Argentina, Brazil pledge joint projects

[Judi Lynn]

Argentina, Brazil pledge joint projects
Published: Feb. 1, 2011 at 6:14 PM

BUENOS AIRES, Feb. 1 (UPI) -- Brazil's nuclear and security industries are set to benefit from new agreements signed after a summit between Presidents Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and Brazil's recently inaugurated President Dilma Rousseff.

Brazilian security industries are aiming to expand their markets in Latin America and beyond as part of a multibillion-dollar defense regeneration program. Argentina last year announced plans to build a new nuclear power reactor to meet rising demand for electricity. This week's agreements ensure a sizeable share of the work on the reactor and other nuclear power projects going to Brazilian industries.

Both leaders emphasized the "special" strategic ties between erstwhile rivals and announced plans to forge closer integration of their economies. Trade turnover between the two sides exceeds $30 billion a year and is weighted in favor of Brazil to an annual total of about $4 billion.

Rousseff said her first foreign visit since being sworn in a month ago highlighted the special relationship that exists between the two countries.

More:
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-Industry/2011/02/01/Argentina-Brazil-pledge-joint-projects/UPI-55241296602076/

[Judi Lynn]

1. Brazil President Meets with Plaza de Mayo Mothers in Buenos Aires

Brazil President Meets with Plaza de Mayo Mothers in Buenos Aires
2011 - February 2011
Written by Newsroom
Tuesday, 01 February 2011 13:55

Brazilian president Dilma Rousseff in her first overseas trip as chief of state ratified in Buenos Aires the "special strategic" relation with Argentina while her counterpart Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, CFK, called for an "increased productive integration" between the two leading Mercosur partners.

"It was not a casual decision to pick Argentina as my first foreign destination," said President Rousseff who added, "I'm here to promote our nations' relationship and make it stronger than ever in both their commercial, political and cultural ties."

Rousseff underlined the roles that Brazil and Argentina must play for the transformation of Latin America in the current century, "we are the two countries with the largest GDP in the region and we have a great potential that Latin America must take advantage off." She mentioned specifically agriculture, energy and industry.

The Brazilian president, who was sworn in only a month ago, also talked during her five hours visit about joint undertakings with Argentina and mentioned the bi-national Garabí hydroelectric dam.

More:
http://www.brazzilmag.com/component/content/article/95-february-2011/12489-brazil-president-meets-with-plaza-de-mayo-mothers-in-buenos-aires.html

[Peace Patriot]

2. These are momentous developments in South America

--The ascendance of these two powerful leftist female leaders in a region where the the fascist "strong men" and their allies in the Catholic hierarchy's "boy's club" grievously oppressed women and consigned them to chattel roles.

--Continuance of the leftist policy of cooperation, integration, social justice and South American independence of which Chavez and the Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela were the pioneers.

--This social, political and economic revolution persisting over two successive administrations in these big, powerful, influential countries, Brazil and Argentina.

--The strong turn away from petty squabbling, macho posturing, predatory competition and fascist nationalism by which Latin American countries have been so "divide and conquerable" lo these many decades--a change begun by Chavez, Nestor Kirchner, Lula and Michele Batchelet (Chile) and that is, herein, clearly getting another boost with the Rousseff-Fernandez alliance.

Our multinational corporate monsters and war profiteers must be tearing their hair out in anguish over this leftist, democratic, South American independence movement--a movement of historic importance that our dull-minded, stuck-in-the mud policy-makers have been unable to sabotage, for all their "dirty tricks," coup plotting and expenditure of billions of our tax dollars to destroy other peoples' democracies. Cristina Fernandez has been a target of their savage tactics, has held firm and fought back. I'm sure she had a thing or two to tell Dilma in their private conversations.

It is so awesome to see these leaders, starting with Chavez, fight back, but even more than this, brilliantly analyze what has been wrong--how they have been divided from one another--and take so many important concrete, far thinking actions to completely change the political/economic landscape of the region. This has been just about the only bright spot in the world for over a decade. It contains profound lessons for those of us in the U.S. and other places who are suffering from and struggling against Corporate Rule and most especially U.S. corporate war in all its aspects--war on the poor, massive looting of "the commons," vicious dismantling of the "New Deal," crippling assaults on democracy and infliction of mass murder and oppression on others.

