Here is a letter in support of the Uruwera 17, from Guadalupe Venegas Reyes, sister of Oaxaqueño anarchist political prisoner David Venegas.

We as oaxaqueños (people of Oaxaca) know perfectly about what moves a people to organize to demand justice and respect. We suffer represion from a mafia network of minor politicians who are protected by a system that is malfunctioning and useless to the people.

Nevertheless in the middle of so much blood spilled by our fallen brothers, to even to think of that pain, we feel, the majority of this people, that it is worthwhile to fight for being free of body but above all of thought and ideal. I energetically join the peoples of the world who are against the selective raids that the government of this country (New Zealand) carried out against people that think differently and correctly.

A NO to racism, disappearances, unjust judgments, entire families pursued, and NO NO NO to all the arbitrary decisions that politicians make in the name of power.

Justice for all the people, justice.

Guadalupe Venegas Reyes
sister of a political prisoner (David Venegas) in Oaxaca, Mexico

Who is this man?
*
David Venegas Reyes is a young 24-year old Oaxacan student at the University of Chapingo. He is an APPO council member representing some of the largest barricades that carried on the resistance during the long months of the intense struggle of the Oaxacan people.

In recent months, as a result of his independent position and his refusal to demand “crumbs” or positions of power from the government of the state of Oaxaca or the political parties, he was accused of trying to divide the movement, when all he really wanted was a space in which all the different points of view of the Oaxacan people would be respected and in which one would not prevail over the other.

Due to the lack of a space that could bring art and culture together with the resistance of peoples, collectives, individuals and groups struggling for autonomy as an alternative to the current political system, at the end of February, David, along with many other people, built an organization called “VOCAL: Voces Oaxaqueñas Construyendo Autonomía Y Libertad (Oaxacan Voices Creating Freedom and Autonomy)”. Part of the work that VOCAL took on was to accompany the families of people who had fallen in the struggle in a walk with crosses through Santa Lucía del Camino, where policemen killed the Indymedia comrade Brad Will. David actively contributed to this activity.

VOCAL works with peoples in resistance in the Mixteca as well as in Oaxaca’s Isthmus (La Venta, Zanatepéc, Santo Domingo Petapa), the central valley region known as Valles Centrales (Zaachila), and in other communities and organizational spaces. This enabled David to carry the art, information, and voice of the barricades to other places in resistance.

Samhain

[Thanks to Brett and Anonymous and Kevin for this post]

Samhain marks one of the two great doorways of the Celtic year, for the Celts divided the year into two seasons: the light and the dark, at Beltane on May 1st and Samhain on November 1st. Some believe that Samhain was the more important festival, marking the beginning of a whole new cycle, just as the Celtic day began at night. For it was understood that in dark silence comes whisperings of new beginnings, the stirring of the seed below the ground. Whereas Beltane welcomes in the summer with joyous celebrations at dawn, the most magically potent time of this festival is November Eve, the night of October 31st, known today of course, as Halloween.

Samhain (Scots Gaelic: Samhuinn) literally means “summer's end.” In Scotland and Ireland, Halloween is known as Oíche Shamhna, while in Wales it is Nos Calan Gaeaf, the eve of the winter's calend, or first. With the rise of Christianity, Samhain was changed to Hallowmas, or All Saints' Day, to commemorate the souls of the blessed dead who had been canonized that year, so the night before became popularly known as Halloween, All Hallows Eve, or Hollantide. November 2nd became All Souls Day, when prayers were to be offered to the souls of all who the departed and those who were waiting in Purgatory for entry into Heaven. Throughout the centuries, pagan and Christian beliefs intertwine in a gallimaufry of celebrations from Oct 31st through November 5th, all of which appear both to challenge the ascendancy of the dark and to revel in its mystery.

Evo Morales Announces: "No More Bolivian Soldiers to the SOA/WHINSEC!"

[Thanks to Catharine for this post]

We are very excited to share that on October 10th, 2007, President Evo Morales announced that Bolivia will gradually withdraw its military from the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation (WHINSEC), renamed in 2001 the School of the Americas (SOA). Bolivia is now the fifth country - after Costa Rica, Argentina, Uruguay and Venezuela - to formally announce a withdrawal from this brutal military training school.

"We will gradually withdraw until there are no Bolivian officers attending the School of the Americas” said Morales. Questioning the U.S. government foreign policy he noted that “they are teaching high ranking officers to confront their own people, to identify social movements as their enemies.”

This is a great victory for torture survivors, social movement leaders and human rights activists of Bolivia and the Americas. The SOA/WHINSEC has played a significant role in Bolivia’s recent political history, Hugo Banzer Suarez, who ruled Bolivia from 1971-1978 under a brutal military dictatorship attended the school in 1956 and was later inducted into the school’s “hall of fame” in 1988. The SOA has trained tens of thousands of Bolivian military officers in the past fifty years. In October of 2006, two former graduates of the SOA/WHINSEC, Generals Juan Veliz Herrera and Gonzalo Rocabado Mercado were arrested on charges of torture, murder, and violation of the constitution for their responsibility in the death of 67 civilians in El Alto Bolivia during the “Gas Wars” of September-October 2003.

...

Chilean President Michelle Bachelet Gives Poor Families Books

posted by birdie

As reported in The Economist, the President of Chile, a medical doctor and breath of fresh air after the cruel rule of Gen. Augusto Pinochet, has instituted a project to give a box of nine books to over 400,000 impoverished families. Her choices, among others, are Kafka's "Metamorphosis" and Salinger's "Catcher in the Rye".

In today's The Lede (blog) from the New York Times...If You Had to Pick Nine Books...you are welcome to view other reader's opinions, and offer your own choices if you so desire. What would you choose?

The Bank of the South: An Alternative to IMF and World Bank Dominance

by Stephen Lendman

In July, 2004, the IMF and World Bank commemorated the 60th anniversary of their founding at Bretton Woods, NH to provide a financial framework of assistance for the postwar world after the expected defeat of Germany and Japan. With breathtaking hypocrisy, an October, 2004 Development Committee Communiqué stated: "As we celebrate the 60th anniversary of the Bretton Woods Institutions....we recommit ourselves to supporting efforts by developing countries to pursue sustainable growth, sound macroeconomic policies, debt sustainability, open trade, job creation, poverty reduction and good governance." Phew.

In fact, for 63 hellish years, both these institutions achieved mirror opposite results on everything the above comment states. From inception, their mission was to integrate developing nations into the Global North-dominated world economy and use debt repayment as the way to transfer wealth from poor countries to powerful bankers in rich ones.

The scheme is called debt slavery because new loans are needed to service old ones, indebtedness rises, and borrowing terms stipulate harsh one-way "structural adjustment" provisions that include:

-- privatizations of state enterprises;

-- government deregulation;

-- deep cuts in social spending;

-- wage freezes or cuts;

-- unrestricted free market access for foreign corporations;

-- corporate-friendly tax cuts;

-- crackdowns on trade unionists; and

-- savage repression for non-believers under a system incompatible with social democracy.

