Un modelo político agotado

El único aspecto positivo de la profunda crisis que atravesamos quizá sea disponer de la siempre interesante oportunidad de presenciar, en primera fila y a tiempo acelerado, el derrumbe de un sistema político, aunque eso sí, con el grave inconveniente de no saber cuánto va a durar todavía, qué va a sustituirlo y, especialmente, cómo va a hacerlo. No es que los muchos defectos del modelo estuviesen precisamente ocultos en tiempos de bonanza, pues eran evidentes para cualquiera que se molestase en tener los ojos abiertos, pero sin duda la prosperidad general permitió asumirlos como disfunciones inevitables, ni siquiera exclusivas de nuestro país y, a la postre, fácilmente negociables. La crisis ha venido a hacer añicos esta ilusión. Comprendemos ahora que esos defectos son trabas formidables que amenazan gripar la maquinaria del Estado, hundir nuestra economía, dejarnos a todos en la estacada. Durante un tiempo confiamos en que bastaría con sustituir a los tripulantes al mando para que las cosas se solucionasen, como si éste fuese sólo un problema de gestión o de mera competencia técnica. Pero es necesario asumir que esta crisis deriva, como casi todas las verdaderamente complicadas, de un conjunto de incentivos perversos que afectan necesariamente a todo aquel que ocupe el poder jugando con las reglas ahora en vigor. En un sistema político tan descentralizado como el nuestro, en el que las citas electorales que ponen en juego intereses vitales de los partidos (o mejor dicho, de quienes los controlan) se repiten cada pocos meses, no existen incentivos para ejecutar estrategias a largo plazo. Más aún, la dirección de esos partidos está apoyada en un extenso y trabado régimen clientelar que disuade de adoptar medidas de adelgazamiento y racionalización del sector público. Como hemos visto con actuales Presupuestos, los recortes se centran en la inversión y en servicios públicos esenciales, mientras se permite que las numerosísimas entidades y empresas públicas, al disminuir sus ingresos sin disolverse, sigan consumiendo el grueso de sus presupuestos en su propio mantenimiento. Un sistema de organización territorial abierto y en constante mutación fomenta que la ambición personal de poder se imponga siempre a la racionalidad y a la eficiencia. Por lo demás, una partitocracia tan cerrada como la nuestra impide asumir responsabilidades por las derrotas. Los candidatos repiten hasta la extenuación, sin más aval que el apoyo del aparato del partido que, evidentemente, ellos han montado a su imagen y semejanza por la fácil vía de respaldar a su vez a aquellos fieles que han probado lealtad en los momentos difíciles. La consecuencia es una dirección política sin verdaderos incentivos para asumir las reformas estructurales clave para el futuro del país. Pedir a políticos que se olviden de sus intereses particulares, se sacrifiquen por interés general es no comprender cómo funciona este sistema partitocrático que hemos construido entre todos. Líderes con personalidad y visión de Estado capaces de asumir ese riesgo (y hasta de salir airosos) son muy escasos, y de cualquier forma no son los que selecciona y promueve este sistema (…..)

Link: http://elcomentario.tv/reggio/un-modelo-politico-agotado-de-rodrigo-tena-en-el-mundo/30/04/2012/

México emerge como plataforma mundial exportadora

México fue el país de América Latina cuya economía se hundió más profundamente en la crisis global 2008-09, con una caída del 6% ese último año. La economía mexicana se ha recuperado en los niveles previos a la crisis, con una tasa de crecimiento de 3,5% este año, una pauta de expansión baja, pero estable (nivel de inflación en los últimos 12 meses: 3,73% anual), como ha ocurrido en los últimos 3 lustros. Lo importante son los cambios estructurales que ha experimentado el país en ese período, en especial con relación a la economía global. México ha emergido de la crisis convertido en una de las principales plataformas exportadoras de la industria manufacturera trasnacional, y ha vuelto a ganar posiciones en el mercado norteamericano frente a la competencia china, primera exportadora mundial. (Fuente: Clarín – 30/04/2012)

