domingo, 31 de enero de 2010

AVATAR: una metáfora del Perú

 

La última superproducción de James Cameron tiene dos lecturas bien definidas, aparte del fantástico mundo creado. Existe una dimensión política muy actual y una distorsión espiritual igualmente de moda.

avatar-foto16

Cameron incluye en la trama al un codicioso representante de la empresa extractora de minerales, a los ex militares que brindan protección con un ejército mercenario y que prefieren atacar en vez de negociar con los “nativos” (Na´vi), raza extraterrestre de seres pacíficos cuyo bienestar está directamente ligado al bosque de la luna “Pandora”. Políticamente, Avatar refleja la constante denuncia que los activistas por la preservación del medio ambiente realizan en contra de las empresas explotadoras de recursos naturales. La trama de la película es una metáfora que bien podría describir el constante conflicto que existe entre las comunidades andinas y las empresas mineras, las cuales están igualmente protegidas por empresas privadas de seguridad, mercenarios al servicio del abundante dinero que las mineras les dispensan y que no dudan discriminar y asesinar a los dirigentes comunales que se les oponen. El mismo caso de la “curva del diablo” en Bagua tiene su origen en este fenómeno del abuso de un gobierno al servicio de los intereses privados, las empresas explotadores de los recursos.

avatar-foto15

Desde el punto de vista espiritual una de las mayores distorsiones está en la de dar a la naturaleza atributos divinos. En el siglo XXI se viene aumentando la tendencia a rescatar antiguas creencias animistas de origen nativo que son adoptadas por modernos deístas. En este supuesto “redescubrir la religión”, los creyentes retroceden a la adoración de los fenómenos y objetos naturales tal y como lo hicieron los seres humanos en la antigüedad, cuando no existía una explicación para los mismos. En la película Avatar los Na´vi poseen una conexión física (no espiritual) con el bosque y con ciertos árboles místicos que contienen las almas (de parecido a las creencias druidas) de los antepasados, además de una conexión general con todo el bosque. Es una interesante metáfora para comparar la conexión cultural de naciones como los Wampis del Perú con el bosque amazónico, quienes han vivido miles de años en armonía con su entorno y que hoy sienten que está en peligro.

avatar-foto6

En resumen, Avatar es una divertida película que puede resultar familiar a muchos peruanos, especialmente a quienes han perdido sus comunidades a manos de la insaciable codicia extractiva.

sábado, 30 de enero de 2010

jueves, 28 de enero de 2010

¿Aumento de sueldos para las fuerzas armadas y la policía? No parece probable.

 

Por: Iván Izquierdo Elliot

billetes copy Imagínese que en la empresa que Ud. trabaja, el gerente de recursos humanos o su gerente de área le ha ofrecido un sustancial aumento de sueldo y el gerente general participa de la importante noticia. Ud. y sus colegas vivirán durante varios días el entusiasmo de la perspectiva de mejoramiento económico que posiblemente les permitirán cumplir con algunos objetivos familiares largamente postergados. Luego de algunos días el gerente financiero anuncia que el prometido aumento de sueldo no será viable dada la mala situación económica de la empresa. Días antes, el gerente general había anunciado que las metas financieras de la empresa habían sobrepasado todas las expectativas y se habían alcanzado records de ventas, animando al gerente de área a ofrecer el esperado aumento de salarios. Ahora el gerente financiero brinda información contradictoria a la del gerente general y la del gerente de área, y para colmo de males, los gerentes hacen este tipo de anuncios a través del sistema de altavoces de las oficinas de manera que todos los empleados se enteran de la caótica situación ¿Ud. qué pensaría de los gerentes a cargo de la empresa? Posiblemente que son incapaces, que no tienen idea de lo que están haciendo, sin mencionar la burla a la que los empleados son sometidos.