Everywhere the scheme is the same: huge public wealth transfers to elitist private hands, exploding public debt, an ever-widening disparity between the super-rich and desperate poor, and an aggressive nationalism to justify huge spending on security for aggressive surveillance, mass incarceration plus repression and torture for social control.

An Alternative to Debt Slavery - The Bank of the South

Last December, Hugo Chavez announced his idea for a Banco del Sur, or Bank of the South, as part of his crusade against the institutions of international capital he calls "tools of Washington." The bank will be officially launched at a presidential November 3 summit in Caracas, where it's to be headquartered, with seven founding member-states - Venezuela, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Ecuador.

On October 12, Colombia's President Alvaro Uribe announced his nation agreed to become the eighth member but said "The decision is not a rejection to the World Bank or Inter-American Development Bank, but a sign of solidarity and fraternity towards the South American community." At this time, only four South American states aren't included - Chile, Peru, Guyana and Surinam, but Chile seems likely to come aboard following Colombia's lead, and the others may decide to join them.

Finance ministers from the founding countries met in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil October 8 to finalize the Bank's Founding Document. Many key operating issues have yet to be resolved, but unofficial information was that each nation will commit 10% of its international reserves and have equal oversight over the new institution. In a concluding news conference, Brazilian finance minister Guido Mantega stated: the participating countries "have been able to overcome all obstacles that were in the way of an understanding around the formation of the Bank of the South. We can now say that the (bank) is close to becoming a reality" even though Brazil (Latin America's largest economy) hasn't yet formalized its entry.

Venezuelan finance minister Rodrigo Cabeza explained the bank will help develop the region by offering South Americans more credits. It's being "created to build a new architecture that assumes an improved relationship of the bank and its capacity to offer credits for its people." It also aims to increase liquidity and revive socioeconomic development and infrastructure investments in participating countries and keep them outside the restrictive control of the IMF and World Bank that are fast losing influence and being phased out of the region.

In 2005, 80% of IMF's $81 billion loan portfolio was to Latin America. Today, it's 1% with nearly all its $17 billion in outstanding loans to Turkey and Pakistan. The World Bank is also being rejected. Venezuela had already paid off its IMF and World Bank debt ahead of schedule when Hugo Chavez symbolically announced on April 30: "We will no longer have to go to Washington nor to the IMF nor to the World Bank, not to anyone." Ecuador's Raphael Correa is following suit. He cleared his country's IMF debt, suspended World Bank loans, accused the WB of trying to extort money from him when he was economy and finance minister in 2005, and last April declared the Bank's country representative persona non grata in an extraordinary diplomatic slap in the face.

The Banco del Sur will replace these repressive institutions with $7 billion in startup capital when it begins operating in 2008. It will be under "a new financial architecture" for regional investment with the finance ministers of each member nation sitting on the bank's administrative council with equal authority over its operations as things now stand. Venezuelan Finance Minister Rodrigo Cabeza stressed the banks Latin roots saying: "The idea is to rely on a development agency for us, led by us" to finance public and private development and regional integration projects. He added: "There will not be credit subjected to economic policies. There will not be credit that produces a calamity for our people and as a result, it will not be a tool of domination" like the international lending agencies.

Hugo Chavez's vision is to liberate the region's countries from IMF, World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank (IBD) control that condemn millions to poverty through their lending practices. Helped by windfall oil profits, his government is already doing it with an unprecendented commitment to provide financial aid and below-market priced oil to regional and other countries. So far this year, it's on the order of around $9 billion, and, unlike the Washington-controlled kind, it comes at low cost and with good will, a cooperative spirit and few if any strings.

Nobel laureate economist Joseph Stiglitz recognizes Chavez's efforts and stated his support for the Banco del Sur on an October 10 visit to Caracas. He said "One of the advantages of having a Bank of the South is that it would reflect the perspectives of those in the South (while in contrast IMF and World Bank conditions) hinder (regional) development effectiveness."

Stiglitz met with Hugo Chavez on his visit and praised his redistributive social policies. He also criticized Washington Consensus neoliberal practices that exploit the regions' people, "undermin(e)....Andean cooperation, and it is part of the American strategy of divide and conquer, a strategy trying to get as much of the benefits for American companies" at the expense of the region and its people.

Venezuela's acting ambassador to the Permanent Mission to the UN, Aura Mahuampi Rodriguez de Ortiz, warned the world body about Latin American debt during her participation in the General Debate on Macroeconomic Policies in October. She stressed: "The persistence of the foreign debt of the developing countries affects negatively on its process of development. It is not worthy to direct resources for the development of poor countries if such resources end up directed to the payment of the foreign debt" instead of going to economic development internally. She also spoke of the new Bank of the South, how it will help strengthen regional integration and also fairly distribute investments and finance projects to reduce poverty and social exclusion.

A less publicized Bank of ALBA (Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas) will also begin operating by year end under "a new regional financial architecture under principles that create a new form of channeling financial resources" to its four country alliance - Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia and Nicaragua.

Chavez first proposed ALBA as an alternative to the Free Trade of the Americas (FTAA) in 2001 with Venezuela, Cuba and Bolivia its original members in December, 2004. Nicaragua then joined the alliance in January, 2007 under its newly elected president, Daniel Ortega, who signed on as his first act in office. ALBA's goal is ambitious. It's the comprehensive integration of the region and development of its "the social state" for all its people. It's boldly based on member states complementarity, not competition; solidarity, not domination; cooperation, not exploitation; and respect for each participating nation's sovereign right to be free from the grip of other countries and corporate giants.

In April, the 5th ALBA summit was held in Caracas to discuss ways to improve the alliance. Initiatives covered included a Permanent (coordinating) Secretariat and a plan to create 12 public companies to be co-managed by ALBA member states. Its goal is to strengthen key economic sectors in areas of energy, agriculture, telecommunications, infrastructure, industrial supplies and cement production. ALBA country foreign ministers then agreed in June to create a development Bank of ALBA to help finance these ventures with low-cost credit. It will complement the Banco del Sur and also be headquartered in Caracas.

Uncertain Future Prospects

Socially responsible regional banks, like those discussed above, will challenge the dominant institutions of finance capital if they fulfill their promise. But therein lies the problem. These new institutions aren't panaceas, and they may end up letting capital interests exploit them for their own advantage. In addition, financial autonomy alone won't free the region from Washington's grip without greater change. What's needed are sweeping nationalizations of basic industries, an end to one-way WTO-style trade deals, socially redistributing national resources, developing local economies, achieving land and housing reform plus a sweeping commitment to social equity and a resolve to end a 25 year neoliberal nightmare. From 1960 to 1980, the region's per capita income growth was 82%. From 1980 to 2000, however, it was 9%, and from 2000 to 2005 only 4%. For the region, it meant sweeping poverty, inequality and the most extreme disparity between the super-rich and desperate poor in the world.

