Ciro Di Costanzo criticizes the euphoria of the Mexican government over the integral migratory reform approved in the United States, which the majority of Latin American organizations and leaders have met with wariness and even outright condemnation. The reform plans, among other sweeping changes, to give citizenship to all undocumented immigrants who have been living in the country for over 5 years. Di Costanzo postulates that the bill approved by the Senate and under debate in the House of Representatives does not represent a real victory for Mexico or for any Mexicans living on American soil.
Mario Esteban writes that since the failure of the Washington Consensus –which the United States began to export actively to a number of emerging countries during the 1990’s– the world has witnessed the rise of China, and with it, the birth of the Beijing Consensus. This new model for development is based on an authoritarian government with strongly interventionist policies in regards to its economy. Esteban conjectures that the example of China is attractive not only to authoritarian leaders around the world but also to democratic regimes like Brazil, India, and South Africa who welcome the growing strength of China, and the creation of a multilateral world order.
Maximiliano Borches suggests that the electoral victory of Peruvian President Alan García (social democrat) cannot be perceived as a political victory, considering the massive successes of the Union Party of Peru (Partido Unión por el Perú, UPP) and its leader, Ollanta Humala, who won the first round of elections. Analyzing the situation from this point of view, Borches attributes García’s victory to public fear that his opponent might win, and estimates that he will not be faced with an easy presidency. García has come to power in a political situation of extreme fragility, and must face the popular scrutiny and mistrust that many members of his new government are receiving. In order for García to be able to broaden democracy in Peru, he must reach a consensus within his country.
Ricardo Israel Z. explains how, paradoxically, Israel will be the one to benefit from Hamas’ victory of the Palestinian elections, and that among those who will suffer most from an ever-imminent Palestinian civil war will be Egypt, Jordan, and the Palestinian cause itself. Ricardo Israel Z. believes that the new international scenario created by Hamas’ extremism will permit Israel to make decisions that before were unviable: such as carrying forward a unilateral withdrawal from a good part of the West Bank, and establishing the borders of a Palestinian nation.
Fernando Delage analyses the state of the European Union’s impasse and explains how the organization is hindered from moving forward not from a crisis of values, but rather from a failing of leadership and disorientation in the face of societies disillusioned with their leaders and fearful for their futures. The impact of globalization and the loss of Europe‘s international influence are both factors, which have contributed to the decline of popular support for the Union; a support, Delage affirms, that is essential in order to secure the strong Union that democracy needs in Europe.
Carlos Escudé believes that the possibility of a theocratic and fundamentalist regime such as the Iranian possession of nuclear arms, returns us to the debates of 1945 and 1949 in the US, between those who initially supported the preemptive war against the Soviet Union –including the pacifist philosopher and mathematician Bertrand Russell– as well as those more idealistic who proclaimed that the uranium of the world should be managed by the UN (Baruch Plan). Escudé returns to these debates again by reanalyzing those old discussions regarding the possibility of the Soviets utlizing the nuclear bomb. In the process, he reveals why such debates nowadays are more relevant than ever, especially in the context of the Iranian threat.
Pedro G. Cavallero remarks that even if it has been known for years that Raul Castro (Fidel’s younger brother) is the regime’s number-two figure, or even the island’s de facto regent, it is less clear what the brother-to-brother succession would mean for the regime’s continuity. Cavallero comments on the two possible after Fidel scenarios, both dominated by the Cuban military: either a succeeding praetorian regime resulting from Raul assuming leadership, as repressive as the current one, or a second even more worrisome scenario that would occur if Raul were to die before his brother.
Javier Ortiz writes about the US plans regarding the border with Mexico, and about the Spanish efforts to stop its own illegal immigration, and says that for both countries it is like trying to repair a pipeline in bad condition: an escape is soldered, but the next instant, the water pressure provokes yet another leak. Ortiz believes that the social and economic development in the origin countries of the immigrants must be bolstered, so as to improve the living conditions of potential immigrants to the point where immigration is no longer the only escape.