By contrast, Alvaro Uribe of Colombia and Alejandro Toledo of Peru passed through New York and Washington with barely a ripple. Not only that, they didn't really want to be noticed. True, both agreed to meet with editors and reporters of The Post. But neither one was willing to speak publicly about the biggest development in Latin America in years. That is, of course, the increasingly conspicuous emergence of Chavez as the political and ideological successor to Fidel Castro, and his aggressive attempt to succeed where Castro failed in constructing an anti-American alliance.Actually, they had a second simple message, this one for journalists like Diehl: Stop talking about Chavez all the time and start covering Latin America like responsible journalists. Colombia and Peru aren't just Hugo's neighbors, they are their own countries with their own success stories and challenges ahead.
...That's why when Uribe and Toledo did speak about Venezuela, to their contacts in Congress and the Bush administration, the message was a simple one: Stop talking about Chavez, and start competing with him. Chavez-bashing, whether by Pat Robertson or Donald Rumsfeld, only sends his poll numbers soaring; meanwhile, say the Latin presidents, hard-pressed leaders are wondering if Washington has anything that matches Chavez's largesse.
When Uribe and Toledo don't talk about Venezuela, it's not because they are acquiescing to Chavez's human rights abuses or they are bought off by his oil, it's because their countries have issues that they want to discuss in the media. Uribe wants to talk about Colombia's military and economic success, the future of Plan Colombia and even the criticisms of the government's human rights record. Toledo wants to talk about the difficult transition to democracy after Fujimori, the success Peru has had in the tourism industry or the challenges of drug trafficking that are on the rise.
So Diehl, maybe you'd like to write that column? You know, the one where you interviewed the Colombian and Peruvian presidents and talked about Colombia and Peru. The one where instead of telling those presidents what the major regional concern is, you asked, "What do you feel is the biggest concern in the region?" The one where you ask how well they get along with the US and whether there is any more the US government can do to help the region. Who knows? Maybe, just maybe, when journalists start reporting on the Andean Region as something more than Hugo's neighbor, the US will then be ready to retake some initiative in Latin America.
4 comments:
And I should note that I don't just mean to pick on Jackson Diehl, whose writing I generally like. He is simply one of many journalists guilty of failing to cover Latin America outside of the single frame of Venezuela.
Amen
"The other is a self-declared enemy of Washington who, despite enjoying an extraordinary bonanza of oil revenue, has managed to increase the poor population in his country by a quarter."
Kind of like the poverty increase under Bush in the US?:
Since President Bush took office, the average annual household family income has declined by $2,572, approximately 4.8 percent.
The bougus coup backed by Chimpy and the gang didn't exactly help the Venezuelan economy, a point Mr. Diehl conveniently ignores.
It's standard talking points for the Venezuelan government to say that the coup is the reason for the increase in poverty under Chavez. The fact is, Chavez's economic model is based on populism, and while the government gives the poor food to eat and medical clinics, it does little to lift the poor out of poverty or improve the society as a whole.
I had a short discussion here about models being used by a few other countries including Brazil to pay children who are going to school. While not perfect, it is certainly better than what's being done in Venezuela.
Post a Comment