Change is needed, and Venezuela under Hugo Chavez has done most in the region to achieve it. Finance Minister Rodrigo Cabezas just presented his government's 2008 budget to the National Assembly that allocates 46% of it to social spending. It devotes special attention to health and education but also to subsidized and free food, land reform, housing, micro credit, job training, cooperatives and more as Chavez continues to use his nation's resources to address the needs of his people. Since he took office, social spending per person is up more than threefold and in 2006 was 20.9% of GDP.

Chavez now has an ally in Ecuador under Raphael Correa who's early efforts are promising. Hopefully, they'll continue under a new constitution to be drafted in the next six months and then put to a national referendum next year. Other Bank of the South founding countries like Brazil, Argentina and Bolivia, however, claim to be center-left but, in fact, embrace 1990s neoliberalism, and financial autonomy won't change that. The Bank of the South will only work if it fulfills a mandate to prioritize local needs and development, not corporate ones. That's a tall order, and achieving it won't be easy with its dominant member, Brazil under Lula, closely tied to Washington and in its grip.

Nonetheless, small signs of change are emerging, the Bank of the South may be one of them, and a new generation of leftist leaders may in the end break Washington's weakening (but still strong) hold on the region. That's the hope, and every step forward means more power to the people and another possible world.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

Also visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to The Steve Lendman News and Information Hour on TheMicroEffect.com Mondays at noon US central time.

Building a Global Southern Coalition: the competing approaches of Brazil’s Lula and Venezuela’s Chávez

To Our Readers

The following article, “Building a Global Southern Coalition: the competing approaches of Brazil’s Lula and Venezuela’s Chávez,” by COHA Senior Research Fellow Sean W. Burges, originally appeared in the Third World Quarterly Vol. 28, No. 7, 2007, pp. 1343-1358. From time to time, COHA issues scholarly articles by members of its intellectual community. Their viewpoints and interpretations we feel are of importance and deserve to be presented to fellow Latin Americanists–even though they may on occasion be at variance on certain points with the viewpoint of COHA’s editorial board. We welcome submissions on regional issues, such as addressed here by Dr. Burges, or on other inter-American subjects of concern to other scholars and activists.

ABSTRACT. This paper will set out the two very different regional leadership strategies being pursued by Brazil and Venezuela, concluding that it is the Brazilian neo-structuralist vision that will have more success than the Venezuelan overseas development aid approach. The two different approaches to Latin American leadership point to substantive difference in how the regional system should operate in geopolitical and geo-economic terms, with the Brazilians favouring market-oriented system in opposition to Venezuela’s statist option. Contestation for regional leadership as set out in the article emerges as an early indicator of chilling of relations between Brazil and Venezuela and points to future scenario where other regional states may be able to play off contending would-be leaders.

Read the full article in PDF format

This analysis was prepared by COHA Senior Research Fellow Sean W. Burges

Oventic 2

From: http://brodielewis.blogspot.com

We left Oventic last week. It has been an inspiring month. The class structure was that we had Spanish class five times a week, academic class twice (held in the Oventic café), and various activities throughout the week such as song night, where all of the group would get together with the five promoters and sing all of the revolutionary songs, like the Zapatista Hymn and De Colores.

Every Wednesday was a field trip of sorts. During the second week we visited Magdalena de la Paz, a local Zapatista Community. We happened to visit during a festival celebrating the patron saint f the town. These festivals are quite a spectacle. We walked around the town for an hour before lunch (the local junta insisted that we had to let them treat us to a lunch) and saw the various traditions. In one, local men dance around in a circle with all sorts of instruments and wearing all white clothing with ribbons of every color draped from their hats and sashes. This performance was punctuated by two very intoxicated men coming up o us and asking us who we were, and telling us how appy they were to receive us, and yet acting quite strange, and asking us over and over who we were there with and what we were doing. We found out later that only half of the town, at most, is Zapatista, and the other half, the Priistas, aren’t too happy with their presewnce. Apparently our two hosts were aware that most of the foreigners who visit the town are their to meet with the local Zapatista junta, which is a government that operates alongside the official Priista government.

Not long after this encounter we had the opportunity to meet with this Junta. All twenty of us piled into this simple yet brightly painted building, decorated inside with all sorts of Zapatista posters and hand written signs on cardboard reading “Democracia, Libertad, Justicia,” and illuminated by bare bulbs hanging from the open rafters. We were greeted by the whole junta, men and women of all ages, who represented all of the posts within the junta, and were welcomed with a traditional song on Mayan instruments, all twenty of us bouncing up and down and shaking maracas for what seemed like fifteen of the best minutes of my life. Every three or four minutes the song would stop, we would all look around, and for whatever reason the same song would start right back up again. This seemed so emblematic of the whole experience of interacting with the locals, where there seemed to be such a cultural divide that it was all we could do to grin and bear it and stop wondering why we never knew what was going on.
Our talk with the junta was another good example. The twenty of us were surrounded by the fifteen or so members of the junta, and we were told to give any questions we might have, so most of us managed to come up with one or two reasonably intelligent questions, which the junta dutifully wrote down and began to answer, but only after asking several times if we were sure we didn’t have more questions. There is, however, a particular style in which many of these questions are answered. First, the question is discussed in Tzotzil by the whole Junta, many of whom speak less Spanish than us. Then the spokesman answers, but in a very roundabout yet exhaustive manner.

Finally, after three hours of explication, we finished our original group of questions, and then the spokesperson began exhorting us to ask more questions, because that’s why they were there after all. However, more and more of his answers began to have references to our long-awaited lunch in them, and so finally Jennifer, one of the teachers, took this as a hint to stand up after another half hour of answers to suggest that we adjourn the meeting and go to lunch, upon which she instantly realized that she had not mastered the art of Mayan manners, as the spokesman looking totally insulted, apologized if he had wasted our time and begged us to forgive his long-windedness.

So then we went to lunch, which was served between to ramshackle huts a couple of blocks away, and we ate our soup with beef and tostadas as one of the junta members told us what a big deal it was to eat meat in this community, and how they normally have nothing more than some hot water with a bit of chile and lime in it, totally mortified that some members of the group had made a big deal out of the fact that their wasn’t a vegetarian option.

