Showing posts with label central america. Show all posts
Showing posts with label central america. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 29, 2024

Shephard News: "US supplies latest vessel to strengthen Caribbean and Central American security"

 

"US supplies latest vessel to strengthen Caribbean and Central American security"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez

Naval Warfare

Shephard Media

29 May 2024

Originally published: https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/naval-warfare/us-supplies-latest-vessel-to-tighten-caribbean-and-central-american-security/

A US Navy Rear Admiral highlighted the importance of the US working closely with allies in its own backyard as Louisiana shipbuilder delivers latest patrol vessel to partner nation.

Continue reading... 

Friday, December 1, 2023

Geopolitical Monitor: "Supreme Court Ruling Lands a Blow against Mining Interests in Panama"

 

"Supreme Court Ruling Lands a Blow against Mining Interests in Panama"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez

Situation Report

Geopolitical Monitor

1 December 2023

Originally published: https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/supreme-court-ruling-lands-a-blow-against-mining-interests-in-panama/

Panama’s Supreme Court issued a historical ruling on 28 November. After deliberating for less than a week, the judiciary of the Central American country determined that a controversial and very unpopular contract between Canada’s First Quantum Minerals and the government of Panama is “unconstitutional.” While the dust still needs to settle, and repercussions are expected, including potential legal actions by First Quantum, the decision is a significant victory for the Panamanian environment and the people’s voice.

Continue reading... 

Thursday, November 2, 2023

Geopolitical Monitor: Protests Put Panama’s First Quantum Minerals Copper Project in Doubt

 

"Protests Put Panama’s First Quantum Minerals Copper Project in Doubt"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez

Situation Report

Geopolitical Monitor

2 November, 2023

Originally published: https://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/protests-put-panamas-first-quantum-minerals-copper-project-in-doubt/

In late October, thousands of Panamanians took to the streets (and even the water) across the country to protest a contract granted by the Panamanian government to the Canada-based First Quantum Minerals mining company to operate Central America’s largest copper mine. Copper is a precious mineral and a critical component for various industries. However, the people of the Central American country are pushing back due to a long list of environmental concerns.

The historical decision by Panama to hold a national referendum on 17 December over the contract represents a major win for environmental organizers and could well set a precedent for other polities in South and Central America.

 

Continue reading...

Friday, June 2, 2023

Expediente Abierto: "Acercamiento en materia de defensa y seguridad de China con Centroamérica y el Caribe"

 

"Acercamiento en materia de defensa y seguridad de China con Centroamérica y el Caribe"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez

Reporte

Expediente Abierto

31 de Mayo, 2023

Publicado:  https://www.expedienteabierto.org/acercamiento-en-materia-de-defensa-y-seguridad-de-china-con-centroamerica-y-el-caribe/

A pesar de los esfuerzos del gobierno de China por proveer armamento y equipos militares a Latinoamérica y el Caribe, la incidencia de sus acercamientos respecto al sector de seguridad y defensa es limitada. China ha transferido por medio de donaciones, tecnología y equipos para las fuerzas policiales y de seguridad pública de la región. Beijing también ha sido exitoso en establecer acuerdos de cooperación de defensa con la región, incluyendo el entrenamiento de personal militar latinoamericano en Asia. Sin embargo, países centroamericanos y caribeños no han comprado equipo militar, como también ha sido la generalidad en Latinoamérica, que prefiere adquirir sus equipos con socios más tradicionales (salvo Venezuela y Bolivia).

Friday, February 3, 2023

Shephard Media: Metal Shark makes programme progress for Caribbean navies

 

"Metal Shark makes programme progress for Caribbean navies"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez

Naval Warfare

Shephard Media

3 February, 2023

Originally published: https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/naval-warfare/metal-shark-makes-programme-progress-for-caribbean-navies/

US shipbuilder Metal Shark has delivered a new patrol vessel to Costa Rica and achieved a major milestone on a project for Guyana.

Continue reading...

Tuesday, October 25, 2022

Shephard Media: US donates equipment to three Central American partners

 

"US donates equipment to three Central American partners"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez

Defence Notes

Shephard Media

25 October 2022

Originally published: https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/defence-notes/us-donates-equipment-to-three-central-american-partners/

The US is supplying aircraft and vehicles to the armed forces of three Central American nations to help them meet regional security and defence needs.

Continue reading... 

Wednesday, July 15, 2020

Shephard Media: Procurement struggles and stretched resources hinder Guatemala

"Procurement struggles and stretched resources hinder Guatemala"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez
Shephard Media
Defence Notes
15 July, 2020
Originally published:  https://www.shephardmedia.com/news/defence-notes/premium-procurement-struggles-and-stretched-resour/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=auto_post&utm_campaign=news_promo


Lacking hefty procurement budgets, small Central American countries are struggling to fulfil their defence equipment acquisition ambitions – and the situation is only likely to worsen once the ramifications of COVID-19 become clearer.

Thursday, December 6, 2018

Providence: Tensions along the US-Mexico Border: Using “Lethal Force” against Migrants


"Tensions along the US-Mexico Border: Using 'Lethal Force' against Migrants"
Wilder Alejandro Sanchez
Providence
4 December 2018
Originally published: https://providencemag.com/2018/12/tensions-us-mexico-border-lethal-force-migrants/

But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him?” 1 John 3:17
 
On November 25, some 500 migrants, including women and children, attempted to cross the Mexico-US border near the Mexican city of Tijuana. They were repelled by US border patrol agents using tear gas. The Mexican government has declared that those involved in the incident will be deported.

