radiofree.asia

Category: bolivia

  • The Cochabamba Water War: Bolivia’s rebellion against neoliberalism

    Water. 

    The most precious resource on the planet.

    And yet, in many places, there has been a push to privatize it.

    This was the case in 1999, in Cochabamba, Bolivia, when the city privatized the city’s municipal water supply.

    The move came at the mandate of the World Bank.

    The new company was a subsidiary of the US construction firm Bechtel and several other foreign corporations.

    The company raised water rates more than 30% overnight.

    A manager said “If people didn’t pay their water bills their water would be turned off.”

    Protests exploded in January 2000. 

    Workers. Campesinos. Retirees. Even the middle class hit the streets.

    They were organized under the Coordinator in Defense of Water and Life.

    And they occupied Cochabamba’s main square.

    Their only demand: Cancel the contract.

    They held a general strike that lasted for four days. 

    Police cracked down. Tear gas. Rubber bullets. 

    200 protesters were arrested. More than 120 people injured. 

    Protests spread to other cities. Roadblocks shut down towns and highways. 

    President Hugo Banzer declared a state of siege, suspending constitutional guarantees. 

    Nighttime raids. Arrests against labor leaders. 

    And then… Víctor Hugo Daza.

    He was a high school student in a crowd of protesters that April, when he was shot and killed by a Bolivian Army captain.

    The act was recorded on camera. It reverberated across Bolivia.

    Finally, the Bolivian government acquiesced.

    On April 10, 2000, leaders of the protest movement signed an agreement with the national government, reversing the privatization.

    The people had won.

    This is episode 18 of Stories of Resistance — a new podcast co-produced by The Real News and Global Exchange.  Independent investigative journalism, supported by Global Exchange’s Human Rights in Action program. Each week, we’ll bring you stories of resistance like this. Inspiration for dark times.

    If you like what you hear, please subscribe, like, share, comment, or leave a review. You can also follow Michael’s reporting and support at www.patreon.com/mfox.

    Written and produced by Michael Fox.

    If you are interested in more information on the Cochabamba Water War, we recommend you check out the 2010 movie “Tambien La Lluvia,” featuring Gael García Bernal. It is a tremendous look back at that time, amid a scathing critique of how the Spanish, foreign companies, and white elites have always treated local Indigenous and campesino populations in Bolivia and across Latin America.

    This post was originally published on The Real News Network.

  • We can be heroes: the inspiring people we met around the world in 2024 – part one

    From an exuberant mountaineering woman to a boy representing unheard refugees, here are some of the brave individuals that gave us hope

    Nine years ago, Cecilia Llusco was one of 11 Indigenous women who made it to the summit of the 6,088 metre-high Huayna Potosí in Bolivia. They called themselves the cholitas escaladoras (the climbing cholitas) and went on to scale many more peaks in Bolivia and across South America. Their name comes from chola, once a pejorative term for Indigenous Aymara women.

    Continue reading…

  • Interview With Former Bolivian President Evo Morales

    In the early morning hours of October 27, 2024, unmarked cars shot at the car that was transporting former president of the Plurinational state of Bolivia, Evo Morales Ayma, in an attempted assassination in Villa Tunari, Chapare, Cochabamba as he was making his way to the Radio Kawsachun Coca that hosts his Sunday morning shows. Immediately speculations arose that implicated the military, a possible DEA agent , the Interior Minister , the internal right wing that participated in the U.S. backed 2019 coup, the media, and the courts, among others.

    The post Interview With Former Bolivian President Evo Morales appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Workers saved Bolivian democracy

    Jacobin logo

    This story originally appeared in Jacobin on Dec. 14, 2024. It is shared here with permission.

    While left-wing governments hold power across most of Latin America, ultraright social forces remain a threat. In Bolivia, powerful left-Indigenous social movements have managed to keep an insurgent right wing at bay since the devastating coup of 2019. But a growing political crisis for the plurinational state highlights the urgent need to maintain unity in the face of an ever-powerful right.

    The coup of 2019 was a catastrophic attack on Bolivian democracy. It saw the rapid ascent of ultraright conservatives from the lowland city of Santa Cruz — the axis of regional-class antagonism to the then President Evo Morales and his party, the Movement Toward Socialism, or MAS — directed by businessman Luis Fernando Camacho, the leader of the business group Comité Pro Santa Cruz and former leader of the Nazi youth group Unión Juvenil Cruceñista (UJC).

    The coup unfolded when middle-class protesters took to the streets to dispute Evo’s victory in that year’s elections. As the protests escalated, the head of the armed forces “suggested” Morales resign, forcing him into exile in Mexico.

    In the resulting power vacuum, the right-wing evangelical Jeanine Áñez seized the presidency, and as social movements resisted, she presided over two mass killings — of nine protesters in Sacaba, Cochabamba, and of ten protesters blockading the Senkata gas plant in El Alto who were shot dead by a military exempted from criminal liability by a sudden presidential decree.

    Áñez swiftly reestablished diplomatic ties with the United States and Israel, with whom Morales had had strained relations. Clutching a giant Bible, Áñez declared, “The Bible has returned to the government,” as she paraded through the government headquarters. Soldiers were filmed burning the Wiphala flag, representing highland Indigenous peoples, signifying a new turn against the decolonizing policies of the state. A frenzied crackdown on leftists ensued as the coup government issued arrest warrants against journalists and MAS-supporting politicians.

    A year later, Bolivia’s left-wing party, the MAS, staged a stunning political comeback. It came after campesinos, Indigenous groups, and the Central Obrera Boliviana (COB), Bolivia’s major trade union federation, brought the country to a standstill by forming roadblocks to demand that the dictatorship government hold elections. Faced with the insurgent popular forces, the government buckled.

    In the elections that followed, the MAS swept to power in a landslide, repudiating the neoliberal and racist policies initiated by Bolivia’s elites. Those elites remain, nonetheless, active and powerful.

    Dissecting the Right

    In a recent article in Nueva Sociedad, Cristóbal Rovira argues that as in Europe, far-right political projects are on the rise everywhere in Latin America. In the 2019 coup in Bolivia, two key strands of right-wing mobilization emerged, the newest being the self-styled pititas — urban, young, middle-class protesters. Some were students at the universities in La Paz, such as the Universidad Mayor de San Andrés (UMSA), whose then rector, Waldo Albarracín, was a longtime critic of the MAS.

    Their modus operandi was the formation of makeshift string barricades in the streets. They shared memes likening Bolivia to a dictatorship, and their protest chants decried Morales’s “communism” and compared Bolivia to that old bogeyman, Venezuela.

    The pititas were joined by a more dangerous element: the ultraright concentrated in the wealthy eastern region of Santa Cruz with ties to Brazilian fascists and Washington, DC. This faction coalesced around Camacho, who went on to become governor of Santa Cruz in the 2021 regional elections. His old organization, the UJC, launched a campaign of terror in Santa Cruz in the wake of the coup, setting off bombs outside the headquarters of the local peasant union.

    The coup of 2019 was a catastrophic attack on Bolivian democracy.

    The formation of the UJC in 1957 is linked to the arrival in Bolivia of German Nazis who fled Europe after World War II. In recent decades, it has functioned as a kind of paramilitary group protecting the interests of loggers and agribusinesses. It seeks to establish an autonomous Santa Cruz state, and it uses racist rhetoric to castigate the highland Indigenous “savages” associated with the national government.

    The far right also exploits the long-standing cultural divisions between the eastern and western regions, the Andean highlands and the lowlands, respectively. Until the mid-twentieth century, the city of Santa Cruz was an isolated backwater, presided over by white elites who viciously exploited the small and dispersed Indigenous populations who lived in the wider region. The discovery of oil and gas deposits in the 1960s generated huge economic growth. Today Santa Cruz is the powerhouse of Bolivia, fueled in the past two decades by the expansion of the agricultural frontier for soy production, logging, and livestock, which are devastating the biodiverse landscapes and usurping Indigenous territory.

    In these eastern territories, vast tracts of land are still owned by a small wealthy elite, many of them having acquired the land during the dictatorships of the 1970s and ’80s. One of these landowners is Branko Marinkovic, the openly fascist descendant of wealthy Croatian immigrants, who, as minister of economy and public finance under Áñez, was rewarded with 34,000 hectares of land. In 2008, Marinkovic was arrested and went into exile in the United States and, subsequently, Brazil after orchestrating an assassination attempt against President Evo Morales.

    Cruceño elites — those associated with the Comité Pro Santa Cruz — have fashioned an identity as cambas to refer to their lowland identity, which they juxtapose with the racialized and often pejorative term collas, meaning highland Indigenous peoples. They are well integrated with the far right regionally. Marinkovic, for example, is a close associate of Jair Bolsonaro, the former Brazilian president; earlier this year, he was detained at Ezeiza airport in Buenos Aires, where he was on his way to meet Argentina’s libertarian president, Javier Milei, for dinner.

    Unlike the right-wing supporters of Milei and Bolsonaro, who were able to win national power at the ballot box, the ultraright in Bolivia remains heavily concentrated in the east of the country and has not yet been able to court wider support translating into electoral success nationally. In June 2022, Áñez was sentenced to ten years in prison for her role in the coup, and that December, Camacho was kept in preventive detention on charges of terrorism and embezzlement of funds. Despite their imprisonment and relative marginality, however, the forces that brought these two figures to prominence remain significant.

    Defending Democracy

    The ill-fated coup attempt of June 26, 2024, showcased the commitment of Bolivian movements to resisting threats to democracy. Troops led by an aggrieved army general sent a tank into the presidential palace in La Paz in what many feared was an effort by the military to seize power in the context of an ongoing internal conflict within the MAS. General Juan José Zúñiga demanded the release of Añez and Camacho.

    Although the “coup” fizzled out of its own accord within a few hours, Bolivia’s social movements immediately rushed to take a stand. “We will take to the streets. We will defend democracy!” declared Guillermina Kuno, an Aymara leader of the Bartolina Sisas, Bolivia’s national union of Indigenous peasant women, at a press conference. Social movements flooded Plaza Murillo in a show of strength against military interference.

    Unlike the right-wing supporters of Milei and Bolsonaro, who were able to win power at the ballot box, the ultraright in Bolivia has not yet been able to court wider support translating into electoral success nationally.

    The incident nonetheless bodes ill for a country still reeling from the 2019 coup. It certainly would not be the first time that military leaders had subverted democratic rule in Bolivia. Amid a litany of military coups, one of the most tragic in recent history was the putsch led by Luis García Meza in 1980. Troops entered the headquarters of the trade union federation and kidnapped socialist party leader Marcelo Quiroga, who was tortured and killed. As a result, almost the entirety of the labor movement leadership was forced into exile.

    In the late 1970s and ’80s, the peasant movement was a fierce defender of democracy in Bolivia in the face of authoritarian regimes. The MAS has its early origins in the mobilizing strategy of that peasant movement. It first came to power in 2005 under Morales, on the back of a cycle of uprisings between 2000 and 2004 led by peasants, miners, workers, and Indigenous groups against the privatization of the country’s resources and other neoliberal policies.

    With revenues from the newly nationalized oil and gas industries in the late 2000s, the economy boomed, and inequality reduced drastically. Social spending transformed the lives of the poor people, workers, Indigenous communities, and women. In a country marked by deep racial discrimination against Indigenous peoples, the state newly proclaimed the importance of Indigenous languages and ways of living.

    An Uncertain Future

    Today Bolivia’s left is mired in a new crisis. The country’s economic outlook is deteriorating. Diesel and basic food prices are rising sharply, putting pressure on ordinary people and exacerbating social tensions. The economic boom of the 2000s created a new middle class that is now seeing its fortunes turn and the value of its savings tumble.

    Marcelo Quiroga once observed that “nonrenewable natural resources are today’s bread and tomorrow’s hunger.” A legacy of the colonization of the Americas by Europeans in the fifteenth century, Bolivia’s economy remains stubbornly reliant on the export of primary commodities. It is one of the poorest countries in Latin America. Revenues from hydrocarbons have plummeted since the glory days of the 2000s, and foreign exchange reserves have dried up. Due to the collapse of exports, Bolivia has run out of dollars, which in turn means it cannot import diesel.

    Meanwhile, a bitter rift in the ruling MAS party between those loyal to Evo Morales, the ex-president, and Luis Arce, the current president, is crippling the Left. Both Arce and Morales want to run as the MAS candidate in the 2025 elections.

    In December last year, the country’s Plurinational Constitutional Court ruled that Morales was not eligible to run again under the constitutional term limits. But this has not deterred Morales from amassing a considerable support base in a massive march to La Paz to demand that he be allowed the candidacy.

    Morales has the loyalty of some sectors within the social movements, but he is unlikely to win favor with the electorate as a whole. A recent poll suggests that 65 percent of voters would not vote for him. Indeed, one of the major factors behind the coup in 2019 was Morales’s decision to overturn a referendum in which the electorate decided he should not be able to run for a fourth term in office, then prohibited by the constitution.

    The COB, led by Juan Carlos Huarachi, remains loyal to Arce, while the peasant union is split down the middle; there are, in effect, two parallel organizations within it, loyal to Morales and Arce, respectively. These divisions are having a corrosive impact on the unity of workers’ and Indigenous peoples’ movements, which is the base of the MAS.

