El Universal, Mexico

Bush Hopes to Break the Hold of Hugo Chavez …

"The only coherent explanation for Bush's sudden interest in Latin America (after six years of total amnesia with respect to the South) is to counter the influence of Chávez and his insistence on a Latin America united under [and against] U.S. domination."

By Víctor Flores Olea

Translated By Douglas Myles Rasmussen*

February 26, 2007

Mexico – El Universal – Original Article (Spanish)

From March 8 to 14, George W. Bush will visit five Latin American nations, including Mexico (also Brazil, Uruguay, Colombia and Guatemala), which has surprised both Tyrians and Trojans [everyone], since the trip was preceded by a budget proposal to drastically cut aid to the back porch of the United States - with the exception of Colombia – and while construction continues on the wall of ignominy along the Mexican border, which means that workers and technicians will actually be moved onto our territory to build it from here. Democratic Congresswoman Hilda Solís has said, “This is a vacation that Bush is taking at a moment in which everything is going badly for him.”

[Editor's Note: The reference to Tyrians and Trojans is from the ancient Greek classic, The Aeneid. The Tyrians and Trojans were enemies, and apparently unlikely to agree on anything or do anything together. Aeneid was a Trojan that traveled to Italy and is said to have been the original Roman ].

He couldn't avoid a visit to Brazil (in Sao Paulo), since without that country there is no continental balance. Bush will try to seduce [Brazil's President] Lula into restraining Hugo Chávez (the true reason for his trip), perhaps offering to supply some Ethanol in return . Furthermore, Brazil is the second largest sugarcane producer in the world, after the United States [ethanol can be made from sugarcane]. The other reason for the trip has to do with rescuing the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) which was buried in Mar del Plata in 2005 (with a pathetic intervention on Bush's behalf by Fox, who sought to keep the deal under Washington's control ), and for which there seems little chance of success for the White House chief.

Bush will also pay a visit to socialist President Tabaré Vázquez of Uruguay, who is inclined toward Washington; Álvaro Uribe of Colombia, his favorite on the continent; and he will travel to Guatemala City to thank Óscar Berger for competing as a candidate a few months ago for the open seat on the U.N. Security Council against the Venezuelan  [Chavez]. Then he will come to Mexico to tighten his bonds to [President] Felipe Calderón, and secure even more proclivity from this one [Calderón] toward the United States. 

But perhaps the most interesting element of the trip are the portions of the continent that Bush will not visit, since several countries are regarded as “high risk” for the United States chief executive. He will not go to Argentina because of his tense relations with [President] Kirchner, nor will he go to Chile for the opposite reason (his relations with President Bachelet are optimal). Obviously a trip to the Bolivia of [President] Evo Morales is unthinkable, as is [President] Rafael Correa's Ecuador, much less the Venezuela of Hugo Chávez, with whom there is open hostility. I repeat: the only coherent explanation to be found in Bush's sudden interest in Latin America (after six years of total amnesia in the White House with respect to the South) is to counter the influence of Chávez and his insistence on a Latin America united under [and against] U.S. domination.

Bush's trip, as we all know, will be marked by massive demonstrations of repudiation. His single-minded warmongering, his aggression toward weak nations and the crimes that this has unleashed, his violence against human rights - including his denial of his own nation's Constitution, and his role as a torturer and repressor on a planetary scale, have won him the repudiation of the entire world beginning with his own people, as was seen in last November's elections. In Latin America, including Mexico, this repudiation will reveal some of its most radical manifestations.

Regarding our country, President Calderón – both before and after being elected - declared himself ready to correct Fox's silly mistakes and reestablish political and diplomatic relations with the rest of Latin America [Fox was seen to favor the U.S. too much – damaging ties to Latin American countries]. But in spite of initial high hopes, the situation degraded quickly. Not because of the ham-handed and weak-mouthed ex-President [Fox], who nevertheless did what he was told [by the U.S.], but rather the articulate expression of a policy that leaves no doubt about what the President has decided upon. In this sense, Calderón has clarified the deep-seated contradiction between his government and the alternative paths to development that other Latin America nations are looking for.

The breaking point came at Davos [The World Economic Forum] in a brief exchange between [Brazil's President] Lula da Silva and President Calderón. While Calderón criticized the “prejudice” against free trade and the nationalizations of private property in Venezuela, Bolivia and Argentina (also referring to “lifelong personal dictatorships”), the Brazilian, in a decidedly intelligent way – pointedly defended the South American bloc, including Hugo Chávez and Evo Morales. He pointed out that Chávez was elected democratically three times, and said that if anyone was scared that Morales might want to nationalize the gas fields, he must understand that Bolivia's only wealth are its natural resources.

Even the Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS), José Miguel Insulza, mentioned that refusing free trade is not prejudice, and that he had given the FTAA - which President Calderón had just defended - up for dead. The shameful situation is that Calderón is very far from understanding the real causes of poverty in Latin America and Mexico. Without such an understanding and without appreciating the efforts of several of our countries to find new methods of development and well-being, the “desire” to restore the damaged relations with many countries in the South are purely rhetorical and superficial. The impossibility is structural, and not circumstantial.