A pesar de la intensificación de la violencia provocada por el conflicto con el narcotráfico, la inversión, sobre todo en la industria manufacturera y automovilística, crece significativamente y en forma acumulada, solo por detrás de Brasil en América Latina. En 2011, recibió U$S 19.600 millones de inversión extranjera directa (IED), que fueron U$S 20.200 millones en 2010, y alcanzaron a U$S 15.900 millones en 2009. Una característica fundamental que diferencia a la IED que recibe México con la del resto de América Latina, y en especial la de América del Sur, es que más de 2/3 del total se dirige a industria manufacturera y posee una tipología “vertical”, que integra esas inversiones como segmentos o anillos de las cadenas trasnacionales de producción, núcleo productivo del capitalismo en su fase de globalización. Las que se dirigen a América del Sur y ante todo a Brasil, son de naturaleza “horizontal”, orientadas a cubrir la demanda del mercado interno, como manifestación actualizada de la estrategia tradicional de sustitución de importaciones. Esta particularidad de la IED mexicana, implica que cada una de estas inversiones “verticales” profundiza su integración con el núcleo estratégico de la acumulación capitalista en el siglo XXI, que es la expresión más avanzada de la internacionalización de la producción. La pujanza de los cambios estructurales en México se sobrepone incluso a la ola de criminalidad desatada por el crimen organizado. Estados fronterizos con EEUU han sido el epicentro de la violencia en los últimos 5 años; y en el período previo a la agudización del conflicto, recibieron 22,5% del total de la IED; y luego, en la sangrienta etapa 2006-2010, ese porcentaje aumentó a 28,5%.

En período 2000/03, al irrumpir China a gran escala en comercio internacional, y ganar espacios significativos en el mercado norteamericano, México perdió más de un 30% de las empresas extranjeras radicadas en el país, sobretodo maquila, que se dirigieron al mercado asiático en busca de mejores condiciones de competitividad. Ahora en gran parte han regresado, y las exportaciones mexicanas han aumentado entre 7% y 9% su participación en el mercado estadounidense, sobrepasando a los productos chinos. Lo que diferencia a los países emergentes en relación al mercado mundial es su distinta inserción internacional (camino de doble vía por el que transcurren comercio y las inversiones). En el caso de México, esa inserción internacional se realiza con la economía norteamericana (EEUU + Canadá), al igual que lo que sucede con Centroamérica y el Caribe. Distinta es la situación de América del Sur, cuya inserción internacional tiene lugar con la región asiática, con eje en China. En el mundo de hoy, la fortaleza de un país y su relevancia internacional no dependen de su PBI, sino de su vinculación estructural con el núcleo productivo del sistema mundial (cadenas trasnacionales de producción); y en este punto específico, estratégicamente decisivo, México está a la cabeza de ALC, y en cierta forma adelanta un futuro posible.

Wasting Our Minds

In Spain, the unemployment rate among workers under 25 is more than 50%. In Ireland almost a third of the young are unemployed. Here in America, youth unemployment is “only” 16.5%, which is still terrible, but things could be worse. And sure enough, many politicians are doing all they can to guarantee that things will, in fact, get worse. We’ve been hearing a lot about the war on women, which is real enough. But there’s also a war on the young, which is just as real even if it’s better disguised. And it’s doing immense harm, not just to the young, but to nation’s future. Let’s start with some advice Romney gave to college students during an appearance last week. After denouncing Obama’s “divisiveness,” the candidate told his audience, “Take a shot, go for it, take a risk, get the education, borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business.” (by Paul Krugman – NYTimes – 30/04/2012) 

