17‏/03‏/2011

Latin America

Latin America contains more than 20 countries, ranging from "Patagonia" to "Rio Bravo". I can confirm that the comrades will Ihkuroni not attempted a detailed exposure of the political and social conditions of each country separately. I want to touch upon only some of the most important trends in the region.
As is known comrades, the Latin American fast-changing area, experiencing a huge explosion of mass struggles, and is looking for an alternative to the corrupt policies of the small national bourgeoisie. And suffer from the tragic consequences of the subordination of the masses of the repressive military dictatorships. References direction and played a crucial role in this deception, especially in the sixties and early seventies.
Today Latin America remains more polarized societies and political turmoil on earth. Since 2000, was overthrown at least ten governments in the consequences of this crisis, whether through coups or popular uprisings as well as the U.S. invasion of Haiti.
At the outset, it is necessary to identify the issues handled by the research centers of Washington and the media, major parties in the United States.
The first is that Washington has lost influence in the region considered by the back yard, and the second is linked to the subject they call a "shift to the left"
In Latin America. This latter phenomenon, associated with the petty-bourgeois left, and auditors, on the basis that they seem to confront and decisive confrontation with imperialism, and also, like a new road to socialism.
But it is not. There is no doubt that there are deep substantive significance for the transition of power in many countries of Latin America belong to the forces of one form or another for the left, and her voice of opposition to U.S. policies.
There is growing concern in U.S. ruling circles of the current developments in the region. In this framework, published "fluorine Affairs," in its latest issue an article titled (Do you lose Washington Latin America?) By "Peter Hakim," the President of the dialogue between the Americas, financed by the business community, and serves as the group property which provides strategic visions of the ruling inner circle the opening of markets in the region. And deplores the "Peter Hakim," and condemns the Departments of "Clinton" and "Bush," indifference to Latin America, which allowed the influence of American spin on the region after the period in which Latin America goes forward in the right direction.
In fact, the decline in U.S. influence in Latin America, whether as a result of errors in foreign policy or political decisions taken by this or that. It returns to changes in the global economy and as a result of the catastrophic policies of America or the United States backed during the period in which he calls the "Hakim" that the area which was heading towards the right.
These changes in the global economy was a result of globalization and as a result of increasing the relative decline in the development of American capitalism to West Europe
Principle (Monroe) - refusing to acknowledge that U.S. foreign policy of any external force except the United States to extend its influence to the Western Hemisphere - has become a non-existent. Over the past two centuries, American governments have put that principle into practice. And used as a justification for American intervention in the region and throughout the twentieth century, to the imposition of military dictatorships and to suppress the revolutionary movement of the working class. Throughout this period, the national bourgeoisie arose systems of U.S. imperialism. But economic changes have broken this principle and previous relationships.
Rivals the United States earn economic clout
Over the course of the last decade, more than the European Union on the planetary capital as a major source of foreign direct investment and trade in the countries of South America. The United States remained the first trade partner with the countries of Latin America as a whole. And enjoy strong economic relations with Mexico under NAFTA was signed in 1993. Where two thirds of U.S. exports go to the region to Mexico, and take advantage of cheap Mexican labor in the production of goods for the American market.
What is most disturbing to Washington that China is playing an increasing role of South "Rio Grande". Chinese President "Hu Jintao", and his deputy, "Zeng Koinfong", they made two trips to Latin America during the past two years, and signed trade agreements and other military cooperation. The area became an important source of raw materials for Chinese industries. Doubled and China's imports from the region six times over the past six years is expected to reach $ 100 billion at the end of this decade.
China also committed to invest 100 billion dollars to build roads, ports and infrastructure works over the next decade. China is continuing the construction of several major projects, particularly in the oil in Venezuela, in Bolivia's natural gas and base metals.
Held two sessions of the U.S. Congress hearing on the so-called Chinese threat or threat to China's long-term American influence in the world. Confirmed during which the Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs for the Western Hemisphere, "Roger Noriega," that the U.S. administration attentive and vigilant to any indications of economic cooperation lead to political relations. Can negatively affect the fundamental interests in the region.
In short, these changes in economic relations planetary mean that American capitalism is no longer monopolize the sole control of the Latin American countries. And it is concerned about the growing relations between the countries of the region and competition between the forces of the United States of America, which provides an opportunity and room for maneuvering systems to the region between the forces of international competitors, and run counter to American unilateralism and attempts to continue to dominate the region. This is the basic framework of what might be called a trend towards the left. Which could be described better as a trend towards the "euro" and "yuan".
In the western hemisphere itself, Western capitalism is facing emerging challenges and emerging from Brazil. Which has a population of 180 million people have the wealth and natural weight. And became the tenth largest industrial power in the world and the fifth largest exporter of weapons. This growth is the Brazilian lead to recurrence of a collision with the United States on trade issues, particularly in intellectual property rights issues and on issues of agricultural exports.
Seem political indicators of these changes clearly in the resolution adopted by the White House recently by refusing to allow Spain to sell the plane that contains the Spanish American technology to Venezuela. A deal signed by the Chavez government with the Spanish Ministry of Defense. Spain announced on the challenge of this position the aircraft industry, depending on the European technology. It is also expected that Spain take a similar position at its deal to sell military patrol boats, with Brazil on military aircraft, which are manufactured for Venezuela.
Brazil has announced the second week of March, after a meeting between the "but for" and "Chavez" and the President of Argentina, "Kirchner" in order to establish industry common weapon in the framework of the trade that brings some Latin American countries known as the "Mercosur". Designed to produce military aircraft and other weapons, you need the countries of the continent, to compete with American weapons imported by the countries of the continent are traditionally from the United States, where the continent consumes annually about $ 3.5 billion in armaments.