    In the context of economic hardship, a number of social sectors have organized blockades to demand action by Arce on the economy. Not all of these sectors are in favour of Morales, however. The Ponchos Rojos, a highland Aymara peasant force, which has historically been highly autonomist, is not pro-Morales but has been protesting vociferously against Arce in recent weeks.

    Camacho has recently called for replacing masista — socialism — with the Cruceño model of growth: agrarian extractivism that enriches agribusiness elites without the state redistribution offered by the MAS. There is a deep risk that as the internal conflicts intensify, the right wing will again seize the chance to commandeer democratic institutions, entrench inequality, and reverse the socially oriented policies of the MAS. Bolivia’s leftist movements have trounced the ultraright before. Whether they can continue to do so is uncertain.

    This post was originally published on The Real News Network.

  • The Weakness of Progressive Latin American Governments in These Precarious Times

    Andry León (Venezuela), José Gregorio Hernández, 2023.

    Dear friends,

    Greetings from the desk of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.

    On 16 August 2024, the Organisation of American States (OAS), whose 1948 formation as a Cold War institution was instigated by the United States, voted on a resolution regarding the Venezuelan presidential elections. The nub of the resolution proposed by the US called upon Venezuela’s election authority, the National Electoral Council (CNE), to publish all the election details as soon as possible (including the actas, or voting records, at the local polling station level). This resolution asks the CNE to go against Venezuela’s Organic Law on Electoral Processes (Ley Orgánica de Procesos Electorales or LOPE): since the law does not call for the publication of these materials, doing so would be a violation of public law. What the law does indicate is that the CNE must announce the results within 48 hours (article 146) and publish them within 30 days (article 155) and that the data from polling places (such as the actas) should be published in a tabular form (article 150).

    It is pure irony that the resolution was voted upon in the Simón Bolívar room at the OAS headquarters in Washington, DC. Simón Bolívar (1783–1830) liberated Venezuela and neighbouring territories from the Spanish Empire and sought to bring about a process of integration that would strengthen the region’s sovereignty. That is why the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela pays tribute to his legacy in its name. When Hugo Chávez won the presidency in 1998, he centred Bolívar in the country’s political life, seeking to further this legacy through initiatives such as the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our Americas (ALBA) that would continue the journey to establish sovereignty in the country and region. In 1829, Bolívar wrote, ‘The United States appears to be destined by providence to plague [Latin] America with misery in the name of liberty’. This misery, in our time, is exemplified by the US attempt to suffocate Latin American countries through military coups or sanctions. In recent years, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela have been at the epicentre of this ‘plague’. The OAS resolution is part of that suffocation.

    José Chávez Morado (Mexico), Carnival in Huejotzingo, 1939

    Bolivia, Honduras, Mexico, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines did not come to the vote (nor did Cuba, as it was expelled by the OAS in 1962, leading Castro to dub the organisation the ‘Ministry of Colonies of the United States’, or Nicaragua, which left the OAS in 2023). Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (known as AMLO) described why his country decided not to appear at the OAS meeting and why it disagrees with the US-proposed resolution, quoting from article 89, section X of the Mexican Constitution (1917), which states that the president of Mexico must adhere to the principles of ‘non-intervention; peaceful settlement of disputes; [and] prohibiting the threat or use of force in international relations’. To that end, AMLO said that Mexico will wait for the ‘competent authority of the country’ to settle any disagreement. In Venezuela’s case, the Supreme Tribunal of Justice is the relevant authority, though this has not stopped the opposition from rejecting its legitimacy. This opposition, which we have characterised as the far right of a special type, is committed to using any resource – including US military intervention – to overthrow the Bolivarian process. AMLO’s reasonable position is along the grain of the United Nations Charter (1945).

    Many countries with apparently centre-left or left governments joined the US in voting for this OAS resolution. Among them are Brazil, Chile, and Colombia. Chile, even though it has a president who admires Salvador Allende (killed in a US-imposed coup in 1973), has displayed a foreign policy orientation on many issues (including both Venezuela and Ukraine) that aligns with the US State Department. Since 2016, at the invitation of the Chilean government, the country welcomed nearly half a million Venezuelan migrants, many of whom are undocumented and now face the threat of expulsion from an increasingly hostile environment in Chile. It is almost as if the country’s president, Gabriel Boric, wants to see the situation in Venezuela change so that he can order the return of Venezuelans to their home country. This cynical attitude towards Chile’s enthusiasm for US policy on Venezuela, however, does not explain the situation of Brazil and Colombia.

    Pablo Kalaka (Chile), Untitled, 2022, sourced from Lendemains solidaires no. 2.

    Our latest dossier, To Confront Rising Neofascism, the Latin American Left Must Rediscover Itself, analyses the current political landscape on the continent, beginning by interrogating the assumption that there has been a second ‘pink tide’ or cycle of progressive governments in Latin America. The first cycle, which was inaugurated with the 1998 election of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela and came to an end following the 2008 financial crisis and US counter-offensive against the continent, ‘frontally challenged US imperialism by advancing Latin American integration and geopolitical sovereignty’, while the second cycle, defined by a more centre-left orientation, ‘seems more fragile’. This fragility is emblematic of the situation in both Brazil and Colombia, where the governments of Luiz Inácio ‘Lula’ da Silva and Gustavo Petro, respectively, have not been able to exercise their full control over the permanent bureaucracies in the foreign ministries. Neither the foreign minister of Brazil (Mauro Vieira) nor Colombia (Luis Gilberto Murillo) are men of the left or even of the centre left, and both have close ties to the US as former ambassadors to the country. It bears reflection that there are still over ten US military bases in Colombia, though this is not sufficient reason for the fragility of this second cycle.

    In the dossier, we offer seven explanations for this fragility:

    1. the worldwide financial and environmental crises, which have created divisions between countries in the region about which path to follow;
    2. the US reassertion of control over the region, which it had lost during the first progressive wave, in particular to challenge what the US sees as China’s entry into Latin American markets. This includes the region’s natural and labour resources;
    3. the increasing uberisation of labour markets, which has created far more precarity for the working class and negatively impacted its capacity for mass organisation. This has resulted in a significant rolling back of workers’ rights and weakened working-class power;
    4. the reconfiguration of social reproduction, which has become centred around public disinvestment in social welfare policies, thereby placing the responsibility for care in the private sphere and primarily overburdening women;
    5. the US’s increased military power in the region as its main instrument of domination in response to its declining economic power;
    6. the fact that the region’s governments have been unable to take advantage of China’s economic influence and the opportunities it presents to drive a sovereign agenda and that China, which has emerged as Latin America’s primary trading partner, has not sought to directly challenge the US agenda to secure hegemony over the continent;
    7. divisions between progressive governments, which, alongside the ascension of neofascism in the Americas, impede the growth of a progressive regional agenda, including policies for continental integration akin to those proposed during the first progressive wave.

    These factors, and others, have weakened the assertiveness of these governments and their ability to enact the shared Bolivarian dream of hemispheric sovereignty and partnership.

    Antonia Caro (Colombia), Colombia, 1977.

    One additional, but crucial, point is that the balance of class forces in societies such as Brazil and Colombia are not in favour of genuinely anti-imperialist politics. Celebrated electoral occasions, such as the victories of Lula and Petro in 2022, are not built on a broad base of organised working-class support that then forces society to advance a genuinely transformative agenda for the people. The coalitions that triumphed included centre-right forces that continue to wield social power and prevent these leaders, regardless of their own impeccable credentials, from exercising a free hand in governance. The weakness of these governments is one of the elements that allows for the growth of the far right of a special type.

    As we argue in the dossier, ‘The difficulty of building a political project of the left that can overcome the day-to-day problems of working-class existence has unmoored many of these progressive electoral projects from mass needs’. The working classes, trapped in precarious occupations, need massive productive investments (driven by the state), premised on the exercise of sovereignty over each country and the region as a whole. The fact that a number of countries in the region have aligned with the US to diminish Venezuela’s sovereignty shows that these fragile electoral projects possess little capacity to defend sovereignty.

    Daniel Lezama (Mexico), El sueño del 16 de septiembre (The Dream of September 16th), 2001.

    In her poem ‘Quo Vadis’, the Mexican poet Carmen Boullosa reflects on the problematic nature of pledging allegiance to the US government’s agenda. Las balas que vuelan no tienen convicciones (‘flying bullets have no convictions’), she writes. These ‘progressive’ governments have no conviction regarding regime change operations or destabilisation efforts in other countries in the region. Much should be expected of them, but at the same time too much disappointment is unwarranted.

    Warmly,

    Vijay

    The post The Weakness of Progressive Latin American Governments in These Precarious Times first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Failed coup in Bolivia exposes new rifts


    This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Failed Coup in Bolivia: Army Chief Arrested After Leading Troops in Attack on Government Palace


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Are EVs Truly the Greenest Form of Transportation?

    A friend recently told me of a new study showing that the “life cycle” of electric vehicles (EVs) causes fewer CO2 emissions than gas-powered cars.  This is important since research comparing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions per mile have left out the enormous emissions associated with the complex mining, manufacturing and disposal phases of EVs. Is this recent announcement just more corporate bunk?  Or, could it mean that EVs are truly a step toward a greener world?

    And, is there a transportation alternative that avoids the pitfalls of both EVs and gas cars?

    The article by Julian Spector and Dan McCarthy was highly touted as showing that EVs are “definitely cleaner than gas cars over their lifetime.”  Citing research by BloombergNEF it admitted that the battery production phase of EVs results in more carbon emissions than occurs with fossil fuel (FF) cars.  It claimed that driving EVs (the use phase) is so much “cleaner” than gas cars, that, overall, EVs are responsible for fewer GHGs.  It further insisted that the production phase of EVs is getting cleaner all the time, meaning that it is “a slam-dunk” for the environment.

    Ever since I began teaching Environmental Psychology at Washington University years ago, when EVs were barely on the horizon, I explained to students the sleight-of-hand that manufacturers made when claiming that newer FF cars emitted fewer GHGs than older models.  How could it be that cars were getting “cleaner” while simultaneously GHGs from all cars were going up?

    This occurs if the categories of cars being purchased changes.  More and more SUVs were being sold and they emitted greater quantities of CO2 than did sedans.  Thus, sedans became “cleaner;” SUVs became “cleaner;” but the total quantity of CO2 from cars went up.  The same principle applies today with FF cars and EVs.

    Ralph Nader, who gained notoriety from publishing Unsafe at Any Speed (1965), recently wrote of serious problems with EVs.  These include high-voltage lithium-ion battery fires, disruption of electric power by storms, the scarcity of minerals required for manufacture, and serious difficulties with recycling their very heavy batteries,

    Car categories also affects pollution from tiny tire particles.  While tire manufacturers are slowly “moving to make-longer lasting tires,” the category of EVs presents a greater problem than gas cars.

    When a FF car weighing 5000 pounds is replaced by an EV version, the weight is 8000 pounds.  As weight goes up, tire duration goes way down.  Due to their heavier weight, EVs get only 13,000 miles per tire instead of the expected 40,000 miles.

    When the Rubber Hits the Road

    Writing in The Atlantic, David Zipper probes deeply into the tire problem that Nader touched on.  Tire toxins include rubber, petroleum, nylon, and steel, with many specks being so minuscule that they cannot be seen by the human eye.  Their quantity of 6 million tons globally is likely growing due to the heavier weight of EVs.  Smooth roads can actually be more harmful because they result in smaller particles that float further.

    The weight of EVs increases health threats to humans and other living things.  Tires could be the source of 28% of ocean microplastics.  One study found that the chemical 6PPD (designed to lengthen tire life) caused Northwestern-coho-salmon populations to decline dramatically.

    Low income neighborhoods next to highways have suffered elevated birth defects, kidney damage and problems for respiratory and neurological systems.  The extra weight of EVs renders them more dangerous to bikers, pedestrians and those in other cars.

    One factor which makes EVs so attractive is their extra power.  The power appears both for acceleration (“instant torque”) and “regenerative” braking.  These increase tire friction, which releases more wee particles that poison.

    Since transportation is a large portion of total energy used, EVs are an integral part of the drive to “electrify everything.”  Canada is offering $13 billion to help Volkswagen build a facility to manufacture EV batteries.  The “1500 acres of prime agricultural land” that would be taken for that factory is merely a fraction of the amount of expanding land required for expanding electrification of energy sources.

    While we usually think of ways to obtain necessary minerals for electrical power from mining land, there is likely to be at least as destructive effects from deep sea mining.  Thousands of feet at the bottom of the sea rest nodules, deposits and crusts containing materials such as nickel, rare earths, and cobalt.

    The deep sea mining process releases chemicals and heavy metals which disrupt marine life.  Sediments from mining are typically dumped back into the sea “which can harm filter-feeding species like corals and sponges.”  The bottom of deep oceans are devoid of light and sound and typically do not have disturbances that stir up sediment.  Many organisms on seabeds evolved without ways to filter out clouds of dirt or respond to the shining lights or noises of machines searching for and extracting minerals.  Effects on unknown species are, of course, unknown.