The first thing you notice here is, of course, the Romney touch, the distinctive lack of empathy for those who weren’t born into affluent families, who can’t rely on the Bank of Mom and Dad to finance their ambitions. But the rest of the remark is just as bad in its own way. I mean, “get the education”? And pay for it how? Tuition at public colleges and universities has soared, in part thanks to sharp reductions in state aid. Mr. Romney isn’t proposing anything that would fix that; he is, however, a strong supporter of Ryan budget plan, which would drastically cut federal student aid, causing roughly a million students to lose their Pell grants. So how, exactly, are young people from cash-strapped families supposed to “get the education”? Back in March Mr. Romney had the answer: Find the college “that has a little lower price where you can get a good education.” Good luck with that. But I guess it’s divisive to point out that Romney’s prescriptions are useless for Americans who weren’t born with his advantages. There is, however, a larger issue: even if students do manage, to “get the education,” which they do all too often by incurring a lot of debt, they’ll be graduating into an economy that doesn’t seem to want them. You’ve probably heard lots about how workers with college degrees are faring better in this slump than those with only a high school education, which is true. But the story is far less encouraging if you focus not on middle-aged Americans with degrees but on recent graduates. Unemployment among recent graduates has soared; so has part-time work, presumably reflecting inability of graduates to find full-time jobs. Perhaps most telling, earnings have plunged even among those graduates working full time, a sign that many have been forced to take jobs that make no use of their education. College graduates, are taking it on the chin thanks to weak economy. And research tells us the price isn’t temporary: students who graduate into a bad economy never recover lost ground. Instead, their earnings are depressed for life.

What the young need most of all, then, is a better job market. People like Mr. Romney claim that they have the recipe for job creation: slash taxes on corporations and the rich, slash spending on public services and the poor. But we now have plenty of evidence on how these policies actually work in a depressed economy and they clearly destroy jobs rather than create them. For as you look at the economic devastation in Europe, you should bear in mind that some of the countries experiencing the worst devastation have been doing everything American conservatives say we should do here. Not long ago, conservatives gushed over Ireland’s economic policies, especially its low corporate tax rate; Heritage Foundation used to give it higher marks for “economic freedom” than any other Western nation. When things went bad, Ireland once again received lavish praise, this time for its harsh spending cuts, which were supposed to inspire confidence and lead to quick recovery. And now, as I said, almost a third of Ireland’s young can’t find jobs. What should we do to help America’s young? Basically, the opposite of what Mr. Romney and his friends want. We should be expanding student aid, not slashing it. And we should reverse the de facto austerity policies that are holding back US economy, the unprecedented cutbacks at the state and local level, which have been hitting education especially hard. Such a policy reversal would cost money. But refusing to spend that money is foolish and shortsighted even in purely fiscal terms. Remember, young aren’t just America’s future; they’re the future of the tax base, too. A mind is a terrible thing to waste; wasting the minds of a whole generation is even more terrible. Let’s stop doing it. 

La bomba de tiempo del empleo juvenil en Latinoamérica

El desempleo juvenil y la falta de calidad de los trabajos de los latinoamericanos más jóvenes constituyen el mayor problema laboral de la región, expresó en Montevideo la directora regional OIT, Elizabeth Tinoco. La alta funcionaria se expresó así tras la conclusión del foro “Productividad, empleo y protección social” que se realizó en la sede del MERCOSUR en la capital uruguaya impulsado por su organización y la CEPAL. Esta actividad congregó a los responsables de asuntos laborales de toda la región para recopilar los principales retos que en esa materia enfrenta Latinoamérica para que puedan tratarse en Naciones Unidas el próximo mes de julio. Según señaló Tinoco a Efe, entre las conclusiones más importantes surgidas de la reunión está la necesidad de fomentar la “articulación” del mercado laboral regional con políticas sociales y a su vez con las educativas, para que éstas puedan “acentuar su rol en cuanto a ser una formación para el mundo laboral”. Tinoco apuntó que precisamente los jóvenes que recién terminan su formación son el grupo al que más duramente afecta el desempleo en ALC, y pese a que el desempleo está en “mínimos históricos” en la región, el paro juvenil “está en alza y triplica la tasa media”. “Esta es una realidad que está bastante distanciada de la de los adultos y por eso la OIT asume como prioridad crear políticas efectivas de generación de empleo juvenil y sobre todo de calidad”. La funcionaria apuntó que “4 de cada 10 jóvenes ingresan al mercado laboral desde la informalidad” y que por eso es necesario trabajar en conjunto con Gobiernos regionales para “avanzar e identificar las políticas exitosas de generación de empleo de calidad” que se han desarrollado y que otros países puedan implementar. Entre otras soluciones, Elizabeth Tinoco destacó la necesidad de desarrollar la formación profesional “y las competencias laborales articuladas en la necesidad de la demanda del mercado de trabajo” sin olvidar “políticas activas” de trabajo que permitan desarrollar “piso de protección social”. “Transferencias condicionadas para favorecer el tránsito escuela trabajo, a través de pasantías de formación, a través de políticas de aprendizaje en lugares de trabajo, de incentivo a los emprendimientos juveniles, microcréditos, incentivo en la inserción empresarial. Ese tipo de cosas”. La responsable regional OIT resaltó la posibilidad que la “preocupante” situación en Europa alcance la región, si bien rescató que “América Latina sigue un camino distinto a Europa porque aprendió de las distintas crisis pasadas y supo desarrollar políticas que preservaran el empleo por una parte y colchón fiscal lo suficientemente amplio para desarrollar políticas de incentivo que permitieran mantener el empleo con protección social”. Según dijo, ese aprendizaje es lo que está haciendo que América “continúe creciendo” a diferencia de otras regiones y que lo haga “con empleo y protección social”. (Agencia EFE – 30/04/2012)

