Andean Bloc Presidents to Chart New Course

[cal04]

Four Andean nations agreed Tuesday to chart new trade plans with the United States without Venezuela, a major U.S. critic. Bolivia's Evo Morales, Ecuador's Alfredo Palacio, Colombia's Alvaro Uribe and Peru's Alejandro Toledo signed an accord pledging to respect the rights of Andean bloc nations to negotiate free trade agreements with the United States. President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, a fierce critic of U.S.-backed trade liberalization, announced in April that he was abandoning the Andean bloc, saying it had been ``fatally wounded'' when Colombia and Peru signed trade pacts with Washington.

Another focus of the summit was extending the U.S. trade preferences granted in 1991 to diversify the Andean nations' economies, helping to wean them away from the production of coca leaf, the raw ingredient of cocaine.
The preferences, covering thousands of products, are scheduled to end later this year. U.S. officials have said that an extension, in lieu of formal trade deals, is not in the cards.

The leaders agreed to urge Washington to extend the preferences. Morales at first sided with Chavez in opposing U.S. trade agreements, but later relented and urged Chavez, who was not invited to Tuesday's summit, to
reconsider. Michael Shifter, a Latin American analyst at the Inter-American Dialogue think tank in Washington, said that ``Morales cannot afford'' to take Chavez's position.

``Chavez, after all, benefits enormously from the U.S. market, the recipient of an estimated 60 percent of its petroleum exports,'' he said. ``It makes sense that Morales would also try to see how Bolivia can take better advantage of the U.S. market.'' Colombian trade minister Jorge Humberto Botero said President Alvaro Uribe - Washington's staunchest ally in the region - was expected to appeal to President Bush during meetings Wednesday at the White House to restart stalled trade talks with Ecuador.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5885006,00.html

[Pavulon]

1. Reality Check

Hugo didn't promise enough oil money to get his way.

Bolivia relies on its neighbors to transfer gas and is not making ridiculous profit at the pumps.

The US economy and trade are integral parts of SA. Even Hugo uses citgo profits to buy ak's and various other crappy weapons.

[Peace Patriot]

2. Why make these negative comments on Chavez, when you know that

the Bush junta is doing everything it can to "divide and conquer" South American countries, and this region in particular? Do you have some special knowledge or information to share about Chavez and Morales' relationship that would support your statement that their friendly relations are based solely on oil money? That are quite compatible politically, and have been very friendly. Your statement also implies an entirely monetary motive on Morales' part. Is this based on anything? Is it fair?

And do you think it's a good thing that the Bush junta may have disrupted Andean unity?

That the "US economy and trade are integral parts of SA" has brought enormous harm to South American people and the environment--including a severe divide between tiny rich elites and vast populations of extremely poor people, exploitation and destruction of natural resources with no benefit to the people, and widespread torture and death in the defense of US financial interests. You call this a "reality check." Some reality.

I tend to agree with Chavez--and with Simon Bolivar--that the Andean countries should never have been split up by colonial borders, and should unite--or at least closely cooperate--to completely reject the vicious "free piracy" model of US-based global corporate predators, and to resist US/Bush interference, including our death squads in Columbia, the fomenting of coups against democratically elected governments, the illegal, Bush Congress funding of South American rightwing political parties and candidates, and other outrages.

Like the corporate news monopolies, you personalize these issues, and do so in a particularly demeaning way, by calling the president of Venezuela "Hugo." I'm surprised you didn't add "self-styled leftist."

I am bothered by your lack of thoughtfulness, and your easy, snide dismissal of the hopes and dreams of millions of Venezuelans, and of all of the poor in the Andean region. Your remarks are superficial and smart alecky. Did it never occur to you that Morales may be under tremendous pressure and threat, or that it is nearly the sole purpose of the Bushites in this region to isolate Hugo Chavez,--who has been such an outspoken critic of Bush and his heinous war on Iraq, and who provides such a strong example of what governments should be doing for their people--so that he can be more freely gotten rid of? Or do you have some sort of illusion that the Bushites are out to benefit the people of the Andes?