Luckily the next trip was much smoother. We visited another municipality, which was a last minute substitution for a visit to Polho. Polho is basically a refugee camp, home to some seven thousand displaced Chiapanecans who have been exiled from their communities, almost always by the local PRI government as retribution for their affiliation with the Zapatistas. They now live in this refugee camp, a sort of purgatory where they haven’t been able to start new lives, for the lack of land, but still feel they face to much repression to go back to their communities. To put it in perspective how much this affects the local communities, Oventic, as the local Zapatista center, containing all of the aforementioned programs like free healthcare and school, spends seventy percent of its budget every year supporting Polho. When the news came that we were not able to visit Polho, because of security concerns, we weren’t entirely sure if this was a bad thing. 16 de Febrero, the town we visited instead, is a serene little town at the base of the mountains where few speak Spanish, accessible only by foot, and they are just beginning to see what they can achieve themselves with the help of the Zapatistas. It was obviously not accustomed to foreigners, as everywhere we went there were local kids peering out from behind doorways and windows with their mouths agape. On a more personal note, 16 de Febrero’s most recent addition is a brown leather wallet, stuffed full of money and cards with the name Brodie Lewis emblazoned across them, tucked away somewhere in the dense foliage along the side of the road.

The day after this trip, we packed up our stuff, cleaned our little dormitories, and said good bye to the stray dogs and dog-sized spiders that had been our housemates, as well as the promoters, who informed us that they had wanted to come into San Cristobal with us, but had determined that the security risks didn’t warrant a frivolous trip into the city.

Living in a Zapatista community did a great deal to demystify Zapatismo to us, to show us the true faces of those fighting for something different, and to understand it without a veil of flowery language or romantic photographs. Interestingly, it did nothing to dissuade any of us from our adoration of the movement, and if anything all of us now feel a deeper truer connection to the movement having had this experience. There is a phrase that they use, caminar preguntando, which means, more or less, to ask questions along the way, to always question yourself, and your struggle. Seeing people who had dedicated their lives to struggle, such as the promoters who, while they have free room and board are provided with no other stipend, and have to ask the junta for things as small as toothbrushes and toothpaste, to see these people, so intimate with sacrifice, step back and actually listen to our questions and critiques, as a bunch of privileged american kids, was amazing. They internalize their ethics of rebellion to an extent that is almost unbelievable.

We are all sad to have to reenter the real world.

Posted by brodie

Costa Rican Banana Growers Form Fair Trade Cooperative

From democracynow.org

Bananas are the most popular fruit in the United States - you may have had one for breakfast today. But how did that banana get from the farmer in Latin America to your kitchen table?

The legacy of American banana corporations is a dark one. Earlier this year, Chiquita admitted to paying $1.7 million to a rightwing Colombian paramilitary group that is considered a terrorist organization by the US government. Chiquita is one of five major multinationals that dominate the US banana industry, controlling over 95% of the business.

However, there is an alternative to these corporate-controlled bananas that is growing in both producing and consuming countries.

In Costa Rica, Chiquita used to rule the banana trade until it pulled out in 1980 following a devastating hurricane. Some of its ex-workers joined together to form the Coopetrabasur cooperative. Together they purchased the Chiquita plantation, and now each of its 70 members own a piece of the land. As a Fair Trade banana producer, Coopetrabasur has developed measures to protect the environment, expand business, and improve the quality of life for its members.

Yocser Carranza Godoy is a banana farmer from Costa Rica. He is President of the worker-controlled cooperative called Coopetrabasur. Carlos Eugenio Vargas is a lawyer for Coopetrabasur and boardmember of Agrofair. They both join us in our firehouse studio.

• Carlos Eugenio Vargas, Lawyer for Coopetrabasur and board member of Agrofair.

• Yocser Carranza Godoy, Banana farmer from Costa Rica. He is President of the worker-controlled cooperative called Coopetrabasur.

AMY GOODMAN: We turn from the issue of immigration to the issue of fair trade and to bananas. Bananas are the most popular fruit in the United States. You may have had one for breakfast today. Well, how did that banana get from the farmer in South America to your kitchen table?

The legacy of American banana corporations is a dark one. Earlier this year, Chiquita admitted to paying $1.7 million to a rightwing Colombian paramilitary group that’s considered a terrorist organization by the US government. Chiquita is one of five major multinationals that dominate the US banana industry, controlling over 95% of the business.

However, there’s an alternative to these corporate-controlled bananas that are growing in both producing and consuming countries. In Costa Rica, Chiquita used to rule the banana trade until it pulled out in 1980, following a devastating hurricane. Some of its ex-workers joined together to form a cooperative. Together, they purchased the Chiquita plantation. Now, each of its seventy members own a piece of the land. As a Fair Trade banana producer, the cooperative has developed measures to protect the environment, expand business, improve the quality of life for its members.

We’re joined right now by Yocser [Carranza Godoy]. He is a banana farmer from Costa Rica, is president of the worker-controlled cooperative. Carlos Eugenio Vargas is a lawyer for the cooperative and a board member of Agrofair. They both join us in our studio. We welcome you both to Democracy Now!

Let us begin with you, Carlos. Explain the significance of what’s happened in Costa Rica.

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Well, you already started talking that -- we started twenty-eight years ago, when Chiquita left the lands, so the government, well, had in their hands a big trouble, because those farms were the only source of employ for the people there. So we faced something like a very small agro reform in the town. So that’s how we start. Ten years ago, we started with the fair trade, and that means a very important difference for our cooperative.

AMY GOODMAN: What’s the name of the cooperative?

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Coopetrabasur. Now, actually, we are two cooperatives in this town. We formed another cooperative. We now are working together, and we are proud to say that we have 200 -- more than 200 owners of the system. And, well, we are alive, because since 1997 we started working with fair trade, when in the region there was fifteen banana farms. Now there’s only one remaining there, and not only in the south of Costa Rica, as well in the north of Panama, because the big companies has left this area, and, you know, the consequences that this means.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you talk, Yocser, about your cooperative and how you sell your bananas? Yocser is being translated by Jennifer Godoy, whose family actually worked on a farm, a banana farm in Ecuador, and she grew up here, though, in the United States, in New Jersey. Yocser?

YOCSER CARRANZA GODOY: [translated] My cooperative, Coopetrabasur, has been able to sell their bananas behind the fair trade system. When we began to be a part of the fair trade system, we’ve been able to have access to markets. So me and my family [inaudible] are getting the benefits of having that access to markets, which was facilitated through fair trade.

AMY GOODMAN: So how does it work? How do the bananas come to the United States? How do people find fair trade bananas?

YOCSER CARRANZA GODOY: [translated] Right now, currently, the way that we’re trying to get our bananas to the US is through the company called OK USA, of which they’re also co-owners of. That’s the ownership [inaudible] of the company, so right now they're not bringing their bananas into the US, and only going to Europe through Agrofair. But the company that OK USA is a part of, which is Agrofair, is how they would bring the bananas to market in the US.

AMY GOODMAN: And if people wanted to get those bananas, where do they call? How do they find out about them? And how many fair trade bananas are there? Let me ask that to Carlos.

