Providence: Don’t Call it a Coup: Venezuela, Maduro, and the Crisis of Legitimacy

"Don’t Call it a Coup: Venezuela, Maduro, and the Crisis of Legitimacy"
Wilder Alejandro Sanchez
Providence Magazine
5 February, 2019
Originally published:  https://providencemag.com/2019/02/dont-call-it-a-coup-venezuela-maduro-and-the-crisis-of-legitimacy/

The international community is picking sides in the ongoing governmental crisis in Venezuela, a South American nation that currently has two presidents: interim President Juan Guaidó, who is recognized by several Latin American nations, Australia, Georgia, and the US to name a few; and President Nicolás Maduro, who is supported by the governments of Bolivia, China, Cuba, Russia, among others.

Washington’s support for interim President Guaidó has prompted accusations that the US government is, once again, supporting a coup in a Latin American state. For example, at a January 29 event with Guaidó’s special representative to the Organization of American States (OAS), Gustavo Tarre at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, three Code Pink protesters interrupted the conference, shouting that the US was orchestrating a coup in Caracas. Hence, it is important to clarify that what is happening in Venezuela is not a coup.

How We Ended Up Here

Venezuela held elections in 2013 following the death of then-President Hugo Chávez. Maduro, acting president at the time, was elected for a full presidential term. Then, in 2015, the country held parliamentary elections in which, for the first time in over a decade, the anti-Maduro opposition gained control of this legislative body. Maduro and his allies would then attempt to discredit or limit the National Assembly’s powers. For example, in 2017 the Venezuelan Supreme Court, made up of pro-Maduro judges, stripped the Assembly of its powers, though it eventually reversed its decision. The regime would then create a National Constituent Assembly (NCA)—based on Articles 347-349 of the 1999 constitution—filled with Maduro supporters to draft a new constitution and to, by default, replace the National Assembly. This is an important fact as there are now two legislative bodies, as well as two presidents, in Venezuela.

Fast forward to May 2018, when Venezuela held presidential elections once again as Maduro’s 2013–18 term was coming to an end. This electoral process has been heavily critiqued by the international community due to the lack of international observers and the fact that opposition parties, except for one candidate, boycotted the elections. Voter turnout was similarly low. Maduro won these elections, and on January 10 he was inaugurated for a presidential term, from 2019–23.

Here is where things get complicated: the opposition-led National Assembly continued to exist, even though Maduro favored the National Constituent Assembly. Decisions made by the Constituent Assembly are regarded as illegitimate by the opposition and by the anti-Maduro international community. For example, in late-May 2018, Maduro took the oath of office in front of the National Constituent Assembly and was inaugurated this past January in front of the NCA as well, not the National Assembly, as stated in Article 231 of the constitution.

Because the opposition-controlled National Assembly does not recognize the elections and the NCA, Juan Guaidó, as president of the National Assembly, was named interim president on January 23. This move is supported by Article 233 of the Venezuelan constitution, which states that “pending election and inauguration of the new President, the President of the National Assembly shall take charge of the Presidency of the Republic.”

Discussion

The main issues here are whether the May 2018 elections can be considered democratic and which legislative organism has validity, the National Assembly or the National Constituent Assembly. Pro-Maduro supporters recognize the elections as fair; hence, he is the rightful president of the country. Anti-Maduro supporters, obviously, state that this is not the case.

As with any crisis, an important fact to keep in mind is whether there is a foreign power involved. In Venezuela’s case, the Maduro regime and its supporters argue that they are the victims of an economic war orchestrated by Washington and that the US and Colombia are trying to overthrow Maduro. Case in point, the two governments were accused of organizing a bizarre August 2018 incident in which an explosion was labeled by Caracas as an assassination attempt against Maduro via a drone attack.

To be fair, the US, just like other global powers, has a long history of involvement in the domestic affairs of other nations to protect its interests, including regime change. Moreover, US media reports have mentioned that Washington officials have met with anti-Maduro Venezuelan military officers to discuss possible coups.

With that said, the government of interim President Guaidó in Venezuela is not a coup, but rather the result of following the law as stated by Venezuela’s 1999 constitution, which ironically was drafted by Hugo Chávez upon taking power. It is ludicrous to regard the 2018 elections as free, fair, or democratic, and the swear-in ceremony did not occur in front of the National Assembly, as stated by the constitution, but rather in front of the National Constituent Assembly. Hence, Maduro’s term ended on January 9, and Guaidó became interim president.

Final Thoughts

Venezuela currently has two heads of state: President Maduro is the de facto leader, as his allies continue to control the armed forces, supreme court, the National Constituent Assembly, the electoral commission, among other state agencies. Meanwhile, interim President Guaidó is the de jure leader but controls no territory or institutions other than the National Assembly.

A plethora of nouns can be utilized to describe the situation in Venezuela, but “coup” is not one of them.

—

Wilder Alejandro Sanchez is an analyst who focuses on geopolitical, military, and cybersecurity issues. He tweets at @W_Alex_Sanchez.

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.

IWP: Alumnus Spotlight: W. Alejandro Sanchez, International Affairs Analyst

Institute of World Politics
October 26, 2017
Originally published: http://www.iwp.edu/news_publications/detail/alumnus-spotlight-w-alejandro-sanchez-international-affairs-analyst

In this interview, we speak with W. Alejandro Sanchez, IWP Class of 2007. Alejandro is an international affairs analyst who focuses on geopolitical and defense issues in the Western Hemisphere.

How did you become interested in international affairs/national security? 

My father is a colonel (now retired) in the Peruvian Army, and several of my relatives have also been part of the Peruvian armed forces (my godfather is a retired general etc). Hence I grew up learning about the Peruvian military, the country's internal security problems (back in the 1980s and early 1990s we had two terrorist groups, Shining Path and the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement) as well as South American geopolitics. I wouldn't say that I became interested in international relations and defense issues but rather that such issues have been part of my life for as long as I can remember.