This incident comes at the heels of the Trump administration’s controversial authorization of lethal force, if necessary, by US troops stationed on the border with Mexico. He has similarly increased his rhetoric when referring to the migrants, whom he has labeled as “criminals,” and characterized the caravan as an “invasion.” Such statements do no help defuse the tense situation at the border.

Migrants and Troops
At the time of this writing, reports from the border say that between five and nine thousand migrants from Central America, particularly Honduras, are in Tijuana, camping by the border and at a sports complex. The November 25 incident demonstrates that these people are not willing to wait long until their case is heard by US immigration authorities. (Certain media reports say some migrants are returning to their homeland.)

In response, President Donald Trump deployed over five thousand troops to the border—the mission was originally called Operation Faithful Patriot, but later the Department of Defense labeled it as simply border support. Additionally, military police officers from the port of entry in Texas have been deployed to support Border Patrol agents in the San Ysidro Land Port of Entry in San Diego.
According to CNN, the Pentagon has explained that “the $72 million price tag covers the cost of deploying the approximately 5,900 active duty troops until December 15 and will increase the longer the troops are deployed.” This is quite the price tag to deal with unarmed men, women, and children.

“Rocks as Rifles”
President Trump has shown no reservation regarding how the migrants should be treated. He declared:

Anybody throwing stones, rocks, like they did to Mexico and the Mexican military, Mexican police, where they badly hurt police and soldiers of Mexico, we will consider that a firearm… We’re not going to put up with that. They want to throw rocks at our military, our military fights back. I told them to consider it a rifle.
This statement was probably a reaction to a photo that has been circulating online which shows a bloody Mexican police officer; violent migrants allegedly injured him. That story has been exposed as a lie as the photo was actually taken in 2012.

Moreover, Newsweek has published a decision memorandum, dated November 20 and signed by President Trump, which states that the deployed military personnel to the border “may perform those military protective activities that are reasonably necessary to ensure the protection and safety of Federal personnel, including a show of force (including lethal force, where necessary), crowd control, temporary detention, and cursory search” (click here for the entire document). The incident last month is an example of US security personnel taking non-lethal actions in response to an attempted stampede by the migrants to cross the border.

Discussion
The caravan coincided with the US midterm elections; hence, President Trump made it an electoral issue. The US president has characterized the caravan members as “young men, strong men,” many of whom are criminals, according to him. He once stated that there were individuals from the Middle East in the caravan—he would later acknowledge that there was no proof for this accusation.

To be fair, the US Department of Homeland Security reportedly has informants in the caravan, and DHS officials have worked with Mexican authorities to identify them and figure out if any of them have criminal pasts. Authorities should treat such individuals appropriately (including deportation), but President Trump’s stereotypes and lies are a major problem. Similarly, individuals interviewed by Fox News have also said that the migrants have diseases like smallpox, tuberculosis, and even leprosy. In other words, the men, women, and children of this caravan are evil-incarnated, and they are coming to “invade,” as President Trump tweeted on October 29, the US and spread violence and leprosy. (Did Jesus not treat a leper with kindness rather than hate?)

This type of inflammatory language is not helpful. Rather than engaging with the governments of Central America or the new administration in Mexico, or with the caravan leaders themselves, President Trump has focused on militarizing the border, vilifying the migrants, and threatening US allies—he has threatened to cut financial aid to the Central American nations where the migrants come from.

Final Thoughts
It is understandable that any nation should refrain from having an open-door migration policy, and should the situation turn more violent at the border, it is correct for military personnel to defend themselves. However, it is certainly not acceptable for any government to spread hate and lies while dealing with a defenseless migrant population.

—
Wilder Alejandro Sanchez is an analyst who focuses on geopolitical, military, and cybersecurity issues in the Western Hemisphere. The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the author is associated.

Friday, November 9, 2018

Providence: US-Central America Relations: Using Aid as a Foreign Policy Tool Will Backfire


"US-Central America Relations: Using Aid as a Foreign Policy Tool Will Backfire"
Wilder Alejandro Sanchez
Providence
2 November 2018
Originally published: https://providencemag.com/2018/11/us-central-america-relations-using-aid-as-a-foreign-policy-tool-will-backfire/

A caravan of thousands of people, mostly Hondurans, is currently in southern Mexico as it attempts to reach the US in search of a better life. This situation has prompted harsh criticism from President Donald Trump, who has threatened to cut financial aid to Honduras and the other Central American nations where the migrants originate from. This is a bad idea that will backfire rather than help the situation.

Caravans and Statements
The caravan originated in San Pedro Sula, a Honduran city well known for high levels of gang-related crime and violence. This mass of human beings has already walked through Honduras and Guatemala and has entered Mexico. While most of these individuals are Hondurans, others have joined as it made its way north, from neighboring countries like El Salvador and Guatemala—these three nations are known as the “Northern Triangle.” How many migrants constitute the caravan is unclear; estimates put the number at between 4,500 and 7,000.