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Well, that's why we are here, and that's why we thank you to give us the opportunity to tell to the people that they have to go to the supermarkets and ask for the fair trade bananas. Fair trade in Europe has been successful. You can see fair trade bananas in major chains in UK, in Switzerland. So we say, why not in the United States? Maybe -- well, maybe we can link the last information with this information. What we want to do with the fair trade is to keep alive and safe our people in our communities. We don’t want to break our families. So we will ask the people that are seeing your program to go to their supermarkets and ask for the fair trade bananas. So in that way, they will allow us to bring our products here. So the consumer has their voice, their vote, and they can vote for the fair trade bananas. And what we want to do is give more cooperatives, more people on board of this system and benefit, expand --

AMY GOODMAN: Tell us about Agrofair.

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Agrofair is a very interesting organization. You know, I’m a producer, and I belong to a producer organization. But Agrofair is co-owned organization -- it’s an organization co-owned by the producers. So I can be sitting here talking in the name of Agrofair, because we produce. Agrofair is a Dutch company, settled by some NGOs. They have the 50% of the shares in this moment, and the other 50% belongs to all the producers in the South, in Latin America, Caribbean and Africa. So Agrofair is a very interesting model that redistributes in the chain not only money, because we receive a fair deal with them, but as well they redistribute power in the chain. And we say that we receive from Agrofair the fair say, the fair share, through the fair price.

AMY GOODMAN: If people want to get bananas from Coopetrabasur, which stands for cooperative of the workers of the South, what do they tell their supermarkets?

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Well, you know, in UK, one of the biggest supermarkets recently changed, because the consumer pressure to --

AMY GOODMAN: This is in Britain.

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Yeah, this in Britain. Sainsbury is a supermarket. They changed because of pressure of the consumers. So the people in their houses in this moment that is eating a banana, their choice count, and they have a vote in their hand.

AMY GOODMAN: Do you have a website?

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Yeah, if you want to visit Agrofair, www.agrofair.com.

AMY GOODMAN: That’s www.agrofair.com.

CARLOS EUGENIO VARGAS: Agrofair. There’s a cooperative of producers of Agrofair, www.cpaf.nl, or our cooperative, www.coopetrabasur.com.

AMY GOODMAN: And people can just go to our website at democracynow.org; we will link to all of those. I want to thank you all for being with us. Our guests have been Carlos Eugenio Vargas, Yocser [Carranza Godoy], and thanks to the translator Jennifer Godoy.

Lula Wants His Yellow Submarine

Nuclear-R-Us:
Is Brazil's proposed construction of a nuclear submarine the result of imperial ambitions
or a matter of diving to the depths of pandering politics on Lula's part?

* Lula reignites the dream of the military junta: a Brazilian nuclear submarine.
* Washington derides Iran's and North Korea's nuclear plans but mums the word when it comes to Brazil.
* Is the Brazilian navy expecting to be attacked on the high seas by some far off land, or, is a new militarized geopolitical strategy being evolved by Brasilia, or, is Lula merely being pressured by his military to acquire this trophy weapons system which could cost the nation upwards of a billion dollars, yet do little to augment Brazilian security?
* If Brazil goes ahead with its nuclear project, it may violate the spirit of the Treaty of Tlatelolco and the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
* Who is going to provide Brazil with the necessary technology and advice it needs in order to successfully develop a nuclear submarine? Russia or China? Or will it be Brasilia's new sister pact members India and South Africa, or perhaps Iran with which it has had a decade-long nuclear relationship. What will be the roles of the UN, IAEA and OPANAL?

On July 10, Brazilian President Inácio Lula da Silva announced his intention to fulfill one of the Brazilian Navy's ultimate dreams: to launch a nuclear-powered submarine. This idea was originally hatched during the era of military rule from the 1960s to 1980s but floundered due to a lack of funds and priority status. It has resurfaced at a time when there are disturbing signs that much of the subcontinent may be falling into an unintentional arms race. Criticism is mounting both within and outside of Brazil regarding whether it would be wise for the nation to go ahead with this plan, and what does this say about the Lula presidency. Will it deed itself over to engaging in rhetorical vertigo about the need to become one of the world's dominant sea powers, rather than come forth with a sober naval expansion programthat will not break the bank and nor ignite an arms race.

As the international community tries to blunt North Korea's and Iran's nuclear ambitions, Brazil (long rumored to be readying a campaign to launch an all-embracing effort to obtain a permanent seat on the United Nations' Security Council), has put forth a plan to construct a nuclear-powered submarine by 2015. What is alarming about this situation is that Brazil's decision could risk having a destabilizing impact on the hemisphere because it doesn't factor in the grave consequences it could possibly generate.

Brazil's Nuclear History
The genesis of Brazil's nuclear ambitions can be traced back to the 1960s, a time when military governments were a plague on the hemisphere, with the South American giant being, if anything, a pathfinder for this process. Nevertheless, the Brazilian military junta that ruled from 1964-1985 never managed to come up with concrete plans to construct such a super-sophisticated weapon as a nuclear-powered submarine. According to an AP story, the navy's nuclear program, which actually had begun in 1979, already had mastered part of the uranium enrichment process, but it had lagged in developing and constructing a reactor entirely from Brazilian technology, according to Navy Admiral Julio Soares de Moura Neto. A July filing by Deutsch Presse-Agenteur revealed that the nuclear submarine project was part of a 1975 agreement between Brasilia and the then-Western German government in Bonn.

Meanwhile, it should be noted that in a recent article, in the Latin American Weekly Report, Brazil was found to be far behind other regional countries in terms of its budgetary support for its armed forces: "Brazil's armed forces are now far behind, by any aspect of comparison apart from troop numbers, the armed forces of Chile, Peru, and Venezuela." This obviously begs the question regarding what will happen to the country's security if Lula decides to allocate the country's scant economic resources not to a balanced force but for an expensive and glamorous weapon, which will further neglect the people's direct social welfare needs.

During the period of military rule, Brazil's neighbor Argentina (if anything, was under a far more draconic military regime), was also heatedly developing a comparable nuclear program at its remote facility near Bariloche, Argentina. A Spring 1981 Foreign Affairs article by Gerard Smith (Chief of the U.S. Delegation to the Strategic Arms Limitations Talks [SALT] from 1969 to 1972) and George Rathjens (a Professor of Political Science at MIT) discussed nuclear non-proliferation, touching on Latin America. The article mentions the Brazilian-Argentine nuclear arms race which thought to exist at the time, explaining that "despite U.S. pressures and the expenditure of considerable political capital, the Federal Republic of Germany insisted on going ahead with its previous commitments to assist Brazil in acquiring reprocessing and enrichment facilities. And the FRG and Switzerland have recently agreed to provide Argentina with a power reactor and a heavy-water plant."

