The
RIO DE
JANEIRO, BRAZIL
{12-05-2019}
CARNIVOROUS LEFT IN LATIN AMERICA:
PROFITS AND LOSSES 2019/2020
Jorge Hernández Fonseca
2019 will go into Latin American history
as a very “moved” year from the
political point of view, where the
right-left camps alternated
“transcendently”. All actions, in
different countries and of various
kinds, are intimately connected. The
process began in Venezuela with the
proclamation of Juan Guaidó as president
in charge, passing Nicolás Maduro to be
considered illegitimate president,
opening the crisis.
The above was accompanied by a massive
popular mobilization and successive
episodes of questioning of Maduro's
authority, such as the recognition of
Guaidó by almost 60 important countries
of the World, a frustrated attempt to
enter Venezuela with humanitarian aid
that Venezuelan government rejected and
even a serious threat of coup d'etat,
with the participation of high-ranking
mature leaders. No one doubted that
Maduro would fall.
In the midst of this environment, the US
tempted to move to Colombia and Brazil
to accompany it in a military action
against Venezuela, rejected by all the
countries of the “Lima Group” and
specially by Colombian President Iván
Duque. Maduro managed to “weather the
storm” and as a representative of the
carnivorous left in South America,
summoned the San Pablo Forum to prepare
a counterattack, which would take the
threatening crisis out of its territory.
A false move by Lenin Moreno in Ecuador
gave the starting whistle. The organized
hordes of the carnivorous left attacked
disproportionately the infrastructure,
both in Quito and Guayaquil, with an
unprecedented attack on "popular"
demonstrations. Moreno had to
capitulate, leaving the main Ecuadorian
cities very affected.
Then, another "skid" of President Piñera
in Chile, led to a planned and
devastating attack on the infrastructure
of the Santiago Metro, looting of
supermarkets, businesses and homes, far
exceeding the police response, which
plunged Chilean society into the
greatest helplessness, subject to
vandals of all kinds. Revenge against
its exemplary democracy.
In parallel, the Bolivian people were
well rebelling against the fraud of Evo
Morales that would perpetuate him in
power. Then, the left lost the elections
in Uruguay, cutting off long years of
governments that supported
Castro-Chavismo. In Brazil, Bolsonaro
had a law passed that protects his
police against vandals. Then, as if by
magic, the carnivorous left attacked
Colombia to ask for the head of
President Duque, who had refused
military action against Venezuela and
now received an asymmetric war from his
neighbor to rank the Colombian left's
values , facing the replacement of Duke
- right now if it falters - or in the
next presidential elections.
The United States, a natural ally of the
Latin American democracies, has already
blamed Cuba and Venezuela for these
attacks, but has not ruled in the field
of actions. Will you continue to the
Lima Group thinking that military action
against Venezuela is not convenient, in
response to these attacks? Will Duque
think that a military action against his
neighbor does not respond to Colombian
interests, directly attacked by Maduro
and Cabello?
The panorama remains open. In the fray,
the left has lost two important places:
Bolivia and Uruguay; but it has dealt
important blows in Ecuador, Chile and
Colombia. In 2020 there are presidential
elections in the USA. Would it respond
to the electoral interests of President
Trump, that the US (with or without
Colombia and Brazil) solve “the
Venezuelan problem” by military means?
The answer to this question will
delineate the actions within Venezuela
2020 as a democratic response to the
excesses of the carnivorous left, with
consequences in Brazil?
***********************************
RIO DE
JANEIRO, BRAZIL
{12-01-2019}
AMERICA: THE COUNTER ATTACK OF THE
CASTRO-CHAVISTA LEFT
Jorge Hernández Fonseca
The attack of the masses - supposedly
well intentioned - on the
infrastructures of Ecuador, Chile and
Colombia (so far) we all know that they
originated from structured plans in the
Castro-Chavist laboratories of Havana
and Caracas. These accurate and
destructive "popular" attacks also have
more or less real justifications for
problems that these countries present
and / or were initiated as a
premeditated reaction to unpopular
measures.
That said, I personally believe that the
current situation that Latin America is
going through must be seen as a whole. A
global perspective would be to see these
widespread excesses as a revenge of
Castro-Chavismo to the critical
situation that Maduro's Venezuela went
through earlier this year, beset by
popular demonstrations and the
proclamation of Juan Guairo as President
in Charge, questioning the dubious
legitimacy of Maduro at the head of the
Executive. The Maduro's head is not
worth a penny, but he failed to defeat.
