E-IR: Pop Culture and Latin America’s Conflicts

"Pop Culture and Latin America's Conflicts"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
E-International Relations
Article
December 3, 2016
Originally published: http://www.e-ir.info/2016/12/03/pop-culture-and-latin-americas-conflicts/

Latin America has been plagued with internal conflicts for decades, be them against left-wing insurgencies or narco-cartels. Naturally, regional film and television industries have utilized them as sources of inspiration for the plots of films and soap operas (the famous Latin American telenovelas). How Latin American security forces are portrayed in these productions is controversial, as there seems to be a bias towards portraying them in a negative way. Whether this is done on purpose or not is debatable, however it appears that regional defense officers believe that entertainment industries deliberately critique them while glorifying criminals. This is an important issue to keep in mind as the entertainment industry has an important effect on how the civilian population views its government and security forces.

Which Wars to Portray?

Prior to beginning our discussion on how conflicts are portrayed by Latin American entertainment industries, we first need to clarify what types of conflicts are depicted. For example, Hollywood producers have the dubious luxury of being able to make a film inspired by one of the many military operations that the US has carried out throughout the world, as portrayed in films like American Sniper, Black Hawk Down, Lone Survivor, Platoon, Zero Dark Thirty, to name a few.

On the other hand, it is important to note that as violent as Latin America is perceived to be, inter-state conflict in the region is actually scarce. Case in point, the last inter-state war in the region occurred in 1995: a short-lived, non-declared war between Ecuador and Peru. The most recent conflict prior to that one was the Falklands/Malvinas War in 1982 between Argentina and the United Kingdom. Rather, Latin American militaries and police forces have been deployed internally to combat insurgencies in various countries, between the 1960s to mid-1990s, as well as drug trafficking entities nowadays, like Mexico’s war against narco-cartels, and transnational gangs like the Maras that operate in El Salvador and Honduras.

In other words, while Hollywood can produce a film that depicts a real U.S. military operation abroad, Latin American producers wishing to tell stories about recent real world Latin American military operations have to, by default, focus on internal conflicts.

How Are They Portrayed?

Due to space issues, we cannot discuss every Latin American production, whether a film or telenovela, that addresses some regional internal conflict, whether it be against left-leaning insurgents or a narco-cartel. The list below includes films that, in the author’s opinion, provide a particularly harsh portrayal of regional defense forces.

At a personal level, one of the earliest TV portrayals of the Peruvian military that the author watched was the Peruvian telenovela Los De Arriba y Los De Abajo (The Elite and Lower Ones) in the early-mid 1990s. One of the telenovela’s subplots revolved around an army commander who accidentally orders his troops to fire upon a group of civilians in an Andean town while they were searching for terrorists. The commander and the widow of one of the men killed meet again decades later after their children fall in love. The inspiration for this plot comes from the real-life conflict between the Peruvian military and two terrorist movements, the Shining Path (SenderoLuminoso, SL) and the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (Movimiento Revolucionario Tupac Amaru, MRTA). The military has been accused of carrying out massacres against civilians throughout the 1980s and early 1990s during the internal war against said movements (e.g. the 1985 Accomarca massacre). Another controversial soap opera is Brazil’s Amor e Revolução (Love and Revolution), which has been critiqued for focusing on human rights abuses committed by the Brazilian military government (1964-1985).

As for movies, most critique regional militaries. For example, the 2006 Colombian-Argentine film Soñar No Cuesta Nada (Dreaming Is Free) focuses on a group of Colombian soldiers who discover a cache of money belonging to the insurgent movement Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC); rather than reporting the find, they keep the money and spend it amongst themselves. The film was inspired by a similar real-life 2003 incident. Similarly, the 2003 Argentine drama Captive discusses the fate of children who were adopted by families connected to the military after their parents were disappeared by the Argentine military government (1976-1983). Decades later, these individuals have begun to find out their true identities. Like the aforementionedSoñar No Cuesta Nada, the film is inspired by real events. For instance, in 2015 the Argentine media reported that a man called Mario Bravo discovered his true identity: as a child he was taken away from his mother who was arrested by the military government in the 1970s.

Another example is the 2009 Peruvian film La Teta Asustada (The Milk of Sorrow)  which discusses the fate of Peruvians that were affected by the massacres committed by Peruvian insurgents and the security forces during the country’s internal war (early 1980s to mid-1990s). The movie’s IMDB webpagesummarizes the plot: “Fausta is suffering from a rare disease called the Milk of Sorrow, which is transmitted through the breast milk of pregnant women who were abused or raped during or soon after pregnancy.” A scene from the movie, in which the main character hyperventilates after seeing a photo of a military officer, implies that the Peruvian armed forces in some way abused her or her family.

A final example is the 2004 Mexican film Voces Inocentes (Innocent Voices) which focuses on El Salvador’s civil war (1980-1992).  The movie tells the story of children and teenagers that were forced to join the Salvadoran military to combat the Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (Frente Farabundo Martí para la Liberación Nacional, FMLN).  The role of child soldiers in this Central American nation’s civil war has also been well recorded.

It is the opinion of this author, which also appears to be the opinion of some Latin American defense officers, that the aforementioned movies address specific incidents or scandals, all of them unfortunately true, which give the viewer a negative opinion about armed forces. The problem may be that such productions lack a degree of balance, like for example some statement that not all military officers and troops behaved in such despicable manner during these periods of internal warfare or military rule.