Ironically, Lula protested the construction of the nuclear submarine during the military regime, at a time when he was a fiery union leader with solid leftist credentials, protesting that the country had more important needs for its citizens than something so expensive. It seems that Lula, along with new obsessions, has had a dramatic change of heart.

Lula Revives Nuclear Plans
To the surprise of many, whose knowledge of Lula's value system was formed in the past and who now have come to see him as a parody of the ethical code to which he once so passionately subscribed, the Brazilian leader now emphasizes his intention to pursue his military predecessors' nuclear ambitions. He plans to have the submarine operating by 2015. A July 11 wire story by Agence France Presse quotes the Brazilian president as saying during a visit to the Brazilian navy's Technological Center in Sao Paulo, "Brazil could rank among those few nations in the world with a command of uranium enrichment technology, and I think we will be more highly valued as a nation -- as the power we wish to be." There in essence, is the new Brazil that Lula ululates over; he has been transformed into a different kind of author with a vastly different script than the one he once daily honored as the leader of the metallurgical union in the Sao Paulo industrial belt.

Lula's references raise several very revealing insights into the nuclear submarine project. Among them are: will it be constructed solely by Brazilian scientists and technicians? Or will scientists by recruited from abroad as consultants? Does the Brazilian navy possess the necessary skill to design, construct, test and operate a vessel which goes far beyond the admirable design and construction technological capacity it has evinced up to now, even after factoring in all of Brazil's engineering successes and its commercial triumphs in the fields of aircraft and weaponry fabrication? Will the crew be sent abroad to gain training on how to operate this kind of super-sophisticated equipment? What kind of design principles will the submarine feature? Will it be a replication of another country's nuclear submarines or will it be a totally new concept?

While Lula appears to be particularly jaunty when it comes to referring to the submarine, other Brazilians tend to be desperate, according to O Estado, as cited by the Latin American Weekly Report: "'For a long time the government has abandoned the armed forces to its own luck, in a display of disinterest in national defense and the way of life of Brazilians.' The newspaper goes on to say that the pitiable situation of Brazil's armed forces 'does not match the ambitions' of President Lula da Silva to lead South America in an 'increasingly instable regional strategic environment.'"
O Estado zeroes in on the restless musings now taking place in the Brazilian armed forces: "Two-thirds of the air force's planes are grounded due to lack of replacement parts. The air force does not have any medium-range-to-air and air-to-ground missiles, attack helicopters or the so-called 'intelligent bombs' which are part of the equiptment of its Chilean, Peruvian and Venezuelan counterparts. Furthermore, only half of the navy's combat ships are fit for their intended purpose. In the army the situation is no different. There is no money for ammunition, Brazilian tanks are all secondhand and most over 30 years old." Does this sound like a country that could spend almost a billion dollars on nuclear submarine project, which will do nothing to upgrade or modernize the rest of the fleet?

The Brazilian president also is saying that his government will complete the long-suspended Angra III nuclear plant in Rio de Janeiro state. "We will complete Angra III, and if necessary, we'll go on to build more (nuclear plants) because it is clean energy and now proven to be safe," Lula went on to note that the plant will cost 3.5 billion dollars over five and a half years. But he did not mention the nuclear waste disposal issue which has been bedeviling Washington in recent years and still defies easy solution, as seen in the feral Yucca Mountain dispute.

Going Nuclear All the Way
A June article by Nuclear Engineering International explains that Brazil has always strived for self-sufficiency in nuclear power, but the ambitious plans of the 1970s were never fully realized, leaving Brazil with just Angra I & II and the equipment and technical skills required for a third, all to be sited at Angra Dos Reis in Rio de Janeiro state. The construction of Angra III was originally contracted out to the German firm KraftwerkUnion (KWU), now part of Siemens, which was taken over by Framatome ANP (now Areva). At the end of 2001, Brazil's National Energy Policy Council (CNPE) was asked to make recommendations on Angra III and was authorized to take the preliminary steps to restart the project, with Lula ultimately deciding to go ahead with it. Brazil's two operating nuclear plants, Angra I and Angra II, have an installed capacity of about 2,000 megawatts. Angra III would raise its capacity to 3,300 megawatts, at an estimated cost of about US$3.6 billion (euro2.6 billion). According to several costing engineers, they would be surprised if the plant construction didn't come in at least 50 percent higher than the current estimated figure, with the same being true of the projected costs for the submarine.

An October 2004 article in Science by Liz Palmer, entitled "Brazil's Nuclear Puzzle" reported that in 2004 Brazil had plans for a uranium enrichment plant, which, it if configured to do so, could fuel several nuclear weapons annually. It went on to explain that "Brazil has pledged to enrich its uranium to only 3.5% 235U, the concentration required by its two power reactors. This would be too weak to fuel a bomb, which typically requires a concentration of 90% or above. If Brazil should, however, change its mind, its stockpile of uranium already enriched to 3.5 or 5% will have received more than half the work needed to bring it to weapon grade. This would confer what is known as "breakout capability" — the power to make nuclear weapons before the world can react, rendering it a fait accompli. Such a capacity is what the United States and some European countries fear Iran is aiming at."

While it is true that Brazil wants to build a nuclear submarine, not a nuclear weapon, the feeling remains that Brazil has the potential to become a global nuclear power incrementally rather than spontaneously, if it chose to do so at all. It certainly has the resources and the personnel to carry out nuclear projects, and if you take Lula's words to heart, he also seems to have the will. But the greatest source of energy currently fueling Brazil's nuclear dream does not derive from nuclear fission as much as it comes from Brazil's growing sense of ultimate grandeur—that it is destined to be a superpower this century, as well as belonge to the nuclear club, which could help the country's image.

And who is the amiable Jingoist stoking the line of Brazil über alles—well, no other than Lula. Yet there is still another chapter to the Brazilian story, and that consists of the megalithic corruption that infuses every cranny of the nation's public life, the inefficiency, the hypocrisy, the environment chicanery and the unspeakable violence of both the common street crime and their prosecutors, and the drug-trafficking mafia that renders Brazil a hellish state in which to reside, if you are not well to do and strategically positioned.

Interestingly, on June 8 there was an article in the International Herald Tribune about the Russian nuclear power company, Atomstroyexport (a former branch of the Soviet atomic energy ministry) and how Russia is becoming an important exporter of nuclear energy and engineering skills. The article explains how the company is currently constructing reactors in countries like China, India and Bulgaria. The core of the article is based on declarations by Sergei Shmatko, chief executive of Atomstroyexport. The business executive speaks of a "nuclear renaissance, with Moscow emerging as a global exporter of nuclear technology for developing nations. He added that his company is already producing a new design for emerging markets; it has a line of mini-reactors more typical of the power plants required for nuclear submarines or ice breakers, then ostensibly for nuclear power plants. Moscow already has proven that it has very few qualms about exporting military technology, as exemplified by the multi-billion dollar deals with Venezuela over the past couple of years, even though it hasn't quite overtaken the U.S. as a world leader in the export of weaponry. It is only logical to assume that the Kremlin would be more than willing to provide a nuclear reactor to Brazil for its nuclear submarine if Brasilia has the money for it. And, as Lula boasts, Brazil has the cash, even though his admirers and generals claim that only penury is to be found in the Palácio da Alvorada.