The three lessons that I keep citing are: 1) honest, transparent elections (we've lost that here), 2) grass roots organization (just getting started) and 3) think big. The changes needed are not small and people shouldn't think in terms of settling for less than thorough reform. Sometimes you have to "settle for less," strategically, but you should never give up articulating and seeking the biggest reforms, aimed at the best democracy and the best life for all.

But I'm sure there are more lessons to be learned from this leftist democracy revolution in Latin America. We need to be picking these out and talking about them--and looking forward--and fighting the tendency of the rightwing to take over discussions, on the basis of corpo-fascist 'news' items. The whole Chavez/anti-Chavez thing often takes place, here at DU, on corpo-fascist 'news' terms. Chavez did this. Chavez did that. I've often tried to widen the discussion, first of all to include the people of Venezuela, who have elected and re-elected the Chavez government and will likely do so for a third term (like our FDR); and second of all, to address policy issues in a reform context, for instance, explaining the "Fairness Doctrine" that we used to have here--that the corporations don't have any "right" to use the PUBLIC airwaves and were obliged to provide politically neutral news coverage and balanced political opinion. People FORGET this--or never knew it--in discussions of Chavez and RCTV (which was not just wildly far rightwing, but actively participated in a rightwing coup attempt). And the problem--corporate control of all news/discussion--is not just in Venezuela; it is HERE.

Anyway, in reading an article like this, from Brazil magazine, that is so packed with momentous changes, we need to unpack them and understand their importance and history. I've mentioned four of them, above. I want to quote the article to discuss several more.

---------------------------

(Rousseff) also recalled former Argentine president Nestor Kirchner's commitment to Unasur and the consolidation of regional integration through Mercosur, and mentioned the fact Argentina and Brazil, as members of the powerful G 20 are involved in the defense of the interests of Latin America.

Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner described the summit as a continuation of the commitment from their predecessors (Nestor Kirchner and Lula da Silva) "which marked an end to the existing differences between our countries and built for the first time a bilateral relation that has prospered and must be deepened."

Further on she called for "greater productive integration" between Argentina and Brazil underlining that "our destiny and that of the region are indissolubly united to that of Brazil and vice versa, and from now even more."

Mrs. Kirchner said that the current century is signaled by three different issues: food, energy to sustain economic growth and scientific development and the partnership with Brazil in the three areas is strategically crucial for both countries. "The world changed completely in 2008, and this offers the region a unique opportunity."

http://www.brazzilmag.com/component/content/article/95-february-2011/12489-brazil-president-meets-with-plaza-de-mayo-mothers-in-buenos-aires.html

-------------------------

The last first. "The world changed completely in 2008." I assume that Fernandez de Kirchner was talking about the formalization of UNASUR in summer 2008. Do you agree, Judi? The article is not entirely clear. There were SO MANY things that happened that year--including the end of the Bush Junta, and the roll out of the U.S./world bankster looting plot. And there were several momentous events swirling around UNASUR's creation, the most notable being that its very first action was to support Evo Morales in Bolivia after he threw the U.S. ambassador out for colluding with the white separatist insurrection. UNASUR's support was decisive, with the key players being Chile (esp. Michele Batchelet, leftist prez of Chile and first head of UNASUR), Brazil, Argentine and Venezuela, all with leftist presidents. Another was the Bush Junta's reconstitution of the US 4th Fleet in the Caribbean, which Lula da Silva said was "a threat to Brazil's oil" (not just Venezuela's), with Brazil then proposing a "common defense" under UNASUR's auspices.

Then there are the events at the beginning of 2008--the U.S./Colombia destroying all hope of a peaceful end to Colombia's 70 year civil war, with the U.S./Colombia bombing/raid against a FARC peace camp just inside Ecuador's border. These leaders took that matter to the Rio Group because UNASUR hadn't yet been formalized. There they extracted a promise from Colombia's treacherous little Bush rat, Alvaro Uribe, never to do such a thing again. But that wasn't the end of it. Uribe then began accusing Chavez and Ecuador's Rafael Correa of being "terrorist lovers"--a charge he publicly leveled at EVERYONE who opposed him in Colombia. It was clear that Colombia's civil war was being used by the U.S. to embed its war profiteering in South America and to stir up anger, aggression, violence and all-out war. A tumultuous year, 2008, and the overarching matter at issue was South American unity vs disunity.

