At this point in time the landlord of Miraflores (the Venezuelan White House) must be worried about what has happened in Haiti. Colonel Hugo Chavez has some similarities with run away president Aristide. Both share Marxist-populist ways of governing, both have used their fierce rhetoric to enchant the masses and the international community.
There was not much to destroy in Haiti after the Duvalier's regime. Everything was already plundered and looted by Baby Doc. Haiti on its long two hundred years as an independent nation has not enjoyed until Mr. Aristide was elected a pacific election that led him the first time to legally become president. Too many hopes were shattered by this crazy former priest that used to be an advocate of liberation theology. What has happened in Haiti is not something we should be surprise if we understand from where Aristides comes, Marxist theology that states that only the class warfare will advance the revolution. Fight and warfare those are the clue words to understand how they behave.
On the other hand Venezuela was bankrupt politically when Chavez tried to seize power through a coup d's tat. Few years later he was able to gain power with his fierce rhetoric. You can see an excelent report on on Venezuelan contemporary history here
Chavez has been the result of a bankrupt political system, that managed to keep a relatively stable democracy, but failed to deliver prosperity to a large group of the population. If you add to the mix the corruption that has characterized former presidents like Carlos Andres Perez you know why Chavez enticed a sector of the population to elect him president. Now this doesn't justifies what has Chavez done to Venezuela, this just explains how the arrived to the current situation.
President Chavez has been characterized throughout his government to be involved in conflict after conflict. Much the same like Aristide, and judging from what has happened in previous demonstrations it seems that Mr. Chavez will remain in power until the very last minute when everything is lost. Again all this after all the rhetoric that he was not going to resign, and that he will fight until the end.
If we can try to forecast what is going to happen in Venezuela is that only when the international community start being serious about Chavez, and only when everybody in the country starts to turn their backs on him he will be forced to quit or be oustedl like it happened to Haiti. How long will that take? It can be like the Aristide regime that only lasted a few years, or worst it can be a never ending story like Cuban Castro, that stills rocks on after 40 years in power.
2004-02-26
The day after
By now it seems that only a miracle or Vodoo can save President Aristide of being ousted from Port Au Prince.
Everybody in the country, thugs, rebels, and the opposition, are for it, abroad France Minister Villeipin already said that Aristide should step down, and the Americans, although are trying not to be involved again are hinting that watever solution comes, the future is without Mr. Aristide.
The question then is what is next? I have been speaking with some Haitians and that is the problem, what is going to happen the day after. By now it seems that internally and internationally some of the so called leaders of the uprising are former military and thugs trained by Mr. Aristide that were not happy with the Reparto. In spanish I will say "Hubo mal reparto" there was a bad share of the benefits, and that is why this thugs flipped sides from being pro-Aristide, to be his worst nightmare. The best option the Civil Society side doesn't have a clear leader, and the group is amorphous (even though I have heard good comments about Group 184), there are no shared objectives, and the only common objective is the opposition to Chavez, (Sorry a mental lapse, Aristide)
Mary O'Grady on her friday's feb 20, 2004 America's column suggested that Haiti can be a meltdown a la sub-Saharan Africa and the dilemma is precisely will the West stand by and watch quietly?
I believe that only when countries start taking care of their own problems they will be able to face a better future. The Saddans, Talibans, brutal dictators in Africa and Mr. Aristide are the fruit of the good intentions of the international community that sides with the weakest ones. Unfortunately it sends the wrong message to the natives that get used to see somebody to came up and clean the mess. It's like kids that are overprotected by their parents. They end up being weak and fragile. Only when you let people face the results of their decisions, they start being responsible. And that can be sometimes nerve wrecking specially if you see somebody that you care go over the same mistakes again and again.
The international community should wait and see what happens, help receiving refugees, and have and advisory role if it's asked, but sending troops, and siding with some of the opposing forces its going to be only a source of more conflict and teach the citizens of the country not to act responsible when they go to elections either by not showing up to elections or electing Messiahs that offer God-send solutions.
Some Links of interest about Haiti:
The Economist
Haiti Pundit
A bloger in Haiti
Everybody in the country, thugs, rebels, and the opposition, are for it, abroad France Minister Villeipin already said that Aristide should step down, and the Americans, although are trying not to be involved again are hinting that watever solution comes, the future is without Mr. Aristide.