Si el ejemplo le parece familiar, entonces acertó. Esta es la situación a la que han sido sometidos miles de miembros de las fuerzas armadas y policía nacional durante las últimas semanas, con la excepción de que, el presidente de la república (gerente general) ha sido incapaz de manifestarse para corregir las contradicciones en su gabinete ministerial. En mi particular opinión al presidente más le interesa inaugurar un resonador magnético de una empresa privada– que es el equivalente a inaugurar un avión pequeño o un yate moderno- que mostrar algún interés por el bienestar de los miembros de las fuerzas armadas.

La ministra de economía ha anunciado que el aumento de sueldos equivaldría a gastar 5500 millones de soles anuales. Tomando en cuenta que el presupuesto de la república es de aproximadamente 72 mil millones de soles, la cifra citada equivale al 7% del mismo. No parece ser una cifra inmanejable del presupuesto, entonces ¿Por qué la ministra se opone a dicho aumento?

La razón es por otras causas en las que existen fuerzas poderosas que se oponen al mejoramiento de los sueldos en general.

IMG_0741 

¿Quiénes se benefician?

La actual bonanza económica beneficia a solo el 1%, máximo al 2% de la población (600 mil personas). El cálculo exacto es casi imposible de definir, pero investigando las cifras de la economía formal se aprecia claramente esta tendencia[i]. A esto se debe sumar que el 60% de la economía es informal y todo esto viene distorsionado por el ingreso de 20 mil millones de dólares del tráfico ilícito de drogas[ii]. En este complicado panorama es la economía formal la que requiere ser controlada muy de cerca por conveniencia de los agentes financieros. La actual política gubernamental es muy celosa por evitar cualquier rebrote inflacionario con la excusa que este perjudicaría a los más pobres, verdad a medias. En realidad una pequeña inflación producto de factores de crecimiento es inevitable en una economía sana[iii] en la cual los salarios se reajustan según sea necesario. Pero quienes realmente pierden con cualquier proceso inflacionario son los bancos y los agentes financieros que han prestado dinero con altísimos intereses fijos. Las políticas ministeriales están diseñadas para evitar cualquier tendencia inflacionaria normal manteniendo el nivel de sueldos y salarios de la mayoría de la población artificialmente bajo, en compensación del proceso inflacionario producido por el 2% de la población que tiene el privilegio de consumir.

IMG_0748

El caso de las Fuerzas Armadas

Como señalé anteriormente, los miembros y pensionistas de las fuerzas armadas y la policía suman alrededor de 450 mil personas[iv]. Si el gobierno reajustara los sueldos de los grados de comandantes para abajo, supongamos al doble (lo cual sería el mínimo decoroso para arrastrar fuera de la línea de pobreza a la mayoría de los miembros de estas instituciones) se traduciría inmediatamente en el mejoramiento del poder adquisitivo de estas maltratadas familias y por consiguiente una presión inflacionaria sobre la pequeña economía formal del Perú. Además, los empleados del resto de sectores estatales tendrían el derecho de exigir el reajuste de sus salarios de forma equivalente.

En este panorama, la economía se aceleraría, las familias de clase media mejorarían su nivel de vida, el comercio crecería y el ministerio de economía y finanzas no podría mantener la inflación controlada. Los poderosos dueños del Perú, dueños de bancos y agentes financieros, los grandes perjudicados debido al bienestar de las mayorías, retirarían el apoyo político, económico y mediático al gobierno de turno. Los bancos extranjeros que han venido al Perú a especular con los exorbitantes intereses regresarían a sus países de origen, lo cual a la mayoría nos tendría sin cuidado.

La próxima vez que visite su banco, piense en el porque su sueldo no ha sido reajustado.


[i] Althaus de Jaime. La Revolución Capitalista.

[ii] Joseph Leslie, Kozac Robert. Perú Battles Thriving Drug Trade. The Wall Street Journal, set 22 2009.

[iii] Galbraith, John Kenneth. Una sociedad mejor.