At the time of this writing, thousands of caravan members have entered Mexico, and many have others have applied for temporary visas or refugee status. Nevertheless, many have entered without proper documentation by crossing the Suchiate River or turning to human traffickers. According to CNN En Espanol, some 3,000 Hondurans are returning home rather than facing additional risks to reach the US President Trump, who campaigned on an anti-immigration platform, has demanded that the caravan not reach the US. On October 22 he tweeted, “Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador were not able to do the job of stopping people from leaving their country and coming illegally to the US. We will now begin cutting off, or substantially reducing, the massive foreign aid routinely given to them.” In a separate tweet, he declared that “criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed in” the caravan.

President Trump has often accused undocumented Latin American migrants of being violent criminals. Furthermore, there is no evidence that “Middle Easterners” are part of said caravan.

Discussion
In short, blackmailing the three Northern Triangle governments into stopping their citizens from migrating is a bad foreign policy strategy.

First of all, these three nations have historically been faithful US allies; in fact, the US military has facilities at the Palmerola base in Honduras, home of Joint Task Force Bravo; and the Cooperative Security Location in Comalapa, El Salvador. Moreover, in an example of desiring to support its ally, Salvadoran troops fought in Iraq as part of the US-led coalition. Hence, it makes little geopolitical sense to alienate reliable US partners in the region, particularly at a time when Washington requires regional support and cohesion to deal with hemispheric problems, such as Venezuela—in fact, Guatemala and Honduras voted in favor of a US-backed resolution in the Organization of American States that attempted to suspend Venezuela earlier this year.

Secondly, these three nations are poor, and they rely on foreign assistance. Should the US cut off aid, the situation would get worse, not better. For example, ForeignAssistance.gov explains that in 2019 Washington plans to provide $65.75 million to Honduras; these funds will be utilized to (hopefully) improve democracy, human rights, and governance, as well as economic development and education. Meanwhile, USAID reports that in 2016 a total of $127 million was donated to Honduras across all US agencies, with the main targets being programs on violence prevention, counter-narcotics, and strengthening justice and human rights. In other words, the money will be used precisely to improve the situation that prompted the caravan to leave its homeland in the first place.

Additionally, there is the obvious question of how exactly these Northern Triangle governments could stop their citizens from leaving. None of these countries have particularly large militaries or police forces—which contributes to the ongoing wave of violence in the region, which in turn prompts migration—that can be deployed along their common borders. Moreover, the region’s geography does not help the situation, as it is a dense jungle with several rivers, not to mention the Sierra Madre de Chiapas mountain range. In other words, a border wall across these countries is not a possibility.

Without a doubt, there is a valid concern of whether US economic aid to the Northern Triangle nations is having a positive effect nowadays. For example, in 2019 Washington plans to provide $69.41 million to Guatemala in foreign assistance, with $20 million going to the rule of law, civil society and good governance. This is ironic as Guatemalan President Jimmy Morales is behaving in an increasingly dictatorial manner, exemplified best by his refusal to allow the head of Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG), Iván Velásquez, into the country. The reason for this is CICIG’s work on cracking down on corruption in Guatemala, which includes the president himself.

Final Thoughts
Violence, poverty, and lack of opportunities for a good life prompted a new caravan of thousands of people to leave Honduras en route to the US, where they hope to have a good life. Mass migration is certainly a problem that governments need to deal with, but punishing the countries where these migrants come from is not a solution, particularly given that these nations are reliable US allies. Cutting economic aid will make the situation worse, not better, because such a policy won’t address the causes of why this migration occurred in the first place.

As a corollary to this analysis, it is important to point out that on October 23 Infobae.com reported that a new caravan is being organized, this one out of El Salvador. If President Trump cuts foreign assistance to these nations, what leverage will he have left to influence them?

—
Wilder Alejandro Sanchez is an analyst who focuses on geopolitical, military, and cybersecurity issues in the Western Hemisphere. The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the author is associated.

Monday, July 9, 2018

Providence: The Church and Nicaragua's Crisis


"The Church and Nicaragua's Crisis"

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez

Providence: A Journal of Christianity and American Foreign Policy

9 July, 2018

Originally published: https://providencemag.com/2018/07/the-church-and-nicaragua-crisis/

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.” (Matt. 5:9)

On July 1, Pope Francis prayed and called for peace in various parts of the world, including Nicaragua. While acting as a mediator and protecting protesters from the government forces’ repressive tactics, the church there has had an important role in the Central American nation’s ongoing crisis.

The Violence
Civil unrest started in Nicaragua on April 18 when the government passed (very) unpopular reforms to the country’s Social Security Institute (Instituto Nicaragüense de Seguridad Social, or INSS) that would have cut benefits to elderly pensioners by 5 percent. Protests led by university students erupted over these changes, and in response the government resorted to repressive tactics, like organizing paramilitary forces to fight protesters.

At the time of this writing, according to the local non-governmental organization the Nicaraguan Association for Human Rights (ANDPH), there have been 285 deaths related to the protests against President Daniel Ortega’s government. This number is worth stressing as the Central American country has not experienced a wave of violence so extreme since the internal war in the 1970s and 1980s, during which Ortega overthrew the Somoza dynasty in 1979. Those events prompted the United States  to back the infamous counterrevolutionaries known as the Contras in an attempt to overthrow him.