    Environmental Disaster Manifests Social Disruption

    It is no coincidence that the production of EVs is wrapped around some of the most loathsome social conflicts on Earth.  Unlimited expansion of electrification requires obfuscating what lurks in its corners.

    The giant of EV production is Tesla, the only non-union company among major US automakers.  It recently fired Buffalo NY workers following plans to unionize.  Its boss Elon Musk is likewise infamous for mass firings after acquiring Twitter.  While Musk seeks to captain a tight economic ship when keeping workers in line, he has no trouble squandering millions to pilot ships into outer space.

    Far from being tangential for the environment, these events establish the context of Musk’s most revealing statement, “We will coup whoever we want.”  Bolivia has extremely rich deposits of lithium which can most efficiently be mined for EV batteries by extracting vast amounts of water from an already dry desert.

    When Bolivian president Evo Morales sought deals that would bring more money to the poor of that country he was illegally removed from office in 2019.  When Musk scripted that infamous comment in July 2020, his company had long looked at Bolivia with an eye hungry for lower lithium prices.

    Even more distressing are the horrors that confront cobalt workers, as documented by Siddharth Kara’s Cobalt Red: How the Blood of the Congo Powers Our Lives (2023).  Almost 75% of cobalt is currently mined in the DRC by being “dug by ‘artisanal miners’, namely desperately poor people, including many children, for pennies a day.”

    In 2023 flooding and ensuing armed violence forced a half a million Congolese from their homes. Corporate media was not exactly absorbed with the story.  As Secretary General of the Norwegian Refugee Council Jan Egeland told Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! “The Congo is not ignored by those who want to extract the riches of that place. It’s ignored by the rest of the world who would want to come to the relief of the children and families of the Congo.”

    These practices portend things to come.  As mining expands to the far corners on Earth, minerals required for solar panels, wind mills and EVs will become increasing difficult to find and, like fossil fuel, will have decreasing yields.  Corporations will increasingly treat indigenous communities as obstacles to be shoved aside and their politicians will increasingly comply “just to deal with the energy crisis we have right now.”

    When dollar costs of manufacturing cars are reported, some of these factors might not make their way to corporate spreadsheets:

    • Legal donations to elect favorable politicians;
    • Illegal bribes for politicians;
    • Propaganda telling affected communities that there will be no serious environmental consequences from mining and manufacturing;
    • Lawsuits from communities that suffer serious environmental consequences;
    • Police and military personnel and equipment costs to put down opposition;
    • Funeral costs for those killed by police and military.

    Since EV supply chains require such a vast number of different minerals, these costs could well exceed those for FF cars.

    The Only Green Form of Transportation Is …

    In reality, neither gas cars nor EVs sport the greenest transportation.  The green alternative has been known for decades.  Actually, for centuries or millennia.  Just google the phrase “walkable communities” and you will find thousands of articles exploring how people can live better with parks, restaurants, stores, post offices, barber shops, schools, clinics, etc. within walkable distances.

    Unfortunately, if discussions of transportation even mention “walkable communities” it is a throw-away phrase to be ignored after giving it lip service.  The debate over EVs vs. gas cars is an enormous diversion from grappling with genuine issues that confront efforts to reduce transportation impacts:

    • How do we transform existing neighborhoods into walkable/cyclable ones while including the very young, very old and very sick?
    • How do we maximize closeness to work while minimizing difficulties with moving?
    • What would be the most reasonable ration of transportation miles per person via bus, train and air?

    Questions such as these show appreciation of this truism: The only green transportation is less transportation.  We may take buses or trains for some trips and cars for special trips but green transportation has the goal of minimizing trips that cannot be made by walking of cycling (or golf-carting for those with physical limitations).

    These concepts are central to the broader environmental question: How do we improve the quality of life of all people while treading more softly on the Earth?  The corporate view of “environmentalism” is the exact opposite.  Corporations exist in order to expand profits, which means expanding production, which requires convincing people to crave flashy things they do not need.

    EVs epitomize the mindset of conspicuous consumption.  As General Motors CEO Mary Barra quipped: “Once you’ve experienced an [electric vehicle] and all it has to offer—the torque, handling, performance, capability—you’re in.”  If the glorification of crass consumerism by corporate executives is repulsive, its regurgitation by “environmentalists” is obscene.

    Those who adopt the corporate mentality have their own set of questions:

    • Why build a home with passivhaus design when you can cover the top of a neighboring mountain with wind turbines?
    • Wouldn’t it be a waste of effort to require new homes to be built to passivhaus standards when the tops of a mountain range could be clearcut for cheap, clean energy from an expanding wind turbine company?
    • Why pass legislation to enhance walkable communities when EVs run so quietly and can zoom from 0 to 60 mph in less than four seconds?
    • Why would those people badmouth EVs when buying one gives me warm fuzzy feelings that I have done all that I need to do for the environment?

    EVs are hardly the only commodity that saddle humanity and the Earth with negative effects.  At the same time that cars have increased in size and ostentation, home building has marched in step to the tune of pointless growth.  As Canadian author Yves Engler observes, it’s “past time to shift away from the private car and resource intensive sprawl towards walkable, bikeable and transit-oriented living spaces … automotive infrastructure underpins a massive growth in house sizes, which consume more wood, cement,” glass pipe, etc.

    The drive toward “more stuff” is not limited to larger stuff.   It also means stuff that falls apart or goes out of style quicker.  You may have noticed a shorter life-use span for everything from clothes to electric coffee pots along with the increasing inability to repair consumer products.

    Those in Bolivia and the Congo who have direct experience with Western greed for power are not alone.  For people throughout the world who suffer from fossil fuel colonialism, electrification of energy is not the end-all-be-all of a “just transition” to a more humane economy.  Electrification is already becoming electric colonialism.

    The deep green question regarding EVs is: “Should there be an EV for every adult on Earth?”  If the answer is “yes,” then EVs could be even more destructive than FF cars because of the vast amount of habitat required for mineral extraction as well as the expanded use of FFs that would be required to produce them.  If the answer is “no” then applauding EVs manufactured for only the rich world is the most crass form of colonialism imaginable.

    Imaginary Numbers and Imagining True Effects

    The electrification of energy should go global only if it is by and for those where the transition occurs.  The means self-determination of energy sources that are consistent with people’s culture, preserve the land, water and air where they live, and do not sacrifice these on the alter of corporate profit.

    Infinite economic growth is antithetical to cultural and environmental preservation.  Tunnel-visioning on the very real threat of climate change has lured many an environmentalist into the trap of “green growth” and away from the pursuit of conservation.

    As Stan Cox points out, “economic growth has never been achieved over large geographical areas for extended time periods without having serious environmental impacts.”  He explains that even a 2% growth rate cannot be sustained “without excessive resource extraction and greenhouse-gas emissions.”

    Keeping these nuances in minds shines light on the claim that the life cycle of EVs has fewer CO2 emissions than gas cars.  A fact that is superficially true can be rendered ambiguous or false when taking its context into account.

    A more complete context for cars would go beyond “life cycle” and incorporate its “Total Life Effects” (TLE), which would include factors which might only be imagined.  The idea of imaginary values has stuck with me ever since taking high school algebra and studying little “i,” the square root of -1, or -1½.

    A complex number is expressed as: a + i X b, where a = a real number and b = the multiple for the imaginary number.  “i” has become a serious line of study of abstract math.  (Ironically, a field which finds “i” particularly useful is electricity.)

    Since many enormous environmental effects are incalculable, big “I” could be included to imagine them.  It is difficult to assess total environmental effects of the extinction of a species on its ecosystem.  How would anyone estimate financial effects of the collapse of an ecosystem on near and far ecosystems?  Who could possibly calculate the effects of an underwater holocaust of unknown species brought on by deep sea mining for minerals essential for EVs?

    Thus, TLS would be expressed as a complex number with big I being Incalculable effects and Σ being their total effect: TLE = $ + Σ I 

    All hitherto formulas for calculating environmental effects of manufacturing and mining are invalid and can become valid only by including big “I”s, that it, all potential effects on all species, including human cultures.  In other words, those who pretend that infinite expansion of electricity has no effect and leave big “I” out of their calculations – just as those who dismiss little “i” – suffer from a profound deficit in imagination.

    The post Are EVs Truly the Greenest Form of Transportation? first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Don Fitz.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • US Congressional Resolution Calls for Annulling the Monroe Doctrine and Ending Sanctions

    Now, 200 years after President James Monroe first promulgated his dictate giving the Yankees dominion of the rest of the hemisphere, a congressional resolution calls for annulling the Monroe Doctrine and replacing it with a “new good neighbor” policy. The intent is to “foster improved relations and deeper, more effective cooperation” with our neighbor nations.

    Led by Rep. Nydia Velázquez (D-NY) and cosponsored by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Delia Ramirez (D-IL), Chuy García (D-AZ), and Greg Casar (D-TX), House Resolution 943 notably calls for ending unilateral coercive economic measures against Cuba and other regional states. Initially introduced on December 19, 2023, Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) and Hank Johnson (D-GA) added their co-sponsorships on January10. Others may join them.

    Rap sheet on Monroeism

    While the Monroe Doctrine ingenuously claimed to protect hemispheric independence from foreign interference, HR 943 charges that the policy has, in fact, been used as a “mandate” to give the US license to interfere in the internal affairs of other states to promote its own narrow interests.

    The resolution forcefully begins with noting the “massive, forced displacement and genocide of Native peoples” by the North American colonialists.

    The resolution goes on to enumerate the further progression of the US imperium on the hemisphere. Back in the 1840s, the US took 55% of Mexico. In 1898, Puerto Rico (still possessed) and Cuba (Guantánamo still controlled) were seized. From 1898-1934, Washington intervened militarily in Cuba, Panama, Honduras, Nicaragua, Mexico, Haiti, and the Dominican Republic.

    In 1904, “international police power” to protect US and foreign creditors in the region was claimed under the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine. In 1947, the CIA was created with authorization for covert action in the region. Then in 1953, Guatemalan President Jacobo Arbenz was overthrown in the “first” CIA coup.

    In 1961, the US facilitated a 21-year military dictatorship in Brazil. The following year, the still continuing embargo (really a blockade) of Cuba was initiated. In 1973, Washington backed a coup in Chile and the succeeding 15-year military dictatorship.

    From 1975-1980, the US coordinated Operation Condor with terroristic military dictatorships in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay. In 1983, the US invaded and overthrew the government of Grenada. And in the 1980s and early 1990s, the US backed “dirty wars” in El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua.

    In 1991, the US covertly financed a military coup in Haiti. Another coup in Haiti was precipitated in 2004. Starting in 2000, billions were provided for Plan Colombia, implicated in massive human rights abuses. Meanwhile, from 1941-2003, US Naval operations in Vieques, Puerto Rico, caused deaths and lethal illnesses. In 2002, the US supported an unsuccessful coup in Venezuela. US-backed coups in Honduras in 2009 and in Bolivia in 2019 were both followed by Washington’s support for the subsequent illegitimate governments.

    Although this amounts to an appalling rap sheet, the resolution just highlights some of the more obvious transgressions. Omitted, for instance, is the 1989 US invasion of Panama and overthrow of that government.

    US-imposed institutions of regional control

    The resolution notes that the Washington-based and largely US-controlled Organization of American States (OAS) ignores “the many egregious abuses perpetrated” by the US and its client states.

    Similarly, the largely US-dominated International Monetary Fund is implicated in the regional debt crises, which has resulted in austerity and stagnant development. Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions, which are often imposed by the US in free-trade agreements, are also criticized in the resolution.

    The resolution blames the massive regional immigration of displaced persons partly on Washington’s own policies. The Central American “dirty wars” in the 1980s and 1990s and more recently the US-sponsored US drug wars and free trade agreements are cited among the problematic contributing causes.

    Regarding foreign intervention in the hemisphere, although not noted in the resolution, has been the US’s actual abetting of foreign interference; that is, when it aligns with its interests. Just this month, the British sent a warship to Guyana. At the same time, a US deputy secretary of defense was meeting with the Guyanese, backing the claims of a US oil company in territory disputed between Guyana and Venezuela.

    Further, the US fully backs what amount to European colonies, regardless of whether they are called dependencies, overseas territories, or even departments. France claims French Guiana, Guadeloupe Saint Martin, Saint Barthélemy, and Martinique. Netherlands possesses Aruba, Curaçao, and Sint Maarten. The UK has Bermuda, Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Turks and Caicos Islands, and the Malvinas. Washington, too, has its own de facto colonies of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

    Remedies

     Following this devastating bill of particulars, the resolution calls for remedies. The first of which is for the State Department to “send a strong signal” by annulling the Monroe Doctrine. A “good neighborhood policy” is proposed to replace it.

    That sounds nice. But, as the resolution notes, then US Secretary of State John Kerry mouthed similarly soothing words in 2013 and nothing came of that.   Notably, this resolution adds a bite to the bark, specifically calling for terminating all unilateral coercive economic sanctions. These measures are a form of collective punishment and as such are illegal under international law and condemned by the United Nations.