Liberation Wars and Inter-State Conflict

To be fair, there have been films which portray Latin American militaries in a positive light, however they tend to focus on 19th century conflicts, namely the region’s independence wars. For example, the 2013 film The Liberator is a Venezuelan-Spanish historical movie which centers on the life of revered South American liberator Simón Bolívar. Similarly, there have been several movies about the Argentine José de San Martín, the region’s other liberator. Moreover, Gloria del Pacífico named the best Peruvian film in 2014, is about the 19th century War of the Pacific (between Peru and Bolivia against Chile, supported by the British Empire). The movie focuses on Peruvian Army hero Francisco Bolognesi.

It is worth noting that Argentina has produced movies about the 1982 Falklands/Malvinas War, which, as previously mentioned, was an inter-state conflict. Such films include 2005’s Iluminados Por El Fuego or1984’s Los Chicos de la Guerra (The Boys of War)

A Sensitive Issue

Cinematographic and television portrayals of militaries and real world security operations are a sensitive issue. For example the film Zero Dark Thirty was critiqued as it showcased US intelligence officers (repeatedly) torturing prisoners to gather intelligence during the hunt for Osama bin Laden. This is even more controversial in Latin America as the conflicts portrayed in most films address civil wars and other internal conflicts, rather than operations on the other side of the globe. Another problem is that these films are about recent conflicts, some of which are still ongoing (e.g. Colombia). In other words, they will be even more relatable to viewers.

As part of the research for this analysis, the author carried out off-the-record interviews with members of Latin American security and defense agencies. The overall consensus, albeit from a miniscule pool of interviewees, is that regional television and cinematographic industries portray a skewed version of reality when it comes to the activities carried out by these agencies to protect the homeland. Namely, security forces are portrayed as “los malos,” (the bad ones) meaning that they are consistently showcased carrying out human rights abuses whether they be disappearances, rape, summary execution of civilians, or other abuses of power.

On the other hand, as one Colombian security officer explained to the author, there is a reversal of values, as narco lords like the infamous Pablo Escobar appear as a charismatic individual with altruistic goals, for example in series like Narcos; Pablo Escobar: El Patron del Mal (Pablo Escobar: The Lord of Evil); La Reina del Sur (The Queen of the South); El Señor de Los Cielos (The Lord of Heaven), among others. The officer explained that this portrayal does not allow the viewer to properly understand the duties and sacrifices of the members of the security and defense forces to protect the homeland.

At this point, it is worth remembering that in the US, Hollywood (broadly speaking) is often critiqued by conservative media outlets of having a “liberal agenda” which aims at vilifying the U.S. military. We will not delve into conspiracy theories regarding whether there is some “agenda” behind Latin American cinematographic and television productions and the negative way they portray security forces. Nevertheless, the author would like to highlight a comment by a retired Peruvian army officer about the way the country’s military has been portrayed in the aforementioned films and telenovelas. The officer explained “these people [meaning the producers and directors] have disliked the military since the time when it was in control of the country, this [the movies and telenovelas] is their revenge.” Meanwhile, a retired Colombian military officer explained that the country’s narco-related telenovelas are “apologists of crime.”

The issue, thus, may be one of perception. Are Latin American producers and filmmakers purposely trying to make security forces look “bad,” because of personal biasness? Additionally, do narco-novelas aim at glorifying narco lords and the narco life, or is this for dramatic effect in order to attract viewers?  No Latin American filmmakers, producers or script writers were consulted by the author, but the perception from interviewed Latin American defense and security officers (again from a very small number, but the author will cautiously generalize it) is that regional films and telenovelas focus on humanizing and even praising insurgents and criminals, while critiquing militaries and police forces. As a retired Colombian defense officer explained, this issue is part of a wider problem of civil military relations at a time of internal conflict. The officer explained, “in Latin America, certain social organizations consider themselves the exclusive owners of issues like the protection of minorities and human rights in general … they maximize any error or criminal act, done purposely or by accident, committed by defense forces while minimizing the atrocities committed by terrorists.”

One example of a positive portrayal of modern Latin American forces could be the Colombian television series Comando Elite, produced by RCN, which focuses on a police unit that combats crime, taking down real-life Colombian narco-lords and insurgent leaders. However, the overall pattern appears to be that portraying defense forces by default requires a negative portrayal, rather than a positive one. It is certainly possible to make a film that positively showcases the bravery of specific units in the field of battle, like for example the Mexican military’s operations against narco-cartels, or the Peruvian Army’s successes against Shining Path and the MRTA, however they may be critiqued for appearing as government-propaganda and not showcasing abuses committed by security forces, which have been well-recorded.

Due to space limitations we have not discussed the relationship between governments and entertainment industries, and the possibility of state-censorship of films or series critical of security forces. This author would argue that fact that these projects continue to be produced and broadcasted is an example of the general success of freedom of speech in Latin America (at least in this specific industry and in most countries, with some exceptions). If anything, regional film producers desire more state support for their movies to reach wider masses. For example, the film industry and the local governments in Colombia and Peru have attempted to design legislation to support their domestic cinematographic industry, while there are programs in countries like Argentina and Mexico where the state provides financial support, like subsidies, towards domestic television and film industries.

Concluding Thoughts

The influence of films on the views of populations is an issue that has been researched by academics. For example, Michelle Pautz, Associate Professor at the University of Dayton, has published an essay analyzing the influence of Argo and Zero Dark Thirty on how U.S. citizens view their government. In a 2015 blog commentary about her research, Professor Pautz states “films that have a more distinctive characterization of characters and institutions might foster a greater influence on viewers.  Put differently, if the “good guys” and “bad guys” are easier to determine, films might be able to influence their audiences.” Meanwhile, in a 2014 interview for the Peruvian daily Diario Correo, Peruvian actor Reynaldo Arenas, who had a role in Gloria del Pacifico, declared that “cinema teaches the youth to not forget history. This art must entertain, educate and inform.” Both Professor Pautz and Mr. Arenas touch on the issue of effects of movies in viewers, with the Peruvian actor taking the stance that movies have a sort of social duty.