*Writer and Political Analyst

Spanish Version Below

Bush en AL

Víctor Flores Olea

26 de febrero de 2007

George W. Bush, del 8 al 14 de marzo, visitará cinco países latinoamericanos, incluido México (con Brasil, Uruguay, Colombia y Guatemala), lo cual ha sorprendido a tirios y troyanos, ya que el anuncio del viaje fue precedido por un proyecto de presupuesto en el que se diminuyen drásticamente las ayudas al patio trasero estadounidense, con excepción de Colombia, y cuando continúa en la frontera mexicana la construcción del muro de la ignominia, que ahora implica hasta el traslado de trabajadores y técnicos a nuestro territorio para desde aquí edificar. La congresista demócrata Hilda Solís dijo: "Esto de Bush son unas vacaciones que se toma en un momento en que todo le va mal".

No podía faltar la visita a Brasil (en Sao Paulo), ya que sin ese país no hay equilibrio continental. Bush tratará de seducir a Lula para frenar a Hugo Chávez (el verdadero motivo del viaje), tal vez con alguna oferta en materia de etanol. Además de que Brasil es el segundo productor mundial de caña de azúcar después de EU. El otro motivo del viaje tiene que ver con el rescate del ALCA, enterrado en Mar del Plata en 2005 (con una patética intervención de Fox a nombre de Bush, procurando salvar la asociación bajo el control de Washington), en lo cual no parece tener ninguna oportunidad real el jefe de la Casa Blanca.

Saludará también al presidente socialista Tabaré Vázquez, de Uruguay, proclive a Washington; a su preferido continental Álvaro Uribe, de Colombia; y pasará a la ciudad de Guatemala para agradecer a Óscar Berger la presentación hace unos meses de una candidatura al Consejo de Seguridad que compitiera con la venezolana. A México vendrá a estrechar lazos con Felipe Calderón, para asegurar aún más la proclividad de éste hacia EU.

Pero tal vez lo más interesante del viaje sea la porción continental que no visitará Bush, por ser varios países de "alto riesgo" para el mandatrio estadounidense. No acudirá a Argentina porque son tensas sus relaciones con Kirchner, ni a Chile por el motivo contrario (sus relaciones con la presidenta Bachelet son óptimas). Obviamente ni pensar en la Bolivia de Evo Morales, ni en el Ecuador de Rafael Correa, y mucho menos en la Venezuela de Chávez, con la cual las hostilidades son abiertas. Repito: la única explicación coherente que se descubre en este repentino interés de Bush por América Latina (después de seis años en la Casa Blanca de amnesia absoluta respecto a su región sur) es la de contrarrestar la influencia de Chávez, y su insistencia en una unión latinoamericana bajo el dominio estadounidense.

El viaje de Bush, como se sabe, estará marcado por masivas manifestaciones de repudio. Su función guerrera, su agresión a pueblos débiles y los crímenes que ha desatado, su violencia contra los derechos humanos, también negando la Constitución de su país, su papel de torturador y represor a escala planetaria, le han ganado el repudio del mundo, comenzando por el de su propio pueblo, según se vio en las elecciones del pasado noviembre. En América Latina, incluido México, este repudio tendrá algunas de sus manifestaciones más radicales.

Por lo que hace a nuestro país, el candidato y el presidente Calderón se declararon dispuestos a corregir los disparates de Fox y rehacer relaciones políticas y diplomáticas con América Latina. A pesar de cierta expectativa inicial, la situación se degradó rápidamente, porque ya no se trata de las erráticas intervenciones del boquiflojo ex presidente, respondiendo de todos modos a intereses precisos, sino de la expresión articulada de una política que ha decidido el Presidente y que no deja dudas. En este sentido Calderón ha puesto en claro la contradicción de fondo entre su gobierno y las alternativas de desarrollo que buscan varios países latinoamericanos.

El punto de ruptura se dio en Davos. Y se expresó en la breve polémica entre Lula da Silva y Calderón. Mientras este último criticó los "prejuicios" contra el libre comercio y las expropiaciones en Venezuela, Bolivia y Argentina (refiriéndose además a las "dictaduras personales vitalicias"), el brasileño reivindicó inteligente y decididamente al bloque sudamericano, incluyendo a Hugo Chávez y a Evo Morales. De Chávez, señaló que fue elegido tres veces democráticamente y dijo que si alguien tiene miedo porque Morales quiere nacionalizar el gas, debe entender que sus recursos naturales son la única riqueza de Bolivia.

Inclusive el secretario general de la OEA, José Miguel Insulza, le mencionó que la negativa al libre comercio no es asunto de prejuicios, y dio por muerto el ALCA que antes había defendido el Presidente de México. La vergonzosa situación es que Calderón está muy lejos de entender las causas reales de la pobreza latinoamericana y mexicana. Sin tal reconocimiento, y sin apreciar los esfuerzos de varios países nuestros para encontrar renovadas rutas al desarrollo y al bienestar, es puramente retórico y superficial el "deseo" de rehacer al sur las muchas relaciones maltrechas. La imposibilidad es estructural y no de coyuntura.

Escritor y analista político