    Regarding the recidivist US practice of backing “extraconstitutional transfer of power,” the resolution urges Congress to legislate automatic reviews of assistance to coup governments. Aid would only be reinstated after the both the US and the majority of regional states agree that constitutional order has been re-instituted.

    Interestingly, the resolution calls for the “prompt” declassification of all US secret documentation on coups, dictatorships, and human rights abuses. Cover-ups from the past would be exposed.

    In terms of regional governance, the resolution insists that the OAS be reformed. Without naming US-sycophantic Luis Almagro, the resolution requests accountability for unethical and criminal activities by the organization’s secretary general plus full transparency on financial and personnel decisions (not explicitly named, but including his girlfriend). An ombudsman’s office is proposed. Human rights rapporteurs and electoral observation would be independent. Similarly, the US is asked to work cooperatively with other regional bodies such as CELAC, CARICOM, and UNASUR.

    Unspecified reforms of the International Monetary Fund and other international financial institutions are proposed to ensure equity for loans to developing countries. International Monetary Fund Special Drawing Rights are cited, which would help regional development and climate adaptation. Contributions are also recommended to the Amazon Fund.

    Citizen initiatives

    Of the sponsors of the resolution, three had been on a delegation to Brazil, Colombia, and Chile in August facilitated by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR), where they met with high-level officials. CEPR’s Director of International Policy Alexander Main commented that the delegation sought to “promote a fresh approach to US relations.”

    CEPR publishes the monthly Sanctions Watch, which reports on the asphyxiating impact of the unilateral coercive economic measures. Longest sanctioned, Cuba is in dire need of humanitarian relief from Uncle Sam. Particularly debilitating for Cuba was President Trump’s inclusion of the island nation on the State Sponsors of Terrorism (SSOT) list, which cuts it off from otherwise available aid.

    The SSOT policy has been continued by President Biden. A call to reverse the policy is absent from the proposed congressional resolution, which is sponsored by Biden’s fellow Democrats. However, the National Network on Cuba (NNOC) and the Alliance for Cuba Engagement and Respect (ACERE) are among the many organizations working to get Cuba off that list. These include faith-based groups such as the Presbyterian Mission and the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC). Even the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), which is the DC-based think tank that serves to give a liberal gloss to State Department policies, wants Cuba removed from the list.

    The Nicaragua Solidarity Coalition (NSC) works on reversing US sanctions there and is gearing up against a new congressional initiative to extend the grueling collective punishment. Fire This Time Movement for Social Justice (FTT) and the Venezuela Solidarity Network are among the North America groups working to take the US sanctions burden off of Venezuela.

    The SanctionsKill campaign opposes all economic coercive measures, including those imposed by the United Nations. The Latin America and the Caribbean Policy Forum, spearheaded by CodePink, is working for an “Americas without sanctions” with the Alliance for Global Justice (AfGJ) and others. CodePink and World Beyond War hosted a mock “funeral” for the Monroe Doctrine in December.

    Counter initiative

    Earlier on December 1, María Elvira Salazar (R-FL) and Chip Roy (R-TX) had introduced a resolution, which was opposite of the intent of the resolution led by Velázquez. This other resolution celebrated the Monroe Doctrine’s bicentennial and was joined by fourteen other Republican representatives as cosponsors. They asserted that the need is greater than ever to protect against “malign overseas influence.” Salazar warned, “China, Russia and Iran are trying to invade the Western Hemisphere.”

    Although Velázquez’s and her fellow Democrats’ HR 143 calls for annulling the Monroe Doctrine and ending sanctions, we should have no illusion that their resolution will end US imperialism any time soon. Unfortunately, many on the blue team including their standard bearer have developed a fervor for American exceptionalism similar to the wing-nuts on the other side of the aisle.

    But, given the seemingly unlimited bipartisan appetite for foreign intervention, it is at least a step in the right direction and a platform that can be used for organizing, particularly against sanctions. As the Spanish daily El País commented, the resolution to annul is a “charge against two centuries of US expansionist policy.”

    The post US Congressional Resolution Calls for Annulling the Monroe Doctrine and Ending Sanctions first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Latin America and the Caribbean stand with Palestine

    The countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, with a few notable exceptions, have been critical of Israel’s ongoing campaign of genocide in Gaza. Perhaps more than any other region, they have expressed their solidarity with Palestine. Most recognize that the partnership between US imperialism and Israeli Zionism applies not only to Palestine, but also to Israel’s role as attendant to US domination in this hemisphere.

    President Gabriel Boric of Chile condemned Israeli’s attacks on Palestinians in Gaza. The largest Palestinian population outside of the Middle East (more properly West Asia) resides in Chile. Belize and Peru, likewise, joined the denunciation of Israel. Bolivia, meanwhile, has severed diplomatic relations with Israel, while Honduras and Colombia recalled their ambassadors.

    Cuba had cut relations back in 1973 and Venezuela in 2009. Except for Panama, almost all of the region’s states recognize Palestine. Brazil, Colombia, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, and Venezuela all have sent aid to Gaza. Even Argentina, with the largest Jewish population in the region, censured Israel over its violations of international law when hostilities first flared up.

    Samuel Moncada, Venezuela’s ambassador to the United Nations, addressed the General Assembly on November 23: “It is repugnant to see how, despite the cruelty…the government of the United States of America and its satellites aim to justify the unjustifiable.”

    Cuba and Iran called for a global coalition to protect the rights of Palestinians on December 4, noting that the world community has failed to stop the US-backed genocide.

    A month before the October 7 offensive by Hamas, President Gustavo Petro of Colombia had presciently taken the occasion of the opening of the United Nations session to call for a united world effort at achieving peace in Israel-Palestine (along with Ukraine).

    Nayib Bukele, president of El Salvador and ironically of Palestinian heritage, stood out in his support of Israel among the regional heads of state. That is, until the militantly pro-Zionist Javier Milei assumed the presidency of Argentina two months after the most recent eruption of aggressions.

    Henchman for the hegemon

    The head of Colombia publicly criticizing Israel would have been unthinkable until Gustavo Petro won the presidency in 2022. The former M19 guerilla turned center-left politician was the first president from the portside in the entire history of Colombia. Pre-Petro, Colombia was known as Washington’s closest client in the region, the largest recipient of US military aid, and the only NATO global partner in Latin America.

    Back in 2013, then Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos reflected on his country’s status as the regional equivalent to the US’s proxy state in the Middle East. He proclaimed that he was proud that Colombia is considered the “Israel of Latin America.” Indeed, Israel had an extensive role as henchman for the US hegemon in Colombia. The right-wing linked Colombian military and paramilitaries had long been closely intermeshed with the Zionist state.

    The United Self-Defenses of Colombia (AUC in its Spanish initials), a drug trafficking cartel with a reputed 10,000-20,000 combatants at its peak, was one of the largest paramilitary groups in South America. The AUC was used by the US-allied official Colombian military to do its dirty work against left campesino and worker organizations. AUC militaries were trained by Israeli operatives. Some fifty of its most promising cadre received “scholarships” to Israel. Operating out of Guatemala, the Israeli arms supplier GIRSA sold Kalashnikov rifles and ammunition to the AUC paramilitaries in Colombia.

    Another Latin American country with a closely intertwined relationship with Israel was Nicaragua before the Sandinista revolution. During the long US-backed Somoza dictatorship, Israel maintained a “special relationship” with this dynasty of ruthless autocrats. In the last days of the dictatorship, the US cut off arms supplies in response to public revulsion over atrocities committed by Somoza’s forces. Undaunted, Israel continued to supply them with military equipment. Then, when the US instigated the counterinsurgency after the successful Sandinista-led national liberation, Israel again served as supplier of the contras. Paralleling the Somoza-Israel bond were the Sandinista-Palestine ties, which continue to this day.

    Israel’s partnership with US imperialism in the region

    For the 31st time in November, the UN nearly unanimously condemned the US blockade of Cuba for its devastating effects on civilians and as a violation of the UN Charter. The vote would have been unanimous except for “no” votes cast by the US and Israel along with an abstention from Ukraine. The latter, which is now essentially a US dependency, is a newcomer. But Tel Aviv, on the other hand, has consistently stood with Washington in support of its coercive and illegal economic measures that have created a dire crisis in Cuba.

     In fact, Israel has served as Washington’s partner in training reactionary death squads and supplying repressive militaries throughout the region for decades. Al Jazeera reported that Israel has trained, supplied, and advised militaries in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Venezuela in addition to Colombia and Nicaragua.

    Not only was Israel entangled with the Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua, but it had a similar relationship to the 29-year Duvalier dynasty in Haiti, selling arms for the dictators’ repressive forces. Ditto for the 35-year dictatorship of Alfredo Stroessner in Paraguay, the 17-year Pinochet dictatorship in Chile, and the military dictatorships in Argentina and Brazil. Likewise, Israel was the supplier of arms and trainer of death squads in the “dirty” wars in Guatemala and El Salvador. In all these grisly ventures, Tel Aviv was joined at the hip with Washington.

    The Middle East Research and Information Project (MERIP) explains that many right-leaning Latin American countries see a “close military relationship with Israel as a political asset in restoring or maintaining military and political ties with Washington.”

    When reactionary regimes in the region need coercive muscle for hire, Israel is a prime choice. After right-winger David Noboa won the Ecuadorian presidency last month, he called in Israel to help restore government control of its prison system, which had been taken over by criminal gangs. Israel is also being tapped to design maximum security prisons in Ecuador.

    According to Israeli psychologist Benjamin Beit-Hallahmi’s The Israeli Connection, “Israel is generally admired in Latin American military circles for its macho image of firmness, ruthlessness, and efficiency…Latin American military establishment is where most of Israel’s friends are found and where Israel continues to cultivate support.”

    Case in point is the far-right Javier Milei, who assumed the presidency of Argentina on December 10. He campaigned on the promise to realign the second largest economy in South America with the US and Israel and away from its largest trading partners Brazil and China. On his first trip abroad after his election victory, Milei went to the US where he made what was described as a pilgrimage to the grave of an ultra-orthodox Jewish rabbi and announced his intention to convert from Catholicism to Judaism. The self-described anarcho-capitalist had accused the Argentina-born pope of being a communist and a false prophet.

    Palestine’s friends and foes

    Support of Israeli Zionism is a unifying issue for the fractious far right in the region, where virulent antisemites buddy up with Jewish nationalists, wrapping themselves – literally as in the case of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro – in the Israeli flag.

    When the now disgraced and exiled Juan Guaidó first got the nod from the US to self-declare himself “interim president” of Venezuela in 2019, he staged the announcement on a street corner in Caracas with an Israeli flag flying behind him. Just as the red flag has been adopted as the banner for the left, the pennant of Israeli has become the insignia of the right. That blue and white banner can be seen at right-wing political rallies and at market stands owned by evangelicals throughout the region.

    A growing evangelical Christian movement views Israel as a crucial part of their theology of the “end times” and is becoming an influential political force in the electorates of Guatemala (42%), Costa Rica (26%), Brazil (25%), Venezuela (22%), and elsewhere. The evangelicals have yet to exert a significant pro-Zionist political influence in the region. But that potential should not be discounted as events unfold.

    On December 12, the United Nations General Assembly voted on a ceasefire in Gaza. Only Guatemala and Paraguay in Latin America voted “nay,” joining the US and Israel, while Uruguay, Argentina, and Panama abstained. The rest of the region united with the world supermajority of 153 nations supporting the resolution.

    For now, Latin America and the Caribbean remain a bastion of support for Palestinian freedom. Palestine’s cause is popular with countries striving for independence from the US. Factors contributing to that stance are large Arab diasporas in the region, small pro-Zionist Jewish populations, and no powerful lobbies like AIPAC. For many, the struggle to assert national self-determination under US hegemony finds a kindred affinity with the cause of Palestine.

    The post Latin America and the Caribbean stand with Palestine first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Citing Crimes Against Humanity, Bolivia Severs Diplomatic Relations With Israel

    Citing “crimes against humanity,” Bolivia’s socialist administration on Tuesday became the first in the world to completely sever diplomatic relations with Israel over its war on Gaza, while the leftist governments of Chile and Colombia and Jordan’s monarchy recalled their ambassadors from Tel Aviv. “We are sending this official communication to the state of Israel in which, as stated…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Bolivian ex-president to pay damages to victims of military in landmark US case

    Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada and former defence minister agree to pay for 2003 violence in which 60 protesters were killed

    A former Bolivian president and his defence minister have agreed to pay damages to the families of people killed by the military during their government, in a landmark settlement that sets a precedent by which other foreign leaders could face accountability for human rights abuse in US courts.

    The settlement concerns events in 2003, when massive protests broke out over then president Gonzalo Sánchez de Lozada’s plan to export Bolivia’s natural gas. The army was sent to clear blockades in the largely Indigenous and working-class city of El Alto, killing more than 60 protesters and injuring hundreds.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Sarah Polley’s Act of Imagination

    Women Talking is about the struggle to unearth language capable of describing profound desires for freedom and safety.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • Sarah Polley’s Act of Imagination

    Women Talking is about the struggle to unearth language capable of describing profound desires for freedom and safety.

    This post was originally published on Dissent MagazineDissent Magazine.