Latin America is a region that has experienced major civil unrest over the past decades, morphing in type, from ideological-oriented uprisings to high levels of street violence and the so-called “war on drugs.” Naturally, regional television and film producers have plenty of material that can inspire them to write telenovelas and movies that discuss particular incidents or the consequences of abuses carried out by defense forces in the aforementioned internal conflicts. Hence, the reason why there’s a significant amount of productions about these internal conflicts may be simply because they are topical and it is something that viewers can relate to. Nevertheless, at least one of the aforementioned interviewed defense officers seems to believe that there is a resentment behind these films and telenovelas given how defense forces are portrayed while narco-criminals tend to be glorified.

It would certainly be a welcome development to have major productions that portray the efforts of modern military forces in a positive light, like what has been done with movies relating to the 19th century independence wars, but the problem is that they may in turn be dimissed as government propaganda. Nevertheless, as Professor Pautz and Mr. Arenas highlight, movies do have an influence on the perceptions of moviegoers and it would be a good method of improving popular opinion about security forces in the region since, while it is true that (many) human rights abuses have been unfortunately committed during internal security operations, Latin America is ripe with stories of heroes and heroines who gave their lives to protect their homeland from various internal threats. Militaries and police forces can win wars, but the television and cinematographic industries are critical components that will determine whether or not they will be remembered as heroes.

*The views presented in this essay are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the author is associated.

CIMSEC: The Status of Brazil's Ambitious PROSUB Program

"The Status of Brazil's Ambitious PROSUB Program"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
Center for International Maritime Security
The Southern Tide
November 22, 2016
Originally published: http://cimsec.org/status-brazils-grand-prosub-program/29505

Written by Wilder Alejandro Sanchez, The Southern Tide addresses maritime security issues throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. It discusses the challenges regional navies face including limited defense budgets, inter-state tensions, and transnational crimes. It also examines how these challenges influence current and future defense strategies, platform acquisitions, and relations with global powers.

“The security environment in Latin America and the Caribbean is characterized by complex, diverse, and non-traditional challenges to U.S. interests.” Admiral Kurt W. Tidd, Commander, U.S. Southern Command, before the 114thCongress Senate Armed Services Committee, 10 March 2016.

By W. Alejandro Sanchez

In spite of Brazil’s political crisis, the Brazilian Navy has continued with its ambitious project of domestically constructing a new fleet of submarines, including a nuclear-powered platform. The first Scorpène-class submarine is expected to be launched in 2018, an important development though a couple of years behind schedule. However, the question remains: does Brazil require today, or will it require in the foreseeable future, an advanced submarine fleet?

The PROSUB Program

A 2009 contract between the Brazilian Navy and French conglomerate DCNS “covers the design, production, and technology transfer required for four Scorpène-class conventional submarines, and the design assistance and production of the non-nuclear part of the first Brazilian nuclear powered submarine, including support for construction of a naval base and a naval construction site.” This contract was the result of a defense agreement signed in 2008 by then-Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and his French counterpart, then-President Nikolas Sarkozy. This project is known as the Submarine Development Program (Programa de Desarrollo de Submarinos; PROSUB).

At the time of this writing, SBR-1 Riachuelo (S-40) is nearing completion as it is expected to be launched in 2018 and delivered to the Navy in 2020. The next submarine, SBR-2Humaitá, will be launched in 2020, while SBR-3 Tonelero (S-42) and SBR-4 Angostura (S-43) are scheduled to be completed by the early 2020s.

It is worth stressing that the Brazilian Navy is particularly interested in learning how to manufacture the submarines domestically, rather than relying on DCNS to construct and assemble the submarines abroad. For example, in July, the Brazilian company Nuclebras Heavy Equipment (Nuclebrás Equipamentos Pesados; NUCLEP) delivered the stern section of Humaitá to Itaguaí Construções Navais (ICN) which is assembling the platform in Rio de Janeiro. According to IHS Jane’s Defense Weekly, “the submarine’s hull has been divided into five sections and to date … four sections of SBR 2 [have been delivered]. The final one is scheduled to be delivered in November.”

As for the nuclear submarine SN-BR Alvaro Alberto (SN-10),the Brazilian Navy’s PROSUB webpage reports that it is still in the developmental phase and that actual construction will commence in 2017 and be completed by 2025. “The transfer [of the submarine] to the Navy is expected to take in 2027,” the Navy explains.

A word should be said about the status of the shipyard, also part of PROSUB, since the Navy wants the capacity to construct more of these platforms in the future. To this end, a 750,000 square meter complex is under construction in the municipality of Itaguaí (Rio de Janeiro). In 2013, the Metal Structures Manufacturing Unit (Unidade de Fabricação de Estruturas Metálicas; UFEM) was inaugurated, with then-President Dilma Rousseff in attendance. Among other tasks, UFEM will manufacture the metal hull structures of the platforms.

The DCNS and Other Issues

It is necessary to highlight that the construction of these platforms has not been a smooth ride. A 1 March 2013 article by Reuters reported that “the first conventional submarine [will be completed] in 2015 and the nuclear-powered submarine will be commissioned in 2023 and enter operation in 2025, the Brazilian Navy said in a statement.” The timetable was perhaps too ambitious as the first submarine Riachuelo is now scheduled to be launched in 2018, three years later than originally reported. Similarly, the nuclear platform is now expected to be ready by 2025, not 2023. Part of the reason for the delay has to do with the country’s recent economic crisis which has affected the budget of governmental agencies, including defense.