OIT advierte sobre nueva crisis global de empleo

La Organización Internacional del Trabajo advirtió sobre una naciente crisis global de empleo y señaló que actualmente aún faltan alrededor de 50 millones de empleos que se perdieron durante la crisis financiera. A pesar de que en algunas regiones las señales de crecimiento han resurgido, la situación global del empleo es alarmante y no muestra signos de que vaya a recuperarse en un futuro cercano, dijo la OIT en un documento titulado “Informe sobre el Trabajo en el Mundo 2012: Mejores Empleos para una Mejor Economía”. En el informe se atribuye el hecho anterior a factores que incluyen políticas de austeridad fiscal y las duras reformas del mercado laboral puestas en práctica por muchos gobiernos, en especial en las economías avanzadas, a la pérdida de confianza al igual que a la pérdida de habilidades de quienes buscan empleo, a las formas no estándar de empleo que van en aumento y al agravado clima social que podría conducir a más disturbios sociales. Las tasas de desempleo juvenil han aumentado alrededor de un 80% en los países desarrollados y en dos terceras partes en los países en desarrollo. En promedio, más del 40% de los solicitantes de empleo en las economías avanzadas han estado desempleados por más de un año, mientras que la mayoría de las economías en desarrollo muestran un descenso en el desempleo a largo plazo y en las tasas de inactividad. El empleo de medio tiempo involuntario ha aumentado en dos terceras partes de las economías avanzadas y el empleo temporal ha aumentado en más de la mitad de esas economías, mientras que el empleo informal se ubica en más de un 40% en dos terceras partes de los países emergentes y en desarrollo, según el informe. Se señaló que en los países desarrollados, especialmente en Europa, no se espera que el mercado laboral se recupere antes de finales de 2016, a menos que haya un cambio dramático en la dirección de las políticas. Si se emprende una combinación de políticas amigables con el empleo que incluyan impuestos, mayor gasto en inversión pública y prestaciones sociales, se podrían crear aprox. dos millones de empleos el próximo año en las economías avanzadas. (Agencia Xinhua, China – 30/04/2012)

My Faith-Based Retirement

My 60th birthday is less than a week and a half away, and if there is one thing I can say with certainty it’s that 60 is not the new 50. My body creaks and groans. My eyes aren’t what they used to be. I don’t sleep as soundly as I did just a few years ago. Lately, I’ve been seeing a lot of doctors, just to make sure everything still more or less works. I’ve found myself with a sudden urge to get my house in order just, you know, in case. Insurance, wills, that sort of thing. Sixty is when you stop pretending you’re going to live forever. You’re officially old. Or at least old-ish. The only thing I haven’t dealt with on my to-do checklist is retirement planning. The reason is simple: I’m not planning to retire. More accurately, I can’t retire. My 401(k) plan, which was supposed to take care of my retirement, is in tatters. (source: Joe Nocera – NYTimes – 28/04/2012)