While the social security law was the catalyst for the current violence, the protesters’ demands have increased to include regime change due to the head of state’s perpetuation in power. President Ortega returned to power in 2007 and was then re-elected in 2011 and 2016. Moreover, during the last election First Lady Rosario Murillo ran as her spouse’s running mate, so she is now (a very unpopular) vice president.

The author can personally attest to the protesters’ sentiment, at least regarding the Nicaraguan community in Washington, DC. Case in point, the Inter-American Dialogue, a Latin America-focused think tank in DC, held an event on June 4 about the country’s situation. The attendees carried Nicaraguan flags and during the question-and-answer section constantly talked about the impending end of the Ortega-Murillo regime: “de que se van, se van” (“they will leave yes or yes”) was mentioned more than once.

The Role of the Church
At a time when the behavior of the government and some of its forces disgusts the Nicaraguan population, the church is one of the remaining institutions that still enjoys popular support and legitimacy. Thus, the Nicaraguan church has attempted to utilize this credibility to find a peaceful solution to this crisis.
An early attempt occurred on April 28. When the protests were heating up, the church organized a massive peaceful protest in the streets of Managua. Cardinal Leopoldo Brenes even held a mass in the capital city’s cathedral. A similar peaceful demonstration took place in Matagalpa with Monsignor Rolando Álvarez at the helm.

Nevertheless, the protests and violence persisted, so the church switched tactics. In late April, Nicaragua’s Episcopal Council (Conferencia Episcopal de Nicaragua, or CEN) offered to act as a mediator between the government and the protesters. President Ortega accepted, reportedly stating in a letter that “we are grateful in name of the Nicaraguan families and the government for [the CEN’s] participation as mediators and witnesses to these important developments in Nicaragua.”

In spite of these meetings, the situation has unfortunately not improved as the violence continues. The general perception is that the Ortega regime wants to remain in power and is using the mediation to stall for time while using repressive and violent tactics to intimidate the population into submission. For example, a June 23 CEN press release urged President Ortega to respond to a request CEN presented to him on June 7 regarding early elections in 2019 to appease the protesters. The Nicaraguan leader has flip-flopped about this possibility.

Still, the Nicaraguan church continues its attempts to promote peace. The Nicaraguan media has reported that the aforementioned Cardinal Brenes and Monsignor Alvarez met with Pope Francis in the Vatican at the end of June, and the CEN remains committed to dialogue. The CEN is also involved in monitoring the release of protesters who were imprisoned.

Furthermore, there is footage of priests attending the protests and walking in front of the protesters to dissuade the police from violent, repressive tactics. For a religious nation, a robe-wearing priest is a very powerful image. But this is a dangerous path because it may erode the church’s current image of neutrality, and some individuals may be willing to physically attack the clergy—there have already been incidents of masked gunmen threatening priests at gunpoint.

It remains to be seen how successful the church will be as a mediator in Nicaragua, but there have been some noteworthy precedents in the region. For example, a war between Argentina and Chile almost occurred in 1978—a border dispute known as the Beagle Conflict—which was thankfully averted due to Vatican mediation (a peace treaty was signed in 1984). On the other hand, the church has called for peace and dialogue in Venezuela with little success.

Final Thoughts
Much has been written about the importance of the separation between church and state. However, there are times when the former should be involved in the affairs of the latter, as the church has the moral responsibility to stop unjust violence. For example, the Bible verse at the beginning of this essay highlights biblical support for peacemakers.

The church has pursued peacemaking in Nicaragua while in the past months protests have escalated and the Ortega government resorts to violence rather than sincere negotiation. In this crisis, Nicaragua’s Episcopal Council has emerged as a consequential actor, and hopefully its peacemaking activities will prove successful.

—
Wilder Alejandro Sanchez is an analyst who focuses on geopolitical, military, and cybersecurity issues in the Western Hemisphere. The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the author is associated.

Sunday, June 17, 2018

IPD: The Situation in Nicaragua Deteriorates

"The Situation in Nicaragua Deteriorates"
W. Alejandro Sanchez & Scott Morgan
International Policy Digest
17 June 2018
Originally published: https://intpolicydigest.org/2018/06/17/the-situation-in-nicaragua-deteriorates/


Once again there is a political crisis in Central America. Although there has been some justified criticism towards the government of Guatemala and how it has responded to Fuego volcano’s eruption, that is not the focal point of this commentary.

Since April 2018 there have been a series of protests that have taken place in Nicaragua, which have fallen outside the purview of most media reports as other more compelling stories, such as Syria, the G-7 summit and the North Korea-US meeting dominate the news cycles. Most of the protests have taken place outside the capital of Managua as well.

The death toll right now is reported to be at least 139 people, according to the Centro Nicaragüense de Derechos Humanos, a Nicaraguan human rights organization. What could cause such an uprising? The root cause is a decision that was made by President Daniel Ortega to amend social security benefits has morphed from student led protests into a movement bent on driving the president from office before the next scheduled elections in 2021.