The question then is what is next? I have been speaking with some Haitians and that is the problem, what is going to happen the day after. By now it seems that internally and internationally some of the so called leaders of the uprising are former military and thugs trained by Mr. Aristide that were not happy with the Reparto. In spanish I will say "Hubo mal reparto" there was a bad share of the benefits, and that is why this thugs flipped sides from being pro-Aristide, to be his worst nightmare. The best option the Civil Society side doesn't have a clear leader, and the group is amorphous (even though I have heard good comments about Group 184), there are no shared objectives, and the only common objective is the opposition to Chavez, (Sorry a mental lapse, Aristide)
Mary O'Grady on her friday's feb 20, 2004 America's column suggested that Haiti can be a meltdown a la sub-Saharan Africa and the dilemma is precisely will the West stand by and watch quietly?
I believe that only when countries start taking care of their own problems they will be able to face a better future. The Saddans, Talibans, brutal dictators in Africa and Mr. Aristide are the fruit of the good intentions of the international community that sides with the weakest ones. Unfortunately it sends the wrong message to the natives that get used to see somebody to came up and clean the mess. It's like kids that are overprotected by their parents. They end up being weak and fragile. Only when you let people face the results of their decisions, they start being responsible. And that can be sometimes nerve wrecking specially if you see somebody that you care go over the same mistakes again and again.
The international community should wait and see what happens, help receiving refugees, and have and advisory role if it's asked, but sending troops, and siding with some of the opposing forces its going to be only a source of more conflict and teach the citizens of the country not to act responsible when they go to elections either by not showing up to elections or electing Messiahs that offer God-send solutions.
Some Links of interest about Haiti:
The Economist
Haiti Pundit
A bloger in Haiti
2004-02-19
Haiti
Things in Haiti seem to be getting out of control since President Aristide has called to the attention the fact that some of the opposition leaders are former members of the now defunct army. Add to that the fact that this sort of events are never peaceful and you have things like the US trying to solve the problem.
The whole Haiti situation is a sad story given the fact that this year they are celebrating their 200 anniversary of being an independant country. In fact the first Latin American country to become independant. This was maybe a premonition of what has happened to Latin America. Even though that Latin America became free from the colonial empire of Spain, Portugal and other European countries, the region still has not become free from state oppresion. The master or the ruler or the king is not any more a nation like Spain or Portugal (that recently have improved so much, only if we could learn from them a little bit) the master is every nation state in Latin America that have become one way or another a symbol of the people, but rather a symbol of the ruling class. The individuals have not obtained in this 200 years major protections against the nation state.
Every country in Latin America, altough in varying degrees, suffer from the same problems, lack of the rule of law, excesive regulation, limitation of freedom and lack of political, civic or economic liberties.
Coming back to the case of Haiti, 200 years have not meant much, and most of the people in that country and in the region mistakenly believe that because we have democracy the government is legitimate. Mr. Aristide might have been elected democratically, but his actions and attitudes have undermined any vestige of democracy in his government. Its a great mistake what some leaders of the develop world have argued that to protect democracy the people of Haiti does not have the right to get rid of Mr. Aristide. Only when we stop believing in democracy as the utmost objective and rather see it as a means to achieve a peaceful transfer of power we will start building real societies in which the rights of the citizens are respected and everybody is treated as a human being within a framework of the rule of law and not the rule of a few.
The whole Haiti situation is a sad story given the fact that this year they are celebrating their 200 anniversary of being an independant country. In fact the first Latin American country to become independant. This was maybe a premonition of what has happened to Latin America. Even though that Latin America became free from the colonial empire of Spain, Portugal and other European countries, the region still has not become free from state oppresion. The master or the ruler or the king is not any more a nation like Spain or Portugal (that recently have improved so much, only if we could learn from them a little bit) the master is every nation state in Latin America that have become one way or another a symbol of the people, but rather a symbol of the ruling class. The individuals have not obtained in this 200 years major protections against the nation state.
Every country in Latin America, altough in varying degrees, suffer from the same problems, lack of the rule of law, excesive regulation, limitation of freedom and lack of political, civic or economic liberties.
Coming back to the case of Haiti, 200 years have not meant much, and most of the people in that country and in the region mistakenly believe that because we have democracy the government is legitimate. Mr. Aristide might have been elected democratically, but his actions and attitudes have undermined any vestige of democracy in his government. Its a great mistake what some leaders of the develop world have argued that to protect democracy the people of Haiti does not have the right to get rid of Mr. Aristide. Only when we stop believing in democracy as the utmost objective and rather see it as a means to achieve a peaceful transfer of power we will start building real societies in which the rights of the citizens are respected and everybody is treated as a human being within a framework of the rule of law and not the rule of a few.
2004-02-15
Hi
I have fall for the latest fads of all. Weblogging. I am on a trial period so let's see how this works out
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)