Latin America, represented by the Lima
Group, had opposed a military
intervention - which was what the
situation demanded - to close the game
against in Venezuela. Earlier this year,
the defense ministers of Colombia and
Brazil, which have borders with
Venezuela, were summoned to Washington.
It is not difficult to imagine that it
was to coordinate the war actions. I
remember that the new president of
Brazil, Jair Bolsonaro, had expressed
his support for this solution, but
President Duque aborted the attempt and
now pays with an asymmetric war in his
country, while Venezuela is pleased.
Historical experience tells us that
every time a wrong decision is made in
the military field (it is the current
Latin American field) the consequences
are very expensive. Colombia (and the
Lima group) did not want war (against
Chavista Venezuela) due to humanitarian
circumstances, but it turns out that it
is now Venezuela that has taken the
dreaded war to its own spaces,
irregularly and asymmetrically, but
painfully and cruel .
Castro-Chavismo has Brazil in its sights
for the continuation of its asymmetric
war within the South American Giant, but
Bolsonaro has already taken preventive
measures. Everything could have been
avoided if, at the beginning of the
year, that war against Chavismo, the
Lima Group (which now suffers from the
costly consequences of its indecision,
or its bad decision) would have cut it
off for its sake, also freeing the
suffering of the Venezuelan people. Now
there is war within democratic Latin
America, Venezuelans continue to be
oppressed and Castro-Chavismo alive.
The circumstances that occurred at the
beginning of the year in Latin America
are no longer the same. Brazil, which at
that time had entered into the
confrontation, no longer thinks alike
and although the attacked Colombia is
now more prone to the military solution
against its Venezuelan neighbor, in the
US there is an electoral environment
that may not help in this regard. Lost
opportunity.
The lessons of World War II are
decisive. At the beginning of it, the
future allies against fascism, all, to
avoid war, allowed with their weakness
that Hitler had free hands to act, as we
now allow Castro and Maduro. Errors are
paid dearly; It is hard to recognize
that the current excesses could have
been avoided.
***********************************
RIO DE
JANEIRO, BRAZIL
{10-28-2019}
IMPEACHEMENT AGAINST DONALD TRUMP: TWO
HIPOTHESES
Jorge Hernández Fonseca
In the United States, in the face of the 2020 elections, there is an
Impeachment movement against the current president, partially
officialized by the leader of the US Democratic Party. Logically,
hypotheses have been made in this regard, based on the principle,
"in politics, the important thing is what is not said." Personally I
have two hypotheses, which I will expose, to follow this clodely
interesting and risky episode (for the Democrats).
It is not a secret for anyone, including Trump, that there will also
be news of all kinds against the Democratic candidate who leads the
nomination for election run by that party, Joe Biden, who drags his
son in the debate, because somehow they were the origin of Trump's
supposed “sins,” in private conversation with the president of
Ukraine.
Both hypotheses originate with the question, to whom does this
process suit? The first hypothesis immediately jumps: to the
Democratic candidates who go after Biden in the run for the primary
elections. Trump hypothetically seems to be weakened with the
impeachment - if he comes alive - Elizabeth Warren and Bernie
Sanders would be the main beneficiaries. By intuition I think that
Sanders could be behind this strategy, because Biden would get
“badly hurt” from the incident and Mrs. Warren has been very beaten
by Trump.
The second hypothesis is based on the fact that it is practically
impossible for Trump to be replaced from his position at the end of
the process, because his party dominates the Senate vote, which is
essential for pulling Trump out of the presidency. In that case and
adding that hypothesis to the analysis, President Trump himself
would have been the one who set this "trap" to the Democrats.
Indeed, the process is going to involve Trump, but he has Biden and
his son as co-participants, with accusations that seems to be as, or
more serious than those made to the president.
Personally I prefer the hypothesis that Trump was the origin of
everything. First, the process would always end without its
replacement for the reasons stated above and second, it is very
suspicious and too casual, that everything came to the public at the
time that the president of Ukraine was in the US and could appear
with Trump before the press to exonerate him from the main
accusation. There will be a serious "shooting" of accusations
between Trump and Biden during the impeachment, but, the most harmed
would be Biden, because Trump elevates his possibilities of
reelection.
***********************************
***********************************
RIO DE
JANEIRO, BRAZIL
{10-09-2019}
THE PROBABLE STAGES OF CUBa's future
Jorge Hernández Fonseca
Before the materialization on the island of an
attempt to model the continuity of the political, economic and
social cancer that Castroism has meant for the Cuban Nation, taking
hostage a patriotic date that is alien to it - on October 10 - I
want to expose my considerations on what will be in the future the
recognition of socialist failure, the defeat of the dictatorship and
the opening of the skies of the Fatherland to new economic, social
and political directions.