[iv] Compendio estadístico del sector defensa y datos de la PNP.

lunes, 18 de enero de 2010

Chile’s Winds of Change: The Real Thing or The Most Discreet of Nudges

COHA

by COHA Research Associate Evan Ouellette

On December 13th, Chilean billionaire and rightwing candidate of the newly formed “Coalition for Change,” Sebastian Piñera, won a striking plurality of 44%. The modestly center-left Concertación candidate Eduardo Frei won 29% of the vote, forcing a runoff slated for January 17th. Since replacing the country’s brutal military dictator Augusto Pinochet through a national referendum in 1988, Chile’s center-left coalition, La Concertación, has achieved significant progress on both social and economic fronts, reducing Chile’s poverty rate from over 40% to approximately 15%, while boasting the region’s most impressive growth tempo since 1990.

When considered in the context of La Concertación’s well-documented success, the state of the current presidential elections is somewhat surprising. The nation’s current Concertación coalition president, Michelle Bachelet, has an approval rating of 81% as she approaches the end of her term. However, Concertación’s present candidate and former president, Eduardo Frei-Ruiz Tagle, has failed to ride the surge of Bachelet’s popular support and galvanize the now-fractured Concertación after Socialist party candidate Marco Enriquez-Ominami (MEO) split from the coalition in September to run as an independent.

According to the most recent opinion poll, Piñera, has a one point lead over rival Eduardo Frei heading into Sunday’s runoff election, down from the six point advantage reported on Monday by Opina S.A. As Piñera increasingly hinges his campaign rhetoric on the promise of change, the question arises: what improvements do Chileans hope to bring about by electing the first rightwing president in over 50 years, and what do they have in mind? Although La Concertación has failed to modernize Chile’s profoundly unequal education system and effectively combat crime and narco-trafficking, its twenty-year rule has been generally marked by impressive GDP growth, and a successful series of social reforms. A swing to the right would bring a new approach to these pressing issues, but it would come at a high price for the quality and quantity of Chilean democracy.

Chile’s dictatorial past still stings for a large sector of voters, including Bachelet, who was tortured under the Pinochet regime and refused him a state burial. Moreover, Concertación candidate Sen. Eduardo Frei’s father, also a former president, is widely believed to have died at the hands of Pinochet’s secret police, the DINA. What separates Pinochet from the majority of recent military dictators in Latin America is the malignant specter of his influence that continues to linger over certain power-wielding sectors of the Chilean oligarchy. Many Chileans respect, even venerate him, if only for his one-sided development model, whose role they falsely credit or at least exaggerate in saving the republic from economic collapse. La Concertación has largely continued the neoliberal policies responsible for the rapid economic growth generated by Pinochet’s U.S.-trained economic team, the Chicago Boys, while increasing the social spending necessary to combat the resulting spike in economic inequality, which continues to grow to this date. The economic policies of La Concertación have appeased many moderate voters, but recently the coalition has been perceived by the electorate as running out of dynamic solutions the republic’s most persistent problems.

Moving On

The results from the first round of elections may signal that Chile’s anxiety over electing a conservative president has largely diminished, even one whose brother served as Pinochet’s labor minister, orchestrating pension reforms under the regime. Piñera has stated to the Sunday Telegraph that, “I was against Pinochet,” and insisted that, “I’ve always reinforced my commitment towards democracy and human rights. Now is the time to look ahead and innovate and reform the government, and obviously to fight against inequality.” Nevertheless, he kept silent during the years of the dictatorship while building his fortune, quietly exploiting to the hilt the fruits derived from the oppression of labor rights pursued by Pinochet throughout his reign. During the only debate between the two candidates on January 12th, Eduardo Frei was quick to question Piñera’s sincerity on the issue, pointing out that he supported amnesty for those who had committed or covered up abuses under Pinochet. Frei continued that, if the proposal had gone through, his father’s death would never have been investigated.