To put it mildly Nicaragua is at an impasse. President Ortega is currently in his second phase of being president of the country after leading the victorious Sandinista forces in ousting the Somoza dynasty back in 1979. He ruled the country from 1979 until 1990, and returned to power in 2007; he has ruled since then after winning re-elections in 2011 and 2016. Meanwhile, his spouse, First Lady Rosario Murillo Zambrana, became Vice President of the country in the 2016 elections, bringing back memories of Somoza-style nepotism. So if there is actually a change of government in the Central American country, will it also include asking the Ortega family to kindly step away? Or will they be forced to leave via a popular revolution? In most instances those who gain power by violent moves will not always leave via the ballot box.

What is the current remedy? There is a call for an advancement of the electoral calendar – the next presidential elections are scheduled to take place in 2021 but President Ortega has apparently suggested that they could take place in 2019. It is unclear so far if this offer means that Ortega will not run then, or if he intends to run again. The obvious risk being that if somehow he wins again he will cement his grip on power, and maintain the status quo. That will not be an adequate solution for one segment of the population that is currently suffering.

The Catholic Bishops in the Country have sent letters to both President Ortega and to the political opposition and leaders of these protests offering to mediate the crisis and come up with their own proposals for how to solve it. While there has been an affirmative answer from the opposition there has yet to be a decision made by President Ortega. Some Evangelical groups have criticized the Catholics for offering to facilitate talks to end the current impasse. Nevertheless, at the time of this writing, international media has reported that the Nicaraguan government has freed around 17 young protesters thanks to mediation by the Catholic Church.

Has Nicaragua reached the breaking point where an all-out civil war erupts? It is clear that it is not at that stage yet. There is discontent with the current regime but most indications report that the situation is just at the demonstration phase. With that said, the anti-Ortega sentiment is gaining momentum. A clear example took place at an event at the Inter-American Dialogue, a well-known think tank in Washington DC, on June 4. This on-the-record meeting discussed the situation in Nicaragua, and the Nicaraguan community in the U.S. capital clearly stated their message: they want Ortega and Murillo gone (“de que se van, se van” which roughly translates “they will leave, yes or yes,” was the chant).

A resumption of hostilities could result in a new wave of refugees fleeing north towards the United States. Refugees from Central America has been a wedge issue during the last two election cycles in the United States. Unfortunately, violence is not unknown to Nicaragua, as President Ortega came to power when his Sandinista National Liberation Front overthrew President Somoza. Afterwards, the U.S., during the Reagan administration, led a not-so covert war to overthrow him. We know now well how the hearings in the U.S. Congress went during that debacle.

Could the Trump administration be forced to revisit the history of the 1980s by returning to the scene of a Cold War battlefield? Washington has other security priorities elsewhere in the world right now so it is difficult to imagine that this could happen. With that said, if the violence and repression continues, it will be important to monitor how the international community, including Washington, reacts.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect those of any institutions with which the authors are associated.

Monday, April 23, 2018

Journal: On (the lack of) Latin American supranationalism


"On (the lack of) Latin American supranationalism"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
Global Change, Peace and Security
 Volume 29, 2017 - Issue 2
P. 179-187
Published Online 28 February 2017


This commentary discusses the state of supranationalism in Latin America. We will enumerate the numerous regional organizations in the Western Hemisphere, and also discuss their successes and failures at regional integration. While integration has had some successes, supranationalism has yet to flourish among Latin American states and it will probably not for the immediate future. Empirical evidence suggests that, while inter-state warfare is scarce in the region, there are still too many inter-state tensions, including ongoing border disputes, as well as occasional incidents, which prevent supranationalism from taking hold. This explains the lack of a North Atlantic Treaty Organization-esque type South American bloc. Nevertheless, small-scale integration projects have been successful, like visa waivers systems, educational programs or defense-cooperation projects. Ultimately, in a changing global geopolitical system, the distrust for supranationalism remains the same in Latin America.
KEYWORDS: Latin America, Caribbean, supranationalism, security, integration, geopolitics

*Please contact the author for free a PDF copy

Tuesday, February 20, 2018

The Space Review: Latin America’s space programs: an update


"Latin America’s space programs: an update"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
22 January, 2018
The Space Review
Originally published: http://www.thespacereview.com/article/3413/1



Latin American space programs have continued to develop and expand in recent years, with countries like Bolivia and Peru achieving major victories after the successful launches of new satellites. While there has been the occasional loss, like the 2015 destruction of a Mexican satellite aboard a Russian rocket, regional space programs have in general continued to grow, with additional launches planned for the near future.

This commentary is an update to the author’s 2012 article on the subject (see “Latin America’s space programs in 2012”, The Space Review, August 27, 2012), aimed at discussing new developments among Latin America’s programs and what they signal for the future.

Recent successes

This article will not attempt to enumerate every single test and initiative that Latin American space programs have carried out in the past five years. Rather, this will focus on highlighting particular accomplishments by different nations to provide a broad overview of recent developments.

As mentioned in the introduction, two successful launches that occurred in recent years were part of Peru’s and Bolivia’s growing programs. In the case of Peru, its high-resolution Earth observation satellite, Peru-Sat1, was constructed by Airbus Defense and Space and launched from French Guiana in September 2016. The Airbus-Peru deal included the construction of a center (Centro Nacional de Operaciones de Imágenes Satelitales: CNOIS) outside Lima so the Peruvians can control their satellite. The project has generally been regarded as a success, as the Peruvian government has declared that “the investment it has made into the satellite programme has already been recouped,” according to a December 2017 Airbus press statement that also explained that in its first year of operations, the satellite has delivered more than 71,000 images. Peru-Sat1 was also praised for helping monitor the damage caused by floods that affected the country’s northern regions in early 2017.