What attracted you to IWP?

A decade ago, IWP had some signs in the DC metro, and I remember seeing one and decided that I would check it out. 

I had almost finished my M.A. degree, but I felt like I wanted to keep on studying and learn more perspectives about security affairs and global geopolitics. So I wrote down IWP's name and website on a notebook (this was just before smartphones came out), checked out the course catalog, and liked the courses that were offered. I also attended one of the open houses and found the staff and faculty very friendly, so I decided to apply.

IWP's location was another factor that convinced me to attend, as I work in the Dupont area, so commuting was pretty easy.

What was the most interesting thing you have learned at IWP? Did you write any papers or take any classes that you particularly enjoyed/were useful? 

Two classes I remember taking were Geography and Strategy with Professor Marek Jan Chodakiewicz and Chinese Grand Strategy with Professor Ross Munro. I really enjoyed the course on China, as I had never taken one just about said country before, and it really opened my eyes to Chinese foreign policy. I have written some pieces on China's relations with Latin America and Caribbean relations for several outlets, and it really helped me to take such a class to understand Beijing's vision and objectives.

As for the Geography class, I remember that we had to do a term paper, and I decided to go outside my area of expertise and I picked the Golan Heights. My paper discussed their importance from military and political perspective. I researched it so much that I decided to write a letter to the editor to the Jerusalem Post to provide my opinion about the importance of the Heights. And it was published! I remember adding the letter to my paper.

This success helped me gain confidence to write pieces on topics other than Latin America and the Caribbean.

Did studying at IWP change your thoughts about international affairs or national security?

I like to think that I'm open minded and willing to have my opinions changed, particularly when it comes to geopolitics, which is all about perspectives. At IWP, I certainly learned new points of view and opinions that I had not been exposed to in other places where I studied. Even if I do not agree with a point of view regarding international affairs, it's important for me as an analyst to be aware of it so I know how other individuals regard a particular issue. 

What do you feel are the most impactful actions/decisions you have made so far in your career? 

 I would say, writing about topics that could be considered obscure but are important geopolitically. I realized that to stand out as an analyst, I couldn't just write about the same issues everyone else was writing about, particularly as there are people much smarter than me (quite a lot of them) that analyze the same geographical regions as I do. So rather than writing about country X or problem Y that were on the news, I'd do some of that but also write about other areas. And it paid off!

Once I did a report on the role of Latin American militaries in United Nations peacekeeping operations, as my father was a Peruvian peacekeeper during the Yom Kippur War.

After the report was published, a professor contacted me saying he had read my piece and he invited me to write an essay for him, as he was the guest editor of an issue of the journal Globalizations. Of course I accepted, and I wrote about Brazil's role in the peacekeeping operations in Haiti and East Timor. I realized the literature out there, particularly in English, about Latin America's role in peacekeeping is very limited, so I started writing more pieces. Eventually, I became a member of an initiative called Providing for Peacekeeping: I did a profile of Peru's role in peacekeeping operations and I became their "Peru expert." I've also been invited to be a peer reviewer for a couple of journals on articles that discuss peacekeeping, and recently I co-authored a piece about MONUSCO, the UN peacekeeping mission in the Democratic Republic of Congo, with an analyst friend of mine who focuses on African affairs, as he has read my work on peacekeeping. 

It's pretty amazing the opportunities one gets from having an idea that's different.

What are your plans for the future?

I've thought about applying for a PhD program, as I think I have done enough articles, including various essays in books and peer-reviewed academic journals, that demonstrate that I'm a serious analyst and scholar. 

Additionally, I've thought about writing a book, though I have yet to find a topic that I can write 300 pages or more about and that would be of interest to publishers and readers.

What is a piece of advice you would give to members of the IWP community interested in joining the national security field? 

Considering all the different jobs and activities that fall under the umbrella term "national security," it is difficult to give a one-size-fits-all type of advice. 

I would say to those that want to be national security analysts (which includes a lot of intelligence/information gathering, analysis and writing), recognize you that your first draft will never sound like Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. You can write the best analysis imaginable, but if it has spelling/grammatical mistakes, your boss will be mad at you - I've seen reports lose credibility fast because the author kept writing "Columbia" instead of "Colombia" or the author mistook Paraguay for Uruguay. Always take the time to edit whatever you just wrote.

In your opinion, what is the strategic importance of Latin America and the Caribbean to the US? 

While I certainly acknowledge the tensions Washington has with countries like Venezuela these days, the truth is that the vast majority of Latin American and Caribbean states have cordial relations with the U.S. and want to maintain them, if not increase them.  While in other regions of the world, there is concern about U.S. military presence for example, most regional governments would actually welcome more U.S. security aid, particularly to combat transnational crimes like drug trafficking. I've read several posture statements by the commanders of Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) that repeatedly state how said agency has the lowest priority among the other Commands. I certainly understand the reason for this situation, as Latin America does not have nuclear weapons or major military powers that could threaten the U.S. or its allies (actually most Latin American governments can be regarded as U.S. allies!). Hence, I understand that this regional stability allows Washington to focus on more problematic areas of the world. 

With that said, the U.S. is part of the Western Hemisphere, this country has significant trade relations with Latin America and the Caribbean, a growing number of U.S. citizens have Latin American or Caribbean descent, and most regional states are reliable U.S. allies.

Moreover, since the region is not at risk of some violent conflict (Mexico's internal struggle with cartels notwithstanding), this means that the U.S. does not need to deploy major military resources and assets to protect its allies. Economic aid, greater support to combat transnational crimes, educational scholarships, public diplomacy initiatives, visits by the USS Comfort to communities in need, fairer trade agreements, or more regular visits by senior officials can go a long way to show to Latin America and the Caribbean that Washington recognizes their importance and values their support.