A Nuclear Brazil: Is this Wise?
Lula appears to be resorting to the traditional waving of the "bloody flag of nationalism" in order to increase his personal popularity and confirm the support of the nation's powerful military establishment, although all is not sound here, and his efforts at placating it are probably doomed to not be enough. This call to arms comes at a time when his administration has been sent reeling by almost daily corruption scandals in his political party and administration. In the latest round of nationwide discontent, landless workers blocked an iron ore railway (with ore being a key ingredient for the production of steel) owned by Companhia Vale do Rio Doce SA. The company claims only 300 individuals protested, while the Landless Workers Movement insists they were as many as 2,600, according to the Associated Press.

Lula's critics insist that, instead of allocating hundreds of millions of dollars to a nuclear submarine program, why not address the multiple social problems pressing Brazil? These include environmental and anti-poverty initiatives to constructively impact Brazil's current social ills. Instead, Lula has decided to turn to acquiring a trophy military weapon that couldn't be less relevant to Brazil's immediate future as a great nation and Latin America's current concerns. But this could be unwise and will only further provoke regional tensions. Among others, one must wonder what will be the reaction in Buenos Aires, with an Argentine military still nursing its wounds over its defeat in the Falklands. If Brazil's nuclear submarine actually becomes operational, might this immediately invoke the concerns of the Argentine navy? One might reply that during that conflict with Britain, the Argentine cruiser ARA General Belgrano was doomed by the U.K.'s nuclear-powered submarine, HMS Conqueror. The Belgrano was the second largest ship in the Argentine navy at the time and was sunk by two Tigerfish torpedoes from the Conqueror, killing 323 sailors. This was a critical point in the war as it proved to the Argentine navy that it could not compete against a modern British fleet, including its nuclear submarine. What will the Argentine navy have to say about Brazil obtaining a nuclear submarine of its own?

Finally, it is still illogical that Brazil's decision-makers even think for a moment that the nation must have its submarine. The sub-continent, in spite of the arms race it has experience in recent years, has not had an major inter-state war since the Peruvian-Ecuadorian border conflict in 1941. Brazil fought a war against Argentina in the 1820s when Argentina was known as the United Provinces of Rio de la Plata. The last armed conflict (not counting its involvement in World War II) in which Brazil fought was the War of the Triple Alliance when it allied itself with Uruguay and Argentina against Paraguay from 1864 to 1870. If anything, Brazil's security threats today come more from drug cartels, the possible infiltration of the Colombian guerrillas known as the FARC into its territory, and the widespread occurrence of gang violence, than from Argentina or Paraguay (a landlocked border country)

Military Politics
By deciding to build a nuclear submarine, Lula is reviving the old dreams of the Brazilian military. At the same time, he has certainly given reason to the Argentine navy to push for even a bigger defense budget at a time when the country is still recuperating from the 2001 economic meltdown. Both the Brazilian and Argentine security forces have dark pasts that have sullied their countries' good names. The possession of a nuclear submarine might provide both militaries with an increased status that would be prejudicial to the two countries' still not completely stabilized democracies, but might equip them with a sense of arrogance to question their subordination to civilian rule.

It is ironic that Lula has declared his intention to build a nuclear submarine. While he was a union leader before becoming president, Lula had protested against such nuclear aspirations, but it seems he has now had a change of heart. Why has this occurred? Can this be explained by the growing pressure being mounted against Lula from the country's military, which never has quite regained the self-esteem it had when it ruled the country with an absolutist style? According to a report by the Deutsche Presse-Agentur, Lula has emphasized repeatedly that he sees the use of nuclear power as a source of energy as a bread and butter issue for his administration, and that down the road such addicting power will be essential to meet the country's energy requirements; according to estimates, building the nuclear submarine will cost an annual disbursement of $68 million dollars per year over eight years, so it will be ready (ideally) not before 2015. But officials close to the defense establishment claim that any figure less than $1 billion dollars would be falsely optimistic.

Curiously, the aspiration to acquire a nuclear submarine comes at a time when the Brazilian military is going through a process of upgrading its conventional equipment. During a September trip to Spain, in spite of the obvious disenchantment felt by many of Lula's senior military colleagues over the poor state of affairs of Brazil's Armed Forces, Lula told the Spanish daily El País "in the 1970s, we had modern factories that built tanks […] But they have been dismantled. Brazil must return to what it had. To rebuild our weaponry factories, we must buy." According to various reports, Brazil plans to raise military spending by 50 percent next year and is planning to modernize its conventional submarines, build missiles in cooperation with South Africa and purchase second-hand aircraft.

The Armed Forces View of the Project
Logically, it would seem that Lula should have the enthusiastic backing of the Brazilian military establishment for his drive to acquire the submarine. But this is not necessarily the case. On October 13, an article in the Brazilian daily Correio Braziliense focused on declarations by General Barros Moreira, a former commander of the War College (Brazil's military intelligence service) who currently serves as head of the Political, Strategic and International Relations Secretariat at the Defense Ministry. On the question of the nuclear submarine, General Moreira declared: "What is going to happen to a country where 95 percent of international trade takes place by sea? And our oil, where is it? If we had a nuclear submarine, we would be more secure. If the Argentine navy had had a nuclear submarine, England would not have attacked during the Falklands conflict. A peaceful country such as ours, that has no intention of attacking anyone, has every right to defend itself, because it is growing increasingly richer and more tempting" Of course, it remains somewhat obscure as to which country, if any, would be inclined to attack Brazil, no matter how tempting its resources may be.
Opponents of the nuclear submarine and the nuclear plant programs include Lula's Environment Minister Marina Silva. The minister declared that "in the last 15 years, no country has built nuclear power plants because of the problems with the waste […] We have other sources of power: a great potential in hydroelectric, and clean energies in which we should invest." In addition, the construction of the Angra 3 power plant is potentially dangerous because it is located in the state of Rio de Janeiro, near a natural reserve, where the soil is unstable and has included a history of landslides. Angra already was a subject of considerable controversy because of a flawed geological survey which was originally done on the site, which did not include problems with existing faults that should have been ventilated in public discussion. Lula has ruled out solar or wind plants, arguing that they are more expensive than a nuclear plant.