Meanwhile, Bolivia’s new telecommunications satellite, Tupac Katari (TK-1), was constructed by China and launched in 2013. Bolivia’s space agency (Agencia Boliviana Espacial: ABE) manages the satellite, which is aimed at improving access of Bolivian citizens to telecommunications and media services. It is worth noting that the project has not been without criticism, as an August 20, 2017, article by the Bolivian daily El Deber explained that ABE’s high prices deter some Bolivian telecommunications companies from utilizing the satellite’s broadband services. In spite of price issues, agencies like Bolivia’s customs service (Aduana Nacional) and the state-owned oil company (Yacimientos Petrolíferos Fiscales Bolivianos: YPFB) already utilize the satellite, in addition to numerous radio and television stations. The telecommunication company Viva has stated that thanks to the satellite, it can provide better broadband services to customers in rural and isolated areas.

As for Colombia, the country’s domestically-manufactured satellite UAPSAT was put into orbit in January 2014 after being launched from Wallops Island, Virginia. The Colombian daily El Colombiano has described UAPSAT as the “first satellite manufactured with Colombian parts and systems,” albeit with support from the Peruvian university Alas Peruanas.
 
These examples highlight the different types of services new satellites are rendering for Latin American countries, ranging from better access to communication services to helping monitor their territories, particularly after extreme weather events. Colombia’s UAPSAT satellite is also worth noting, as this was a domestically manufactured platform, demonstrating how more countries want to develop their own satellite-building capabilities (more on this later).

In spite of these recent successes, there has been one loss, though not a direct cause of Latin American programs themselves: in May 2015, a Russian Proton-M rocket launched from the Baikonur space center (Kazakhstan) failed, causing the loss of a Mexican telecommunications satellite called Centenario.

The Latin American-Kazakh connection

One aspect to keep in mind is the different launch centers that Latin American countries utilize to deploy their new satellites, such as include China, French Guiana, and the United States. It is also noteworthy that Kazakhstan’s Baikonur Cosmodrome has been utilized by several Latin American nations for launches in recent years.

For example, back in 2007, Colombia’s Libertad 1 cubesat was launched from Baikonur. Four years later, in 2011, a Russian-built Proton rocket launched Mexico’s QuetzSat-1. More recently, in 2014, Chasqui-1, a nanosatellite constructed by a Peruvian state university (Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria: UNI), was launched aboard a Russian rocket. Finally, in July 2017, a Russian Soyuz rocket left Baikonur with a payload of dozens of satellites, including a nanosatellite manufactured by an Ecuadorian university (Universidad Tecnológica Equinoccial) with Russian assistance. A June 15, 2017, article by Russian government news service Sputnik Mundo highlighted that this successful launch meant that for the first time Ecuador had a satellite in orbit that was constructed by one of its universities.

The reason why Kazakhstan is singled out as a launch center is because Kazakh-Latin American relations are fairly limited (see the author’s December 2017 commentary, “The Eurasian Economic Union and Latin America: What could 2018 Bring?”). Hence one strategy that Astana could utilize to approach Latin America is to provide potential customers from the region more cost-efficient launch services.

What will the future bring?

As for future initiatives, Chile is arguably the nation is most need to launch a new satellite, as Fasat Charlie has been in orbit since 2011. Back in 2016, the Chilean media was already discussing when will the government order a replacement for the satellite, but so far no new project has been announced. Even more, a January 2 op-ed in the Chilean daily El Mostrador, which discussed the country’s natural security challenges, called out the lack of progress regarding a replacement for Fasat Charlie. The argues that “so far there is no new information regarding a final decision, even though Chile requires satellites to strengthen its telecommunications industry and to monitor its territory in order anticipate possible natural disasters.” It will be interesting to see if president-elect Sebastian Piñera will make the acquisition of a new satellite a priority when he returns to power this March (he was previously president from 2010 to 2014.)

As for Brazil, in October, the Brazilian Ministry of Defense announced the drafting of a new blueprint to revamp the country’s space program. This proposal includes establishing a national council for space affairs (Conselho Nacional do Espaço: CNE) and an executive committee for space (Comitê Executivo do Espaço: CEE). It is unclear if current President Michel Temer will be able to make this proposal become law, given the year he has left in office, or if a decision will be made by the next president: Brazil will carry out general elections this October and the next head of state takes office on January 1, 2019. The South American giant is well known for its ambitious space program, exemplified by the Alcântara center (Centro de Lançamento de Alcântara: CLA), so hopefully the blueprint helps create a new momentum so it continues to grow. It is also worth noting that there are also plans to expand the CLA’s facilities, but this goal has encountered resistance from the communities that live in the area. Coincidentally, also in October, Paraguay held its first ever conference on space issues at the country’s Central Bank. The landlocked nation’s space agency (Agencia Especial del Paraguay: AEP) organized the event, and brought renowned special guests like Brazilian astronaut Marcos Pontes, to develop interest among the audience members to support AEP.