Federatsia: Washington Ve a Medios Periodísticos Rusos como “Agentes Extranjeros

"Washington Ve a Medios Periodísticos Rusos como “Agentes Extranjeros”

 Por: W. Alejandro Sanchez

Analista

Federatsia

Octubre 3, 2017

Publicado originalmente en:

 https://www.facebook.com/notes/federatsia-%D1%84%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F/washington-ve-a-medios-period%C3%ADsticos-rusos-como-agentes-extranjeros/1314733255319500/

El 11 de Septiembre del 2017, la agencia de noticias rusa RT publicó un artículo informando que el Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos ha enviado una carta a sus oficinas, indicando que dicha agencia va a tener que registrarse, ante el gobierno norteamericano, como “agente extranjero” (“foreign agent”). Casi paralelamente reportes periodísticos explican que el FBI está investigando a Sputnik News, otra agencia de noticias rusa, para verificar si ha violado leyes federales al, aparentemente, haber diseminado propaganda rusa.

Estos incidentes se suman a las crecientes tensiones diplomáticas entre los dos países, mientras que el Congreso de los Estados Unidos continúa investigando el rol del gobierno ruso, en las elecciones del 2016 que resultaron en la victoria de Donald Trump. De acuerdo a Fox News la decisión sobre RT es una “fuerte señal que el contenido [de RT América] es visto como propaganda rusa.”

Declarar a una entidad como “agente extranjero” en Estados Unidos tiene como base legal el Acta de Registro de Agentes Extranjeros (Foreign Agents Registration Act: FARA) de 1938. Dicha ley “requiere a todos los que representen los intereses de potencias extranjeras a que expliquen su relación [con dichos gobiernos] además de proveer información de sus actividades y finanzas.” En este entonces, el objetivo de dicha ley era combatir la propaganda nazi. El Congreso Norteamericano, probablemente como consecuencia de las elecciones del 2016, está debatiendo una nueva versión de la ley FARA, llamada Agents Registration Modernization and Enforcement Act (ARMEA).

Vale mencionar que el respetado centro de investigaciones en Washington DC, el Brookings Institute, argumenta en un comentario que “si RT se registra como agente extranjero, esto no afectara la habilidad de esta agencia para diseminar su mensaje,” sino mas bien “proveerá transparencia a la ciudadanía norteamericana.”

Será importante monitorear la situación y ver si el gobierno ruso lleva a cabo acciones recíprocas, como exigir que los periodistas que trabajan para agencias extranjeras en Rusia, como Voice of America o Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty se registren como agentes extranjeros también. Esta posibilidad fue discutida recientemente durante un evento en Washington DC organizado por el Center for New American Security con el Representante Adam Smith (D-WA). Durante la sección de preguntas y respuestas, el congresista norteamericano fue preguntadosi agregar a RT y Sputnik a la lista de “agentes extranjeros” en EEUU, haría el trabajo de los periodistas extranjeros en Rusia mucho más difícil (no solo norteamericanos sino también británicos y alemanes, entre otros).

 El congresista respondió que sería mejor si Washington utiliza agencias como Voice of America para contrarrestar la retórica rusa y como el mensaje promovido por el gobierno ruso es una “amenaza” a EEUU. Ademas, explicó que aún si se cierran las oficinas en Washington de Sputnik y RT, estas agencias aun podrán transmitir sus mensajes via el internet, por ende el efecto de tal medida sería mínimo.

Vale mencionar que esta táctica de designar a entitades como “agencias extranjeras” no es solo utilizada por Estados Unidos, ya que el gobierno ruso también la usa. En el 2012 el Moscú creó una ley la cual, de acuerdo a Human Rights Watch, utiliza el término “agente extranjero” para cualquier entidad que recibe dinero del exterior (no solo de Estados Unidos) y lleva a cabo “activades políticas,” definidas de una manera bastante genérica. Esta ley sirve como justificación legal para silenciar a una multitud de organizaciones que operan en Rusia, las que tal vez no sean del agrado del Kremlin. El8 de Septiembre, Human Rights Watch publicó una lista de 84 organizaciones que han sido registradas bajo esta ley, más cuatro que lo hicieron voluntariamente.

Un caso digno de mencionar brevemente es Aetas, una organización de jóvenes que combate la contaminación en el Oblast de Arkhangelsk, en la costa ártica del país. El 1 de Septiembre, el Ministerio de Justicia ruso anunció que esta organizazión había sido incluida “en la lista de organizaciones no gubernamentales que llevan a cabo acciones de un agente extranjero”,  de acuerdo a The Barents Observer, ya que trabaja de manera conjuntan con una agencia ambientalista noruega, Nature and Youth, la cual recibe fondos del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores de Noruega. Sin embargo, es necesario expresar que Aetas se dedica a proteger el medio ambiente en Arkhangelsk, es decir no es política, pero aun así ha tenido que registrarse. El reporte de The Barents Observer tiene una objetiva discusión de los problemas que afrentan las organizaciones no gubernamentales rusas hoy en día debido a que el título de “agentes extranjeros” influye en como son tratadas por el público en general y limitan el tipo de actividades que pueden llevar a cabo.

Desafortunadamente, todo indica que los incidentes entre estas dos potencias nucleares mundiales van a continuar. Por el momento, la posibilidad de un incidente militar entre Moscú y Washington es aún muy bajo, al menos esa es la opinión del autor; sin embargo eso no significa que el resto del mundo debe estar tranquilo por los recientes incidentes entre los dos gobiernos.

Las opiniones expresadas en este comentario son solo del autor y no necesariamente representan las opiniones de las organizaciones con las que el autor está afiliado.