  • Bolivia: Far-right leader detained ahead of coup trial

    A Bolivian court sentenced far-right Bolivian leader Luis Fernando Camacho to four months of preventive detention in the Chonchocoro Prison while investigation is underway in the ‘Coup d’état I’ case, reports People’s Dispatch.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • The Volatility of US Hegemony in Latin America (Part III)

    A surging Pink Tide has brought left electoral victories in Latin America and the Caribbean protesting the neoliberal model imposed by the US and its collaborators. Neoliberalism has failed to meet the needs of the peoples of the region and is losing its legitimacy as a prototype for development.

    However, the countries of the region must of necessity engage in a world financial order dominated by the US, which limits the possibilities of developing their economies successfully.

    Troubled waters

    US and other western central banks – what Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega calls the “gang of assassins who control the global economy” – maintained low interest rates for much of the last decade which encouraged countries in Latin America and the Caribbean to take out large loans.

    Starting around 2021, interest rates were slowly raised. Coincident, the pandemic hit and developing countries were forced to go further into debt to fund Covid measures and cushion the effects of the economic dislocation. In these volatile times, the value of the US dollar has increased on international markets.

    For developing nations, this has meant higher interest payments coupled with capital flight to US financial markets in particular. Inflation, fueled by US and allied sanctions on Russia, have disrupted international supply chains, making goods less available and more expensive. In addition, large corporations have extracted excess profits.

    The Pink Tide meets a right-wing counter current

    Paradoxically those very problems which the left-leaning governments protested about, now have become theirs to solve once in power and at a time of growing economic distress. What Reuters calls the now “orphaned right” in Latin America and the Caribbean may be down but not dead.

    Mexico. In Mexico, AMLO is termed-out for the 2024 presidential race. The popular president is currently advocating contentious electoral reforms and expanded welfare. Economic growth is stagnating, and the country continues to be plagued with horrific drug cartel violence. The US is heavily pressuring Mexico to accept GMO crops, energy sector privatization, and measures to prevent immigrants for crossing the border into the “land of the free.”

    Argentina. Argentina, a major global supplier of grains and soybeans, is in the third year of a draught. The economy is in shambles with inflation running at nearly 100%, wages stagnant, and an enormous debt incurred by the former rightist administration.

    Current vice president and former president (2003-2007) Cristina Fernández de Kirchner (CFK) is the likely left candidate in the upcoming presidential race in October. She may be pitted against former right-wing president Mauricio Macri in what would be a polarizing contest. CFK, who narrowly escaped death when the assassin’s gun jammed, is facing major legal “lawfare” challenges for corruption. Presently, the right is favored to win in the polls.

    Bolivia. President Arce faced a month-long coup attempt in the Santa Cruz department of Bolivia. Right-wing forces set up blockades and violently attacked unionists and campesinos, causing considerable damage to the national economy before an agreement was reached. The timing of the next national census was the ostensible point of contention, but the larger and continuing purpose was to destabilize the leftist administration.

    Peru. The ever-mercurial Peru has had five presidents in three years. After winning by a razor thin margin, the majority right-wing legislature has so hounded President Castillo that he has literally been unable to govern. They have even blocked his ability to leave the country while he is being investigated on multiple corruption charges. Castillo is hanging in there by his fingernails, having survived two impeachment attempts (and another in progress) and some five cabinet reorganizations.

    Honduras. After over 12 years of US-aligned governments in Honduras, President Castro has inherited a strongly entrenched rightist judiciary, military, and police and a weak economy. A state of emergency was imposed at the end of November to address widespread extortion by gangs.

    The new president has proceeded cautiously given her constrained options. The legislature passed her repeal of the ZEDE free trade zones. But the US ambassador has interfered in Honduran affairs, opposing the repeal.

    Chile. Gabriel Boric has tried to position himself as the “good” non-authoritarian left. On the campaign trail and in office, he criticized Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, creating disunity among the left-leaning Latin American states. Maduro of Venezuela returned the compliment by labelling him the “cowardly left”; Ortega of Nicaragua called him a White House “lapdog.”

    While he may ingratiate himself to the US, President Boric’s popularity ratings have plummeted. He surfed into office on the popular wave for a new constitution to replace the Pinochet-era one, but which went down in a referendum on September 4 with only 38% approval. The economy is in decline and the indigenous Mapuche people are in revolt.

    Colombia. The new progressive president has to carefully triangulate with the entrenched right and the colossus of the north. Colombia is the only NATO “global partner” in Latin America, and President Petro has proposed bringing NATO into the Amazon. The congenitally anti-communist, neoliberal Soros foundation is also working closely with the new government.

    Despite these constraints, President Petro has reopened relations with Venezuela, reversing Colombia’s previous role as the US surrogate to attack its neighbor. Petro has forged ahead with his Total Peace initiative with the ELN and other armed guerillas, based on the 2016 Peace Agreement. Further, the new administration seeks to negotiate peaceful settlements with right paramilitaries and drug cartels. Meanwhile, illicit cocaine production in Colombia, the world’s largest supplier, is on a record increase.

    Petro has also been successful in getting his tax reform enacted to fund his ambitious social programs. Nevertheless, his energy policies present problematic choices between extraction for profit and retrenchment for the environment.

    Brazil. Lula beat Bolsonaro by 1.5%. Given the unexpected closeness of the vote and Bolsonaro’s extreme right-wing positions, not to mention his bungling of the Covid crisis and general mismanagement, some analysts considered the election more of a rejection of Bolsonaro than an affirmation of Lula. A significant proportion of the electorate believe, without evidence, that Lula is a corrupt criminal who stole the election.

    For over three weeks after Bolsonaro lost, right-wing truckers blocked Brazil’s highways in protest, and evangelicals preyed outside military bases calling for the army to overturn the vote. Bolsonaro neither conceded, nor commented, nor even appeared in public. His Vice President Hamilton Mourão offered the excuse that his chief had a skin disease preventing him from wearing pants!

    Finally, Bolsonaro called for annulling over half the votes because of a supposed bug in the electronic system, which would allow him to remain president of Brazil. The independent election authority reaffirmed Lula’s legitimate victory.

    Lula’s Workers’ Party lost some of the major cities and states and lacks an effective majority in the national legislature, immediately forcing Lula to moderate his economic agenda after his initial proposal set financial markets plunging. Lula’s running mate and now VP Geraldo Alckmin is a center-right politician, who was included on the ticket to attract that constituency. Lula will take office on January 1.

    Prognosis for the Pink Tide

    The recent left successes of the Pink Tide have been considerable, but may be transient, subject to the ebb and flow of the electoral arena. Further, this Pink Tide is limited by social democratic politics ideologically tied to accommodating their own bourgeoisies, which inhibits how far social change can be achieved.

    Significantly, no new revolutions accompanied this current wave of left electoral victories. Nor are any new revolutions currently on the horizon. The existing socialist countries of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua have been engaged in defensive struggles against the regime-change campaigns of the US. Their futures are more constrained than they were a decade ago. And their continued survival is by no means guaranteed.

    Overarching the hemisphere is the continued presence of US. Globally, Washington has become more aggressive in asserting its dominance and more unified in its imperialist mission now that the Democrats have become the leading party of war.

    Meanwhile, recessionary clouds are gathering over the world economy which will impede the left-leaning administrations’ social programs. Unlike the previous Pink Tide of 2008, this one won’t be buoyed by a comparable commodities boom.

    Nevertheless, looking into the new year, Venezuelan President Maduro observed at a meeting of the São Palo Forum of regional left parties: “We are facing a favorable wave for the peoples, for the anti-neoliberal model, for the advanced pro-independence model.”

    See Part I here; Part II here

    The post The Volatility of US Hegemony in Latin America (Part III) first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • The Volatility of US Hegemony in Latin America (Part 1)

    Latin America and the Caribbean have again began to take on a becoming pink complexion, all the more so with June’s historic electoral victory in Colombia over the country’s long-dominant US-backed right-wing and a similar reverse in Brazil in October. These electoral rejections of the right-wing followed left victories last year in Peru, Honduras, and Chile. And those, in turn, came after similar routs in Bolivia in 2020, Argentina in 2019, and Mexico in 2018.

    This electoral wave, according to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, speaking at the Climate Summit in November, “open[s] a new geopolitical age to Latin America.” This “Pink Tide” challenges US hemispheric hegemony, whose pedigree dates back to the 1823 Monroe Doctrine.

    The tidal surge

    The metaphor of the “Pink Tide” aptly describes the ebb and flow of the ongoing class conflict between the minions of imperialism and the region’s popular forces. Back in 1977, the region was dominated by the “rule of the generals.” The infamous US Operation Condor supported explicit military dictatorships in all of South America, except for Colombia and Venezuela, and in much of Central America.

    Then the tide began to turn with the election of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela in 1998. By 2008, almost the entire region was in the pink with the notable exceptions of Colombia, Mexico, and a few others. A decade later, a conservative backlash left Uruguay, Ecuador, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Cuba, and a lonely handful of other states on the progressive side. But that was to change by mid-year 2018.

    Mexico

    The first blush of pink to the current wave dates back to July 1, 2018, with Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s landslide victory in Mexico. Many believe his two previous runs at the presidency were stolen from him. Affectionately known by the acronym AMLO, his broad coalition under the newly formed MORENA party swept national, state, and municipal offices and ended 36 years of neoliberal rule.

    Mexico’s list to the left was significant. It is the second largest economy in the region and the thirteenth in the world. Mexico is the second largest US trading partner after Canada and before China.

    AMLO has made important foreign policy initiatives independent, in fact, defiant, of the US. He conspicuously invited Venezuelan President Maduro as a guest of honor to a major Mexican holiday celebration. When Biden called a “democracy summit” for the hemisphere last June but did not invite Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, AMLO boldly led a boycott, which largely sabotaged the affair. And AMLO has been a strong proponent of regional integration promoting CELAC and other multi-national institutions.

    Argentina

    A year after AMLO’s ascendency, the rightist Mauricio Macri was replaced by the left Peronist Alberto Fernández on October 27, 2019. The flip from right to left was a repudiation of Macri’s subservience to the IMF and austerity economic policies, which had generated mass opposition.

    Bolivia

    Two weeks after the election in Argentina, the left suffered a major body blow on November 10, 2019, when a coup overthrew leftist President Evo Morales in Bolivia. The coup was backed by the US with the complicity of the Organization of American States (OAS) under the leadership of Luis Almagro, a sycophant to the Yankees.

    Evo, as he is popularly called, was the first indigenous president in the majority indigenous country. He barely escaped the coup violence when a plane supplied by AMLO whisked him to safety in Mexico.

    Evo’s vindication came a year later on October 18, 2020, when his fellow Movement to Socialism (MAS) Party member Luis Arce won back the presidency by a landslide. Evo then returned from exile and has since played an international role as a spokesperson on climate change, regional integration, indigenous rights, and other left issues.

    Peru

    Then seven months later, a person from a Marxist-Leninist party took the presidency in Peru on June 6, 2021. When the rural schoolteacher and strike leader Pedro Castillo emerged as one of the two contenders in the first presidential election round, he was virtually unknown. The international press even struggled to find a photo of the future president.

    Castillo won the final election round against the hard right Keiko Fujimori. Castillo’s victory spelled the end of the Lima Group, a coalition of anti-Venezuela countries. Strategically, the Pacific rim of South America, which had previously been entirely populated by right-wing US allies, now had a leftist in its midst.

    Nicaragua

    The left trend was further consolidated five months after the success in Peru when the ruling Sandinista Party (FSLN) in Nicaragua swept the national elections on November 7, 2021. A year later on November 6, 2022, the Sandinistas were further affirmed with a sweep of the municipal elections.

    Nicaragua had been recovering from a violent unsuccessful coup attempt in 2018 involving the Catholic Church and other right-wing elements. Having failed to achieve regime change by helping to instigate and back the coup, the US has since tightened the economic screws on the third poorest state in the hemisphere ratcheting up unilateral coercive measures.

    Despite the illegal US sanctions designed to punish its people, the socialist government has done so much with so little. Nicaragua’s 8.3% economic growth during the pandemic is among the highest in the region and indeed the world.

    Nicaragua is the safest in the entire region and among the safest internationally. Education and healthcare are free. With the best roads in Central America, the previously neglected and isolated Caribbean coast is now more fully integrated with the rest of the country. And an unsurpassed 30% of the national territory is in autonomous zones for indigenous and Afro-descendent peoples. Contrary to US propaganda, polls show President Daniel Ortega is popular with his constituents.

    Venezuela

    Then two weeks after the left electoral affirmation in Nicaragua, the same was repeated in Venezuela. The ruling Socialist Party (PSUV) swept the regional and legislative elections on November 21, 2021.

    Although the US and a handful of its most sycophantic allies still recognize the Trump-anointed Juan Guaidó as “interim president” of Venezuela, the vast majority of states accept Nicolás Maduro as the lawful president. The hapless Mr. Guaidó has the highest disapproval ratings among potential opposition candidates for the 2024 presidential election. While polls show that if a snap election were called, Maduro would win.

    Meanwhile, Biden, under pressure to ease fuel shortages of its own making, is ever so slightly easing Trump’s draconian sanctions. Chevron is resuming limited operations in Venezuela and some of Venezuela’s $20 billion of “kidnapped” assets in foreign banks are being released for humanitarian projects.

