Safe Democracy Foundation - Safe Democracy

Mauro Victoria Soares analyses the wave of attacks that occurred in São Paulo and says that the motivation of the strikes was apparently to press the governors to concede benefits for jailed leaders of the organization that are not allowed for prisoners under the regime, but the action overall was a demonstration of force and efficacy. To make things worse, the immediate response of the police, conversely, prompted a jump in the number of suspects murdered. Since the problem of organized crime has structural causes, comprising a multitude of factors, Victoria Soares remarks that if the actions of the crime organizations constitute a menace to the Democratic Rule of Law, the problem will definately not be solved through a break of this same Rule of Law, he concludes.

Ricardo Israel Z. analyzes the reasons why Evo Morales decided to nationalize the hydrocarbon, and says that there exist serious doubts over the fact that the initiative may enrich Bolivia. Nevertheless, Israel Z. believes that the measure was not a surprise, and that it will be the political and economic success of Morales in the short-term. The most probable fact is that the multinational companies decide that it is no worth betting for the failure of the initiative, but they will decide that the most important thing is to be present wherever the gas and the petroleum are.

Juan Tokatlian says that Latin America is living two tendencies: the dis-institutionalization –after more than three lost decades– and the dis-integration in the mechanisms of political, economic and diplomatic unity (as the Andean Community, MERCOSUR and others). Furthermore, he claims that these two processes have lead the region towards fragile States, broken societies, feeble economies and inconsistent diplomacies. In such light, Tokatlian believes that only the effective expansion of the democracies may establish an internal and regional order, fairer, safer and with more justice.

Ariel Moutsatsos analyzes the Mexican political scenario previous to the presidential elections (of the upcoming month of July) and states that the country is divided in two: the “pro”AMLO –Andrés Manuel López Obrador initials, the Leftist candidate–and the “anti” AMLO. Moutsatsos believes that the discussion level in Mexico is lamentable and if it follows this route, the next President will be elected by chance and not by the debate of ideas and proposals among the parties in battle: PRI, PRD and PAN.

Gustavo Gamallo says that after a decade with an agenda dominated by issues related to economic reforms, Latin America is placing in the foreground the political activity again. However, according to Gamallo that is not enough: an active, conscious and responsible citizenship must be built, capable of plural participation in the political debate and of developing its potency in the public scenario.

Pedro G. Cavallero analyzes the current escalating dispute with Uruguay and Argentina in opposition (or in confrontation). As explained, the dispute has come as a result of two European companies’ decision to build an ambitious cellulose-pressing company in Uruguay. Cavallero illustrates the fact that Argentina’s concern is the would-be environmental impact, stemming from the plant’s operation, in one of its provinces. On the other hand, the Uruguay’s response has to push forward with expanding foreign trade policy. Cavallero thinks that this dispute has revealed a subtler discontent: the lack of an effective institutional venue to adjudicate transnational matter, in other words, a trusted, impartial mediator.

Fabián Bosoer believes that winds of change are blowing in Latin America again. Some people, enthusiastic or worried, consider that the turn to the left of the continent is getting deeper, in order to stress a rupture with the nineties. For others, he adds, the classic dilemma between populism and liberal democracy is on the table again. Bosoer rejects both positions, which put all the countries of the world in the same basket, and states a third alternative. In any case, the key question is: Is there a new paradigm of the democratic governability in Latin America?

Pedro G. Cavallero states that electoral processes in Latin America receive sporadic coverage in the US despite the fact that most of the region’s democracies are far from fully consolidated. Mr. Cavallero analyzes the Mexican political situation –before National elections– and notes that the perception of Mexico in the US remains blurred, often distorted, and even reduced to simplistic notions, and despite this “binding vicinity”, the country is becoming a vanishing neighbor for the US.