Due to space considerations, we cannot provide a full account of Brazil’s political crisis over the past year with regards to theLava Jato revelations. Nevertheless, it is important to note that the Brazilian conglomerate Odebrecht, which is involved in PROSUB via its ICN unit, has been implicated in the scandal.(Ret.) Admiral Othon Luiz Pinheiro da Silva, considered the father of Brazil’s nuclear program and a major supporter of the nuclear submarine (see his biography in Togzhan Kassenova’s commentary Turbulent Times for Brazil’s Nuclear Projects) has also been implicated in illicit activities. He was sentenced to 43 years in prison this past August for corruption and money-laundering. While PROSUB itself has survived the recent crises, these scandals raise the question whether there will be new allegations of illegal activities surrounding the construction of these platforms in the near future.

The other problem with PROSUB is that sensitive information about the Scorpène-class subs may be out in the open as DCNS has suffered a massive intelligence leak. This past August, the Australian daily The Australian published documents which “detail the secret combat capability of six Scorpène-class submarines that French shipbuilder DCNS has designed for the Indian Navy.” According to reports, the DCNS leak includes more than 22,000 pages about the Indian platforms.

Regarding this incident, Brazilian Rear Admiral Flavio Augusto Viana published a letter stating that “the Brazilian submarines were designed along specifications made by the Brazilian Navy, which means that there are differences between our submarines and those of other countries.” Therefore, the Brazilian Navy, “does not foresee any impact on the construction of the SBR.” The author is not qualified to compare the Brazilian and Indian Scorpène-class subs, however it is likely that there are some general similarities between the two models.

At this point it is worth remembering the words of Admiral Eduardo Leal Ferreira, commander of the Brazilian Navy, who spoke at a recent 26 September event entitled “Addressing Challenges in the Maritime Commons” at the National Bureau of Asian Research. An article written by the author for IHS Jane’s Defense, quotes Admiral Ferreira stating that the PROSUB program is the Navy’s main priority, followed by upgrading the fleet’s frigates, and then repairing the Sao Paulo(A-12) carrier. In other words, PROSUB, in spite of delays, budget issues and other incidents, will continue.

Discussion

Given that PROSUB is well underway and by next decade we will see a modern, domestically constructed, Brazilian submarine flee. The question is: why does Brazil need these platforms?

The standard reason is for Brazil to monitor and protect its 7,500 kilometers of coastline and vast maritime territory, including its natural resources (the discovery of underwater oil reserves is an often-mentioned fact), from domestic and foreign threats. In his remarks for NBAR, Admiral Ferreira added that the Atlantic Ocean is an open ocean, not a closed sea, so Brazil requires a blue water navy, hence the importance of the submarine and aircraft carrier program. The admiral also highlighted the necessity to have freedom of navigation, implying a blue water navy is necessary, “so when there are problems in the South China Sea or the East China Sea or wherever, we won’t be affected.”

This author argues that Brazil does not have any major inter-state issues that would make the submarines, a platform suitable for conventional warfare, necessary. The reality of South American geopolitics is that Brazil’s relations with its 10 neighbors, including one-time competitor Argentina, remain quite cordial. Hence, the possibility that a regional state would attempt to aggressively take control of part of Brazil’s exclusive economy zone is too remote to realistically contemplate.

Additionally, while Brazil has pursued the submarine program (among other platform acquisition projects), this has not sparked a regional arms race for fear of an “imperialist” Brasilia trying to take over a neighbor’s territory. In other words, regional states do not appear threatened by Brazil’s PROSUB program, highlighting the current status of regional geopolitics and the general success of confidence building mechanisms (for example Brazil has a constant presence in regional military exercises, such as hosting UNITAS Brasil 2015 and serving as the deputy commander for PANAMAX 2016 – Multi-National Forces-South), which make the possibility of inter-state warfare remote in this region.

Likewise, there is little chance that an extra-regional power will deploy a fleet to Brazilian waters a la Spanish Armada to take over its oil platforms. While it is true that the U.S. did send a fleet, led by the USS Forrestal, to support Brazil’s military coup in 1964, bilateral, regional and global geopolitics are not the same as five decades ago.

Without a doubt, Brazil deserves a well-equipped and modern navy that can address its 21st century challenges, protecting its maritime territory, particularly the offshore oil platforms, and cracking down on maritime crimes like drug trafficking (or other types of smuggling) or illegal fishing. However, this author argues that submarines are hardly the appropriate platforms for these tasks. A fleet of oceanic patrol vessels (OPVs) along with a robust air wing would be more suitable for coastal and oceanic patrol, including the interdiction of suspicious vessels.

Final Thoughts

In his September remarks at NBAR, Admiral Ferreira explained the need for Brazil to possess a blue water Navy in case of a hypothetical armed conflict in the South or East China Seas. This author has not found a direct correlation between the two issues: if an incident took place, would Brazil need to deploy its platforms to the open seas in defense of freedom of navigation? While the Admiral’s statement is not clear, the wider goal is to obviously increase the power projection of the Brazilian Navy by making it a blue water navy. This explains PROSUB’s priority, as this will be a major source of pride regarding the country’s naval capabilities, including the ability to manufacture these platforms.

Additionally, Admiral Ferreira highlighted that the Brazilian Navy is a dual-purpose navy as “we are not just a war-fighting Navy like the U.S., we have other collateral tasks, we are coast guard, we are maritime authority for safety of the sea [and] we have lots of tasks in the Amazon basin.” Indeed, the Brazilian Navy has a variety of tasks. However, the question remains if a fleet of four Scorpène-class submarines and one nuclear-powered submarine are the ideal platforms to carry out these duties when OPVs and frigate-type platforms (which the Navy is upgrading) are more suitable for these tasks.

Alejandro Sanchez Nieto is a researcher who focuses on geopolitical, military, and cyber security issues in the Western Hemisphere. Follow him on Twitter: @W_Alex_Sanchez.