I fear that this story may be a sad one--of the Bushites successfully driving a wedge between Venezuela and Bolivia, and bolstering the power of the terrible government in Columbia, as well as supporting the most corrupt politician in Peru. It MAY not be. But it would certainly fit the pattern of previous US imperialism in South America, and in particular of the Bush junta's ill motives, thievery, and bullying, and its fascist views of workers and the poor, at home and abroad. They are up to no good, is a fairly safe surmise. And I only hope that Evo Morales knows what he's doing. He strikes me as a smart man, and certainly a heartfelt one, if a somewhat inexperienced politician.

[Judi Lynn]

3. Excellent oberservations, as always, Peace Patriot.I've heard, by the way,

it's the _Bush administration's plan to go after Evo Morales, picking away at his inexperience. I believe I heard that there is a move on to work on his senior military officers. (As you know, _Bush is withdrawing funds which used to go to the Bolivian military, by about 90%, with the small trickle remaining to send more Bolivian officers to the School of the Americas, or its new preposterous name, at Ft. Benning, Ga.) It would be something important to watch for in the time ahead.

[Bacchus39]

4. reality check revisited

Pavulon got it dead right. calling Chavez "Hugo" was a euphemism. He could have used idiot, lunatic, power monger, bird brain, jackass, pendejo, cabron, and a variety of other more accurate terms.

the Andean bloc nations were pursuing their own interests outside of the Andean bloc trade interests. It is a sovereign nation's right to negotiate with whomever they please. Bolivia could use trade with the US market as they do not have the oil reserves that Venezuela. Chavez can afford to be a prick. Chavez left the Andean bloc for no other reason than Colombia and Peru signed a trade agreement with the US. Chavez broke off relations with Peru because his candidate did not win.

Gran Colombia dissolved within a decade of forming. you have a utopian naive view of how latin america "should" be but never was.

[ugarte]

5. "Bolivia could use trade with the US market"???

Average Bolivians don't seem to share your opinion, and they're probably in a position to know. How exactly have US corporations benefitted Bolivia?

There is a difference between trade and colonialist domination.

[Bacchus39]

7. seems to me Bolivia is choosing its own course

and will decide what type of relationship they want with the US. and whether or not they choose to remain in the Andean bloc WITHOUT Venezuela.

Those are Bolivia's decisions wouldn't you agree? whether or not Hugo likes it.

[ugarte]

8. Why do Americans like to personalize everything? It's not about "Hugo"

Chavez and Morales both represent majority opinion in their countries and will agree more often than they disagree. Why blow up a single issue as a defeat for Chavez, ergo a victory for Bush?

[Bacchus39]

9. how is it a victory for Bush?

latin american countries making their own policies? its Hugo that has a problem with that.

now, I would agree that it is a defeat for Chavez who has in fact personlized the issues. Saying that they would break relations with Peru if Garcia won. Pulling out of the Andean Bloc because Colombia and Peru signed agreements with the US.

[ugarte]

10. And you think Bush doesn't have a problem with Latin Americans

making their own policies?? Really?? And the US had nothing to do with that little coup against democratically-elected Chavez? Or trying to prevent sovereign Venezuela from buying weapons abroad?

You say you believe in sovereignty, so I assume you would condemn such cases of US interference.

[Bacchus39]

11. yep, and Venezuela's interference in other countries affairs as well

comprendes chamo??

[ugarte]

12. No, hombre, desdichadamente no soy chamo

y no vengo a buscar bronca si tu lo eres. Solo estuve en la tierra soÑada de Venezuela una vez, mucho antes de Chávez, que entiendo que pa' ti es un caso perdido que mandas a la mierda, pero hay que esperarle un toque. En cierto aspectos Chávez es un perro callejero, pero mas le vale para culear con los Bushistas, verdad? Lo único cierto es que hay milliones de venezolanos/latinoamericanos resentidos y hambrientos por la justicia, y si no fuera Chávez la voz de ellos, sería otro por el estilo.

Chaito. Later.

[ugarte]

6. Reality check: US standing in Latin America has never been lower

Blame Chavez if you want, but he doesn't exist in a vacuum. His positions and opinions are really in the mainstream of what milliions of Latin Americans think of Bush and the US agenda.