soft. The United States just can’t win. It is true that the United States doesn’t have a good policy toward the Western Hemisphere, but that is part of another history.

Last week I wrote of two Latin Americas: one, comprised of countries with effective policies that balance the utility of free markets with the necessity of social justice, and another, consisting of countries stuck in the past that leave their citizens poor and ignorant in order to control them.

The first has experienced tremendous advances in terms of equality, evidenced by countries like Brazil, where more than 20 million people have moved from poverty to the middle class thanks to an effective social program that has motivated parents to bring their kids to school and ensure they receive medical services. In these countries, presidents from the right and left have brought political stability, democratic governance, and economic development, and have done so with a social face.

We can include countries like Chile, Uruguay, Argentina, Costa Rica, Brazil, Peru, Colombia and Panama on this list. It looks like El Salvador—despite its problems with violence and economic limitations—is also headed in this direction. On the other hand, there is Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Ecuador, all of which are going backward.

The success of the first set of countries did not involve blaming America. Instead, these countries found their own way. Latin Americans must work as citizens of their countries and region to solve their own differences, reduce the inequality between them, and eliminate social exclusion by effectively balancing market forces and social justice. There is no magical solution that will come from the north. The people must do this work themselves.

In terms of how to deal with elected authoritarians, those who persecute opposition and violate democratic values human rights, the best solution is effective South-South diplomacy — for governments like Brazil, who have been successful, to positively engage countries like Venezuela and Nicaragua on issues of human rights and democracy.

We need governments that have carved out democratic paths to assist in exporting democracy to this “other” America so that it too can share in the prosperity. Democratic countries in Latin America have tremendous potential when it comes to sharing democratic stories and lessons with their more authoritarian neighbors, and it is exactly this, as well as holding the feet of leaders in this other Latin America to the fire.

Civil society organizations in countries like Brazil, Chile and Uruguay should working in conjunction with civil society groups in Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua. These groups should share experience , an effective tool building healthier opposition politics and stronger civil society. In addition to civil society development, democratic governments in Latin America should align their foreign policy with their expressed domestic commitment to democracy and human rights. Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Uruguay and Panama, among others, have been consolidating their democracies internally and have thus increased the opportunities for their civil societies to advance democracy and human rights in other countries.

However, despite enormous potential for cooperation of civil society groups across borders, we too often witness a lack of solidarity between civil society organizations, most importantly between civil society organizations in countries with authoritarian regimes and those with consolidating democracies. Not only this, but some democratic countries have seemingly loaned support to the repressive countries.

It is important that newly emergent democracies do not forget their global commitment to democracy in the tranquility that has corresponded with their political and economic success. Further action is required to promote an awareness of the status of democracy in countries outside one’s own — to more actively engage civil society organizations and diplomats to further democracy across borders, to consolidate democracy in Latin America as a whole rather than leaving the continent to be divided in two, one democratic and successful and the other not.

The voting record of Brazil at the UN Human Rights Council and its support of authoritarians in Venezuela, Iran and Cuba should bring shame on a country that has managed to achieve such a vibrant democracy and fervent respect for human rights in such a short period of time.

Effective diplomacy is possible. For example, look at how the Czech Republic has engaged Cuba, allowing Cuban civil society leaders to use computers in its embassy to blog free from the Castro regime’s usual controls and leading efforts to strengthen and inter-link civil society groups. Czech and Cuban civil society groups have worked with each other on numerous projects.

Democratic countries in Latin America are not without similar examples. For example, look at the effective role Conectas, a small civil society organization in Brazil, has had in promoting responsible diplomacy in the south. There are positive examples of South-South diplomacy. We just need more of them, and we need them to be consistent.

My view of South-South Effective Diplomacy requires responsible governments to facilitate the sharing of best practices among civil society organizations, youth groups and other social, political and economic actors, support the construction of civil society networks, educate civil society leaders on the use of new tools and technologies, promote democratic solidarity across the continent, and promote awareness of what has been accomplished in much of the continent.

Countries like Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, and Ecuador should not be left behind. Instead, they should have their eyes opened to the successes experienced in other countries so that they too may build such democratic foundations.

North-South diplomacy has its place, but South-South diplomacy also has an important role to play. The United States is not all-powerful, and it is time for democrats in the region to come to together to strengthen regional and sub-regional bodies, to adopt country-to-country initiatives, to level the playing field between authoritarians and democratic forces in the countries left behind.