The views presented in this essay are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the author is associated.

Living in Peru: Peruvian blueberries go global

"Peruvian Blueberries go global"
W. Alejandro Sanchez

Living in Peru

Opinion

November 14, 2016

http://www.peruthisweek.com/food-peruvian-blueberries-go-global-110791

The blueberry market has steadily began to increase and make an important niche for itself within the country.

In a commentary for Living in Peru entitled Peru on its way to becoming leader in blueberry exports (November, 2014), the author was optimistic about Peru’s blueberry industry, stating that “while Peru continues to successfully export staple-goods like coffee, potatoes, and quinoa, the blueberry market has, in the span of only a couple of years, made an important niche for itself.” Two years later, this past October, Peruvian Minister of Agriculture Jose Hernandez declared that Peru could become the world’s biggest blueberry producer within the next two years. Needless to say, Lima has become quite ambitious about this particular berry.

According to said ministry, Peruvian blueberry producers are looking to cultivate up to 20 thousand tons of these berries in 2016. This seems like an achievable amount given how just in the first three months of 2016 alone, Peruvian farmers grew 3,600 tons of blueberries, four times the amount during the same period in 2015. If the situation continues, by the end of the year, Peru could have exported as much asUSD$200 million worth of blueberries.

A critical issue regarding the future of blueberry production is farming land. The good news is that according to Alfonso Velasquez Tuesta, president of Sierra Exportadora, the goal for this year is to have 3,200 hectares of land growing blueberries. Most of the farming land is found in La Libertad region.

Another positive news is that new markets are opening for Peruvian blueberry exports. Almost parallel to Minister Hernandez’s declaration, on October 10, Lima signed an agreement with the Colombian government via which five Peruvian agricultural products, including blueberries, can now enter the neighboring country. Even more, Peru has also signed a trade agreement with China, which allows Peruvian blueberries to be sold in this important Asian market. Similarly, Peruvian blueberries have also found their way to the United Kingdom. Finally, we should stress that Peru is also attempting to have a bigger foothold in the U.S. as a delegation of Peruvian trade representatives participated in the PMA Fresh Summit Expo held this past October in Florida – blueberries, among other products, were displayed for the thousands of attendees.

The interest in wellness has greatly contributed to the growing export of Peruvian crops associated with healthy eating, such as quinoa and blueberries.

In spite of these, we must remember that there are other South American blueberry producers which have similarly enjoyed recent accomplishments. For example, a new runway measuring almost 8,000 square meters was inaugurated in an airport in Tucuman, northern Argentina on October 6. The Argentinian daily La Nacion reported that, thanks to the expansion, just in October the airport transported 3,825,000 kilos of blueberries to the United States, which is more than the 3,200,000 kilos sent to said market in all of 2015. The report also mentioned that direct cargo flights (via Air Cargo Global) from Tucuman to London are now taking off in order to increase the presence of Argentinian blueberries in Europe. Meanwhile, Chile has also reported success in production and sales. A September report in Pulso states that Chilean blueberry exports reached USD$896 million in 2015. Chile is the third biggest exporter of this berry in the world, after the United States and Spain; this is an important fact to keep in mind since Peru attempts to enter the U.S. blueberry market, which means that Peruvian exporters will have to compete with local blueberry producers.

A final challenge regarding blueberries is that this is, obviously, an agricultural product. This means that it is at the mercy of the climate, which in Peru can include sharp changes in temperatures and other weather patterns that will be exacerbated by climate change. It is important to note that in Chile, the 2016/2017 season commenced two weeks early due to slightly higher-than-normal temperatures; this will negatively affect some varieties of Chilean blueberries. The author has not found sufficient information to discuss how climate change is affecting (or could affect) blueberry production in Peru, but hopefully appropriate research and planning is being carried out.

Miguel Cordano Rodríguez, general manager of Sierra Exportadora, declared earlier this year that there is “an unfulfilled demand for berries in the world. That’s why I encourage producers to keep on growing these crops to meet this demand, not only in terms of volume but also quality. This way, we will diversify our basket of products as well as the destination markets.” Analogous to the quinoa market, Peruvian blueberries are profiting from the global interest in wellness and healthy eating. Hopefully the new government will continue to support this booming berry industry so that the Ministry of Agriculture’s predictions become a reality by the end of the decade.

Follow W. Alejandro Sanchez on Twitter.

Federatsia: La Geopolítica Mundial y La Posibilidad de Bases Rusas en Latinoamérica

"La Geopolítica Mundial y La Posibilidad de Bases Rusas en Latinoamérica"

Por: El Analista W. Alejandro Sanchez

Federatsia

Octubre 30, 2016

Publicado:

https://www.facebook.com/notes/federatsia-%D1%84%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F/la-geopol%C3%ADtica-mundial-y-la-posibilidad-de-bases-rusas-en-latinoam%C3%A9rica/1001803209945841

A principios de Octubre, el vice-ministro de Defensa de la Federación Rusa, Nikolai Pankov, declaró que su gobierno está considerando abrir, o re-abrir en algunos casos, bases militares en países como Cuba, Nicaragua y Venezuela en Latinoamérica, al igual que Vietnam en Asia. Estas declaraciones causaron furor en los medios periodísticos internacionales, particularmente en lo que se refiere a Cuba debido a que durante los dos últimos años, los gobiernos en Washington y La Habana han mejorado sus relaciones diplomáticas. Hoy en día hay un nuevo régimen geopolítico multipolar, con potencias mundiales y regionales, y como en otrora, las bases militares en naciones amigas son parte de la proyección del poder político y militar de un gobierno.