    Honduras

    Just a week after the Venezuela election, the sweetest left triumph was achieved. Xiomara Castro became the first woman elected to the presidency in the history of Honduras on December 1, 2021. Her husband, Manuel Zelaya, had been overthrown in a coup on June 28, 2009, that was orchestrated by US President Barack Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

    Castro replaced over twelve years of “nacro dictatorship,” a well-deserved opprobrium that is confirmed by the US government itself. Back in 2009, the facts were so clear that even the accomplice Obama had to admit Zelaya was ousted in a “coup,” though he weaseled that wasn’t a “military” coup.

    The US then backed a succession of illegitimate presidents, including the most recent past President Juan Orlando Hernández, with generous military, financial, and political support. Even the OAS, which is essentially an arm of the US masquerading as a multi-national body, questioned the validity of his election. Then once Castro won, “JOH” was quickly extradited to the US and thrown into prison for importing vast quantities of cocaine to the US.

    Formerly known as the “USS Honduras” for its role as the US surrogate in Central America, the new Castro presidency will be charting a new course for Honduras.

    Chile

    Less than two weeks after the defeat of the right in Honduras, Gabriel Boric won the Chilean presidency on December 19, 2021, campaigning under the slogan “neoliberalism was born in Chile and here it will die.” He replaced the rightist Sebastián Piñera who, incidentally, was the richest person in Chile.

    A former student leader turned politician, the 36-year-old Boric came out of the mass anti-neoliberal protests of 2019 and 2021, which mobilized a significant portion of Chile’s population. Boric had beaten the Communist Party candidate in the progressive Apruebo Dignidad coalition primary and went on the defeat José Antonio Kast in the presidential election.

    To call Kast a far rightist would be an understatement. Sometimes leftist rhetoric too loosely accuses opponents of being fascists. In the case of Kast and his politically active brothers, however, the term is perfectly apt. Their father came from Germany and was an actual member of the Nazi Party.

    Colombia

    What happened next was truly historical. Former leftist guerilla (since moderated toward the center-left) Gustavo Petro and his VP Francia Márquez, an Afro-descendent environmentalist, were the first progressives to ever win in Colombia on June 19th of this year. Their Pacto Histórico coalition had come out of the immense popular protests of 2019 and 2020, which featured indigenous and Afro-descendent participation.

    Colombia, formerly known as the “Israel of Latin America,” had long been the leading US regional client state and the largest recipient of US military aid in the hemisphere. This election promises to upset that role and break with the influential right-wing former President Álvaro Uribe and his successors.

    Outgoing rightist President Iván Duque also made history as Colombia’s least popular president. He immediately joined the rightist Wilson Center in Washington, changing job titles but not, in effect, employers.

    Brazil

    Colombia was a huge splash in the region, but what ensued in Brazil was a crashing tidal wave of global proportions.

    Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, known colloquially simply as Lula, was first elected in 2003 and left the presidency in 2010 with soaring popularity ratings. He was succeeded by fellow Workers’ Party member Dilma Rousseff, who was reelected in 2014. Two years later, the right-dominated legislature used “lawfare” to oust her from office.

    Lula was then a victim of lawfare himself. Although the most popular would-be presidential candidate, he spent April 2018 to November 2019 in prison. This allowed Jair “Trump of the Tropics” Bolsonaro to assume the presidency. Then in a spectacular comeback, Lula beat Bolsonaro in the next presidential contest on October 31, 2022.

    Sea change in Latin America and the Caribbean

    The progressive electoral victories decisively tip the regional geopolitical balance to the portside. The rank order by size of the largest regional economies is Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Colombia, Chile, and Peru – all of which are now on the left side of the ledger. Brazil’s is the eighth largest economy in the world.

    Brazil’s inclusion in the BRICS transcontinental alliance foreshadows an emerging international multipolar independence from the west. Originally including Russia, India, China, and South Africa, BRICS+ may expand to include Argentina, Iran, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, and others.

    Lula campaigned on creating a regional currency, the SUR. Maduro, too, has called for a regional currency, which would challenge US dollar dominance.

    Lula, Maduro, and their fellow travelers promise to be spokespersons for the poor at home, for regional integration (reviving UNASUR and reinforcing MERCOSUR), and internationally for multilateralism (addressing climate change and possibly even helping to broker a peace in Ukraine).

    To be continued…

    • Part II addresses the explicitly socialist countries (Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua), the lessons of Haiti, and the emerging role of China.

    The post The Volatility of US Hegemony in Latin America (Part 1) first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Latin America: Unions denounce right-wing destabilisation attempts in Bolivia

    Trade unions across Latin America have expressed solidarity with Bolivian workers and their government in the face of right-wing destabilisation attempts in Santa Cruz since October, reports Ana Zorita.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Solidarity with Bolivia against destabilisation

    Solidarity activists in Sydney have denounced the campaign of violence and destabilisation against Bolivia’s democractically elected government, reports Ana Zorita and Susan Price.

  • Bolivia presents revolutionary socialist plan to transform world

    At the United Nations General Assembly, Bolivian President Luis Arce outlined his ambitious vision for changing the global capitalist system. Ben Norton reports.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • The Pink Tide Surges in Latin America

    While the political balance between progressive and reactionary states south of the Rio Grande continues to tip to the left, even the corporate press pronounced Biden’s June Summit of the Americas meeting in Los Angeles a flop. Most recently, Colombia elected its first left-leaning president, following similar victories in Chile, Peru, and Honduras, which in turn followed Bolivia, Argentina, and Mexico.  And the frontrunner in Brazil’s presidential contest slated for October is a leftist. However, Nicaragua, Venezuela, and especially Cuba – countries led by explicitly socialist parties – are critically threatened by US imperialism, subjected to severe sanctions. In short, the geopolitical situation in the Western Hemisphere remains volatile. What does this portend for US hegemony and for socialism?

    Ebb and flow of the class struggle in Latin America

    The tidal metaphor describes the shifting constellations of governments in what Washington long considered its exclusive domain ever since the 1823 Monroe Doctrine. The Pink Tide is a reaction to, and a struggle against, neoliberalism, which is the contemporary form of capitalism. The Pink Tide first entered its flow phase in 1998 with the election of Hugo Chávez as president of Venezuela. What followed was truly a sea change with a developing expression of sovereignty and independence. An alphabet soup of regionally integrated entities arose: ALBA, UNASUR, MERCOSUR, Petrocaribe, CELAC, etc.

    Upon assuming state power, the emerging left governments paradoxically inherit the very problems that precipitated the popular discontent that had led to their ascendence. And that is not to mention the looming presence of the Colossus of the North whose official policy is zero tolerance of insubordination to the empire.

    The Pink Tide went into an ebb phase around 2015 with the election of hard-right Mauricio Macri in Argentina. A US-backed coup in Honduras had already deposed Manuel Zelaya’s leftist government in 2009 and foreshadowed a later US-instigated regime-change operation in Bolivia, overthrowing Evo Morales in 2020. “Lawfare” coups in Paraguay and Brazil along with electoral defeats of leftists in Chile and Uruguay shifted the balance right. In Brazil, frontrunner Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (known colloquially as “Lula”) was forced to sit out the presidential election in prison on trumped up charges, allowing Jair Bolsonaro, the “Trump of the Tropics,” to win in 2018.

    Mexico kicks off the second left wave, July 2018

    Prospects for hemispheric progressivism again began looking bullish with Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s (AMLO) victory in July 2018 after two previous attempts at the Mexican presidency, which were widely considered fraudulently stolen from him. A left turn by the second largest economy in Latin America, eleventh in the world, and the US’s second largest trading partner was not insignificant after decades of conservative rule. AMLO, whose MORENA party swept the 2018 national elections, has since shown fortitude in standing up to Washington.

    After it became apparent that Biden would not invite Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua to his Summit of the Americas in June of this year, AMLO led a boycott of the summit to be joined by Bolivia, Honduras, Guatemala, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines. El Salvador and Uruguay also purposely missed the party, albeit for different reasons.

    AMLO pointedly made a state visit to Cuba and previously had conspicuously welcomed Venezuelan President Maduro as an honored guest.  AMLO stayed firm, even after Biden sent a special delegation to Mexico City apparently to remind him about the career prospects of others – such as Qaddafi, Noriega, and Hussein – who similarly failed to heed imperial summons.

    Then on July 4th, the Mexican president facetiously launched a campaign to take down the Statue of Liberty, “no longer a symbol of liberty,” because of the US prosecution of Julian Assange.

     A new president is anointed in Venezuela, January 2019

    Tempering any initial leftist euphoria over the ending of conservative rule in Mexico were the continuing US regime-change efforts against Venezuela designed to bring down the leading left state in the region. In one of the more bizarre examples of imperial hubris, US Vice President Pence called a person unknown to over 80% of the Venezuelan public and one who had never run for national office. Pence asked Juan Guaidó if he would like to be president of Venezuela. The next day, on January 23, 2019, this US security asset declared himself “interim president” of Venezuela on a Caracas street corner. US President Trump immediately recognized Guaidó as the legitimate chief-of-state followed by some 60 of the empire’s loyal vassals.

    Three years later, barely a baker’s dozen of states currently recognize Juan Guaidó as president of Venezuela. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who once gushed how “thrilled” she was with the puppet president, now doesn’t even recognize his name. The hapless Guaidó, by the way, failed to secure an invitation to Biden’s summit in Los Angeles last June now that he is such an embarrassment.

    After Obama first sanctioned Venezuela in 2015, the illegal measures were intensified by Trump and continued for the most part by Biden. After deliberately targeting Venezuela’s cash cow, the oil industry, the economy was devastated. Today, those fortunes are being reversed. With assistance from China, Russia, and Iran along with adroit economic planning and some concessions to garner support of the domestic bourgeoisie, the Venezuelan economy revitalized by 2022.

    Venezuelan President Maduro stood firm against repeated coup attempts by Juan Guaidó and military incursions from Colombia acting as a US proxy. Last November, the municipal and regional elections were a double triumph for Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution: the ruling Socialist Party (PSUV) won significantly while the extreme right opposition (including Guaidó’s party) was compelled to participate, implicitly recognizing the Maduro government.

    A major sticking point blighting relations between the US and Venezuela is the extradition of Venezuelan diplomat Alex Saab and his imprisonment in Miami. Saab had been instrumental in legally helping Venezuela circumvent the illegal US blockade. Apparently, the empire believes it has the prerogative to decide who other countries may appoint as their diplomats and to persecute those they do not like. This is despite the Vienna Convention, to which the US is a signatory and from which absolute diplomatic immunity is provided even in the time of war. However, under Mr. Biden’s “rules-based order” – as opposed to international law – the US makes the rules, and the rest of humanity must follow the orders.

    Rightist replaced in Argentina and a coup in Bolivia, Fall 2019

    The Pink Tide again began to rise when, on October 27, 2019, Alberto Fernández replaced Mauricio Macri, whose neoliberal policies had wrecked the economy in Argentina. The new president is aligned with more conservative elements within Peronism compared to his vice-president. The two Peronist factions have continued to wrangle over how to extricate Argentina from the debt-grip of the IMF and international finance, with the more progressive side recently gaining the upper hand.

    Then the Pink Tide suffered a major reversal only two weeks after its success in Argentina, when a US-backed coup overthrew leftist President Evo Morales in neighboring Bolivia. With the connivance of the Washington-based Organization of American States (OAS), Evo had to flee for his life. Rightist Senator Jeanine Áñez then entered the Bolivian presidential palace with a bible in her hand – I am not making this up –exorcized the building of indigenous paganism and declared herself temporary president. Major popular protests by the largely indigenous and poor populace followed, only to be brutally repressed with many fatalities.

    Almost precisely a year after the initial coup, Evo’s former minister of finance and a member of his Movement for Socialism (MAS) Party, Luis Arce, ran for the presidency. His landslide win vindicated Evo’s initial president victory in 2019.

    Marxist-Leninist assumes presidency in Peru, June 2021 – for now

    After four presidents in three years, in the ever mercurial and unpredictable Peru, a rural teacher and peasant leader from the Marxist-Leninist Perú Libre Party led the presidential primary election. Pedro Castillo faced far-right Keiko Fujimori, the daughter of an imprisoned former president and convicted human rights violator. Castillo was so unknown that the major press services had to scramble to find a photograph of him.

    Castillo was eventually declared the winner of the runoff on June 6, 2021, after a protracted vote count, but by a razor thin margin. With only a minority in the legislature, Castillo has been clinging to elected office by this fingernails ever since. Right off, he was pressured to remove his leftist foreign minister. Since then, he has survived two impeachment attempts, four cabinets, and his banishment from his own political party.

    The capital city of Peru, it should be noted, gave its name to the ill-fated Lima Group, a cabal of US client states aligned against Venezuela. Even before Peru voted red, the Lima Group had drowned in a rising Pink Tide.