Like millions of other aging baby boomers, I first began putting money into a tax-deferred retirement account a few years after they were legislated into existence in the late 1970s. The great bull market, which began in 1982, was just gearing up. As a young journalist, I couldn’t afford to invest a lot of money, but my account grew as the market rose, and the bull market gave me an inflated sense of my investing skills. I became such an enthusiast of the new investing culture that I wrote my first book, in the mid-1990s, about what I called “the democratization of money”. It was only right, I argued, that the little guy have the same access to the markets as the wealthy. In the book, I didn’t make much of the decline of pensions. After all, we were in the middle of the tech bubble by then. What fun! The bull market ended with the bursting of that bubble in 2000. My tech-laden portfolio was cut in half. A half-dozen years later, I got divorced, cutting my 401(k) in half again. A few years after that, I bought a house that needed some costly renovations. Since my retirement account was now hopelessly inadequate for actual retirement, I reasoned that I might as well get some use out of the money while I could. So I threw another chunk of my 401(k) at the renovation. That’s where I stand today. When I related my tale recently to Teresa Ghilarducci, a behavioral economist at The New School who studies retirement and investor behavior, she let out the kind of sigh that made it clear that she had heard it all before. The sad truth, she told me, is that I’m the rule, not the exception. “People have income shock, like divorce or loss of a job or a health crisis,” and those crises tend to drain retirement accounts, she said. But even putting income shocks aside, she said, most human beings lack the skill and emotional wherewithal to be good investors. Linking investing and retirement has turned out to be a recipe for disaster.

“People tend to be overconfident about their own abilities,” said Teresa Ghilarducci. “They tend to focus on the short term rather than thinking about long-term consequences. And they tend to think that whatever the current trend is will always be the trend. That is why people buy high and sell low”. Financial advisers, at least the good ones, are forever telling their clients to be disciplined, to create a diversified portfolio and to avoid trying to time the market. Sound as that advice is, it’s just not how most humans behave. That data starkly backs up Ghilarducci’s contention. According to the Employee Benefit Research Institute, for instance, only 22% of workers 55 or older have more than $250,000 put away for retirement. Stunningly, 60% of workers in that same age bracket have less than $100,000 in a retirement account. Ghilarducci told me that the average savings for someone near retirement in America right now is $100,000. Even buttressed by Social Security, that’s not going to last very long. What, then, will people do when they retire? I asked Ghilarducci. “Their retirement plan is faith based”, she replied. “They have faith that it will somehow work out”. I laughed, but it’s not funny. “The 401(k),” she concluded, “is a failed experiment. It is time to rethink it”. In truth, I’m one of the lucky ones. I do work I love, which requires no heavy lifting and has no mandatory retirement age. If I become incapacitated, I will have assisted-living insurance. Otherwise, I can keep writing till I drop. But, for millions of others who have discovered, that their original enthusiasm for investing was unwarranted, their faith-based retirement plan is all they’ve got left. 