Opinion: Una Respuesta: Perú y la Creación del Ejército Nacional de Bolivia

Una Respuesta: Perú y la Creación del Ejército Nacional de Bolivia

El columnista Ramiro Prudencio Lizón publicó un comentario titulado “Creación del Ejército Nacional” en el diario boliviano La Razón del 16 de Noviembre de 2016. En su artículo de opinión, el Sr. Prudencio Lizón argumenta que el aniversario de creación del Ejército Boliviano conmemorado cada 14 de Noviembre, por su origen en la Batalla de Aroma del 14 de noviembre de 1810; es una “elección absurda” y que debe conmemorarse el 18 de noviembre ya que“la verdadera creación del Ejército Boliviano se dio el 18 de Noviembre de 1841”. La segunda fecha corresponde a la Batalla de Ingavi, en donde las fuerzas bolivianas derrotaron a un Ejército Peruano liderado por el entonces Presidente del Perú, el Mariscal Agustín Gamarra.

El artículo argumenta que los guerreros del combate de la Batalla de Aroma en 1810 “no fueron soldados, sino montoneros cochabambinos y orureños, encabezados por don Esteban Arze”, mientras que los que participaron en la Batalla de Ingavi en 1841, sí lo fueron (vale recordar que Bolivia recién fue fundada en 1825). El autor brevemente relata dicha batalla, explicando como “esta tuvo una duración de solo 50 minutos, pues con la muerte de Gamarra y con la irrupción por su retaguardia de la famosa caballería chicheña, cedida por el general Velasco a Ballivián, sobrevino la derrota completa de sus tropas. Casi todo el Ejército enemigo quedó prisionero.” Sin duda, fue un gran triunfo para el ejército boliviano.

La razón por la que esta fecha no se ha cambiado, explica el autor, es porque “ello crearía susceptibilidades con el hermano pueblo peruano.”

Al respecto, en aras de la paz me permito expresar una breve opinión: Perú y Bolivia tienen una larga historia en común: empezando por las culturas pre-hispánicas que abarcaron territorios que hoy pertenecen a los dos países. Su cultura, gastronomía y música son afines. Así mismo, durante el periodo virreinal conformaron el Virreinato del Perú como Alto Perú y Bajo Perú y también fueron un mismo país durante la Confederación Peruano-Boliviana (constituida por tres estados: Estado Nor-Peruano, Estado Sur-Peruano y Estado Boliviano). Es decir, aún si Perú y Bolivia son dos países con su propia identidad, también son dos naciones hermanas con una larga historia que los une.

Hoy en día los dos países mantienen relaciones diplomáticas cordiales y lazos comerciales fuertes. Debido a que Bolivia no ha conseguido una salida al mar de acuerdo a sus reclamaciones, el gobierno andino recurre a países vecinos para viabilizar su intercambio comercial.  Por ejemplo, en estos días se especula en medios periodísticos que la Administración de Servicios Portuarios - Bolivia (ASP-B) y la Empresa Nacional de Puertos (Enapu) de Perú firmarían un convenio marco  para trasladar  la carga boliviana a través del Puerto de Ilo, ubicado en el Departamento de Moquegua, con trato y tarifas preferenciales.

En el campo de las Relaciones Internacionales de Defensa, los dos gobiernos mantienen también cordiales relaciones. En este contexto en Diciembre del 2016, la Agregaduría de Defensa Adjunta y Militar de la Embajada del Perú en Bolivia, llevó a cabo una ceremonia para recordar el Aniversario de la Batalla de Ayacucho y Día del Ejército del Perú. La Batalla de Ayacucho del 09 de Diciembre de 1824, fue de transcendental importancia para derrotar definitivamente al opresor Ejército Español en las Américas. En la ceremonia de Diciembre del 2016, las celebraciones incluyeron un  desfile de honor del Batallón de Cadetes de Bolivia. Así mismo periódicamente se llevan a cabo tanto ejercicios militares, como actividades entre las dos armadas en el Lago Titicaca. Es más, ninguno de los dos gobiernos ve al otro como una amenaza y más bien trabajan unidos para combatir al narcotráfico.

En tal sentido   considero que no sería una ofensa al Perú si el gobierno de Bolivia decide cambiar la fecha del aniversario de la creación de su ejército del 14 de noviembre conmemorando la Batalla de Aroma,  al 18 de noviembre conmemorando la Batalla de Ingavi. En otras palabras, pienso que nuestro pasado y presente son lo suficientemente fuertes para “sobrevivir” el cambio del aniversario del Ejército Boliviano.

Para ser sincero, el rol peruano en el conflicto boliviano es un tema que no es muy recordado en Perú, aparte del hecho que el Mariscal Gamarra fue el primer, y único, Presidente peruano que ha perdido la vida en el campo de batalla. He encontrado al menos un blog que celebra la vida del difunto presidente, declarando que el Ejército Peruano fue a Bolivia para cumplir  “el gran sueño que siempre tuvo [el Mariscal Gamarra] de anexar Bolivia al Perú como territorio propio, como lo fue antes de la Independencia.”

Como punto final, si hablamos de herir susceptibilidades, como peruano, más amargo me resulta recordar lo que el General José Ballivian (posteriormente, Presidente de Bolivia) hizo con el cuerpo del Mariscal Gamarra después de la Batalla. Afortunadamente, los restos del Presidente Gamarra fueron devueltos al Perú y hoy descansan en el "Panteón de los Próceres." Eso me ayuda a recordar a la Batalla de Ingavi como una derrota de un Ejército Peruano en territorio extranjero, pero no como una afrenta nacional.

Una batalla se puede perder, pero como actúa el vencedor con el derrotado influenciará mucho las futuras relaciones entre los dos lados, un tema que es bien entendido en nuestra región.