Taking the Arms Race to the Next Level
Brazil's renewed coveting of a nuclear submarine comes at a time when the sub-region is already moving towards an arms race. Among other regional countries, Venezuela and Chile are engaged in major military purchases. Most recently, Venezuela has ordered the purchase of five Kilo-636 submarines from Russia. Peru has contracted a number of naval purchases a couple of years ago during the Alejandro Toledo administration, including the purchase of four Lupo-class frigates from Italy. Last year, Bolivian president Evo Morales declared his plans to build a number of military outposts, with Venezuela's help to parallel Bolivia's borders, including installations facing its border with Brazil. It is unlikely that other countries, including Argentina, will not feel compelled to follow suit at some point in the near future, as a result of pressure coming from its own armed forces

With Brazil's neighbors now interested in increasing their own military capability, Brasilia arms specialists claim that the country has adopted a specific posture on its prospective acquisition of a nuclear submarine that, from a strategic point of view, would give it a definite advantage over potential attackers when it comes to naval warfare, even though the strategy could be seen as being somewhat provocative.

An additional issue regarding Brazil's nuclear submarine has to do with the de facto violation of the spirit, or even the letter of the Treaty of Tlatelolco. Signed in 1967 and entered into force in 1969, the Treaty was drafted in Mexico City to make Latin America and the Caribbean into a nuclear-free zone. Brazil is also a signatory of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. It seems clear that obligations to these treaty regimes would seem to present some problems for Lula's ambitious plans to have his submarine fleet go nuclear.

And Washington's Reaction is….
At a time when the drums of war are beating regarding Washington's tough stand against Iran's nuclear ambitions, and while negotiations continue with North Korea on comparable subjects, how will Washington policy makers react to Brazil possessing a nuclear-powered submarine?

In 1991, Presidents Fernando Collor of Brazil and Carlos Menem of Argentina signed an accord with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna that provided for IAEA inspection of their respective nuclear programs. At the time, the U.S. State Department praised the decision by both leaders, by issuing a statement issued on December 13, 1991 saying that: "The two South American Presidents have demonstrated exceptional statesmanship in moving to free their continent from the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation." What will the State Department say now?

Other institutions that have yet to declare themselves about Brazil's plans include the United Nations' International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Agency for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Caribbean (OPANAL), based in Mexico City. Also of note, the other members of the India-Brazil-South Africa Dialogue Forum (IBSA), who have or have had nuclear ambitions of their own in the past and present, might come to Brazil's defense in terms of justifying its acquisition, even though as one of the newest cross-continental alliances, it has yet to play a large role in the process or come out conclusively for or against Brazil's nuclear plans.

The Nuclear Nightmare
It could be persuasively argued that Brazil's proposed nuclear submarine is an imprudent foreign policy move for Brazil to take. Conventional weaponry, in addition to the country's geography, which features broad land buffers, should serve, as they have in the past, as a sufficient deterrent to dissuade other countries from attacking Brazil under any conceivable scenario. Some unkind soul might even accuse Lula of engaging in a good deal of hypocrisy for considering to carry out the plans that basically echo the aspirations of the military junta which was responsible for numerous human rights abuses when it held power and which Lula himself once fiercely opposed. Brazil is regionally and globally respected and would be the natural Latin America representative in the UN Security Council should it ever be reformed and expanded. In addition the country is presently besieged by a host of domestic problems, including widespread criminal violence and drug trafficking, aside from increasing gang warfare. With all of this on its plate, does it really need a submarine?
This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Fellow Alex Sánchez

Argentina's first lady cruises to election victory

By Fiona Ortiz

BUENOS AIRES, Oct 28

Argentine first lady Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner rode an economic boom and her husband's popularity to victory in a presidential election on Sunday to become the country's first elected woman leader.

Fernandez, a glamorous lawyer and center-left senator, will take over from President Nestor Kirchner in December in a rare power handover between democratically elected spouses.

Results from almost a third of polling stations showed Fernandez with 43 percent support, enough to avoid a runoff given her wide lead over second-place candidate Elisa Carrio, a former lawmaker, and former economy minister Roberto Lavagna in the third spot.

Fernandez, 54, ran an effortless campaign without a primary, a candidates' debate or concrete policy outlines. She instead met foreign leaders and trumpeted lower unemployment and poverty rates since Kirchner took office four years ago.

Kirchner is credited with leading Argentina's recovery from an economic meltdown in 2001-2002. The crisis devastated a proud middle class that long distinguished Argentina, a major grains exporter, from its Latin American neighbors and led it to default on $100 billion in debt.

"This country was destroyed. It was a country in default, with millions of people unemployed. Suddenly, everything changed. She's going to take the policies of this government even further," said Lilia Balencia, 65, a social worker celebrating at Fernandez's campaign bunker on Sunday night.

Although a fiscal conservative, Kirchner increased the state's role in the economy, reversing many privatizations from the 1990s and placing price controls on utility rates and fuel prices.

Fernandez is likely to continue those policies but is not expected to move further left and is a moderate compared with socialist leaders in Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador.

Much more comfortable on the diplomatic stage than her travel-shy husband, Fernandez will remain friendly with anti-U.S. President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela while trying to improve relations with Washington.

In electing Fernandez, Argentines opted for continuity, a sign of a deep fear of change after decades on an economic roller coaster that has wiped out life savings time and again.

The bulk of Fernandez's support came from poor people who think Kirchner has improved their lives, partly through new pensions and tax breaks.

But exit polls showed Carrio taking one of four votes nationwide and giving Fernandez a run for her money in middle class and urban areas like the capital Buenos Aires.

POLITICAL JUNKIE

Opposition candidates were not able to capitalize on corruption scandals involving Kirchner officials, or on Argentines' top concern: the steeply rising cost of living.

Lavagna conceded defeat on Sunday night, but Carrio was apparently waiting for more complete results.

Fernandez was a leftist student activist in the 1970s and has been a political junkie ever since. The mother of two has said even her family took a back seat to her ideals of bringing greater social equality to Argentina.

The opposition criticized Fernandez's expensive clothes and warned that a continuation of Kirchner's price freezes and state intervention in the economy will make things worse for the poor, not better, by frightening off investors.

Argentina has had a woman president before, but she was not elected. Isabel Peron, the third wife of former President Juan Peron, succeeded him when he died in 1974 and ruled for two years until she was ousted in a military coup.

Fernandez has been compared to Peron's second wife, the mid-20th century icon Eva "Evita" Peron. But she has more in common with U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton since both are lawyers and senators married to men who were governors and later became presidents.

Fernandez will be the fifth elected woman leader in Latin America.

Although she was prominent nationally before her husband, many see her presidency as a second Kirchner term. The two have had a tight political partnership for three decades and he is expected to be her top advisor, just as she was his.

Despite her clear victory, economic challenges loom for Fernandez, including higher inflation, an energy crunch and a deteriorating budget surplus.

Argentines recently called for boycotts of tomatoes, potatoes and other foods as prices have soared. The president-elect says she will fight inflation by striking deals with businesses and unions to cap profit and wage demands.

(Additional reporting by Helen Popper)