A Nation Divided

Examples such as these highlight the divisions still present in Chile stemming from the overthrow of socialist president Salvador Allende and the ensuing exceedingly brutal military dictatorship. Margot Charles, a Chilean university professor interviewed by COHA, pointedly declared, “A vote for Piñera is a vote for Pinochet.” Although Piñera is unlikely to replicate the harsh political and social oppression under Pinochet, once in office, the political rhetoric aimed at garnering support from the left is likely to end, and he will return to his native policies in the hopes of appeasing his conservative base. Most troubling for many moderates is the presence of the UDI party, one that represents the most entrenched elite and the incorporation of the radical conservative interests.

Young people are clearly the most skeptical of Piñera, and although they were somewhat invigorated by the campaign of upstart independent Marco Enríquez-Ominami, they still did not come out in sufficient force in the first round of elections. Many seem poised to abstain or cast a null vote rather than support the old-world politico Eduardo Frei in the second round. Luis Zapata, a recent college graduate interviewed by COHA, reiterated that electoral apathy is nothing new among youths. In this case, he believes, it represents disillusionment with the democratic model now in effect, seen as furthering the interests of few, while marginalizing the needs of the many. Equally disconcerting for Chileans is the prospect of re-opening dictator-era wounds by appointing Pinochista cronies to prominent cabinet positions, something Piñera has pledged not to do. Regardless of political qualifications or a given individual’s prominence, any reminder of the brutal past couldn’t possibly benefit Chilean democracy.

In Search of an Attractive Candidate

Marco Enríquez-Ominami garnered a record 20% of the vote in the first round of elections as an independent socialist candidate. However, last September, he split from La Concertación after relations with party officials turned bitter over their refusal to conduct a referendum, allowing him to compete with Frei head on, despite being identified by virtually all opinion polls as favored in a run-off against Piñera. He is seen as being the linchpin to the second round of elections, with his supporters constituting what will surely become the deciding cohort of votes in the runoff. On January 13th he finally endorsed Frei publicly after erroneous speculation spread that he might remain neutral. He announced that, “Given the uncertainty that the right could block Chile’s march toward the future, it is my responsibility to contribute what I can so it doesn’t happen,” representing an indictment of the right more than a vibrant endorsement of the left. This theme was also present in MEO’s former political coordinator, Esteban Valenzuela’s, endorsement of Frei, who qualified his decision to support the former president by telling the conservative daily, El Mercurio, “the polls imply being pragmatic and opting to vote for that which is not ideal but closer to my political ideas: therefore, I am going to vote for Frei”. This indifference towards Frei has contributed to the reported 7% of voters who plan to make theirs into a protest vote. Conversely, Paul Fontaine, a close economic advisor to Enríquez-Ominami, has joined Piñera’s staff, and esteemed columnist, political scientist, and close Enríquez-Ominami supporter, Patricio Navia, recently made his endorsement of Piñera public. Although Enríquez-Ominami’s endorsement will give Frei a forward bump in this Sunday’s runoff, his ambiguous attitude thus far has clearly demonstrated to the public that Frei is not a candidate he enthusiastically supports.

Running Out of Steam

MEO’s rise in popularity and Frei’s slide can be directly linked to the disillusionment of a large sector of the La Concertación constituency and Chile’s left-leaning sector of the population, who feel the country is in need of a change. They view La Concertación as stagnant and lacking innovative ideas just when the country needs them most. Piñera has done well to capitalize on the perceived sluggishness of La Concertación and Frei’s lack of energy and charisma. While giving a speech at Santiago’s Catholic University, which served as the hotbed for the Pinochet era’s economic development decisions, Piñera claimed that, “Chileans know in their hearts that a long, long time ago, Concertación ran out of steam,” and that “the era of Concertación has passed.” He has endeavored to portray a more innovative and energized approach than rival Eduardo Frei, and a more experience-driven approach to substantive change than would have been implemented by the 36-year-old Enríquez-Ominami. He flaunted his business credentials and worked his charm to convince many voters that he is the only candidate able to both create new jobs (he promises a million of them over the next four years), while maintaining Bachelet’s more socially progressive policies, which are the core of her appeal. By wooing Mr. Fontaine, Piñera hopes to convince the electorate that his economic policy will not merely benefit the upper class, but also extend more opportunities to the middle and lower classes.

