Americas

Ecuador

  • Politics and Government
    Press Freedom and Democracy in Latin America
    Last Wednesday, Ecuador’s Supreme Court upheld sentences handed down in July 2011 for four members of the El Universo newspaper’s staff in the latest chapter of a lengthy and controversial trial. Three of the newspaper’s directors, Carlos, César, and Nícolas Perez, and an editorialist, Emilio Palacio, face three years in jail and $40 million in fines. All have fled the country or sought asylum abroad, and many expect that the fines (if collected) will bankrupt the 90-year-old periodical. The February 2011 article that incited the controversy, entitled “NO a las Mentiras” by Emilio Palacio, alleged that during the September 2010 uprising Ecuador’s President Rafael Correa ordered troops to fire on a hospital filled with unarmed civilians. President Correa vigorously denied these claims and filed a libel suit in March 2011. He claims that the defendants are part of a powerful private media aiming to undermine his government and said a court victory “would represent a great step forward for the liberation of our Americas from one of the largest and most unpunished powers: the corrupt media.” The case has been a messy back-and-forth, full of demands for written retractions, refusals of retraction offers, and accusations of judicial corruption—capturing the attention of international human rights organizations and free press advocates. Newspapers such as the New York Times and the Washington Post have published highly critical op-eds on the case, saying that Correa is conducting “the most comprehensive and ruthless assault on free media under way in the Western Hemisphere.” This is just one of several clashes between Correa and the press. This month Ecuadorian journalists Juan Carlos Calderón and Christian Zurita were both fined $1 million for their book, Gran Hermano, which detailed government contracts given to Correa’s brother Fabricio. The government recently passed a law that bans the media from “either directly or indirectly promoting any given candidate, proposal, options, electoral preferences or political thesis, through articles, specials or any other form of message.” Ecuador isn’t the only Latin American country with tense government-media relations. Hugo Chavez’s battles with opposition-leaning television and radio stations are well-known, and the Kirchners of Argentina have had legendary fights with long-standing newspapers Clarín and La Nación. President Cristina Kirchner recently nationalized the only domestic supplier of newsprint (leading many to worry that this will increase the state’s influence over these news outlets). Granted, in some places and cases the press hasn’t been guilt free. In many countries it is concentrated in a few hands, and those individuals have at times chosen to present biased views of politicians and events. These aggressive attacks on ideological opponents have not fostered a more open and inclusive society. What is true is that a strong, independent, and responsible media is vital for Latin America’s democratic future. The challenge now is to both encourage and enable the press to play the role of watchdog. To become substantive (versus just electoral) democracies, Ecuador and other nations must think beyond the ballot box. I look forward to your feedback via twitter, facebook or in the comments section.
  • Colombia
    The Border Crisis Between Colombia and Ecuador
  • Americas
    Welcoming Latin America's New Left
    Over the last eighteen months Presidential elections occurred in twelve Latin American countries. While Hugo Chavez and his anti-American tirades grab most of the headlines, these elections actually show the rise of a new Left in Latin America. In contrast to Chavez’s more socialist populism, these new leaders promise to balance market-friendly economics with broader social policies and protections. These new governments have already shown their commitment to free markets. In less than a year, Chile’s President Michelle Bachelet has signed free trade agreements with China, New Zealand, and Singapore, and is negotiating new accords with both Japan and Australia. Alan Garcia of Peru appointed a well-known private banker as Finance minister and vocally supports free trade agreements with the United States, Canada, and many Asian countries. Brazil’s Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva was re-elected based on his conservative first term economic policies. Tabare Vazquez of Uruguay also continued the orthodox economic choices of the previous government, attracting both Finnish and Spanish foreign investment for Uruguay’s cellulose industry. Even the more rhetorically radical leaders are governing or likely to govern near a pragmatic center. During his first year in office, Bolivian President Evo Morales drew back from his more populist campaign appeals. He cancelled the nationalization of the mining industry, and is now negotiating gas contracts with foreign companies. While peppering campaign speeches with anti-American quips, Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega left the Sandinista’s economic ideology behind. During his first weeks in office he has already started courting domestic and foreign investment, promising to uphold contracts and maintain open markets. Rafael Correa’s of Ecuador began moderating his promises in the final weeks of the presidential campaign, and even reached out to U.S. ambassador, Linda Jewel. In fact, only Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, supported by oil revenues - represents a firm holdover from the political past. Yet while rejecting old-style socialism, Latin American voters did turn left. The winning candidates all reached out to the large portions of the population that have not benefited from economic reforms. They promised to improve the social welfare of ordinary citizens. Now in office, they are pushing forward to create jobs, eliminate hunger, and provide better access to education, social security and health care. This shift Left reflects the real needs of Latin America’s populations. While Latin America’s economies have grown in recent years, these benefits have not trickled down. Some 25% of the population still lives in poverty. The difference between the haves and have nots stubbornly remains one of the most pronounced in the world. More positively, this political turn reflects the spread of democracy. As more open and inclusive governments take root, politicians are responding to voter demands. The winning electoral campaigns focused not just on overall economic growth but also on increasing economic opportunities, particularly for the poor. These newly elected leaders now will try to soften the rough edges of globalization while continuing to compete in international markets. This is a difficult balancing act for any leader, and many will not meet the challenge. But as Leftists, they have an opportunity to build a social consensus behind the long-term investments necessary for real change in these countries. To that end, this new Left represents the best chance for strengthening the economies and the democracies of Latin America.