Living in Peru: Peruvian foreign policy will not change under next president

"Peruvian Foreign policy will not change under next President"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
Opinion
Living in Peru
March 21, 2016
Originally published: http://www.peruthisweek.com/blogs-foreign-policy-elections-opinion-109088

The April 10 elections in Peru will not significantly alter the foreign policy of the Andean state, regardless of which candidate wins the presidency or which party (or coalition of parties) gains control of congress. Peruvian foreign policy for the past couple of decades has been fairly predictable and these elections will most likely not bring about major surprises.

Peru’s relations with the rest of the world are not a major issue to the Peruvian electorate; the hot topics of this election are improving internal security and the economy. Obviously, the latter issue has a lot to do with international commerce as the cornerstone of Peru’s growing economy over the past two decades has been the export of its natural resources (such as natural gas, minerals, oil and agricultural goods). Hence, it comes as no surprise that the main candidates have made similar promises, namely to maintain the current trade model. This will include cementing Peru’s role in the Pacific Alliance, a regional free trade bloc (along with Chile, Colombia and Mexico) as well as pushing for new free trade agreements, probably with India and Turkey. Additionally, the next congress will likely ratify the Trans Pacific Partnership which will open Asia Pacific markets to Peruvian goods.

When it comes to foreign policy itself, Peru is not a Latin American powerhouse, and it enjoys cordial relations with most of its neighbors. The only outstanding issue may be the future of the territorial dispute with Chile. Lima already had some success in a maritime dispute with its Southern neighbor via the 2014 ruling by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Hence, the next head of state may see the ICJ as an option to solve this dispute as well.

Ultimately, while the Andean nation has witnessed its fair share of internal turmoil over the past decades, its foreign policy has remained generally constant. Arguably, Peru’s internal problems, such as terrorism in the 1980s or political instability in the 1990s due to the Fujimori dictatorship, did not allow the Andean country to focus on the outside world. Nevertheless, some foreign policy stances have been constant and will remain so. For example, Lima has been a close ally of Washington, and this will not change, particularly as the Peruvian government and security forces will look for U.S. support to combat drug trafficking.

It is worth noting that of the remaining presidential candidates, only a few have an extreme-left ideology. In theory, if one of them is elected, we could see a radical foreign policy change. This is already happening in Argentina, as new President Mauricio Macri is approaching Washington; this is an almost 180 degree turn when compared to the foreign policy of his predecessor, President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, who was known to be a close friend of Russian President Vladimir Putin. As for Peru, in the 2006 elections then-candidate Ollanta Humala was defeated, in part, because he was regarded as a close friend of the late President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela and a follower of his socialist ideology. Nevertheless, the “extreme left” candidates are fairly down on the polls so unless a major surprise occurs in April, Peru’s relations with the global powers will generally remain unaltered. (The next head of state will likely continue to purchase Russian military equipment, which the Peruvian military is used to utilizing, but we will not see Russian bombers landing in Peru à la Venezuela in 2013).

FAME and Peru’s military industry

On a personal note, I would like to see Peruvian presidential candidates address foreign policy. International commerce is an obvious issue, but there are other parts of the country’s foreign policy that should be discussed, such as the future of the Andean Community (which is headquartered in Lima), having a Peruvian citizen elected to head a major international organization (like UNASUR), the significance of Peru’s recent ratification of the Arms Trade Treaty or the future role of the Peruvian military in UN peacekeeping missions.

For over a decade, Peru has enjoyed significant economic growth. Unfortunately, this has not prompted Lima to have a more ambitious foreign policy – coincidentally, I discuss the steps that the Andean country can take to be more influential in regional geopolitics in a working paper for the Argentine think tank Centro Argentino de Estudios Internacionales entitled, Pax Inca: Why Peru is not a Regional Powerhouse in Latin America.

Hopefully Peru’s next president, whoever he or she may be, will be interested in boosting the country’s foreign policy.

You can follow W. Alejandro on Twiter @W_Alex_Sanchez

Interview: Cuba: Obama is much more popular than Castro brothers. Why?

"Cuba: Obama is much more popular than the Castro brothers. Why?"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
Interview
Matisak's Blog (A Stamp on the World)


According to one published poll US President Barack Obama is much more popular in Cuba than Castro brothers. Why would you say it is so, how would you read the mood of Cubans out of it?Read few comments.

W. Alex Sanchez, Research Fellow, Council on Hemispheric Affairs

It would be bizarre to believe that in 2015 the population of an authoritarian state like Cuba would truly believe that the U.S. is “the enemy.” Sure, the internet does not have a widespread presence in the Caribbean island as in other countries, but it does have an impact. Additionally, relaxed travel rules allow for Cuban Americans to return to the island and tell their relatives that Washington is some kind of “evil empire,” that is prepared to invade their country.

Moreover, since his election, President Obama himself has been viewed positively by the Latin American masses. His handshake with President Raul Castro during Nelson Mandela’s funeral, while it may have been improvised and inevitable because the two leaders ran into each other and it would have been too awkward for them not to greet, was widely covered in Latin America, as a sign that Washington and Havana under Obama and Raul Castro could fix their historical differences.

Finally, this poll was taken in March, months after the historic December 2014 speech in which both governments declared their intentions to improve relations, so Obama has probably that going on for him.

I would say that this poll may be slightly bias. The Miami Herald explains that this was a “secret” poll taken from 1,200 adults without the knowledge and approval of the Cuban government. So one can only wonder if the support rates for Obama or disapproval for the Castros are in some way skewed even more because of the fear that some Cubans may have felt of getting into trouble for taking part of a secret poll.