Tomorrow, October 10, nothing important will happen for the country.
The important thing will come with the physical disappearance of the
last Castro Ruz at the head of the country's destinations. Whoever
the designated successor may be (everyone on the island knows about
Castro's failure) there will be an initial stage of going to
capitalism in the economy, just as China and Viet Nam did before,
but without political freedom. However, during this first stage
Cubans can finally have breakfast, lunch and dinner. It is not all
that a good Cuban wants for his country, but it will be “the”
beginning.
This stage will be welcomed by the United States, whoever is the
ruling president, because the US elite appreciates Cuba - in these
moments - much more its social stability than the change of its
political regime. Of course, the US would like a democracy on the
island, but in the face of current reality, it prefers the
maintenance of the internal "order" of Castroism and the containment
of proven crime, rather than the adventure of a power vacuum that
re-edit control of the country in Cuba that the narco has in Mexico
and Central America today.
Freedom and democracy for Cuba will come “over time” - as a second
stage - when the concepts associated with these values are conscious
in the minds of a people who today are forced only to think about
their livelihood, of some rulers who they have lost their way by
oppressing their fellow citizens to the limit, when the material
hardships of socialism are a sad memory and the guilt of Castroism
is part of reality.
Who writes these lines wishes for an immediate democratic future for
Cuba, at any price. But in the eyes of the United States, a Cuban
opposition government does not seem conducive immediately. Too many
organizations would fight to govern, which have shown little unity
spirit and the northern neighbor fears that the instability
resulting from the struggle for power will affect them because of
their proximity to their coasts. They prefers a gradual solution,
which coincides with the interests of those who will inherit the
socialist disaster, which pits a solution in stages.
It is of secondary importance who inherits the presidency or the
vice presidency, who is designated by finger in the future as prime
minister, whether they are descendants of Fidel or Raúl, whether
they are unknown or not, everyone has in their minds the necessary
changes that Fidel and Raul never wanted for your country, but that
will happen expeditiously, as happened in the Soviet Union. A failed
regime that was reissued on the island, losing 60 years and that
will hardly recover for Cuba the dynamics of when it was a Republic,
but that by stages will provide its people with the necessary
stability to begin the long road of rebuilding.
***********************************
RIO DE
JANEIRO, BRAZIL
{09-29-2019}
IMPEACHMENT AGAINST DONALD TRUMP: TWO
HYPOTHESES
Jorge Hernández Fonseca
In the
United States, in the face of the 2020 elections, there is an
Impeachment movement against the current president, partially
officialized by the leader of the US Democratic Party.
Logically, hypotheses have been made in this regard, based on the
principle, "in politics, the important thing is what is not said."
Personally I have two hypotheses, which I will expose, to follow
this closely interesting and risky episode (for the Democrats).
It is not a secret for anyone, including Trump, that there will also
be news of all kinds against the Democratic candidate who leads the
nomination for election run by that party, Joe Biden, who is dragging his
son in the debate, because somehow they were the origin of Trump's
supposed “sins,” that resulted from a private telephone conversation with the president of
Ukraine.
Both hypotheses originate with the question, to whom does this
process suit? The first hypothesis immediately jumps: to the
Democratic candidates who compete against Biden in the run for the primary
elections. Trump hypothetically seems to be weakened with the
impeachment - if he comes alive - Elizabeth Warren and Bernie
Sanders would be the main beneficiaries. By intuition I think that
Sanders could be behind this strategy, because Biden would get
“badly hurt” from the incident and Mrs. Warren has been very beaten
by Trump.
The second hypothesis is based on the fact that it is practically
impossible for Trump to be replaced from his position at the end of
the process, because his party dominates the Senate vote, which is
essential for pulling Trump out of the presidency. In that case and
adding that hypothesis to the analysis, President Trump himself
would have been the one who set up this "trap" for the Democrats.
Indeed, the process is going to involve Trump, but he has Biden and
his son as co-participants, with accusations that seems to be as, or
more serious than, those made against the president.
Personally, I prefer the hypothesis that Trump was the origin of
everything. First, the process would always end without his
replacement for the reasons stated above and second, it is very
suspicious and too casual, that everything came to the public at the
time when the president of Ukraine was in the US and was able to
appear with Trump before the press to exonerate him from the main
charges. There will be a serious "shooting" of accusations between
Trump and Biden during the impeachment, but, the most harmed would
be Biden, because Trump will be ratified in his position.
Clear of the main obstacle that the Democrats have chosen to pull
Trump from the presidency, and from the 2020 election contest, Trump
has raised his reelection possibilities.
***********************************