    Left victories in Central America, November and December 2021

    The US deemed Nicaragua’s presidential election an undemocratic fraud nearly a year in advance as part of a larger regime-change campaign against left-leaning governments. Disregarding Washington’s call to boycott, a respectable 65% of the Nicaraguan electorate went to the polls on November 11, 2021, and 76% of the voters re-elected Sandinista President Daniel Ortega. The landslide victory was a testament to the Sandinistas’ success in serving Nicaragua’s poor and a repudiation of the 2018 coup attempt fomented by the US.

    Following the left reaffirmation in Nicaragua was the long-awaited and much savored victory in what was once called the USS Honduras, alluding to that country’s role as a base for US counter-insurgency operations during the “dirty wars” in Central America. Xiomara Castro, the first female president, was swept in by a landslide on November 28. The slogan of the now triumphant resistance front was: “They fear us because we have no fear.”

    It had been twelve years since a US-backed coup overthrew Manuel Zelaya, who was the democratically elected president and husband of Castro. The country had devolved into a state where the former president, Juan Orlando Hernández (JOH), was an unindicted drug smuggler, and where the intellectual authors who ordered the assassination of indigenous environmental leader Berta Cáceres ran free, Afro-descendent people and women were murdered with impunity, gang violence was widespread, and state protection from the pandemic was grossly deficient. Once the US government’s darling, JOH will likely spend the rest of his days behind bars given that he has been extradited to the US to face drug trafficking charges.

    Leftists win in Chile and Colombia with Brazil maybe next

    Last December 19, Gabriel Boric won the Chilean presidential election by a landslide against far-right José Antonio Kast. The 35-year-old Boric was a leader in the massive protests in 2019 and 2020 against corrupt President Sebastian Piñera. The slogan of the protests was: “If Chile was the birthplace of neoliberalism, then it will also be its graveyard!” The victory was a repudiation of the Pinochet legacy.

    A constituent assembly, where the left won the majority of the delegates in a May election, has rewritten the Pinochet-era constitution. But current polls suggest that the electorate may reject it. With a 59% disapproval rating and severe unrest in the territory of the Mapuche indigenous people, Boric has hard times ahead.

    Then, on June 19, history was made in the leading client state of the US in the Americas when Gustavo Petro became the first leftist president-elect ever, and his running mate, Francia Márquez, the first Afro-descendent vice president-elect. Petro, a former leftist guerilla and onetime mayor of Bogotá, had since shifted toward the center politically. But in the comparison to the far-right rule of former President Álvaro Uribe and his successors, Colombia has dramatically and decisively shifted to the left. Relations with Venezuela are being normalized and the Monómeros chemical plant, which was handed over to the Guaidó clique and run into the ground, may get returned to Caracas and restart producing needed fertilizers.

    Even more portentous than the left victory in Colombia would be one in neighboring Brazil, the largest economy in Latin America and the eighth in the world. That may happen with the October 2 presidential election where the frontrunner, Lula, has a substantial lead In the polls.

    Troubled waters ahead as the Pink Tide surges

    In conclusion, the surging Pink Tide is symptomatic of the increasingly manifest inability of neoliberalism to address the fundamental needs of the populace. Popular upheavals in Latin America are not isolated, but are indicative of a reaction to increasing inflation, poverty, crime, and drug-related violence. Demonstrations in July in Ecuador led by the indigenous CONAIE organization almost toppled the government of right-wing banker Guillermo Lasso over grievances regarding fuel prices, debts, and illegal mining. Panama is in “permanent strike.”

    The living standards of poor and working people globally are dramatically being eroded by a world order where the US and its imperial allies have imposed sanctions – what the UN calls unilateral coercive measures – on a third of humanity.

    The US may still be the hemispheric hegemon, but the edifice is corroding. While the US’s Millennium Challenge Corporation falters, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has made major inroads in Latin America as it has in Asia and Africa. Argentina joined the BRI last February, following 19 other regional states including Bolivia, Chile, Uruguay, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

    The BRICS summit of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa was held virtually in June, representing some 30% of the world’s economy and 40% of its population. Argentina attended and is slated to become the next member of an expanded group along with Iran and possibly others such as Indonesia, Niger, and Egypt.

    China has become the region’s largest creditor and second-largest trading partner after the US. China’s trade with Latin America and the Caribbean grew 26-fold between 2000 and 2020 and is expected to more than double by 2035. China has provided a vital lifeline for states attacked by the US and room for newfound independence from the hegemon. Particularly when the US weaponized the Covid pandemic by increasing pressure on left states, China filled in.

    Despite a resurgent Pink Tide, the US hybrid warfare measures against the explicitly socialist countries in Latin America has created a precarious and critical inflection point. Cuba solidarity activist W. T. Whitney warns: “Thanks to the US blockade, Cuba’s economic situation is more desperate than ever.”

    The post The Pink Tide Surges in Latin America first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • ‘Fue Golpe’ documents coup in Bolivia

    Stephen Coates reviews Fue Golpe, which chronicles the coup that unfolded in Bolivia in November 2019 against the country’s elected president Evo Morales and the Movement Towards Socialism (MAS) government.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Summit of the Americas Flops While Workers Summit Exposes Cracks in the Imperial Façade

    Valentín, the man next to us in line as we made our way across the international border, asked what we had been doing in Tijuana. We had been at the Workers Summit of the Americas, organized as an alternative to Biden’s Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles. Our summit was as a place where countries besieged by and barred from the US could participate and was held in cooperation with a kindred counter-summit in Los Angeles.

    Valentín, who had been born in Mexico and spent most of his working life in the United States, had seen the border from both perspectives. He commented about Biden’s summit that although the US is rich in resources, industry, and agriculture, “it wants it all,” which pretty much sums up what imperialism is about.

    Historical debt to Mexico

    That border had not always been at Tijuana. As the immigrant rights movement reminds us, “we did not cross the border, the border crossed us.”

    Texas seceded from Mexico and was annexed to the US in 1845. The following year, the Mexican-American War was provoked by the US in a campaign of conquest. Two years later, Mexico was forced to sign the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ceding nearly half its national territory. The US gained what would become parts or all of California, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Colorado. The Gadsden Purchase of 1853 added southern Arizona and New Mexico to the spoils of war.

    In all, 55% of Mexico, over half of her sovereign territory, was taken by the Colossus of the North. Consequently, the US owes Mexico a historical debt for the theft of its sovereign territory. This debt should be included with other major US historical debts such as those incurred by the exploitation of African slave labor and the genocide of its original peoples.

    Mexican Revolution

    Besides acknowledging the theft of Mexican lands, those of us on the left should also recognize Mexico’s considerable political contributions. The Mexican Revolution stands in the pantheon of great 20th century revolutions. Before the Russian, Chinese, Cuban, Vietnamese, and other revolutions, before the many Third World liberation struggles of the last century, came the Mexican Revolution, which began in 1910.

    As the first of the major 20th century revolutions, the Mexican Revolution guaranteed labor rights, nationalized subsoil rights, secularized the state and curbed the power of the Roman Catholic Church, and granted inalienable land rights to indigenous communities. Women’s rights were advanced, and women fought as soldiers and even commanders in General Emilio Zapata’s revolutionary army.

    There was no established path for the Mexicans when they made their revolution. That path was made by walking; they led the way.

    Cracks in the imperial façade

    For the first time since its 1994 launch in Miami, the US was hosting the Summit of the Americas, convened by the Washington-based Organization of American States (OAS). However, as AP News described, Biden’s maneuverings in the lead-up to his summit was a “scramble” to “avoid a flop.”

    That was in part because, today, Mexico again led the way challenging imperial hubris. Its president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), stood up to Biden’s imperial summons to come to the summit. AMLO would only dignify the event with his presence if all the countries of Our Americas were invited. Even after the US dispatched a team to Mexico City to cajole him to attend – but still refusing to invite the heads of Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela – AMLO stood by his original principled stand.

    Joe Biden surely found it lonely with the presidents of Bolivia, Honduras, Guatemala, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines similarly boycotting his summit. The presidents of El Salvador and Uruguay also purposely missed the party, albeit for different reasons.

    Biden’s summit took place, but the buzz both inside the meeting and outside was the hypocrisy of the US attempt to try to appear to be promoting a “Summit for Democracy” while its actions have proven the opposite. The US-imposed illegal sanctions and blockades – unilateral coercive measures – on countries whose people fail to elect leaders sufficiently obedient to Washington are, in fact, a denial of democracy.

    And speaking of unelected leaders, the Trump-anointed and Biden-supported so-called “interim president of Venezuela,” Juan Guaidó, wasn’t on the guest list for the Los Angeles summit either. Even though the US and a handful of sycophantic allies still embarrassingly recognize the puppet as the Venezuelan head of state, he was closeted.

    Inside Biden’s summit, Argentinian President Alberto Fernández delivered what the press called a “damning speech” condemning the US president to his face for excluding other states. Belize, Chile, and a number of Caribbean countries also criticized the exclusions, calling for a realignment of regional institutions.

    Outside Biden’s summit, the official Cuban government statement commented: “Arrogance, fear of inconvenient truths being voiced, determination to prevent the meeting from discussing the most pressing and complex issues in the hemisphere, and the contradictions of its own feeble and polarized political system are behind the US government’s decision to once again resort to exclusion in order to hold a meeting with no concrete contributions yet beneficial for imperialism’s image.”

    As Ajamu Baraka of the Black Alliance for Peace commented: “For the peoples of our region, the failure of Biden’s Summit of the Americas would be a welcome event.”

    Even a corporate press report admitted: “President Joe Biden sought to put on a show of hemispheric unity at a Los Angeles summit this week, but boycotts, bluster and lackluster pledges instead exposed the shaky state of US influence in Latin America.”

    Workers’ Summit of the Americas

    In contrast, the Workers’ Summit of the Americas in Tijuana called for the unity of grassroots working class, peasant, political, and social movements to create a permanent forum for solidarity and linking of progressive struggles.

    Organizers from workers, peace, human rights, and solidarity organizations from north of the Rio Grande included Alliance for Global Justice, All-African People’s Revolutionary Party, Fire This Time, Unión del Barrio, Troika Kollective, Black Lives Matter – OKC, the Latino Community Service Organization (CSO), Freedom Road Socialist Organization, and the Task Force on the Americas.

    Mexican participation included Movimiento Social Por la Tierra, Sindicato Mexicano Electricista, and Frente Popular Revolucionario. Venezuelans included militants with the Plataforma de la Clase Obrera Antiimperialista (PCOA). Among the other participating organizations were Central de Trabajadores de Cuba, Asociación de Trabajadores del Campo de Nicaragua (ATC), and the Haitian MOLEGHAF.

    Host Jesús Ruiz Barraza, rector of CUT-University of Tijuana, opened the encuantro on June 10. US political prisoner Mumia Abu Jamal, via recording, welcomed “the delegates of the excluded” in Tijuana. Former president of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, addressed the encuantro, also via recording.

    Nelson Herrera of the Venezuelan PCOA, Rosario Rodríguez Remos of the Workers’ Central Union of Cuba, and Fausto Torres Arauz of the ATC of Nicaragua spoke. Revered Venezuelan campesino leader Braulio Alvarez, who had twice survived assassination attempts and is now a deputy in the National Assembly, addressed the meeting along with Venezuelan union leader Jacobo Torres de Leon.

    The second day was devoted to movement building and featured workshops on solidarity with the countries excluded from the Biden summit along with workshops on regional integration.

    With flags and banners flapping in the sea breeze, the last day convened on the international border. Speakers from both sides of the border and from throughout Our Americas addressed the crowd.

    Standing in front of the border wall, Venezuelan-American activist with the FreeAlexSaab campaign William Camacaro called for the immediate release of the Venezuelan diplomat from a Miami prison. That day, June 12, marked the second year of Alex Saab’s imprisonment for the “crime” of engaging in legal international trade to buy needed food, fuel, and medicine for the Venezuelan people, but in contravention of the illegal US sanctions designed to asphyxiate that independent nation.

    The final declaration of the Workers Summit called for a robust internationalism to promote solidarity with the sovereign nations and peoples suffering from sanctions imposed by the US and its allies. Latin America and the Caribbean were proclaimed a zone of peace.

    The post Summit of the Americas Flops While Workers Summit Exposes Cracks in the Imperial Façade first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Bolivia: Court sentences former coup president Jeanine Áñez to 10 years’ prison

    A Bolivian court has found Jeanine Áñez and former police and military chiefs guilty for their role in crimes committed during the coup against then-president Evo Morales in November 2019, reports Peoples Dispatch.

    This post was originally published on Green Left.

  • Bolivian court sentences Jeanine Áñez to 10 years in prison

    The First Anti-Corruption Sentencing Court of La Paz sentenced former de-facto Bolivian President Jeanine Áñez to 10 years in prison in the ‘Coup d’état II’ case on Friday, June 10. In the case, Áñez stood accused of crimes of acting against the constitution and illegally assuming the presidency of the country in November 2019, following a right-wing civic-military coup that overthrew democratically elected socialist President Evo Morales. The court found her guilty of “breach of duties” and “resolutions contrary to the Constitution and the Law” in her capacity as the former second Vice President of the Senate.