Sebastian Arcos, Associate Director, Cuban Research Institute, Florida International University

Although I am not familiar with the methodology used in this poll –and therefore cannot take its validity for granted- I am not surprised by this particular result. Cubans see  in President Obama what they would like to see in their own leaders: Obama is young while most of the Cuban leadership is older than 80; Obama is black-like a majority of Cubans are- while the Cuban leadership is overwhelmingly white; Obama is accountable to the media and to a Congress controlled by the opposition party, while the Cuban leadership is accountable to no one; Obama is willing to give his enemies the benefit of the doubt, while the Cuban leadership calls its opponents “mercenaries” and “traitors” and will not even allow the Ladies in White to march in silence to church without harassment.

Cubans are tired of 57 years of sacrifices, scarcity, repression and propaganda. They need hope in their lives, and they are hopeful that the new policy implemented by President Obama will make their miserable lives a little easier. More than anything, that explains Obama’s popularity. Unfortunately, they will be disappointed.

COHA Opinion: ON JAMES BOND AND LATINA CRIMINALS

"On James Bond and Latina Criminals"
W. Alejandro Sanchez
COHA Opinion
Council on Hemispheric Affairs
March 31, 2015
Originally published: http://www.coha.org/coha-opinion-on-james-bond-and-latina-criminals/

On February 25, commentator Peter Bradshaw published a brief article in the renowned British daily, The Guardian, arguing that the next villain of the upcoming James Bond movie ‘Spectre,’ should be a woman.[i] While providing some possible candidates, this British columnist’s list does not go into greater detail of what kind of villainess could rival Bond.

Latin American women have a rich history of involvement in violent matters, including active participation in real-life insurgent groups, like the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) or Peru’s Shining Path. Additionally, women have assumed prominent roles in Mexican drug cartels and other drug-funded criminal networks in the region. Thus, it can be easily argued that the main villain in a future Bond film should be a Latina.

James Bond and the “Real World”

Bond movies are notorious for featuring outrageous plots; for example ‘Moonraker’ (1979) involves a villain that possesses a space station and tries to destroy all human life on earth. Other movies have been inspired by the Cold War, with several references to the Soviet Union and its infamous intelligence agency, the KGB (‘Octopussy,’ 1983). As for the post-Cold War era, Bond has had to face non-Soviet threats that may not be aimed at world domination per se, but nonetheless a threat to global peace and stability. For example, ‘Tomorrow Never Dies’ (1997) can be regarded as a commentary on the influence of the media in society. In that movie, Bond battles a media tycoon bent on utilizing the influence of his media empire to control the fate of governments.

More recent Bond movies have also touched on sensitive real world geopolitical realities. Most prominently, ‘Die Another Day’ (2002) faced considerably criticism for its plot centered on North Korean military attempts at invading South Korea. Additionally, ‘Quantum of Solace’ (2008) deals with Bond stopping a private energy company that is supporting a military coup in Bolivia. The movie also references the increasingly important topic of water control. In 2012, COHA published a report entitled “Latin America: Water Politics, Coups and James Bond,” that addresses these issues.

 Female characters in these films are the brigade of “Bond Girls” – beautiful and smart women who aid the British agent, usually falling in love with him. Certainly there have been some particularly memorable henchwomen to the main villain; for example, Xenia from ‘GoldenEye’ (1995). However, a main female villain, not just a deadly assistant to the main character, is lacking from the Bond cannon. Hence, The Guardian’s Bradshaw is correct to declare that it is time for a main female Bond villain. In his brief commentary on the subject, Bradshaw argues:

It’s never really been tried. There was Lotte Lenya’s minor shoe-stabber Rosa Klebb in From Russia With Love, and a sort of ambiguous lesser role for Sophie Marceau in The World Is Not Enough. But the idea of Bond being seriously tested or threatened by a powerful woman – who might have one or two good lines? Might even win some preliminary skirmishes? That would be revolutionary.

There is plenty of space in the Bond universe for a powerful female character that stands up to Bond. After all, actress Judi Dench portrayed the great “M,” Bond’s iconic boss at MI6. At the time of this writing, it has been reported that Mexican actress Stephanie Sigman has been hired to play the character of “Estrella,” the newest Bond Girl in the English spy’s next adventure, ‘Spectre.’[ii]Sigman’s addition to the movie is significant, as it is the “first Mexican Bond girl to be featured in the franchise’s 50-year history.”[iii] She will be only the third Latina to be a Bond girl, after Talisa Soto, of Puerto Rican descent who appeared in ‘License to Kill’ (1989), and Barbara Carrera, who was born in Nicaragua and who appeared in ‘Never Say Never Again’ (1983).[iv]

While it is definitely a positive development that more Latina actresses are appearing in these iconic blockbusters, one obvious concern is that Sigman will be sexualized in Bond’s newest adventure—which is very typical for Latina actors in Hollywood (though there are certainly exceptions, like Michelle Rodriguez).  Ultimately it may very well be time for a Bond villainess, and an ideal choice is to have a woman appear in the movie as a serious, no nonsense criminal, instead of one of Bond’s frivolous romances. Given the plethora of source material from the real world, a Latina villainess would be a rational and commercially viable move for the entertainment industry.

The goal here is certainly not to simply glorify the career of the female Latin American criminal, nor to imply that there is anything wrong with Sigman playing a Bond girl. Rather given the history of Bond villains, it would be a somewhat welcome development to feature a new approach, such as casting a woman as the primary villain. Moreover, even though a Bond villain will ultimately loose the battle, these characters have, if properly written, fascinating backgrounds that explain the reasons why they behave the way they do. Hence, a Latina Bond villainess could be utilized as a fictional starting point discuss the reasons why women join Latin American violent movements and how their behavior morphs, if at all, as part of them.