Después de la Guerra Fría, Estados Unidos y sus aliados de la Organización del Tratado del Atlántico Norte (OTAN) extendieron su presencia a Europa Central y a Europa del Este. En la actualidad, este bloque tiene miembros que en su momento fueron, o parte de la Unión de Repúblicas Socialistas Soviéticas o parte del Pacto de Varsovia, como los países bálticos o los que bordean al Mar Negro (Bulgaria y Rumania). Hasta hace poco tiempo, aproximadamente en los últimos ocho años, se especulaba que Georgia, en el Cáucaso, o Ucrania en algún momento también serían miembros de la OTAN; sin embargo la guerra entre Rusia y Georgia en el 2008 y el conflicto interno en Ucrania evaporaron estas posibilidades.

Por su parte, Estados Unidos también incrementó su presencia en Asia Central luego de los ataques del 11 de Septiembre del 2011 y la operación multinacional en Afganistán, al igual que en el Mundo Árabe luego de la guerra del 2003 en Iraq. En cuanto a bases militares se refieren, se necesitaría un ensayo solo para enumerarlas, no obstante vale mencionar que Estados Unidos tiene a sus fuerzas armadas en países como Alemania, Corea del Sur y Japón mientras que en el continente americano están en Cuba, El Salvador y Honduras entre otros. Algunos países europeos poseen también bases en otras naciones, como la presencia militar francesa en Mali. Mientras tanto la República Popular China ha abierto su primera base naval en otro país, en Djibouti, un pequeño país africano muy importante por su posición geográfica, está situado frente al Golfo de Adén.

En cuanto a la Federación Rusa, Moscú tiene una presencia militar en los países que lo bordean, incluyendo la Región del Cáucaso. También está presente en Ucrania, de manera muy controversial, dado el rol ruso en el conflicto interno de dicho país y en Transnistria, una región separatista de Moldova. Sin embargo la base rusa que hoy en día hace noticia está en Siria, ya que Moscú está apoyando militarmente al gobierno de Bashar al Assad contra el Estado Islámico y otros grupos insurgentes. Precisamente en estos días, una flota rusa, encabezada por el portaviaones Kurznetsov ha atravesado el Canal de la Mancha, con dirección a Siria. Vale mencionar que esta flota causó preocupación en el Reino Unido, ya que Londres desplegó dos buques de guerra, el destructor HMS Duncan y la fragata HMS Richmond, para que monitoreen las actividades de la flota rusa.

La simbología de esta flota rusa ha sido analizada en extenso. Por ejemplo, Steve Rosenberg de la BBC escribió que Rusia no quiere solo incrementar su poderío en Siria, ya que para hacerlo, sería más rápido enviar aviones directamente a la base rusa aérea cercana a Latakia, en Siria. Rosenberg argumenta que “mandar una flotilla rusa por el Mar del Norte y el Canal de la Mancha envía un mensaje claro al Oeste: todo lo que ustedes pueden hacer, también lo podemos hacer nosotros, hasta mejor.”

Las tensiones entre las potencias mundiales han llevado al Primer Ministro ruso Dmitry Medvédev a declarar, en Febrero del presente año, que el mundo está viviendo una nueva Guerra Fría.  Dado este punto de vista, de un alto oficial ruso, son de esperar los rumores o declaraciones respecto a que Moscú tiene la intención de abrir bases en diferentes naciones amigas, ya que esta sería una forma mediante la cual, la Federación Rusa incremente su presencia militar y política más allá de sus fronteras. Curiosamente, en el 2015, el vice ministro de defensa Anatoly Antonov declaró que Moscú no tiene planes de crear bases en Latinoamérica, mientras que ahora, otro vice ministro dice lo contrario.

Por el momento, la intención rusa de establecer bases en Latinoamérica, no ha progresado. Ciertamente, Rusia mantiene buenas relaciones de defensa con varios países de la región y ha vendido material bélico a los gobiernos de Nicaragua y Venezuela, entre otros. Sin embargo, Rusia no tiene una base militar en Latinoamérica, lo más cercano es el centro de entrenamiento “Mariscal Zukhov” en Nicaragua. Vale aclarar que este centro no es una base militar en el sentido tradicional de la palabra, con tropas armadas y armamento pesado, sino más bien un centro académico y de entrenamiento.

Cuando el vice ministro Pankov declaró que Rusia planea tener “bases militares” en países latinoamericanos y en Vietnam, no es claro a qué tipo de instalaciones se refiere. ¿En verdad tendrá la intención Moscú de abrir bases con un alto número de tropas al estilo de Siria, Transnistria o Ucrania? Aunque esto probablemente no ocurra, hasta una presencia militar simbólica, como los instructores en Nicaragua, sirven para incrementar las relaciones de defensa entre Moscú y otras naciones, algunas de las cuales se encuentran geográficamente cerca a Estados Unidos.

La geopolítica mundial hoy en día es rara. La utopía de crear paz mundial se ha evaporado y ahora tenemos un orden multipolar,es decir, con varios potencias mundiales y regionales.  Hasta pareciera que el mundo está retornando a la geopolítica de otrora, es decir a la época donde las potencias establecen instalaciones militares fuera de sus fronteras para demostrar el alcance de sus fuerzas políticas y de defensa.

Sin lugar a dudas, una hipotética base militar rusa (ya sea con tropas como la base en Siria, o solo con instructores como el centro en Nicaragua) en Latinoamérica tendría fuertes repercusiones a nivel regional, al igual que efectos en el “Gran Juego” geopolítico de las potencias mundiales que se vive en la actualidad.