Since Fernandez de Kirchner was inaugurated as president of Argentina in the midst of these events, early in the year, and was passionately involved in them, she is probably referring to the whole lengthy drama, at the end of which Bolivian democracy was saved, and South America confirmed on a unity path. "All for one and one for all."

The first bold-faced item above--"the defense of the interest of Latin America" (though it's not in quotes, I presume that's what Rousseff said)--is also momentous. The "raising all boats" philosophy--of which Chavez and the Venezuelans were the pioneers (first of all, in their extension of credit to Argentina, to help them out of ruinous World Bank/IMF debt and policy)--is solidified in these words. Brazil is not out for itself alone. Its business interests and prosperity are intricately linked and dependent upon the success of its Latin American neighbors. This is pure Chavez. This was HIS idea--or rather, his and his government's and his peoples'. This IS the Bolivarian Revolution and it is now everyone's policy--or the policy of the leftist leadership, which dominates the region. There may be saboteurs heading some governments, at the moment (Colombia, Peru, Chile?) and within all these countries (notably Brazil's rightwing), but this policy is now firmly set, for generations to come, I would think. This is the policy that can make this Latin America's century--its realization of its long held dream of democracy and prosperity for the region, without U.S. corporations/banksters' continual ravaging of their resources, enslavement of their workers and brutal destruction of democratic governments. Unity was the key. And that began with Chavez and Nestor Kirchner, followed swiftly by the Chavez/Lula da Silva alliance, then other leftist leaders getting elected and joining in the new alliance for a future of cooperation and social justice.

I have another question for you, Judi. And that has to do with Mercosur. ("...Nestor Kirchner's commitment to Unasur and the consolidation of regional integration through Mercosur...".) I don't really understand the relationship between UNASUR and MERCOSUR. For one thing, Mercosur does not include all South American countries, whereas Unasur does. Mercosur is specifically a trade group. Unasur is more like the European Union--an overarching political, policy and governance institution. Venezuela has been excluded from Mercosur--or is still only a candidate member--as I understand it, due to rightwing saboteurs in Brazil's legislature operating against Lula da Silva's policies (pro-Venezuela). Yet Paraguay is a member of Mercosur, which only recently achieved the election of an advocate of the people after 60 years of heinous rightwing rule. Paraguay is much smaller, much poorer, much less democratic and much less influential than Venezuela (and also much more likely to revert to undemocratic rightwing rule--rule by the rich elite). How can serious trade integration proceed without Venezuela? How come Paraguay is a member of Mercosur and not Venezuela? (--I mean the real reason, not rightwing bullshit generated by the USAID/CIA.) If trade integration is a key goal of the region, why aren't all countries members, as in Unasur? And, is there any plan to integrate these two institutions?

A lot of questions, I know, but I'm laying them out here not necessarily to get them answered right away, but because you are such an incredible researcher and have such an amazing encyclopedia of information about Latin America. I'm just suggesting some things to look out for.

I take it as a very good omen that Rousseff and Fernandez have met, so early, and have articulated their commitment to unity, and to defending the interest of Latin America. I wonder if Rousseff will be able to accomplish what Lula da Silva could not--full integration of Venezuela into Mercosur. The rest of the region owes Venezuela/the Chavez government so much--as Lula da Silva acknowledged in many different ways. Rousseff doesn't have (or doesn't yet have) da Silva's astonishing approval rating (80%) but she has a lot of political power as leader of the biggest economy in Latin America. Brazil is on a roll. Surely she can get this done. And I would think that expansion of Mercosur is key to the success of Unasur and that they will eventually be brought together under one South American umbrella, with every country as a member and every country having greater trade opportunities among all of them. Trade has proceeded more on a bilateral than multi-lateral basis. Brazil with China. Venezuela with China. Venezuela with Argentina. Brazil with Argentina. Brazil with Venezuela. Etc. I would think that an overall trade policy would be beneficial, for one thing to rein in predatory instincts of business that might harm a particular Latin American country. But I know that Latin Americans are wary of EU-type centralization of economic policy--and what's going on in Europe now, with bankster looting, is not inspiring.