As for upcoming launches, one country that will have a new satellite in orbit this year is Argentina, as the country’s space commission (Comision Nacional de Actividades Espaciales: CONAE) is finishing the construction of its SAOCOM 1A satellite. The platform is part of an ambitious project between Argentina and Italy to establish a satellite network (Sistema Italo-Argentino de Satelites para la Gestion de Emergencias: SIASGE), and will reportedly be launched out of Vandenberg Air Force Base, California, in August. Similarly, in October, Costa Rica announced the successful construction of Proyecto Irazú, Central America’s first domestically-manufactured satellite. The satellite, a joint project by Central America’s aerospace association (Asociación Centroamericana de Aeronáutica y del Espacio: ACAE) and a Costa Rican university (Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica: TEC), is a cubesat that will be utilized to measure carbon gas emissions. The satellite will now be sent to Japan for final tests before it is launched.
Brazil’s blueprint, as well as Costa Rica’s and Argentina’s new satellites, demonstrate the ongoing interest of Latin American nations to develop their space programs. While these countries do not yet have the capability to launch crewed spacecraft, the fact that several countries are domestically manufacturing satellites is a promising step that should be praised, and also deserves the support of the international community.

Final thoughts

Latin American space programs have enjoyed significant accomplishments in recent years as countries like Bolivia and Peru have modern new satellites in orbit that support telecommunications and surveillance projects, while Argentina, Central America, Colombia, Ecuador, and Mexico have domestically constructed their own platforms. There have even been bureaucratic developments, as Brazil is looking to revamp its new space program while Paraguay is attempting to jumpstart its own. Recent years have brought more successes than failures, notwithstanding the loss of a Mexican satellite and the delay in replacing Chile’s Fasat Charlie.
Earth’s orbit is increasingly cluttered with space debris, but hopefully there is still space for Latin America’s ambitious programs.

 

Monday, November 10, 2014

VOXXI: Central America takes center stage at IADB Conference

"Central America takes center stage at IADB Conference"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
VOXXI
November 10, 2014
Originally published: http://voxxi.com/2014/11/10/interamerica-bank-central-america-crisis/

While conferences in Washington are a dime a dozen, there’s a unique momentum in a one being hosted by the Inter-American Development Bank this month with Central American heads of state in attendance, as well as U.S. dignitaries, all in light of the unaccompanied migrant minors crisis.
The  conference that will address the present and likely future of Central America on Friday, November 14. The goal is to not simply discuss Central America’s problems, such as immigration and poverty, but also how the international community can help local governments to overcome these challenges.

Meetings withe Central Americans heads of state

The IADB’s conference, entitled “Investing in Central America: Opening Up Opportunities for Growth,” will have VIP guests such as presidents Juan Orlando Hernández of Honduras, Otto Pérez Molina of Guatemala, and Salvador Sánchez Cerén of El Salvador, Vice President Joe Biden and IADB President Luis Alberto Moreno. Also in attendance will be policymakers and entrepreneurs from the U.S., Central America and Europe.
Washington has a particular interest in Central America due to ongoing migration from that region. Hence, it came as no surprise that Thomas Shannon, a career ambassador and current counselor to Secretary of State John Kerry, travelled to Central America to meet with the presidents who will arrive to Washington next week.
Additionally, Central American policymakers will visit Washington prior to the conference in order to maintain the momentum. Most notably, on November 13, the ministers of foreign affairs of El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras will participate in a conference at the Atlantic Council.
Moreover, during the IADB event the Central American presidents will unveil the “Plan of the Alliance for Prosperity in the Northern Triangle” (Prosperity Plan for short). This is an ambitious plan meant to promote development and enhance security in the region. The plan both acknowledges the region’s violence and other shortcomings but also provides concrete suggestions on how to improve the economic and security situation there.

A milestone event?

This upcoming event can be analyzed from two points of view. First, at the domestic level, this will be an important test to see how the Obama White House will work with a Republican-controlled Congress after the recent Midterm elections.
Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the Senate’s likely next majority leader, has stated that while President Obama is mistaken by taking unilateral action on immigration (the U.S. president supports immigration reform), the Senate, nonetheless, wants to take action on this issue. With that said, the Republicans are in no-great hurry to promote immigration reform, particularly if this serves to increase President Obama’s popularity.
Given the adverse situation on Capitol Hill, it will be interesting to see how much Vice President Biden will promise when he meets the visiting Central American leaders, all of whom would like to see some type ofimmigration reform in the U.S. in the (very) near future. During his recent trip to Central America, the aforementioned Shannon declared that Washington wants to begin “a new type of relationship” with these countries, but that remains to be seen in the post-Midterm era.