E-IR: Suicide Squad, Atrocity Crimes and the International Criminal Court

"Suicide Squad: Atrocity Crimes and the International Criminal Court"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
E-International Relations
October 19, 2016
Originally published: http://www.e-ir.info/2016/10/19/suicide-squad-atrocity-crimes-and-the-international-criminal-court/

DC Comics has published a one-issue story of its popular comic book franchise, Suicide Squad. Suicide Squad: War Crimes has the fictional team of “worst superheroes ever” undertake a mission in which they will have to deal with a very real organization: the International Criminal Court (ICC).

A Brief Plot

Given that the ICC has a prominent role in War Crimes, it is necessary to briefly summarize the comic’s plot as this will help our analysis when we discuss what the ICC can and cannot do.  In War Crimes, a European mercenary team, Strikeforce Europa, abducts the fictional George Carmody, a former U.S. Secretary of Defense (SecDef), in New York City. The goal is to take him to the ICC’s headquarters in The Hague so he can be tried for ‘alleged war crimes during the last Gulf action.’ It is revealed that the team decided to kidnap Carmody on their own, without receiving orders from a government or the ICC. The ruthless Amanda Waller deploys Task Force X (popularly known to readers as the Suicide Squad) to The Netherlands to rescue Carmody while he is transported from the ICC’s detention centre to its main facilities, both located in Scheveningen.

The objective is to prevent Carmody from having to stand trial since, as Waller puts it, ‘he’s guilty as sin.’ She then briefly explains to the task force how Carmody headed a security company called Black Mountain Ltd, before becoming SecDef and ‘some say he never stopped working for them. Carmody threw them a lot of work during the Gulf action. Big-time war profiteers.’

The Workings of the ICC

Typically comic book storylines create fictional characters and agencies, though there are cases when they mention real-world entities. War Crimes, correctly states that the ICC’s detention center and main facilities are located in Scheveningen; however there are a couple of facts that deserve clarification.

The main plot problem with War Crimes is that the ICC must first open a case against an individual in order to subsequently order his/her arrest. Hence, even if the fictional Carmody was guilty of whatever crimes he allegedly committed, the ICC cannot arrest him and put him on trial if he happened to appear at its offices (e.g. after being kidnapped by the fictional Strikeforce Europa mercenaries).

The ICC’s charter is quite clear on the reasons via which it can prosecute individuals. There are three possible routes:

1. ‘A State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed;’ (ICC Treaty, Art. 14)
2. The United Nations Security Council can request that the ICC investigates an incident;
3. Or ’the Prosecutor may initiate investigations propriomotu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court.’ (ICC Treaty, Art. 15)

According to the comic book, the Strikeforce Europa mercenaries were acting out of their own accord, without orders from a government or the ICC, when they took Carmody. This would not be acceptable for the Court, particularly if there was no case against him to begin with.

Additionally, even if theoretically the case against the fictional Carmody in War Crimes was not dismissed outright by the ICC, given that he was kidnapped from the U.S. without an order for his arrest, the U.S. could veto any judicial procedure against him.

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC), of which the U.S. is a permanent member, has the power to veto cases that could be brought to the ICC. According to Article 16 of the Rome Statute, ‘no investigation or prosecution may be commenced or proceeded with under this Statute for a period of 12 months after the Security Council, in a resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has requested the Court to that effect.’ This power has been recently utilized. For example, in 2014 Moscow and Beijing, also UNSC permanent members, vetoed a resolution for the ICC to open a case for war crimes in Syria. Hence, the fictional Amanda Waller need not have worried about sending her team of criminals to The Hague to rescue the former U.S. SecDef, as Washington could have vetoed a judicial procedure against him.

Finally, there is the issue of nomenclature. The crimes prosecuted by the ICC are known as ‘atrocity crimes;’ this agency is not a ‘war crimes tribunal’ or ‘genocide court.’ The term ‘atrocity’ encompasses genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes (namely the crimes the ICC investigates). Hence, theSuicide Squad issue should have been called ‘Suicide Squad: Atrocity Crimes.’ (For further info, see theFramework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes: A Tool for Prevention, published by the United Nations).

Setting Precedents

War Crimes does bring up an interesting scenario: the possibility of a government official from a developed nation being brought to stand trial at the ICC. While there is significant international support among governments and civic society for the court (after all, the Rome Statute was adopted in 1998 and the 60 ratifications needed to enter it into force were reached by 2002, and today it has 124 State Parties), there has been criticism that the ICC has focused on investigating atrocity crimes perpetrated by citizens of the developing world, particularly Africa, without investigating crimes committed by, for example, military personnel from a global power in another country. For example, Chad’s president, Idriss Déby, has declared that ‘elsewhere in the world, many things happen, many flagrant violations of human rights, but nobody cares.’

Currently there are nine cases that the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor is investigating, which are all located in the developing world: the Central African Republic (two cases), the Democratic Republic of Congo, Georgia, Ivory Coast, Kenya, Libya, Mali, Sudan (Darfur), and Uganda. Even more, the ICC has two arrest warrants (issued in 2009 and 2010) for Sudanese President Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir, which have not been implemented, as the Sudanese leader has travelled abroad, including to South Africa in 2015, and has not been arrested. (The South African Supreme Court of Appeal reprimanded the government for not arresting the Sudanese head of state, hence it is unlikely that he will be able to enter the country again).

In an e-mail interview with the author, Kip Hale, an international atrocity law expert and former UN prosecuting attorney, argues that ‘all cases at the ICC but Sudan and Libya were either expressly requested by the country in question, or in the case of Kenya, given every chance to handle the atrocities domestically (and in that case, the ICC was given little choice but to intervene in the face of impunity).’ In other words, the aforementioned cases have followed the ICC’s bureaucratic procedure as established by the Rome Statute, which over a hundred nations to date (including many Africa governments) have ratified and must adhere to. (There is also the issue of whether certain heads of state are attempting to undermine and delegitimize the ICC in order to prevent the Court from opening a case against them at some point).