Latinas as Insurgents

In violent Latin American movements, women have been forced into sexual slavery, utilized as concubines, and used for support operations. Nevertheless, there are several instances of Latin American women rising to leadership roles in violent entities, in addition to proving themselves to be valuable fighters in the field.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), which has waged a war against the Colombian military since 1964, currently has around 8,000 fighters, of which a significant portion are women. The two sides have been in negotiations since 2012, and it is unclear if a final deal will be reached this year. The FARC has several women in roles of leadership, including Laura Villa, a guerrilla commander who has been part of the ongoing peace negotiations between the FARC high command and the Colombian government in Havana.[v] Another renowned female FARC fighter is Tanja Nijmeijer, a Dutch citizen who first went to Colombia to teach English, and later joined the rebels.[vi]

The FARC has taken particular care to make sure that the world is aware of its female influence. Case in point, the FARC has a webpage, MujerFariana.org, which focuses on the insurgent movement’s female fighters.[vii] The site has various articles about both current female FARC members, as well as historical Latin American women rebels. For example, a February post discusses the life and role of Micaela Bastidas, the wife of a Peruvian rebel that rose up against the Spanish empire in the 18th century.[viii]

The FARC website also has interviews with female fighters, as a kind of “rebel podcast,” as well as YouTube videos. One FARC-produced video currently available on YouTube (“La Dignidad tras las rejas,” which was uploaded on January 22, 2015 to the FARC’s account, “Lucero Fariana”) is meant to display solidarity with the FARC currently imprisoned female fighters.[ix] The short video begins with a shot of a woman with her eyes covered, handcuffed to a chair. The following scenes are a number of real-life female FARC fighters broadcasting messages in support of their imprisoned comrades. The film then switches to an amalgamation of clips of female rebels carrying out training exercises, such as climbing walls, and apparently in real action, as they are seen shooting their rifles.

Likewise, the Peruvian Maoist insurgent movement Shining Path has had several female fighters among its ranks. For example, Elena Ipanaguirre is the wife of Abimael Guzman, founder and leader of the insurgent movement. The two of them currently inhabit adjoining cells in a special prison in Peru while they serve life sentences.[x]Ipanaguirre, AKA “Comrade Miriam,” is known in the Andean nation for her fierce loyalty both to her husband and to the insurgent movement’s ideals. Moreover, a current Shining Path fighter that operates in the Valley of the Apurimac, Mantaro and Ene Rivers (VRAEM, as the region is commonly known) is Tarcela Loya Vilchez, AKA “Comrade Olga.” According to the Peruvian security forces, “Olga” is in her late 40s, of around 150cm of height, with a strong character, knowledge of weapons, and a leader of the insurgent movement’s Central Committee.[xi]

Given the aforementioned examples, it would not be difficult for Hollywood script writers to draft up a villainess with ties to Latin American insurgent movements and known for her fierceness in battle. After all, real life instances in the region have proven that female insurgents can have high-ranking roles in their violent organizations and can be just as deadly as their male counterparts.

Latinas in Drug Cartels

When we discuss the role of women in drug cartels, it is easy to think of them merely playing the role of concubines to narco-leaders, or as drug mules. This role is often highlighted in movies, such as ‘Maria Full of Grace’ (2004), which features a young woman who swallows wrapped pellets of drugs and then flies from Colombia to New York. Nonetheless, Latin women often enjoy major roles in drug trafficking organizations.

Perhaps the most prominent female narco is Sandra Avila Beltran, known as “The Queen of the Pacific.” She is a Mexican citizen with ties to both Mexico’s Sinaloa Cartel, as well as the Norte del Valle Cartel, a Colombian drug cartel. She was arrested in Mexico in 2007 and extradited to the U.S. in 2012. After serving prison time in Florida, she was sent back to Mexico where she remained imprisoned until her release in February 2015.[xii]

Another renowned narco is Claudia Ochoa Felix, also thought to work for the Sinaloa Cartel, but as the leader of a hitsquad. In 2014, there was a global media frenzy over Ochoa Felix, as numerous media outlets republished photos of her from her social media accounts (i.e. Twitter and Instagram); several of the pictures show her holding weapons and in at least one photo she has a couple of men wearing ski masks at her side holding weapons.[xiii] These photographs have since been deleted while Ochoa Felix claims that she is not a narco, but rather a private citizen and mother of three. Nevertheless, the theory remains that she works for the Sinaloa Cartel and may have been involved with two of its leaders, the now imprisoned Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, and the also-imprisoned Jose Rodrigo “El Chino Anthrax” Arechiga Gamboa, leader of cartel hit squad Los Antrax.

Finally, there are constant reports by the Mexican media of women arrested because of their involvement with the cartels: not as drug mules, but assassins. For example, in April 2014, two women were arrested in Chihuahua for working as hit women. One of them, an active-duty female police officer, was arrested along with three other gunmen after they assassinated four individuals in Ciudad Juarez.[xiv]

In other words, Latin American criminal women have shown themselves to be deadly narco leaders and hitwomen. Surely one of them can inspire a script.

Conclusions

Shooting for ‘Spectre’ is well underway, as recent fan videos have appeared about a car chase sequence in Rome.[xv] Bond movies take the spy to various locations across the worlds, and Latin America will once again play a role in this Bond adventure.[xvi]At the time of this writing, the ‘Spectre’ production team, including Daniel Craig (who plays the latest incarnation of the English spy) are filming in Mexico City. At least a few of the movie’s scenes will apparently include Bond running through Mexico’s capital during a Day of the Dead carnival.[xvii] While Latin America will not play a prominent role in ‘Spectre,’ like it did in ‘Quantum of Solace,’ it is positive that the region continues to be present in the spy’s adventures.(Bond has travelled to Latin America and the Caribbean before to fight villains, like Jamaica in ‘Dr. No,’ 1962, and Cuba in ‘Die Another Day,’ among others).

