A new left seems to be incubating in Latin America. A left that does not want to be an accomplice of authoritarian regimes that violate human rights and impose personal worship. A left that does not confuse wealth distribution with income distribution or wealth creation with rising commodity prices, and that understands the need to create wealth with genuine investment for distribution to be sustainable.
That new left, which is willing to denounce state crimes regardless of the ideological identity card shown by the regime that commits them, is showing signs of its advent through the elected president of Chile Gabriel Boric and the Peruvian president peter castle.
The young Chilean leader who defeated recalcitrant conservatism at the polls would surely reject any foreign military intervention in Venezuela or Nicaragua, but he did not stammer when saying that these regimes violate Human Rights, something that the Kirchnerism neither him correism nor the MOST of Evo Morales.
Many things can be questioned about the president of Peru, in general clumsiness and lack of experience that generate serious problems and complications. But he has made it clear that he does not adhere at all to the power models of Nicolas Maduro and Daniel Ortega. In addition, he made it clear that wherever there are political prisoners, electoral farces, censorship and political persecution, he will do the same as Gabriel Boric: he will not hesitate to denounce him.
The new president of Honduras. The first female head of state in Honduran history, and the fourth in Central America along with Nicaraguan Violeta Chamorro, Panamanian Mireya Moscoso and Costa Rican Laura Chinchilla, has given signs of something new.
On the one hand, it managed to break the eternal bipartisanship of Honduras. With it came to power a political force that is neither the Liberal Party nor the National Party, Central American equivalents to what the Democratic Party and the Republican Party represent in the United States. Honduran bipartisanship originates nineteenth century. The center-left first came to the Honduran presidency in the last decade of the 19th century, with Policarpo Bonilla, the founder of the Liberal Party.
Of that center left In recent years, the leftist party emerged that brought Xiomara Castro to the position that a coup d’état snatched from her husband in 2009. Does that mean that his government will lead the country, from the corrupt right that governed it with Porfirio Lobo and with Juan Orlando Hernández, to a left that tries to replace the republican institutionality as it did Hugo Chavez in Venezuela? Will she try to return to the course her husband pointed to by incorporating Honduras into ALBA, the alliance of governments that received subsidized Venezuelan oil if they aligned with Chavez’s regional leadership?
Manuel Zelaya He has returned to the presidential residence from which he was taken, in pajamas and pointed at by rifles, at five in the morning of July 28, 2009. But this time, the position that that coup d’état snatched from him is not held by him but by his wife. And although Xiomara was a member of the Liberal Party and was a promoter of its women’s branch, until the overthrow of her husband she was above all a businesswoman dedicated to the administration of family businesses.
The coup perpetrated by the liberal deputy Roberto Micheletti with the support of the Judiciary and the military leadership led her to battle in the center of the political scene. He promoted the massive march in Tegucigalpa that demanded the return of Zelaya months after the overthrow. Along with her husband, she split a sector of the Liberal Party and founded the Libertad y Refundación party, better known by its acronym: FREE. She lost as a candidate for president against Juan Orlando Hernández. He also lost to Hernández’s re-election, this time as Salvador Nasralla’s vice-presidential candidate (in Honduras the position is called a presidential appointee). But he won the third attempt, with Nasralla running for vice.
Regarding the course that his government will take, what seems revealing is that the highest figures of the regimes that prevail in the country have not been invited to his assumption of command. Venezuela, Nicaragua and Cuba. The daughter of Hugo Chávez attended for Venezuela but Maduro, Diosdado Cabello and Vice President Delcy Rodríguez were not invited. Nor was the Nicaraguan despot invited Daniel OrtegaNot even Vice President Rosario Murillo. Foreign Minister Denis Moncada attended for Nicaragua.
With kamala harris As a stellar figure, the postcard from Tegucigalpa contrasted with that of Managua when Ortega resumed flanked by Maduro, Cuban President Díaz Canel and the Iranian Vice President for Economic Affairs and responsible for the AMIA massacre, Mohsen Rezai.
If to this is added the bankruptcy in which PDVSA fell for giving away oil to finance the construction of leadership that Chávez was carrying out beyond Venezuela, the conclusion is that there are no reasons for Xiomara Castro resume the path that her ostentatious and demagogic husband had begun, whose drift in no way justifies the coup d’état that overthrew him, starting a decade of corrupt and calamitous conservative governments.
The other reason is that the Biden administration supported the electoral campaign of the new president. Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Brian Nichols traveled to Honduras to show support for the Democratic administration. Later, Uzra Zeya, Undersecretary of State for Civil Security, Democracy and Human Rights, did the same.
The initial reason for this North American support is in the ssuspicions of the CIA and the DEA about possible links between Juan Orlando Hernández and drug cartels. In fact, the brother of the conservative leader who has just left the presidency is in prison for drug trafficking in the United States.
But in addition to Hernández’s corruption and mafia ties, the US government seems to trust Xiomara Castro, betting that it will try to follow a path of reforms like the one it is proposing Gabriel Boric for Chile: that does not imply authoritarian models of power, or personalistic cult, or statist economies that are not sustainable.
In short, a institutionalist progressivism liberal-democratic.