There is another dispute between Bolivia and Chile on the freedom of access to the Atlantic, as well as between Peru and Chile. These conflicts could explode into war, with the support of external forces for any of the parties to the conflict, which is increasing the possibility of its occurrence. It also disputes which threaten Washington. It is also possible that the countries of the region is pushing for military cooperation against the United States aggression. However, this does not force us to side of Chavez or any other bourgeois nationalist regime.
Understand the nature of these systems requires examining the implications of the implementation of policies for the U.S. government and financial institutions dominant in America during the eighties and nineties. The policies of "liberalization" known as the "Washington Consensus".
These policies, which called the economic reforms, promoted the claims of economic growth, and served as an end to the industrialization policies to replace imports and national development programs related to national systems in the periods prior to that, and the integration of the economies of these countries in global capitalism.
In this context, tariffs have been reduced to half compared Basbaenja. Lifting of restrictions on international investments in most countries.
In the nineties alone, privatization of state-owned enterprises more than $ 178 billion, and laid off hundreds of thousands of workers. Thus, the value of more than twenty times the value of the projects that have been privatized in the Soviet Union after its collapse.
This economic growth was based on false grounds is unprecedented, and can not be repeated. Where you can not sell state-owned enterprises or public projects more than once.
These policies led to poverty and social polarization that threatens these communities today. Where the United Nations reports indicate that about 213 million people, or about 40.6% of the population of Latin America's 523 million people live below the poverty line.
According to a 2003 study by the World Bank, that 10% of the region's population earn 48% of the total income of the year. While 10% of them only have access to only 1.6%.
Growing inequality in Latin America sharply. And more than Tvaute in the countries of Eastern Europe. As statistics indicate that OECD economic development of the United Nations, which also indicates that this disparity include all aspects of life, is saluting the retreat from providing health care, education and public services, and be able to access to land or property other social.
The Venezuela is an example in this regard, although the situation similar with both Argentina and Uruguay and a number of other countries, Venezuela, which has seen inflation is high, the years 1996, and between 88 and 1996, Venezuela saw a reduction in the number of employees in industry increased by 15%.
At the end of nineties, real wages have declined by 40% of what it was in the eighties. And decreased purchasing power in 1994 to two-thirds what it was in 1978. Social spending also fell by 40% during the same period. Includes the reduction of expenditure on education by 40% and 70% on housing and urban development, and 37% on health care.
And between 1984 and 1995, doubled the number of the poor rate of up to two thirds of the population.
The increasing social misery and the widening gap between rich and poor, while the richest sector of the Venezuelan ruling class and upper middle class by dealing with multinational corporations.
Affiliated trade unions to the Democratic Labor Party, who is totally discredited for his cooperation with the government to abandon the previous gains. There has been a big drop in trade union membership, as a result of the loss of their jobs, and pushing them so-called reform of the streets and unemployment. And the number of workers are members of trade unions from 26.4% of the total labor force in 1988, to 13.5% only in 1995.
Therefore, these unions did not play a significant role in the opposition or in social protests.
In short, none of these systems a thing of the working class. In many cases, walked on the same policy followed by the left-wing nationalist regimes and military systems, popular, such as "John Byron" in Argentina, and "Jtulio Vargas" in Brazil.

ليست هناك تعليقات:

إرسال تعليق