A responsabilidade dos líderes e a Rio+20

O debate sobre o futuro do planeta tem muito de assustador. As análises científicas sobre mudanças climáticas e degradação ambiental deixam vislumbrar o Apocalipse logo ali, na próxima esquina. Enquanto isso, o grau de sucesso das inúmeras reuniões e conferências sobre o assunto leva a crer que os líderes mundiais, com raras exceções, lutam com unhas e dentes para que nada mude, como numa roleta russa mundial. À medida em que se aceleram preparativos para a Rio+20, em junho, essas sensações parecem mais evidentes. Mas aumenta o senso de urgência para que se inicie, finalmente, uma ação coordenada e responsável que rompa impasses, quebre paradigmas, nocauteie o desânimo e permita a todos os envolvidos na batalha pela defesa do planeta, ao menos, um suspiro de alívio. Como lembrou o ministro Gilberto Carvalho, o mundo acabaria se todos passassem a consumir nos mesmos padrões dos muito ricos. Ele evitou usar países ricos, um avanço. Hoje vastas camadas da população, sobretudo nos emergentes, também consomem como ricos que são. É positivo deixar-se de lado o jogo de empurra entre países ricos e em desenvolvimento, embora na prática este continue sendo um dos grandes entraves ao consenso sobre o que deve ser feito. Numa reunião preparatória para a Rio+20, o senador Cristovam Buarque diagnosticou: “Cada chefe de Estado quer dar uma solução ao seu problema e não ao do planeta”. Isto precisa mudar, sob pena de responsabilidade diante das próximas gerações. Tem razão o secretário-executivo do Ministério do Meio Ambiente, Francisco Gaetani, para quem o recurso mais escasso para a implementação do desenvolvimento sustentável “não é dinheiro, mas coordenação”. A opinião foi reforçada pela ministra da Cooperação para o Desenvolvimento Internacional da Suécia, Gunilla Carlsson: “Há um senso de urgência de que precisamos nos comportar de forma mais responsável, para ter mais sustentabilidade tanto econômica quanto social. Os últimos anos de crises, pobreza persistente, mudanças climáticas e instabilidade financeira mostram que é preciso que os líderes se juntem e concordem que temos que resolver as coisas em conjunto.” A forte crise econômica que o mundo atravessa não é desculpa para a inação. Até porque deve servir de motor de arranque para o início das transformações necessárias ao desenvolvimento sustentável, aquele que melhore a vida das populações mas também preserve os recursos naturais. O mundo está diante talvez de sua maior oportunidade de usar o espetacular avanço tecnológico das últimas décadas para resolver impasses aparentemente insolúveis. No caso brasileiro, alguns estranham que o país fale em desenvolvimento sustentável enquanto investe pesadamente na produção de petróleo. Esse é o papel da tecnologia: viabilizar, por exemplo, a exploração do pré-sal com um mínimo de dano ambiental. Mas pouco será conseguido se não houver, junto com conferências e compromissos globais, uma mudança comportamental de todos. Conforme disse ao GLOBO o fotógrafo francês Yann Arthus-Bertrand, “precisamos de amor ao próximo, de uma verdadeira revolução espiritual, que nada tem a ver com religião e, sim, com a ética. As pessoas precisam mudar a forma como pensam e vivem”. (O Globo – 29/04/2012)

Words of the Prophets

As I walk around the streets of Beirut, that verse from “The Sounds of Silence” keeps rattling around in my head: “The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls, and tenement halls …” There is a highly revealing graffiti war going on here pitting opponents of Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad, and his Lebanese ally, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, on one side and their Lebanese and Syrian supporters on the other. Assad and Nasrallah have long called themselves “the resistance” to Israel, using that to build their legitimacy and to justify arming themselves against their own people. What is stunning to me is how much their masks have now been ripped off by their own people. It is written on the tenement walls around Beirut. The latest collection includes slogans like “The resistance is only resisting our freedom,” or Assad’s picture above the words “Step here” and “The one who kills his own people is a traitor.” (source: Thomas L. Friedman – NYTimes – 28/04/2012)

Both Assad and Nasrallah still have their sectarian followers, but outside of that shrinking circle they have lost the aura they cultivated from “resisting Israel”. Now both men stand naked before Arab world for all to see, one using arms to “resist” the will of many Syrians and the other to “resist” the will of many Lebanese. Their people are no longer afraid to openly mock them. Hanin Ghaddar, a rising young Lebanese Shiite journalist, last week wrote an open letter to Hassan Nasrallah published by the popular NOWLebanon.com, saying, “You were the brave hero who vanquished the Israeli Army in 2006 and brought dignity back to the Arabs. But you know what? These glorious days are over, and the word ‘dignity’ has now gained a new definition. It has nothing to do with your sacred arms and glorious victory. It is now about the power of the people on the street and their fight against their dictators….Let us imagine this far-fetched scenario. When the uprising broke out in Syria, let’s say you came out in full support of freedom, or at least clearly asked the Syrian regime to refrain from using violence against the protesters. Can you imagine how popular and loved you would have been today? The Syrian people, from all sects, had photos of you hanging in their shops and homes after 2006. Today they burn your pictures on the streets. They hate you. The Syrian people hate you. The Egyptians, Tunisians, Libyans and many other Arabs hate you, because you support a tyrant who is killing his own people”. But what to do about Syria’s uprising? Let’s start by putting it in historical context. What is happening in Syria, and across Arab world today, is the first popular movement since the late 19th and early 20th century that has not been animated by foreign policy or anticolonialism or Israel or Britain. Instead, says Paul Salem, director of Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut, “it is about us and our jobs and accountable government….It is a profound reorientation to domestic priorities and pragmatism. It is a quest for dignity”, emerging from the bottom up. The Syrian uprising, it is crucial to remember, began as a nonviolent protest by young men over corruption in the Syrian town of Dara’a, for which they were brutally tortured. It stayed remarkably nonviolent, nonsectarian for months, under the slogan “Silmiya, Silmiya.” (Or Peaceful, Peaceful). It was deliberately turned into a civil war by Assad. Syrian opposition activists in Beirut make clear Assad opened fire on unarmed demonstrators, hoping to provoke a violent backlash. Then he could argue that this was not a peaceful democratic revolt but a sectarian revolt by Syria’s Sunni Muslim majority, aimed at ousting Assad’s ruling Alawite/Shiite minority and its allies. To some degree, it worked: Now we have a democratic struggle intertwined with a sectarian one.