It is a positive development that a Latin actress, Stephanie Sigman, will have a role in the upcoming blockbuster, but she will be a Bond girl, rather than a villain. Unless there is a major plot twist in the script,this is a shortcoming on behalf of the film’s script-writers. ‘Quantum of Solace,’ which revolves around water politics and military coups in Bolivia, exemplifies that there is plenty of source material to inspire another Latin American-themed Bond adventure. Moreover, the history of real-life Latin American violent movements, such as insurgent groups like Shining Path or the FARC to Mexican drug cartels, highlights how Latin women have enjoyed prominent roles within these entities. Even more, a fictional villainess allows us to understand some of the real-life reasons why Latinas decide to join the criminal life.

The plot of ‘Spectre’ remains under wraps, though it will reportedly revolve around Bond fighting a “sinister organization.”[xviii]  Moreover, the German-Austrian actor Christoph Waltz will play Bond’s nemesis.[xix]While Waltz will probably make a fine villain, it feels like this was an opportunity-lost for the Bond franchise. Since they are filming in Mexico and have a Mexican actress in the cast, it would have been groundbreaking and “revolutionary,” as The Guardian’s Bradshaw put it, to have a villainess. Even more, given the plethora of source material from the role of real-life women in Latin American violent movements, a Latina Bond villainess one would have been the natural choice for such a role.

By W. Alejandro Sanchez, Senior Research Fellow at the Council on Hemispheric Affairs

Please accept this article as a free contribution from COHA, but if re-posting, please afford authorial and institutional attribution. Exclusive rights can be negotiated. For additional news and analysis on Latin America, please go to: LatinNews.com and Rights Action.

[i] Peter Bradshaw. “The James Bond baddie should be a woman.”  The Guardian. “James Bond Notebook.” February 25, 2015.http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/25/next-james-bond-baddie-woman?CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2

[ii] Justin Krol. “Stephanie Sigman joins James Bond film ‘Spectre.’” Variety. March 10, 2015.  http://variety.com/2015/film/news/james-bond-spectre-stephanie-sigman-casting-1201449990/

[iii] Justin Krol. “Stephanie Sigman joins James Bond film ‘Spectre.’” Variety. March 10, 2015. http://variety.com/2015/film/news/james-bond-spectre-stephanie-sigman-casting-1201449990/

[iv]PalomaCorredor. “Penelope Cruz to be the third Latina ‘Bond Girl’… and the oldest.”VOXXI. June 6, 2013. http://voxxi.com/2013/06/06/penelope-cruz-latina-bond-girl-oldest/

[v]Brittany Peterson. “Entrevista con Lider guerrillera de las FARC. Sputnik News. February 13, 2014.http://mundo.sputniknews.com/spanish_ruvr_ru/2014_02_13/Entrevista-con-lider-guerrillera-de-las-FARC-2210/

[vi]Sarah Rainsford. “Tanja Nijmeijer: Dutch Farc rebel at peace talks.” BBC. January 31, 2013.http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-21237362

[vii]Mujfer Fariana. Official Webpage. http://mujerfariana.org/

[viii]“Micaela Bastidas Puyucahua.” MujerFariana.org. February 18, 2015.http://mujerfariana.org/index.php/heroinas/267-micaela-bastidas-puyucahua

[ix]“La Dignidad Tras Las Rejas.” Video. YouTube. User: Lucero Fariana. Uploaded January 22, 2015.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMpy2zQkWHg

[x]“Esposa de Terrorista Abimael Guzman exige visitas conyugales.” El Comercio  (Peru). October 7, 2014.http://elcomercio.pe/politica/justicia/esposa-terrorista-abimael-guzman-exige-visitas-conyugales-noticia-1762426

[xi]“La violenta ‘camarada Olga’ asumiria liderazgo militar de los senderistas del Vraem.”La Republica. Politica. August 28, 2013.http://www.larepublica.pe/28-08-2013/la-violenta-camarada-olga-asumiria-liderazgo-militar-de-los-senderistas-del-vraem

[xii]“Sandra AvilaBeltran, la Reina del Pacifico, esta libre.” UnivisionNoticias. February 7, 2015.http://noticias.univision.com/article/2238473/2015-02-07/mexico/noticias/ordenan-liberar-a-sandra-avila-beltran-la-reina-del-pacifico

[xiii]“La sexy jefa del narco de Mexico se muestra también en videos.” Infobae.com. Sociedad. June 2, 2014.http://www.infobae.com/2014/06/02/1569592-la-sexy-jefa-narco-mexico-se-muestra-tambien-videos

[xiv]Carlos Coria Rivas. “Arrestan a dos mujeres sicarias en Chihuahua, una de ellas policía.” Imagen.com.mx. April 28, 2014.http://www.imagen.com.mx/arrestan-dos-mujeres-sicarias-chihuahua

[xv]Joey Paur. “New car chase videos from the set of Spectre.” GeekTyrant. March 22, 2015.  http://geektyrant.com/news/new-car-chase-videos-from-the-set-of-spectre

[xvi]“Mexico amanece en pleno Dia de los Muertos por rodaje de ‘James Bond.’” Diario Las Americas. March 19, 2015.http://www.diariolasamericas.com/4868_cine/3010520_mexico-amanece-pleno-muertos-rodaje-james-bond.html

[xvii]ShyamDodge. “Panic in Mexico! Daniel Craig frantically runs through Day of the Dead carnival while filming new Bond movie Spectre.” Daily Mail. March 25, 2015.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3011929/Panic-Mexico-Daniel-Craig-frantically-runs-Day-Dead-carnival-filming-new-Bond-movie-Spectre.html

[xviii] Joey Paur. “New car chase videos from the set of Spectre.” GeekTyrant. March 22, 2015.http://geektyrant.com/news/new-car-chase-videos-from-the-set-of-spectre

[xix]Mikey Smith. “Who is the new Bond villain? Everything we know about 007’s Spectre nemesis.” Mirror.co.uk. December 4, 2014. http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/who-new-bond-villain-everything-4747137