Without a doubt, the ICC should not engage in the circus-type trial of the citizen of a global power or developed nation for the sole sake of appeasing governments from the developing world that would like to see more variety in the suspects that the court investigates. Moreover, the fact that most cases that the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) is currently investigating originate in Africa is influenced by the number of conflicts taking place in said continent as well the inadequate local judicial systems that cannot necessarily assure a competent and impartial judicial process, particularly when the defendant is, or was, a government official. As an analysis in the International Policy Digest explains, ‘by limiting the role of the ICC to complementary [justice], the Rome Statute and the states that are party to the treaty created a last resort institution that will only be utilized if the country is unable or unwilling to prosecute their war criminals.’ In other words, the ICC is supposed to be a ‘last resort’ option for justice, if domestic judicial systems are either inadequate or unwilling to process war criminals. The ongoing ICC case in Kenya is an example of this situation.

Even more, the ICC is starting to be active in areas outside of continental Africa. As Mr. Hale explains, ‘the ICC is currently conducting preliminary investigations in Afghanistan (in part looking at US alleged abuses), Iraq (in part looking at UK alleged abuses) and Palestine (in part looking at Israel’s alleged crimes),’ apart from the ongoing case in Georgia vis-à-vis, alleged crimes committed by Russia during the 2008 conflict. Hence, the ICC is actually starting to investigate alleged crimes by the global powers.

Other regions of the world plagued by internal conflict have created their own courts as well as truth and reconciliation commissions to expose crimes and, if needed, prosecute individuals accused of atrocity crimes. For example, the Guatemalan government is currently prosecuting a former soldier, Santos López Alonzo, accused of ordering the death of over 200 individuals in 1982 during that Central American country’s civil war. The judicial systems in these countries are far for perfect, but justice is (slowly) being served.

An Evolving Mandate?

It is important to note that in mid-September, the ICC decided to start investigating environmental crimes in addition to the four categories of crimes already under its jurisdiction (crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and crimes of aggression). A Reuters report explains that ‘company executives or politicians could now be held responsible under international law for illegal land deals which violently displace residents following the shift.’ Even more, the recent case of The Prosecutor vs. Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi is another landmark as ‘this is the first international trial focusing on the destruction of historical and religious monuments, and the first ICC case where the defendant made an admission of guilt.’ On 27 September, Mr. Al Faqi was sentenced to nine years in prison.

This issue deserves an important clarification. As Mr. Hale explains, ‘the ICC can only charge individuals for the three core atrocity crimes (until the crimes of aggression one day becomes available to it): war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.’ Hence, when the ICC charges individuals for environmental crimes or crimes against cultural property, ‘these are not crimes separate from war crimes, crimes against humanity, etc. They are crimes being charges AS war crimes, crimes against humanity, and/or genocide. Specifically as it relates to war crimes, destruction of the environment and cultural property are already widely recognized war crimes and listed in the Rome Statute,’ Mr. Hale explains.

The question then becomes if the ICC could try the citizen of a developed nation for environmental or cultural crimes if these fall under the provision of the ICC. Discussing such a scenario is beyond the scope of this analysis, but it is clear that if a government from the developed world agrees to have one of its citizens prosecuted by the ICC, this would set a monumental precedent and would give the Court further credibility as a global judicial body.

The U.S. and the ICC

Given that War Crimes focuses on the fictional scenario of a former U.S. official being tried at the ICC, it is important to note that the U.S. government has yet to ratify the Rome Statute. Some U.S.-based research centers argue that Washington should not do so. For example, the Heritage Foundation, published an issue brief in 2014 that advices the U.S. government  to ‘reaffirm its intent not to ratify the Rome Statute; reject ICC claims of jurisdiction over U.S. persons; [and] maintain and expand America’s bilateral Article 98 agreements and exercise available options to protect U.S. persons from the ICC.’

Even though the U.S has not ratified the Rome Statute, Washington has been heavily involved in helping prosecute atrocity crimes for decades. The desire to promote international justice is found in Washington’s support for the United Nations War Crimes Commission (UNWCC); the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East after World War II; and the international criminal tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda in the 1990s. Washington was also involved in the establishment of the ICC itself.

Nowadays, while some official U.S. documents praise the Court, it is unclear if there is a significant official interest in joining it. For example, the 2010 National Security Strategy explains that ‘although the United States is not at present a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), and will always protect U.S. personnel, we are engaging with State Parties to the Rome Statute on issues of concern and are supporting the ICC’s prosecution of those cases that advance U.S. interests and values, consistent with the requirements of U.S. law.’ Meanwhile, the 2015 National Security Strategy has a briefer mention of the ICC, simply stating that the U.S. ‘will work with the international community to prevent and call to account those responsible for the worst human rights abuses, including through support to the International Criminal Court, consistent with U.S. law and our commitment to protecting our personnel.’

While the Obama administration recently made headlines by agreeing to ratify the Paris climate change agreement, we will probably have to wait until the next administration to see if the U.S. becomes a state party of the Rome Statute.

Final Thoughts

While Suicide Squad: War Crimes has a number of factual flaws regarding how the ICC, and the OTP in particular, operates, it nevertheless serves as an interesting point of departure to have a debate about the fairness the ICC so far in investigating atrocity crimes since it was established in 2002. The fact that a fictional U.S. SecDef is taken to The Hague to stand trial brings up the issue of which crimes and which countries the ICC has investigated so far, and which it has not, for one reason or other. While War Crimes is a fictional story, prosecuting atrocity crimes in the real world remains a complex, and sometimes infuriatingly slow, process.

*The views presented in this essay are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the author is associated. The author would like to thank Kip Hale, Christian Maisch and Lucia Scripcari for their helpful suggestions.