Misplaced Hope

Nevertheless, success in the boardroom will not necessarily ensure success in La Moneda, Chile’s presidential palace. Piñera’s billions were made through timely investments, not the entrepreneurialism and job creation that Chile will need in the next four years in order to achieve his core goals: weathering the tail end of the global financial meltdown, achieving 6% annual growth, and bolstering an educational system which is severely lagging and remaining markedly unequal. Unfortunately for Frei, all he can offer is more of the same, a tactic that leaves a bitter taste for many left-leaning Chileans ready for change.
Piñera has successfully marketed himself as the candidate of change and the historical significance of his election would be undeniable; nevertheless, the divisions between the two candidates may appear to be starker than they are in actuality. A victory for Frei would also signal a slight shift to the right on economic policy. The platform of his Christian Democrat Party is fairly more pro-business than the current position of Bachelet and her Socialist Party-led coalition, as was the case of Frei’s previous administration. Piñera has questioned Frei’s economic prowess by emphasizing that his first presidential term was the least successful of the past four Concertación administrations in terms of job creation, though he did maintain a 6% economic growth rate while in office. The philosophical foundation of free-market capitalism has taken a hit since the global financial crisis; however, if Chilean voters are willing to accept Piñera’s economic stewardship, it follows that Frei’s more tempered version would achieve similar results. Unfortunately, he possesses neither the economic credentials that Piñera flaunts as his driving qualifications, nor the fresh approach brought to the table by MEO, reinforcing the notion that under Frei, Chileans will simply receive more of the same.

Courting the Left

Piñera obviously has some advantage when it comes to economic electorability in the eyes of the Chilean public. Despite Chile’s alarmingly high GINI coefficient of .549 (a measure of inequality), the nation has warmed to the idea of a business-minded president. Currently the, the wealth gap in Chile is eclipsed by only Bolivia and Brazil amongst South American nations. Equally as important have been his astute attempts to make inroads to the left by marketing his domestic policies specifically toward social liberals and moderates. Piñera has done the same on a range of issues, including gay rights, environmental protection, and creating a dignified standard of living for the indigenous Mapuche population. Piñera was applauded by social liberals when he declared his support for a gay couple’s rights to inheritance as well as health and social security benefits. Furthermore, one of Piñera’s televised campaign ads included a gay couple holding hands and proclaiming, “People now accept us, but we still lack a government that respects us.” His support for such issues came only after the other three candidates already had done so and without any viable competition from the right. However, the act is unprecedented, since rightwing candidates rely on votes from the sizeable conservative Catholic population and radical UDI party to utilize its hostility.

During Monday’s debate, he reiterated his party’s newfound support for the availability of the morning after Morning After Pill, breaking from traditional right wing policy. He has pledged to protect his 300,000 acre swath of forested land in Patagonia in order to bolster his lagging environmental credentials. Nevertheless, he has not explicitly come out in opposition of the controversial Patagonian dam project or the Pinochet-era privatization of water rights, as Frei did during Monday’s debate, instead opting for a “wait and see” approach.

His bona fide support regarding the Mapuche cause is also similarly questionable. A pillar of his campaign has consistently been his call for stronger and more visible attitude toward law enforcement, an area in which current President Michelle Bachelet has received her lowest marks from the public: a meager 11% approval rating in the most recent public opinion poll. In the short-term, this could translate into the restriction of civil liberties and pointed civil repression, resulting in harsher crackdowns on protests, which already are allowed to be dispersed by riot-gear clad police officers, or carabineros, using tear gas and high-powered water cannons. A large number of public protests in recent months have stemmed from the Mapuche population’s calls for land rights and self-determination, and have resulted in deaths and widespread unrest. This build-up in the name of security will likely be linked to a general increase in police activity under the pretext of combating crime. These short-term solutions may quell conflicts on an individual basis, but will almost surely increase tension between the government and a restless Mapuche community. The concerns of Chile’s largest indigenous population would be more sustainably and reasonably addressed through constructive educational initiatives and more sincere efforts to foster a dignified standard of living.

These attempts by Piñera may simply have been shrewd political theatre on his part. Regardless of his sincerity, Piñera will find himself in a precarious position if elected. Will he follow through on the offers made by his rhetoric pitched to neglected sectors on the left, or be forced to kneel to the pressure of his staunch, power-wielding conservative base and renege on his campaign promises after being elected, if that proves to be his fate?

Regional Relations

Piñera’s most marked departure from Bachelet’s policy would most likely emerge in his approach to foreign relations. He is likely to temper his posture towards his leftist Latin American counterparts in the name of prudentialism. He has stated that he would craft his developmental model more along the lines of Brazil’s Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and Peru’s Alan García rather than Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez or Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega. However, it is difficult to envision the pro-business Piñera following closely in the footsteps of Lula, and his pro-union message; furthermore, his conservative diplomatic appointees predictably are likely to may revert to their far from moderate instincts.

Relations with Peru have been faltering at best; engendering goodwill toward Chile’s neighbor to the north might help to enhance trade between the two nations and also begin to leave old grudges in the past, while overcoming recent tensions after Lima lobbed accusations of espionage at Santiago last November. A victorious Piñera would be wise to cater to Brazil, the region’s emerging powerhouse, as this nation further expands its oil and natural gas reserves. Establishing closer trading ties now could prove a valuable pre-cursor to Brazil’s presidential elections slated for October which could bring right-leaning São Paolo governor Jose Serra to the presidency (he currently sits first in the polls). The sincerity of these efforts to foster amicable relations with leftist administrations in the region is still up for debate.

Aside from espousing some more indirect tactics, Piñera has been unequivocal in his support of the US-Colombian agreement allowing US troops to be stationed at seven military bases in the Latin American nation, a departure from the more sterile policy of the present Chilean Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mariano Fernandez, who has declared that, “decisions that every country takes are sovereign and must be respected.” Moreover, if Colombian President Álvaro Uribe goes through with a proposed constitutional amendment to extend term limits or yields to a like-minded successor, Piñera may find a sympathetic ear in a region dominated by leftwing governments.

Regardless of what far-reaching changes a victorious Piñera might entertain as president, he will to some extent be handcuffed by his Congress, which after the December 13th elections left both houses at a near deadlock. Local-level rightwing candidates and deputies have been able to win elections since Pinochet’s resignation, and the current numbers show the country is evenly divided along party lines. After twenty years of secure democratic rule, it appears Chileans are just now able to stomach the idea of a conservative executive. The election of Sebastian Piñera would certainly not erase the country’s recollection of bitter old memories of dictatorship and disappearances, although he hardly stands for a return to Pinochet-era repression and human rights abuse. The more prudent question for those heading to the ballot box this Sunday might be whether he really represents the change Chile needs right now, or if he will merely abandon his newfound sectors of support in order to strengthen his traditional conservative social policy and hawkish foreign policy. There are pressing issues which need to be addressed either through significant change or a revamping of Concertación policy. Unfortunately, the candidate representing real change, MEO, and the candidate who Chileans would like to see attempt to revitalize Concertación policy and build on its past successes, Bachelet, will not be on the ballot this Sunday.

domingo, 17 de enero de 2010

ELECCIONES EN CHILE: Las implicancias regionales de un evento nacional

 

Por: Iván Izquierdo Elliot

17/01/2010

Las elecciones presidenciales en Chile poseen un significado que trasciende las fronteras del país austral. El enfrentamiento entre el candidato de la concertación Frei (progresista) y el candidato Piñera (neoliberal) no solo definirá el futuro de Chile, sino que moverá las fichas del tablero político sudamericano.

La posición internacional de Chile durante la gestión de Michelle Bachelet (progresista) no solo ha mejorado las relaciones de Chile en el hemisferio y el mundo. El liderazgo de Bachelet fue un efectivo freno a los avances de la clase dominante (neoliberales por antonomasia) en Bolivia y un aviso al resto de las poderosas fuerzas conservadoras del continente.

El golpe de estado de Pinochet en 1973 abrió el camino para el primer experimento neoliberal en el mundo y el salvataje de la clase dominante chilena (Harvey 2005) que hoy intenta regresar al poder a través del ícono empresarial, Sebastián Piñera. El experimento del Milton Friedman (amigo personal de Pinochet) y los “chicago boys” en Chile llegó a un abrupto final en la década de los ochenta luego del fracaso neoliberal que sumió a Chile en una profunda crisis. Ante esto surgió el liderazgo de la concertación progresista que ha conducido a Chile por la senda del desarrollo sostenido, acción reconocida internacionalmente.

Sudamérica: muchos progresistas y solo dos conservadores.

En el mapa político sudamericano es fácil definir qué países han reforzado la influencia de las clases dominantes y su dominio sobre la economía y los recursos, Colombia y Perú. De una u otra manera en el resto del continente se está gestando importantes cambios en el status quo y la composición social y económica de las naciones.

La destrucción de las élites significa un problema mayor para las empresas extractoras de recursos naturales (y a los gobiernos que las protegen) ya que pierden a sus aliados locales en la entrega de los valiosos y escasos recursos. Es más fácil corromper a un pequeño grupo de familias elite que a un gobierno influenciado por las comunidades indígenas o de base democrática popular. Ni que decir de las ventajas obtenidas por los capitales especulativos en detrimento de las ganancias de los países de la región.

La visita de Piñera y el rol peruano

El presidente del Perú y la clase política peruana recibieron hace un par de años al candidato Piñera que buscaba un extraño apoyo en tierras del norte. ¿De qué se trataba esta visita y qué clase de apoyo puede encontrar un candidato a la presidencia de Chile? Luego de la visita de Piñera, el gobierno de Alan García y las destempladas manifestaciones de cancilleres, ex cancilleres y ex generales, llevaron las relaciones con Chile a uno de sus niveles más bajos desde la “crisis de 1975”, produciendo una desestabilización con el gobierno de Bachelet, favoreciendo al candidato de la derecha. En los debates presidenciales previos a la elección chilena el tema “Perú” ha sido de suma importancia y un claro indicativo que los ciudadanos chilenos prefieren una convivencia pacífica con el Perú.

Esto demuestra que una vez más, el rol del presidente García ha sido el de crear situaciones de enfrentamiento en contra de las fuerzas progresistas, en vez de aplicar una política internacional de entendimiento como lo hacen las naciones civilizadas, hecho reforzado con el “espaldarazo” político que el intelectual de derecha, Vargas Llosa, ha dado a Piñera.

El efecto en Chile

Los chilenos son dueños de su futuro y las elecciones del día de hoy lo definirán. Pueden escoger entre una concertación progresista de izquierda, que si bien ha perdido fuerza debido a los complicados eventos económicos internacionales, no se le puede negar el mérito de haber colocado en la presidencia a indiscutibles líderes de nivel mundial como Ricardo Lagos y Michelle Bachelet, que dejaron y dejan la presidencia con niveles de aceptación record en el mundo.

Puede que esta vez le den el voto de confianza al candidato Piñera cuyo lema por el cambio parece haber convencido a los inexpertos jóvenes, tal como lo hizo Alan García en el Perú.

Si Piñera sale victorioso de esta lid electoral solo puedo recomendarle a los chilenos que miren al Perú al detalle. El supuesto “crecimiento” económico del Perú no es para todos los peruanos y la libertad política ha sido secuestrada por la política de la banalidad y el escándalo. Esto es parte del efecto perverso del neoliberalismo que alguna vez fue experimento en vuestra patria y que hoy pugna por no perder su influencia en América Latina.