This is why some Lebanese and Syrian activists here believe that, though it’s a long shot, it is still worth giving time for the U.N. envoy Kofi Annan’s effort to consolidate a cease-fire and put 300 Arab observers inside Syria, because it might create the space for the nonviolent, nonsectarian, democratic protests to re-emerge. These are the real threat to the regime. It may take longer, but remember: The bloodier and more sectarian the fight to depose Assad gets, the more deformed, violent and Islamist-dominated the post-Assad regime will likely be and the more the civil war there will spread to Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan or Iraq. That is why just arming the Syrian opposition and standing back is a bad idea. If the Annan plan fails, then the West, United Nations and the Arab League need to move swiftly to set up a no-fly zone or humanitarian corridor, on the Turkish-Syrian border, that can provide a safe haven for civilians being pummeled by the regime and send a message to the exhausted Syrian Army and residual supporters of Assad that it is time for them to decapitate this regime and save themselves and the Syrian state. The quicker Assad falls, the less sectarian blood that is shed and the more of the Syrian state that survives, the less difficult a difficult rebuilding will be. “Everyone expects these Arab revolutions to solve the problems, but what they are actually doing is revealing the existence of all these problems that were put in a freezer”, the Arab commentator Hazem Saghieh told me. “All these years, the only thing that was allowed to come to the surface was that there is a consensus on the beloved leader and animosity to Israel and imperialism. There was no room for politics and differentiation. Behind this facade, Arab society became rotten, and now we are seeing the return of the repressed”. It’s like a kid who was beaten and left uneducated by his parents for 50 years and one day the kid decides to fight back. “Morally, you have to support his right to revolt, but this guy is very traumatized.” So let’s help in an intelligent, humane way, but with no illusions that this transition will be easy or a happy ending assured. 