    The post Bolivian court sentences Jeanine Áñez to 10 years in prison appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Diaz-Canel, Maduro And Evo Send Messages To People’s Summit, Defying Biden’s Exclusions

    Miguel Díaz-Canel, President of Cuba, Nicolás Maduro, President of Venezuela, and Evo Morales, Former President of Bolivia send messages of solidarity to the people of the United States and the organizers of People’s Summit, an alternative to exclusionary Biden’s Summit of Americas.

    The post Diaz-Canel, Maduro And Evo Send Messages To People’s Summit, Defying Biden’s Exclusions appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Summit of the Americas: Isn’t it a dud?

    The Empire went to assert its position in the Latin America. But it has flopped. CNN headlined: “Snubs, from key leaders at Summit of the Americas reveal Biden’s struggle to assert US leadership in its neighborhood”. It’s a setback for the Empire!

    Today, it’s not an unimaginable development in the region.

    The IX Summit of the Americas has kicked off in Los Angeles on June 6, 2022; and US President Mr. Biden has formally inaugurated the summit on June 9, 2022.

    “Yet”, CNN said, “the absences of the presidents of Mexico, El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala are still notable since the United States has worked to cultivate those leaders as partners on immigration, an issue that looms as a political liability for Biden.”

    The summit, since its planning, was under the shadow of failure.

    The Empire planned to organize the summit of what it calls the Americas.

    But, it began by excluding many, significant parts of the Americas.

    Who were excluded? The Empire excluded its old foe – Cuba. And, new foes of the Empire emerged in the continent: Venezuela, Nicaragua.

    The Empire didn’t imagine that there would be such a reaction to its exclusion-plan.

    The theme of the summit is “Building a sustainable, resilient and equitable future”.

    But, with exclusion, with imposition of self-formulated will on others, how far a sustainable, equitable and resilient future can be built? Anything sustainable requires participation of all concerned. Anything equitable requires space for participation of all related parties. Without sustainable and equitable approach nothing can be resilient.

    How can a continent or two continents move with an equitable approach if countries are excluded, and dictated? And, in Latin America, having such an approach without participation of Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua is beyond imagination.

    With dictation, with treating countries as subjects in Latin America, should one today imagine that an all inclusive sustainable path or model be accepted? Lackeys can accept it. But, today’s Latin America is different than half-a-century ago, although many dream to have a Latin America cowed down. But, the reality today is not that.

    The summit had to brace its failure: Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador denied to be lackey of the Empire. He declined to join the summit. López Obrador said:

    I am not going to the summit because not all the countries of America are invited and I believe in the need to change the policy that has been imposed for centuries, exclusion, wanting to dominate for no reason.

    What is López Obrador’s position? All countries must have opportunity to join the summit on an equal footing. Is it possible to consider the argument useless, irrational? The Empire’s position turned out as irrational, baseless.

    The Mexican President pointed out:

    [T]here cannot be a Summit of the Americas if all the countries of the American continent do not participate.

    He said there can be a summit excluding many, but that would be “to continue with the old policy of interventionism, of lack of respect for nations and their peoples”.

    The Empire’s choice was the second one.

    Thus it was none but the Empire that has undercut the initiative.

    The summit plans to have an approach on health care. But, the document is full with neo-liberalism. Neo-liberalism doesn’t serve people.

    In the area of health care, Cuba is exemplary. Does it sound rational that someone plans to have an approach for people’s health, and peoples’ health across Latin America, but excludes Cuba?

    Cuba’s public health care system stands as an example. It’s far, far advanced, well-organized, well-managed and people-oriented than many, many countries, many advanced, resourceful countries. Denying this fact today is nothing but making oneself a fool.

    The Empire can compare the ways it, the Empire, and Cuba, handled the pandemic. If someone keeps in mind the resource-gap between these two countries, Cuba and the Empire, the failure of the Empire and the success of Cuba will stand as unbelievable fact.

    If someone keeps in mind the fact that Cuba was obstructed in procuring syringes and raw materials for Covid-fighting-vaccine, and Cuba has succeeded in facing the pandemic, then, the Cuba-fact may sound mythical. But, the undeniable reality is: Fidel’s Cuba has done it.

    Cuba’s President Miguel Diaz-Canal said:

    [I]n no case will I attend. [F]rom the beginning, the United States government conceived that the Summit of the Americas will not be inclusive.

    Venezuela’s President Nicolas Maduro said:

    [W]e have a clear path: unity, inclusion, diversity, democracy, and the right to build our own destiny. We reject the claims of excluding and discriminating against peoples at the Summit of the Americas.

    Daniel Ortega, President of Nicaragua, said:

    We are not interested in being at that summit.

    Luis Arce, President of Bolivia, said:

    [A] Summit of the Americas that excludes American countries will not be a full Summit of the Americas.” He reaffirmed: “[I]f the exclusion of sister nations persists, I will not participate in it.

    Xiomara Castro, President of Honduras, said:

    I will attend the Summit only if all the countries of the Americas are invited without exception.

    The ruptured effort also faced opposition from The Caribbean Community (Caricom), the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America-Peoples Trade Treaty (ALBA-TCP), the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (Celac).

    The summit is, thus, standing as a sign of the Empire’s ruptured leadership in the region. It shows that those days are gone, when the Empire was the sole authority. Now, questions are being raised, defiance is being voiced. Countries, not only a single country, Cuba, in Latin America now dare to distance themselves from the Empire. It’s a challenge to the Empire.

    It’s not utterances by a number of state-persons. It’s a different dynamics that has grown in the region. Years of peoples’ political struggles in countries in the region are a basic factor behind this dynamic; and peoples in those countries have learned from their experiences: exploitation by the Empire, brutality, assassinations and mass murders, backing rightist groups and coup-masters, interventions, imposition of undemocratic/authoritarian regimes. These experiences were long, and for many decades. Eduardo Galeano’s The Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent is enough to narrate the Empire’s story in Latin America. The rupture thus went on. It went on in the societies and politics in Latin America. Peoples’ politics are getting manifested in a number of state machines there in the continent.

    This rupture, a rupture in the Empire’s leadership in the region, is a show of the Empire’s declining influence. This trend, decline in influence, will gather strength, which means people’s struggles will gain strength, and that will hopefully get reflected in states.

    The Los Angeles summit will have fora, and documents/declarations, such as Civil Society Forum and Young Americas Forum, and Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity, Action Plan on Health and Resilience in the Americas, and Los Angeles Declaration on Migration.

    But with neo-liberalism, which is unbridled capitalism, with imperialist interest dominating entire activities and programs, the “civil” society, the “young” group, the “partnership” can bring nothing but expansion of imperialist interest and control. Not dignity, but dictation will prevail; not prosperity but exploitation will expand.

    Cuba, the country standing with dignity, has already said: It’s part of effort to apply the Monroe Doctrine.

    “What our region demands”, said Cuban Foreign Ministry, “is cooperation, not exclusion; solidarity, not meanness; respect, not arrogance; sovereignty and self-determination, not subordination.”

    That’s the problem with imperialist interest – meanness, arrogance, subordination. Imperialism doesn’t allow cooperation, solidarity, respect, dignity, sovereignty, self-determination.

    Otherwise, it wouldn’t have planned the summit arbitrarily as if it’s the sole holder of the meterstick of democracy and autocracy. It appears the Empire is the sole master for defining democracy, electoral process, legitimacy. But reality, a much different reality, will emerge tomorrow, as peoples in countries are learning from their experiences, as info on imperialism financed “democracy” programs are getting exposed at an increasing rate, as peoples in countries are increasingly opposing imperialist designs.

    For the Empire, this ruptured summit will stand as a symbol of its decreasing power of leadership in the region.

    It’s already facing competition from China in the region. It wouldn’t be easy to press out China now. Neither is it a quick task nor a few billion dollars’ job. The summit with assurances of a few billions of dollars, thus, will stand as a symbol of the Empire’s decline in a region which it considers as its backyard.

    The post Summit of the Americas: Isn’t it a dud? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Bolivia: “We Are The Center Of The World”

    Humanity is at a turning point. Not only war and climate change threaten life on our planet. Ideologies and some people as well.

    We know that money and the production of wealth and well-being have created a widening and deepening gap between people, neighborhoods, cities and countries that has been exacerbated in the wake of the pandemic.

    So I would like to stop thinking of ourselves as the poor periphery of an unequal, colonial and racist globalization.

    In Bolivia, since the beginning of this century, we have been struggling with some of the most important and decisive issues for the future of the human species: water, our sacred coca leaf, the goods that we can distribute thanks to the generosity of the Pachamama and – of course – the right to decide collectively about our lives.

    The post Bolivia: “We Are The Center Of The World” appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Bolivian President Not To Attend Non-Inclusive Americas Summit

    Bolivia’s President Luis Arce warned that he will not attend the next Summit of the Americas if the United States excludes Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela.

    “Consistent with the Bolivian Plurinational State’s principles and values, I reaffirm that a Summit of the Americas, which excludes American countries, will not be a full Summit of the Americas. If the exclusion of sister nations persists, I will not participate,” Arce tweeted.

    The post Bolivian President Not To Attend Non-Inclusive Americas Summit appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Empire News Roundup: Latin American Sovereignty, Anatoliy Shariy And More

    Listen to a reading of this article:

    ❖

    Multipolarista’s Ben Norton reports that Former Brazilian president Lula da Silva, who is still favored to beat Bolsonaro in the nation’s election later this year, has announced plans to create a Latin American currency called the “Sur” (South) in order to “be freed of the dollar.” Lula is also making headlines today for his position that presidents Zelensky and Putin are both equally to blame for the war in Ukraine, and that the US and EU also share blame for the conflict.

    This comes at the same time the Mexican government begins promoting the idea of a Latin American lithium alliance. Bolivia’s Kawsachun News reports that Mexico’s president Andrés Manuel López Obrador has expressed his intention to form an alliance with major lithium nations Bolivia, Argentina and Chile for the mutual benefit of all nations involved. This could have major implications for the future due to the use of lithium batteries in smartphones, laptops and tablets, as well as electric cars.

    Latin America finally moving out of Washington’s Monroe Doctrine sphere of domination and into its own collective sovereignty for its own benefit would be an earth-shaking historical development. That there appears to be some movement toward that end is both exciting and scary, because the US empire isn’t known for peacefully allowing its vassals to simply move out from under its thumb. Either way, though, the fact that nations around the world are coming out against the empire with increasing boldness is hugely significant.

    class=”twitter-tweet” data-width=”550″>

    Brazil’s left-wing leader Lula da Silva says if he wins the 2022 presidential elections, “we are going to create a currency in Latin America,” called the Sur ("South"), to combat “the dependency on the dollar” https://t.co/bYVifxRL74

    — Benjamin Norton (@BenjaminNorton) May 4, 2022

    The New York Times is reporting that US intelligence has helped Ukrainian forces “target and kill many of the Russian generals who have died in action in the Ukraine war,” citing anonymous senior US officials.

    This incendiary claim may or may not be true; remember US officials have already admitted that they’ve been pouring out a deluge of disinformation about this war with the loyal facilitation of the western press. If it is true, it would mean yet another dangerous escalation in the US proxy war against Russia.

    Oh and on that note it would appear that we are indeed allowed to refer to this as a proxy war now. The New Yorker has come right out and declared that the US is in “a full proxy war with Russia,” a claim that social media users have called me a Kremlin agent and Putin cock sucker many times for advancing in the weeks preceding this narrative pivot. It’s hilarious that it was ever controversial to say that pouring billions of dollars worth of weaponry into a foreign nation to be used by CIA-trained fighters with the direct ongoing assistance of US military intelligence is a proxy war, but it’s nice that we’re allowed to call a spade a spade now.

    Speaking of the US empire’s world-threatening proxy war with Russia, I would like to highlight an important new dialogue between The Socialist Program’s Brian Becker and a scientist named Greg Mello, who is the co-founder and Executive Director of the Los Alamos Study Group and an expert on nuclear war. The interview is just as valuable for Becker’s insightful commentary as Mello’s, and together they provide a lot of sorely needed insight into the nature of the horrifying games the empire is playing with our lives in this nuclear standoff.

    Lastly we should flag the fact that Spanish police just arrested a Ukrainian politician and media figure named Anatoliy Shariy on behalf of the Ukrainian government on charges of treason. This “treason” appears to amount to political speech that has been outlawed by the Ukrainian government, with earlier reports on Kyiv’s accusations against him only referencing “propaganda in favor of Russia” and “subversive activity against Ukraine.”

    Shariy fled Ukraine for EU asylum in 2012 for fear of political persecution by Kyiv, and has been living in Spain since 2019. The opposition party which Shariy founded in 2019 was banned by the Ukrainian government following the Russian invasion. Reuters reports that he has been released by a Spanish court on condition of surrendering his passport and performing regular court check-ins pending an extradition hearing.

    This is the Free World that we are risking nuclear annihilation in order to protect, folks. Are we sure we want to do this? Is this fight really worth risking the life of every terrestrial organism for? It’s a question we should all be contemplating very seriously.

    ______________

    My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on Facebook, Twitter, Soundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi, Patreon or Paypal. If you want to read more you can buy my books. The best way to make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at my website or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. Everyone, racist platforms excluded, has my permission to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, click here. All works co-authored with my American husband Tim Foley.

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    Feature image via Pixabay.