Economic challenges in Central America

The second way to view the IADB conference is by addressing the current situation in Central America. The Prosperity Plan is important because it calls for greater integration between these three violence and poverty-afflicted states. Any follower of Latin American political history has read innumerable speeches that call for regional integration, but few initiatives have been successful in the long-term. The Prosperity Plan outlines projects that would deeply unite El Salvador, Guatemala and Honduras, with the additional effect of supporting the three nations overcome their collective problems.
One aspect of development of the plan worth highlighting is the focus on improving transportation to promote the movement of people, goods and services. The goal is to not only increase trade between the three countries, but also with the greater Central American region.
For example, the Prosperity Plan mentions the need to improve the corridor that connects Puerto Quetzal, a Guatemalan port in the Pacific, with Guatemala City and then with San Pedro Sula in Honduras. While none of these countries are in a position to construct a trans-Oceanic canal a la Panama or Nicaragua, cooperation amongst themselves can help them become a competitive option for the movement of goods.
Moreover, when discussing how to improve the training of local workers, the plan also states that it will “prioritize providing attention to migrant citizens who return [to their country]” so that these people can receive proper job-related training and benefit from health and educational services. The goal is for them to quickly rejoin the local workforce. This is a particularly important objective which highlights how these governments are attempting to address the effects that departing citizens have on their countries, particularly regarding the flight of qualified labor force.
Ultimately, the IADB’s upcoming conference promises a new U.S.-Central American relationship, and the launching of a new plan to integrate these three Central American states. We will have to see how many of these promises and plans become a reality.

Sunday, October 26, 2014

VOXXI: Protests against Nicaragua’s ambitious canal

"Protests Against Nicaragua's Ambitious Canal"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
VOXXI
October 26, 2014
Originally published:  http://voxxi.com/2014/10/26/protests-nicaragua-ambitious-canal/

The Nicaraguan government, with Chinese aid, is about to begin a historic project: the construction of a new inter-oceanic Canal. But sections of the Nicaraguan population are discontent and protesting against this grand scheme. While Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega remains fairly popular, citizen restlessness over the Canal may cost him dearly.
Ortega has been labeled as a “vende patria” (“beytrayer of the homeland”) and that is not a nickname any head of state wants.

Growing discontent

In June 2013, Nicaragua’s National Assembly approved a deal with an obscure Hong Kong-based firm, the HKND Group, to build an inter-oceanic Canal that would rival Panama. A year later, Managua announced that construction will begin this December. The specifications of the proposed maritime corridor are: 278 kilometers in length, across the Great Lake of Nicaragua (also known as Lake Cocibolca), between 230 to 530 meters of width, and some 30 meters of depth.
This analysis will not discuss international concerns with this project (which are numerous) but rather focus on recent developments withinNicaragua. There are two major domestic concerns that are the sources of protests:
First of all, former presidential candidate Edmundo Jarquin claims that recent protests are due to governmental secrecy. Managua argues that the country’s economy will grow by 15% annually from the second year of construction onwards and it will generate between five to 50 thousand jobs. Nevertheless the government has not provided specific details about the project, such as construction timelines and potential environmental impacts.
The second reason is that Nicaraguans that live in the Canal’s proposed path will have to move. Case in point, there have been reports that HKND representatives, with Nicaraguan police officers and soldiers acting as guards, have appeared in various homes, taking measures and informing homeowners that their households will be purchased by the company.

Protests on the rise

A couple of the most recent protests occurred in early October around La Unión, located in the Región Autónoma del Atlántico Sur, RAAS, in Eastern Nicaragua. Some three thousand inhabitants marched with signs that read “The land is not for sale… Nicaragua will not give up!” as well as “Ortega: betrayer of the homeland!”
The people demanded that the construction of the Canal must not pass through their lands. In fact, an indigenous representative, Brooklyn Rivera Bryan, highlighted that the Canal’s current plan passes through a community of the Rama indigenous people, which the government should protect instead of evict.
The indigenous and afro-descendant inhabitants of the Rama y Kriol territorial government (GTR-K), located in the RAAS, are similarly concerned. A July press release in the GTR-K’s government website declares that a deep water port will be built as part of the Canal; it will be located close to the current homeland of the aforementioned Rama community, known as Bang kukuk/Punta del Aguila – the proposed construction will jeopardize the lifestyle of local inhabitants as it will destroy the local environment and biodiversity. The GTR-K press release declares that Managua has not discussed with them the potential environmental, cultural or archaeological impacts caused by construction.
Similarly, in late September some 250 inhabitants of a community in the department of Rivas carried out a peaceful march protesting the likely evictions that the Canal will cause.  “We are fishermen and we have livestock, we cannot live in the city, we cannot take the lake and the livestock [when we move]” one local leader declared.
These protests can be tied to the aforementioned points made that Managua has not engaged in an open dialogue with citizens about the true costs of the Canal. This promotes distrust and anger.
Meanwhile, the government has generally minimized protests. When the aforementioned manifestation in Rivas was announced, a government spokesman said “we respect the people but we know that the population will end up supporting the Canal.” The government has also hinted that the population is being “manipulated” by political groups that are against the project.

Overtly ambitious dreams?

In July, Managua and HKND Group announced that the Canal will be completed by 2019. In other words, it will take half the time the U.S needed to construct the 77km-long Panama Canal (1904-1914). This is a very ambitious timeframe that may not be feasible. Some high-level Nicaraguan policymakers claim that the country is not ready to begin construction in December, as preliminary projects like building temporary housing for workers and engineers must begin first. There is also a deficit of qualified workers, including electricians and carpenters.
President Ortega currently enjoys positive approval ratings. However his popularity is being affected by opposition to the Canal by inhabitants of regions through which it will pass. Hence, he cannot afford that the Canal suffers major delays.
Nicaragua will have elections in 2016, when the Canal’s construction will be well underway. In other words, Ortega’s legacy, as well as the future of his presidency (if he runs for another re-election), is now firmly tied to the Canal.