Brasil desloca militares após Bolívia expulsar brasileiros na fronteira

O Ministério da Defesa brasileiro deslocou uma tropa para o município de Capixaba, a 70 quilômetros de Rio Branco, após o exército da Bolívia ter retomado o processo de expulsão de brasileiros. Além disso, o governo brasileiro fez um protesto formal ao Ministério de Relações Exteriores da Bolívia contra o que considera ser uma “ação inaceitável” das forças armadas do país vizinho. Ontem, o encarregado de negócios da Embaixada do Brasil em La Paz, Eduardo Sabóia, foi recebido no Ministério das Relações Exteriores da Bolívia e o secretário-geral das Relações Exteriores, Ruy Nogueira, conversou com o vice-ministro de Relações Exteriores daquele país. Agora, o governo brasileiro aguarda resposta oficial do governo boliviano. Existem mais 500 colonos brasileiros na região do Alto Acre, que abrange os municípios de Capixaba, Acrelândia, Plácido de Castro, Epicilância, Brasiléia e Assis Brasil, de acordo com o Blog da Amazônia. Além dos colonos, existem 50 produtores rurais com pequenas fazendas, que variam de 100 a 300 hectares de pastagens. De acordo com brasileiros, militares fardados do Exército boliviano invadiram casas de ao menos dez famílias de colonos. Eles teriam expulsado famílias, se apropriado de bens, matado animais para consumo das tropas e ateado fogo em uma das casas. O grupo estaria agora na região em acampamentos e deu um ultimato de 15 dias para que os brasileiros deixem o local. Segundo o secretário de Justiça e Direitos Humanos do Acre, Nilson Mourão, citado pelo O Globo, os membros do Exército chegaram a entrar em território brasileiro fardados e armados em busca de combustível e alimentos, o que contraria a legislação internacional, que impede essa movimentação sem notificação prévia ao país. “O grave é que a Bolívia não parece empenhada em manter boas relações diplomáticas. Qualquer ação militar que envolva os exércitos dos dois países na fronteira deve ser comunicada, mas nem o Exército Brasileiro, nem o Itamaraty e nem o governo do Acre foram informados da operação. A situação exige por parte da diplomacia brasileira um protesto forte junto aos diplomatas bolivianos”, disse Mourão ao Blog da Amazônia. Os brasileiros se instalaram em região proibida pela legislação da Bolívia, que veta a moradia de estrangeiros em uma faixa de até 50km da fronteira. O grupo é formado por pequenos agricultores, que vivem da castanha e do açaí e também por criadores de gado. O reassentamento destas famílias já havia sido acordado entre os governos do Brasil e da Bolívia e vinha sendo colocado em prática de modo gradual. Cerca de 160 famílias já se mudaram, mas ainda existe um total estimado em 300 famílias na região. Segundo Mourão, o governo brasileiro fez uma doação de 10 milhões de reais para que o país vizinho invista em desenvolvimento rural. “O Incra [Instituto Nacional de Colonização e Reforma Agrária] já adquiriu terra para assentar cerca de 150 agricultores familiares, o que deve ser feito nos próximos meses”. Enquanto a situação não se resolve, os moradores buscaram abrigo nas casas de parentes e amigos em Capixaba. (Fonte: Opera Mundi – 28/04/2012)

The French Don’t Know Their Place (In the Global Economy)

(…..) The real divide in this round was not between the left and right but between openness and closure. Sarkozy, Hollande, and François Bayrou (centrist candidate who received nine percent of the vote) all adhere to the idea that France benefits from globalization, even if they don’t say so, and are supportive of continuing the adventure of European integration. But the National Front’s Marine Le Pen and, to a lesser extent, the Left Front’s Jean-Luc Mélenchon represent “la France du non,” those voters who turned down the European constitution in 2005 and believe that the key to a better future is reasserting sovereignty. These voters feel that they have lost their country. For them, France has been taken over by immigrants at home, by Eurocrats in Brussels, by technocrats in the international institutions, and by financiers in the global markets. They would like to send a loud message against status quo. Only by acknowledging that the election in fact hung on the question of openness can one understand Pen’s extraordinary showing. Of course, she leads a party united by nationalism and anti-immigration sentiment. Scapegoating the “other”, especially if that other has North African origins or is Muslim, plays well among the fraction of the electorate she represents. And the massacres in Toulouse and Montauban last month, which saw a French-born radical Islamist of Algerian origin savagely murder soldiers and Jewish children, certainly served as a focal point and helped Le Pen at the polls. But her calls to halt immigration and give France back to the French were only a fraction of her platform. Even more than her father, Jean-Marie, who tried to broaden the National Front’s appeal with some success in 2002 election, Marine Le Pen focused her campaign on freeing France from outside pressures and constraints. She railed as much against Europe, ultraliberalism, and global markets as she did against immigrants. Indeed, the social makeup of her voters, young, with fewer chances at socioeconomic betterment than their parents, and working-class and retired people, resembles nothing so much as American Tea Partiers. In the runoff later this month, choice for French voters will come down to Nicolás Sarkozy and Hollande. And, as I argue below, that contest will not hinge on international economic policy, mostly because the candidates who offered a different vision on that front are now out of the running. In the next few weeks, Sarkozy and Hollande will try to avoid the uncomfortable truth that they are offering the same economic platform. In doing so, they will emphasize societal issues (…..)

Link: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/137372/sophie-meunier/the-french-dont-know-their-place-in-the-global-economy?page=show