Chavez, Kirchner, da Silva have set the direction. Now these women will have special responsibility for making it work, long term. Sounds like they are well aware of this, and are into the details, making this dream of cooperation ever more real. It is something to watch. I am envious, as a citizen of a country that has gone way off in the wrong direction--away from democracy, equality, cooperation and peace. But this bright spot on the world landscape gives me hope. If Latin America can recover, so magnificently, from all that it has been through--often at the bloody hands of our own government--perhaps we can, too.

[Judi Lynn]

3. I wondered what Fernandez meant concerning 2008, also, as soon as I saw it.

Some of the events in 2008 were so large, so abruptly hostile they were points of no return, as there would be no way whatsoever things could go back to "normal" after they occurred, like the events you mentioned, including the invasion of sovereign Ecuadorean ground and the bombing thereof with US assistance, the Rio Group meeting, bypassing U.S. input altogether to settle an enormously explosive situation.

Also remembered the Bolivian tv crew following U.S. ambassador Phillip Goldberg (after the Fulbright scholar, Peace Corps worker testified he was directed to work also as a spy against Venezuelan and Cuban doctors, engineers, etc. in Bolivia, and report to the U.S. embassy on them) as his entourage sped through the streets of Santa Cruz after midnight to a clandestine meeting with the racist separatist right-wing oligarchy there, and the publication of Goldberg standing with a Colombian right-wing paramilitary leader, the massacre at Pando, and the Unasur meeting called instantly to form a statement of unity with Evo Morales, and a warning that their perception it was the opening of a plan to separate from Bolivia' with the warning they would NOT be doing business with any of the parties involved, no one but the elected government of Evo Morales, the official elected government, not a coup government, etc., etc., etc.

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_-2gzvwbdWy4/Si-r-smsDRI/AAAAAAAACbw/lpmZjjZbDYw/UNASUR+summit2.jpeg
Not sure how realistic it is, but I believe UNASUR is the political, social, defense group for Latin American countries, and MERCOSUR is strictly trade-focused. Not so well informed on this, yet, haven't had the time to read as much as needed.

I was surprised to learn Paraguay's assembly also is providing resistance to Venezuela concerning Mercosur, just like Brazil's. As we know, both countries were controlled by ruthless, powerful right-wings using terror, torture, and murder against their people to control them for many painful years.

Paraguay lived under the murderous domination of a man known to literally harbor Nazis post WWII, Afredo Stroessner, who stayed in power for 30 years with total U.S. blessings throughout. They couldn't have loved him more. No one broke the grip of the tyrannical Colorado Party there for over 45 years, until President Fernando Lugo finally was elected, himself and his own biological family, brothers and father having been targeted, imprisoned, tortured, Fernando exiled.

Brazil, as we know, suffered from the same monstrous right-wing barbarity itself for a very long time, and remnants of that group of primitive, brutal people still dominate their own legislature, where Venezuelan acceptance at MERCOSUR is still taking a beating.

The right-wing, which kept the continent paralyzed with fear for decades, is going through the death-throes now, and not going easily, but it's god damned well going to go.

Each step forward from bondage to the right-wing in Latin America has been fought tooth-and-toenail, and with full US assistance, and the utter slavish servitude of the communications media, usually controlled throughout the Americas by the right-wing anyway, even here.

I would think each step forward achieved, however, is a matter of such deep satisfaction, and pride. The horrendous beating democracy took in South America in 2008 may have also, while testing severely, also strengthened the ability of the left to build the unity, and focus needed for the job ahead. The trials may very well have, after all, succeeded in strengthening the cause of the people and their elected representatives in the Presidencies, and the legislatures.

The example of the pounding Morales took resulted in a unanimous (other than Colombia, of course) assertion of support, complete support, unfailing support from the democratic states. Each step forward like that also served the interests of a growing unity among the new leaders who are SO well informed by their own lives on the perversity, and evil of the right-wing, and the necessity of keeping them away from gaining total power again.

It's possible a lot of stuff has happened in communication among the leaders we haven't heard, or read, also. I'd really love to know what specific thing she was thinking of when she said that.

[Judi Lynn]

4. Kicking.

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: