Central America

Subterms

    Latest story

    88 Shares179 Views

    Images of History, From Film to Digital

    by

    The reporter and photographer David Gonzalez once had to ship his film rolls to The Times’s Manhattan office. But in 1999, he went digital.In the In Times Past column, David W. Dunlap explores New York Times history through artifacts housed in the Museum of The Times.Two notable events in David Gonzalez’s nearly 34-year career at The New York Times occurred in 1999. He was appointed the Central America-Caribbean bureau chief, principally covering Cuba, Haiti, Guatemala, El Salvador and Panama.And he bought his first digital camera.Widely known as a Times reporter and columnist, Mr. Gonzalez is also an accomplished photographer. He served for eight years as co-editor of The Times’s Lens photojournalism blog and is a founding member of the Seis del Sur collective of Puerto Rican and Nuyorican photographers in the Bronx. “The Dancers,” which he took in 1979, depicts an elegant couple swept away by salsa music, rapturously indifferent to the fact that they’re in the middle of a street in the South Bronx.Mr. Gonzalez photographed his first assignments in Central America and the Caribbean on film. He had to ship undeveloped film rolls to The Times’s office in New York for processing, a cumbersome method that gave him no chance to review his work.So he bought a digital Olympus C-2020 in 1999, later upgrading to an Olympus C-4040, which was 4-by-3-by-2 inches and weighed 15 ounces. “I couldn’t afford one of the early Nikon digitals,” Mr. Gonzalez recalled in a recent email. (A Nikon Coolpix 950 cost $999.) “I knew Olympus, and the price was right, about $800. Since correspondents were paid $100 per photo, it paid for itself quickly.”With a digital camera, Mr. Gonzalez was immediately able to see what he’d photographed. He could also transmit his photos to New York with a modem that converted digital files into signals that traveled over telephone lines. Though much slower than a modern internet fiber-optic connection, this method was immensely faster than physical shipping.Mr. Gonzalez used the C-4040 digital camera to photograph the visit of former President Jimmy Carter to Cuba in May 2002.David Gonzalez/The New York TimesMr. Gonzalez used the C-4040 to photograph the visit of former President Jimmy Carter to Cuba in May 2002, a vigil Mass for the martyred Archbishop Óscar Arnulfo Romero of El Salvador in March 2003, and a Three Kings Day celebration in Manhattan.The battery compartment of his C-4040 is now broken and corroded. Otherwise, Mr. Gonzalez might have found an eager buyer among Gen Z influencers who prize digital cameras older than they are.On retiring from The Times last month, Mr. Gonzalez gave the C-4040 to the Museum at The Times. He also offered this reassurance: “I still have lots to say and show.” More

    More stories

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Days After Border Closes for Most Migrants, Manageable Crowds but More Anxiety

      by

      On a hot and humid morning in the Mexican border city of Reynosa, less than a mile from the Rio Grande, one question seemed to linger in the minds of hundreds of people who had arrived Saturday at a shelter for migrants.When would they be able to cross into the United States?The answer remained elusive. At least 1,100 men, women and children, a majority of them from Central America and Venezuela, had arrived at Senda de Vida, a sprawling respite center consisting of makeshift tents and temporary wooden rooms, with hopes of reaching the United States. Instead, many felt stuck in limbo after President Biden signed an executive order that prevents migrants from seeking asylum along the 2,000-mile U.S.-Mexico border when crossings surge.The order effectively closed the U.S. border for nearly all asylum seekers as of 12:01 a.m. on Wednesday.Jorge Gomez, 34, from Honduras, rested on Saturday near the U.S.-Mexico border.Paul Ratje for The New York TimesThe full effect of the new rule was difficult to assess three days after Mr. Biden’s announcement, but, as of Saturday, the number of migrants massing at the border showed signs of stabilizing, at least for now, compared with previous years, as many migrants appeared to be heeding the warning that they would be turned away, said Héctor Silva de Luna, a pastor who runs the shelter.During the height of the migration crisis, he welcomed more than 7,000 people, he said. Many now appear to be waiting in the interior of Mexico, in cities like Monterrey and Mexico City, to see what happens. But the migrants at the border like the ones at Mr. de Luna’s shelter are “the ones that will pay the price,” he said, because they are being rejected.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Crews at Site of Bridge Collapse Work on Removing First Piece of Debris

      by

      The governor of Maryland said that the search for missing victims would resume when the conditions for divers improve.Crews in Baltimore on Saturday were working on pulling the first piece of wreckage out of the water after the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge, a tangible sign of progress in the daunting effort to reopen the busy waterway.Rear Adm. Shannon Gilreath of the U.S. Coast Guard said at a news conference that his crew was aiming to lift the first segment of the bridge “just north of that deep draft shipping channel.” He added, “Much like when you run a marathon, you’ve got to take the first few steps.”The bridge was a critical transportation link to one of the largest ports in the United States, and the collapse is costing the region and the country millions of dollars the longer it is out of operation. More than 8,000 workers on the docks have been directly affected, Gov. Wes Moore of Maryland said.Mr. Moore said cutting up and removing the north sections of the bridge “will eventually allow us to open up a temporary restricted channel that will help us to get more vessels in the water around the site of the collapse.”Officials overseeing the cleanup added on Saturday that salvage teams will use gas-powered cutters to systematically separate sections of the steel bridge, which will then be taken to a disposal site.The work was occurring less than a week after a giant container ship known as the Dali suffered a complete blackout and struck the bridge, killing six construction workers and bringing the bridge down into the Patapsco River.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Could the Next Republican President Take Us to War With Mexico?

      by

      As president, Donald Trump reportedly floated the idea of shooting “missiles into Mexico to destroy the drug labs.” When his defense secretary, Mark Esper, raised various objections, he recalls that Mr. Trump responded by saying the bombing could be done “quietly”: “No one would know it was us.”Well, word got out and the craze caught on. Now many professed rebel Republicans, such as Representatives Mike Waltz and Marjorie Taylor Greene, along with several old G.O.P. war horses, like Senator Lindsey Graham, want to bomb Mexico. Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida said he would send special forces into Mexico on “Day 1” of his presidency, targeting drug cartels and fentanyl labs. In May, Representative Michael McCaul, another Republican, introduced a bill pushing for fentanyl to be listed as a chemical weapon, like sarin gas, under the Chemical Weapons Convention. This move targeted Mexican cartels and Chinese companies, which are accused of providing the ingredients to the cartels to manufacture fentanyl.Of course, the United States is already fighting, and has been for half a century, a highly militarized drug war — in the Andes, Central America and, yes, Mexico — a war as ineffective as it has been cruel. Hitting fentanyl labs won’t do anything to slow the bootlegged versions of the drug into the United States but could further destabilize northern Mexico and the borderlands, worsening the migrant refugee crisis.Addiction to fentanyl, a drug that is 50 times stronger than heroin, affects red and blue states alike, from West Virginia to Maine, with overdoses annually killing tens of thousands of Americans. It’s a bipartisan crisis. Yet in our topsy-turvy culture wars, there’s a belief that fentanyl is targeting the Republican base. J.D. Vance rose to national fame in 2016 with a book that blamed the white rural poor’s cultural pathologies for their health crises, including drug addiction. In 2022, during his successful run for Ohio’s Senate seat, Mr. Vance, speaking with a right-wing conspiracy theorist, said that “if you wanted to kill a bunch of MAGA voters in the middle of the heartland, how better than to target them and their kids with this deadly fentanyl?” Mr. Vance’s poll numbers shot up after that, and other Republicans in close House and Senate races took up the issue, linking fentanyl deaths to Democratic policies on border security and crime and calling for military action against Mexico.The Mexican government is in fact cooperating with the United States to limit the export of the drug, recently passing legislation limiting the import of chemicals required for its production and stepping up prosecution of fentanyl producers. And even some of the cartels have reportedly spread the message to their foot soldiers, telling them to stop producing the drug or face the consequences. Still, in a show of Trumpian excess, Mexico is depicted as the root of all our problems. Bombing Sinaloa in 2024 is what building a border wall was in 2016: political theatrics.The United States is no novice when it comes to bombing Mexico. “A little more grape,” or ammunition, Gen. Zachary Taylor supposedly ordered as his men fired their cannons on Mexican troops. That was during America’s 1846-48 war on Mexico, which also included the assault on Veracruz, killing hundreds. Washington took more than half of Mexico’s territory during that conflict.Conservative politicians have used Mexico to gin up fears of an enemy to the south ever since the Mexican American War, which made Zachary Taylor a national hero. Library of Congress Prints and Photographs DivisionReactionaries have fixated on the border for over a century, since before the Civil War, when Mexico provided asylum for runaway slaves. Over the years, newspapers and politicians have regularly demanded that Mexico be punished for any number of sins, from failing to protect property rights to providing refuge for escaped slaves, Indian raiders, cattle rustlers, bootleggers, smugglers, drug fiends, political radicals, draft dodgers and Japanese and German agents. There was a touch of evil about Mexico, as Orson Welles titled his 1958 film set on the borderlands.Long before the Russian Revolution, hostility directed at the Mexican Revolution, which started in 1910, gave rise to a new, more militant, ideological conservatism. U.S. oilmen invested in Mexico blamed Jews for financing the revolution and raised money from U.S. Catholics to fund counterrevolutionaries, some of whom were fascists. From 1910 to 1920, private vigilante groups like the K.K.K., local police departments and the Texas Rangers conducted a reign of terror across the border states that killed several thousand ethnic Mexicans, some of whom were trying to organize a union or trying to vote.Trumpism’s ginned-up racism against Mexicans flows from this history. It remains to be seen whether calls to bomb Mexico’s fentanyl labs will play well in the coming election cycle. Yet the rhetoric itself is a dangerous escalation of an old idea: that international narcotics production, trafficking and consumption can be deterred through military means.Today’s Republican renegades say they represent a break from the “globalist” bipartisan consensus that governed the country through the Cold War and the decades that followed. But aside from some opposition to military aid to Ukraine, Republicans largely toe the line when it comes to the use of military force abroad. Few Republican dissidents dare question the establishment consensus on ongoing military aid to Israel, especially in light of its current siege of Gaza. In this sense, calls to bomb Mexico are a distraction, blowing smoke to hide the fact that the G.O.P. offers nothing new. Republicans certainly aren’t the peace party, as some of Mr. Trump’s isolationist backers would have us believe. All they offer is a shriller war party.(As if to illustrate the point, as Republicans shout about Mexico, the Biden administration has quietly struck a deal with Ecuador that will allow the United States to deploy troops to the country and patrol the waters off its coast, the Washington Examiner recently reported.)Even bombing another country in the name of fighting drugs is hardly innovative. In 1989, George H.W. Bush used the U.S. military to act on the federal indictment of Manuel Noriega, Panama’s ruler, for drug trafficking. In Operation Just Cause, the United States dropped hundreds of bombs on Panama City, including on one of its poorest neighborhoods, El Chorrillo, setting homes ablaze and killing an unknown number of its residents.Bombing another country in the name of fighting drugs is hardly innovative. As early as 1989, the United States was dropping hundreds of bombs on Panama, leaving burned cars and destroyed buildings in their wake.Steve Starr/Corbis, via Getty ImagesFor all their posturing on how they represent a break with the past, today’s bomb-happy Republicans are merely calling for an expansion of policies already in place. Republicans have introduced legislation in the House and Senate that would in effect bind the war on drugs to the war on terrorism and give the president authority to strike deep into Mexico. Mr. Graham also says he wants “a Plan Mexico more lethal than Plan Colombia.”Calls to inflict on Mexico something more lethal than Plan Colombia should chill the soul. Initiated by Bill Clinton in 1999, Plan Colombia and its successor strategies funneled roughly $12 billion into Colombia, mostly to security forces who were charged with eliminating cocaine production at its source. Their campaign included, yes, the aerial bombing of cocaine labs.Conflict in Colombia is a longstanding phenomenon, but Plan Colombia helped kick off a wave of terror that killed tens of thousands of civilians and drove millions from their homes. The Colombian military murdered thousands of civilians and falsely reported them as guerrillas, as a way of boosting its body count to keep the funds flowing. Massacre followed massacre, often committed by the Colombian military working in tandem with paramilitaries. At the end of last year, Colombia had the fourth-largest population that was internally displaced because of conflict and violence, behind only Syria, Ukraine and the Democratic Republic of Congo.For what? More Colombian acreage was planted with coca in 2022 than in 1999, a year before the start of Plan Colombia. Colombia remains the world’s largest cocaine producer.Even after years of attempts to fumigate and destroy cocaine plantations in Colombia, the country remains the world’s largest cocaine producer. Olga Castano/Getty ImagesPlan Colombia did weaken Colombian drug producers and disrupt transportation routes. But it also incentivized Central American and Mexican gangs and cartels to get in the game. Drug-related violence that had largely been confined to the Andes blasted up through the Central American isthmus into Mexico.Then in 2006, with support from the Bush administration, Mexico’s new president, Felipe Calderón, did what today’s Republican would-be bombardiers want Mexico to do: declare war on the cartels. Again, the result was catastrophic. Estimates vary, but by the end of Mr. Calderón’s six-year term, about 60,000 Mexicans had been killed in drug-war-related violence. By 2011, an estimated 230,000 people had been displaced, and about half of them crossed the border into the United States. Tens of thousands of Mexicans, including social activists, were disappeared, or had gone missing. The cartels, meanwhile, grew more profitable and powerful.In the wake of this failure, the current Mexican government, led by Andrés Manuel López Obrador, has de-escalated the conflict to focus more on policing and prosecution. Other Latin American leaders, across the political spectrum, want to call off the war on drugs altogether and begin advancing decriminalization and treating excess drug use as a social problem.If the drug war is escalated, it would lead to more corruption, more deaths and more refugees desperate to cross into the United States. Jose Luis Gonzalez/ReutersFor now, calls to bomb Mexico are mostly primary-season bluster. But if a Republican were to win the White House in 2024, he or she would be under pressure to make good on the promise to launch military strikes on Mexico. Those efforts are not just bound to fail; they also could even make matters worse. Fentanyl labs are hardly complicated operations — with a couple of plastic drums and a pill press, one cook in a hazmat suit can turn out thousands of doses in a day. Trying to eliminate them with drones and missiles would be as effective as bombing bodegas in the Bronx. Hit one lab and five more pop up, perhaps in more populated areas.Further militarizing Mexico’s drug war would lead to more corruption, more deaths, more refugees desperate to cross the border. And those displaced, if Republicans had their way and Mexican cartels were classified as terrorist organizations, would have a better shot at claiming asylum, since they would be fleeing a formally designated war zone.With each escalation of the drug war, its horrors have inched closer to the United States. Now war mongering threatens to destroy the fragile movement among U.S. policymakers toward a more humane approach to drug use, that possession and use of drugs shouldn’t bring draconian prison sentences and that addiction should be treated as an illness, rooted in class inequality. Republican calls to go hard against narcotics below the border can’t but rebound above it, leading back to a callous public policy that treats addicts as enemies. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said of another war, the bombs we drop there explode here.Greg Grandin (@GregGrandin) is a professor of history at Yale and the author of seven books, most recently, “The End of the Myth: From the Frontier to the Border Wall in the Mind of America,” which won the 2020 Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction.The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here’s our email: letters@nytimes.com.Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram. More

    • 113 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      How Biden’s Promises to Reverse Trump’s Immigration Policies Crumbled

      by

      President Biden has tried to contain a surge of migration by embracing, or at least tolerating, some of his predecessor’s approaches.Immigration was dead simple when Joseph R. Biden Jr. was campaigning for president: It was an easy way to attack Donald J. Trump as a racist, and it helped to rally Democrats with the promise of a more humane border policy.Nothing worked better than Mr. Trump’s “big, beautiful wall” that he was building along the southern border. Its existence was as much a metaphor for the polarization inside America as it was a largely ineffective barrier against foreigners fleeing to the United States from Central America.“There will not be,” Mr. Biden proclaimed as he campaigned against Mr. Trump in the summer of 2020, “another foot of wall constructed.”But a massive surge of migration in the Western Hemisphere has scrambled the dynamics of an issue that has vexed presidents for decades, and radically reshaped the political pressures on Mr. Biden and his administration. Instead of becoming the president who quickly reversed his predecessor’s policies, Mr. Biden has repeatedly tried to curtail the migration of a record number of people — and the political fallout that has created — by embracing, or at least tolerating, some of Mr. Trump’s anti-immigrant approaches.Even, it turns out, the wall.On Thursday, Biden administration officials formally sought to waive environmental regulations to allow construction of up to 20 additional miles of border wall in a part of Texas that is inundated by illegal migration. The move was a stunning reversal on a political and moral issue that had once galvanized Mr. Biden and Democrats like no other.The funds for the wall had been approved by Congress during Mr. Trump’s tenure, and on Friday, the president said he had no power to block their use.Hundreds of those seeking asylum in the United States wait to be processed near the border wall in El Paso, Texas.Justin Hamel for The New York Times“The wall thing?” Mr. Biden asked reporters on Friday. “Yeah. Well, I was told that I had no choice — that I, you know, Congress passes legislation to build something, whether it’s an aircraft carrier wall or provide for a tax cut. I can’t say, ‘I don’t like it. I’m not going to do it.’”White House officials said that they tried for years, without success, to get Congress to redirect the wall money to other border priorities. And they said Mr. Biden’s lawyers had advised that the only way to get around the Impoundment Control Act, which requires the president to spend money as Congress directs, was to file a lawsuit. The administration chose not to do so. The money had to be spent by the end of December, the officials said.Asked on Thursday whether he thought a border wall works, Mr. Biden — who has long said a wall would not be effective — said simply: “No.”Still, human rights groups are furious, accusing the president of abandoning the principles on which he campaigned. They praise him for opening new, legal opportunities for some migrants, including thousands from Venezuela, but question his recent reversals on enforcement policy.“It doesn’t help this administration politically, to continue policies that they were very clear they were against,” said Vanessa Cárdenas, the executive director of America’s Voice, an immigrant rights organization. “That muddles the message and undermines the contrast that they’re trying to make when it comes to Republicans.”“This president came into office with a lot of moral clarity about where the lines were,” she added, noting that he and his aides “need to sort of decide who they are on this issue.”Mr. Biden had previously adopted some of his predecessor’s policies, including the pandemic-era Title 42 restrictions that blocked most migrants at the border until they were lifted earlier this year. Those have still failed to slow illegal immigration, and the issue has become incendiary inside his own party, driving wedges between Mr. Biden and some of the country’s most prominent Democratic governors and mayors, whose communities are being taxed by the cost of providing for the new arrivals.Eric Adams, the Democratic mayor of New York, has blamed the administration for a situation that he says could destroy his city. J.B. Pritzker, the Democratic governor of Illinois and an ally of Mr. Biden, wrote this week in a letter to the president that a “lack of intervention and coordination” by Mr. Biden’s government at the border “has created an untenable situation for Illinois.”Bedding for asylum seekers temporarily housed at O’Hare International Airport in Chicago.Jamie Kelter Davis for The New York TimesIn comments to reporters at an event opposing book banning, Mr. Pritzker said that he had recently “spoken with the White House” on the matter “to make sure that they heard us.”The moment underscores the new reality for the president as he prepares to campaign for a second term. His handling of immigration has become one of his biggest potential liabilities, with polls showing deep dissatisfaction among voters about how he deals with the new arrivals. With record numbers of migrants streaming across the border, he can no longer portray it in the simple terms he did a few years ago.Since taking office, Mr. Biden has tried to balance his stated desire for a more humane approach with strict enforcement that aides believe is critical to ensure that migrants do not believe the border is open to anyone.This spring, the president announced new legal options for some migrants from several countries — Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua and Haiti. He also has expanded protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants already in the United States, allowing more of them to work while they are in the country temporarily.But the more welcoming policies have been balanced by tougher ones.Earlier this year, Mr. Biden approved a new policy that had the effect of denying most immigrants the ability to seek asylum in the United States, a move that human rights groups noted was very similar to an approach that Mr. Trump hailed as a way to “close the border” to immigrants he wanted to keep out.The president and his aides have responded to the increased number of migrants by calling for more border patrol agents. Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, bragged on Wednesday about the surge in border enforcement that Mr. Biden has pushed for.“Let’s not forget,” she said. “The president got 25,000 Border Patrol, additional Border Patrol law enforcement, at the border.”In a budget request to Congress, the Biden administration has asked for an additional $4 billion for border enforcement, including 4,000 more troops, 1,500 more border patrol agents, overtime pay for federal border personnel and new technology to detect drug trafficking.And on Thursday, the administration announced that it would resume deporting Venezuelans who arrive illegally, essentially conceding that the policy of creating legal immigration options from that country had failed to stem the tide of new arrivals like they had expected.Ben LaBolt, the White House communications director, said Mr. Biden proposed an immigration overhaul on his first day in office that he noted has been blocked by Republican lawmakers.“He has used every available lever — enforcement, deterrence and diplomacy — to address historic migration across the Western Hemisphere,” Mr. LaBolt said, adding that the administration is “legally compelled” to spend the wall money. “President Biden has consistently made clear that this is not the most effective approach to securing our border.”Despite early reports that the number of migrants had dropped this summer, crossings have soared again this fall. Border Patrol agents arrested about 200,000 migrants in September, the highest number this year, according to an administration official who spoke anonymously to confirm the preliminary data.Still, the administration’s announcement about new construction of a wall was a surprise to many of the president’s allies, who had repeatedly heard Mr. Biden join them in condemning Mr. Trump for trying to seal the country off from immigrants.On Friday, the president, who has long insisted a wall would be ineffective, said he has no power to block the use of funds already approved during Mr. Trump’s tenure.Haiyun Jiang for The New York TimesIn a notice published in the Federal Register on Thursday, Alejandro N. Mayorkas, the homeland security secretary, said that easing environmental and other laws was necessary to expedite construction of sections of a border wall in South Texas, where thousands of migrants have been crossing the Rio Grande daily to reach U.S. soil.“There is presently an acute and immediate need to construct physical barriers and roads in the vicinity of the border of the United States in order to prevent unlawful entries into the United States,” Mr. Mayorkas said.In a statement later, Mr. Mayorkas made clear the administration would prefer to spend the money on other areas, “including state-of the-art border surveillance technology and modernized ports of entry.”There have always been barriers at the border, and Democrats have voted for funding to construct them. But before Mr. Trump arrived on the scene, they were placed in high-traffic locations and were often short fences or barriers designed to prevent cars from crossing.Mr. Trump changed that. He pushed for construction of a wall across the entire 2,000-mile border with Mexico, eventually building or reinforcing barriers along roughly 450 miles. And he insisted on a 30-foot tall wall made of steel bollards, painted black to be more intimidating. At various points, Mr. Trump said he wanted to install sharp, pointed spikes at the top of the wall to skewer migrants who tried to climb over it.The walls being constructed by Mr. Biden’s administration will be different, border officials said. They will be 18 feet tall, not 30. And they will be movable, not permanent, to allow more flexibility and less environmental damage.But the image of an ominous and even dangerous barrier — designed to send a message of “keep out” to anyone who approached — underscored the yearslong opposition from Democrats, including Mr. Biden, to its construction. At the end of 2018, the federal government shut down for 35 days — the longest in its history — over Democratic refusal to meet Mr. Trump’s demands for $5.7 billion to build the wall.For Mr. Biden, the politics of immigration have changed significantly since then.Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York put it bluntly in a letter to the president at the end of August, as New York City struggled to deal with tens of thousands of new migrants.“The challenges we face demand a much more vigorous federal response,” she wrote. “It is the federal government’s direct responsibility to manage and control the nation’s borders. Without any capacity or responsibility to address the cause of the migrant influx, New Yorkers cannot then shoulder these costs.” More

    • 175 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Elecciones en Costa Rica: una contienda reñida entre acusaciones de acoso sexual y corrupción

      by

      En la segunda vuelta, programada para el domingo, los votantes decidirán entre un candidato acusado de acoso sexual en el Banco Mundial y un expresidente que una vez fue acusado de corrupción.SAN JOSÉ, Costa Rica — Fue degradado de un alto cargo a uno menor en el Banco Mundial por acoso sexual. Ahora, el economista Rodrigo Chaves —quien ha hecho campaña como un populista al margen del sistema político en unas elecciones empañadas por la ira contra los políticos tradicionales— lidera las encuestas para convertirse en el próximo presidente de Costa Rica el domingo.Es un ascenso inesperado a la prominencia en un país que ha asumido un papel de liderazgo en el avance de los derechos sociales en Centroamérica, lo que subraya cómo el deseo de castigar a las élites políticas por lo que consideran respuestas gubernamentales inadecuadas a los desafíos de la región opaca la mayoría de los otros asuntos.En 2019, el Banco Mundial reprendió a Chaves por lo que se demostró que era un patrón de conducta sexual inapropiada contra subalternas, aunque los detalles de su comportamiento solo se hicieron públicos en agosto en un periódico de Costa Rica, información que el candidato presidencial ha refutado en diversas ocasiones.La negación de Chaves y la minimización de un historial documentado de acoso sexual se producen dos años después de que otro político costarricense, el expresidente y premio Nobel de la Paz, Óscar Arias Sánchez, evitara por poco ser procesado por abuso sexual, en un escándalo que sacudió al país.Arias fue acusado en 2019 de agresión sexual o conducta inapropiada por al menos nueve mujeres, emergiendo como uno de los casos más significativos del #MeToo en América Latina. Sin embargo, en diciembre de 2020, se retiraron los cargos presentados contra él por dos de las mujeres.Una protesta contra Óscar Arias Sánchez, premio Nobel de la Paz y expresidente de Costa Rica, quien fue acusado de agresión sexual en 2019.Juan Carlos Ulate/ReutersLos grupos de derechos de género dicen ahora que la apuesta de Chaves por el poder amenaza con socavar el progreso en la nación más liberal e igualitaria de Centroamérica.“El mensaje que están mandando a la sociedad es que el abuso sexual es algo menor, no es algo grave”, dijo Larissa Arroyo, una abogada de derechos humanos costarricense. “Esta campaña está normalizando y legitimando el abuso”.Chaves y su oficina de prensa no respondieron a una solicitud de entrevista.Chaves languidecía en la oscuridad hasta su alianza con Pilar Cisneros, una prominente periodista costarricense, que lo presentó a los votantes costarricenses como un gerente experimentado que le haría frente a la corrupción.Justo un día después de que Cisneros se uniera a la campaña de Chaves en agosto, el periódico local La Nación hizo pública la investigación del Banco Mundial que descubrió que había demostrado un patrón de acoso sexual contra empleadas júnior entre 2008 y 2013.Chaves respondió restando importancia a los hallazgos: “Ya están demostrando el miedo de la candidatura de Rodrigo Chaves los que tienen secuestrado a este país”, dijo en un mensaje en video publicado en las redes sociales horas después de la publicación del artículo.Las revelaciones apenas perjudicaron la campaña de Chaves. Cuando se reveló la investigación, Chaves solo contaba con un dos por ciento en las encuestas. En la primera vuelta de las elecciones nacionales, celebrada en febrero, había obtenido suficientes votos para pasar a la segunda vuelta presidencial.Candidatos presidenciales costarricenses durante un debate televisado previo a las elecciones de primera vuelta, que se celebraron en febrero.Mayela Lopez/ReutersCisneros salió en defensa de Chaves, ayudándolo a protegerse de los plenos efectos de las revelaciones. “¿Ustedes creen que Pilar Cisneros hubiera apoyado a un acosador sexual?”, dijo a los medios locales en enero. Al mes siguiente, ganó un escaño en el Congreso por el partido de Chaves.En vísperas de la votación final del domingo, la Universidad de Costa Rica encontró que Chaves tenía una estrecha ventaja sobre su oponente, el expresidente José María Figueres. En una encuesta realizada con 1000 votantes llevada a cabo por la universidad del 24 al 28 de marzo, Chaves lideró por 3,4 puntos porcentuales, ligeramente por arriba del margen de error de la encuesta de 3,1 por ciento.Otra encuesta publicada el 1 de marzo por la universidad reveló que solo el 13 por ciento de los votantes pensaba que las acusaciones de acoso contra Chaves eran falsas. Pero el 45 por ciento dijo que las acusaciones no influirían en su voto.Chaves se ha beneficiado de la impopularidad de Figueres, su oponente, quien se ha visto salpicado por acusaciones de corrupción durante su primer mandato en la década de 1990. Figueres, quien lidera el mayor y más antiguo partido político del país, el Partido Liberación Nacional, está acusado de recibir pagos a principios de la década de 2000 de una empresa de telecomunicaciones francesa a cambio de un trato preferente mientras era presidente.Figueres ha negado las acusaciones y los fiscales que investigaron los pagos, que se produjeron tras el fin de su mandato, no presentaron cargos.Sin embargo, a los ojos de muchos costarricenses, Figueres y su partido han llegado a representar la venalidad y el elitismo del sistema político nacional, que muchos creen que ya no es capaz de resolver los problemas económicos del país, dijo Ronald Alfaro, quien dirige el Centro de Investigación y Estudios Políticos de la Universidad de Costa Rica.José María Figueres, el candidato presidencial por el Partido Liberación Nacional, celebra luego de avanzar a la segunda vuelta presidencial de Costa Rica en febrero.Arnoldo Robert/Getty ImagesLa economía costarricense, dependiente del turismo, se vio muy afectada por la pandemia: en 2020, su producto interior bruto experimentó la mayor caída en cuatro décadas. Aunque gran parte de la economía se recuperó, el país ahora tiene dificultades para frenar el aumento de los precios de los alimentos y el combustible.“Las acusaciones acaban anulándose mutuamente”, dijo. “Los votantes acaban votando no por el candidato que les gusta, sino contra el que creen que tiene más pulgas que el otro”, dijo.Decepcionados por los escándalos que rodean a ambos candidatos, la mayoría de los costarricenses parecen haber perdido el interés en las elecciones. Solo una cuarta parte de los electores registrados votaron por Chaves o Figueres en la primera ronda de las elecciones, que se vio empañada por la participación más baja de los últimos 70 años.Documentos del tribunal interno del Banco Mundial y del sindicato muestran que Chaves fue sancionado en 2019 después de que dos empleadas presentaran denuncias de acoso. En ese momento, era el jefe de país del banco para Indonesia, un puesto de nivel de director que supervisa miles de millones de dólares de préstamos a una de las mayores economías en desarrollo del mundo.Costarricenses rumbo a los centros de votación de San José en las elecciones generales que se realizaron en febrero.Ezequiel Becerra/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesLas mujeres afirmaron que Chaves intentó besar en la boca a las empleadas de menor rango, hizo comentarios sexuales sobre su apariencia y realizó repetidas invitaciones no deseadas a habitaciones de hotel y cenas. Las identidades de las mujeres no se han hecho públicas.Una de las mujeres, que estaba subordinada a Chaves, declaró al tribunal que este “comentó que le gustaba que ella se agachara, y luego procedió a dejar caer un objeto y a pedirle que lo recogiera para él”, petición que, dijo, rechazó.Chaves fue degradado y se le congeló el sueldo, pero el banco no llegó a calificar explícitamente su comportamiento de acoso sexual. Dejó la organización días después y regresó a su Costa Rica natal para convertirse en el ministro de Hacienda del presidente Carlos Alvarado.El Ministerio de Comunicación de Costa Rica dijo que el actual gobierno no había tenido conocimiento del caso de acoso y que Chaves le dijo a sus integrantes que volvió porque deseaba pasar su jubilación con su madre de edad avanzada.A los seis meses, Chaves dejó su puesto en el ministerio y anunció una candidatura presidencial con un partido político poco conocido, prometiendo “devolver el poder a los ciudadanos” mediante la celebración de consultas populares sobre temas políticos importantes.A pesar de la salida de Chaves del Banco Mundial, quienes lo acusaron presentaron un recurso ante el tribunal interno para que revisara la investigación de mala conducta del banco.Mujeres se manifestaron en el Día Internacional de la Mujer en San José, en marzoMayela Lopez/Reuters“Los hechos del presente caso indican que la conducta del señor C. era de naturaleza sexual y que sabía o debería haber sabido que su conducta no era bienvenida”, dijo el tribunal en su fallo de junio. Un funcionario del Banco Mundial dijo que el banco no discutía los hechos del caso tal y como se presentaban en la sentencia.Incluso antes de que se emitiera la sentencia, en enero de 2021, la organización prohibió a Chaves la entrada en sus instalaciones y le impuso una prohibición de recontratación. La organización hermana del banco, el Fondo Monetario Internacional, dijo que también restringió el acceso de Chaves a sus instalaciones.En los meses transcurridos, Chaves ha negado o tergiversado las conclusiones; en su lugar, ha afirmado que el Banco Mundial encontró poco más que una acusación contra él, refiriéndose a la decisión inicial del banco de no calificar sus malas acciones de acoso sexual.También ha dicho que puede visitar libremente las oficinas del Banco Mundial —contradiciendo la prohibición del banco de acceder a sus oficinas— y que como presidente seguirá haciendo negocios con el banco, que tiene 2300 millones de dólares en préstamos pendientes en Costa Rica.Chaves también prometió que “revisará” una reciente flexibilización de las restricciones a la fecundación in vitro y al aborto. El aborto es legal en Costa Rica cuando el embarazo pone en peligro la salud de la mujer.Estas medidas amenazan con desbaratar los lentos pero notables avances en los derechos reproductivos de las mujeres bajo los últimos gobiernos, dijo Arroyo, la abogada de derechos humanos. Dijo que las propuestas también dañan el papel de Costa Rica en el avance de los derechos sociales en una región profundamente conservadora desde el punto de vista social, donde el aborto está ampliamente prohibido y donde la violencia contra las mujeres queda mayormente impune.El Erizo, un barrio de bajos recursos, y el moderno vecindario de Ciruelas, en la provincia de Alajuela, Costa Rica.Luis Acosta/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesLa estabilidad política y la sólida democracia de Costa Rica han sido durante mucho tiempo una excepción en una región dominada por el autoritarismo y el crimen organizado, y el país ha alcanzado uno de los niveles más altos de inclusión social de América Latina, desde el acceso a la educación y la atención sanitaria hasta los derechos civiles.“Si Costa Rica cae en los derechos de las mujeres, lo más probable es que todos los demás vecinos también no tengan este referente para poder seguir avanzando”, dijo Arroyo.Anatoly Kurmanaev es un corresponsal radicado en Ciudad de México desde donde cubre México, Centroamérica y el Caribe. Antes de integrarse a la corresponsalía de México en 2021, pasó ocho años reportando desde Caracas sobre Venezuela y la región vecina. @akurmanaev More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Harassment Case Tests Women’s Rights in Costa Rica’s Close Election

      by

      In Sunday’s runoff, voters will decide between a candidate found to have sexually harassed junior employees at the World Bank and a former president once accused of corruption.SAN JOSÉ, Costa Rica — He was demoted from a senior position at the World Bank because of sexual harassment. Now, the economist Rodrigo Chaves — who has campaigned as a populist outsider in an election marked by anger at traditional politicians — leads the polls to become Costa Rica’s next president on Sunday.It’s an unexpected rise to prominence in a country that has taken a lead role in the advancement of progressive policies in Central America, underlining how the desire to punish political elites for economic stagnation is overshadowing most other issues.In 2019, Mr. Chaves was reprimanded by the World Bank for what was shown to be a pattern of sexual misconduct against junior employees, though the details of his behavior were made public by a Costa Rica newspaper only in August — details the presidential candidate has repeatedly rebutted.Mr. Chaves’s denial and downplaying of a documented history of sexual harassment come two years after another Costa Rican politician, the former president and a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Óscar Arias Sánchez, narrowly avoided prosecution for sexual abuse, in a scandal that shook the country.Mr. Arias was accused in 2019 of sexual assault or misconduct by at least nine women, emerging as one of the most significant #MeToo cases in Latin America. However, in December 2020, the charges brought against him by two of the women were dropped.A protest against Óscar Arias Sánchez, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and former president of Costa Rica, who was accused of sexual assault in 2019.Juan Carlos Ulate/ReutersHuman rights activists now say that Mr. Chaves’s bid for power threatens to undermine progress in Central America’s most liberal and egalitarian nation.“The message that this is sending to society is that sexual abuse is something minor, something not serious,” said Larissa Arroyo, a Costa Rican human rights lawyer. “This campaign is normalizing and legitimizing the abuse.”Mr. Chaves and his press office didn’t respond to an interview request.Mr. Chaves languished in obscurity until his alliance with Pilar Cisneros, a prominent female Costa Rican journalist, who presented him to Costa Rican voters as an experienced administrator who would tackle corruption.Just a day after Ms. Cisneros joined Mr. Chaves’s campaign in August, the local newspaper La Nación made public the World Bank’s investigation that found he demonstrated a pattern of sexual harassment against junior female employees between 2008 and 2013.Mr. Chaves responded by downplaying the findings: “Those who have kidnapped the nation are already showing their fear of the candidacy of Rodrigo Chaves.” he said in a video address posted on social media hours after the article’s publication.The revelations did little to damage Mr. Chaves’s campaign. When the investigation was revealed, he was polling at just 2 percent. By the first round of national elections, held in February, he had earned enough votes to move onto the presidential runoff.Costa Rican presidential candidates during a televised debate ahead of the general election, which was held in February.Mayela Lopez/ReutersMs. Cisneros came to Mr. Chaves’s defense, helping to shield him from the full impact of the revelations. “Do you think that Pilar Cisneros would have supported a sexual harasser?” she told the local media in January. The next month, she won a congressional seat for Mr. Chaves’ party.Ahead of the final vote on Sunday, the state-run University of Costa Rica found Mr. Chaves narrowly leading against his opponent: a former Costa Rican president, José María Figueres. In a poll of 1,000 voters conducted by the university on March 24-28, Mr. Chaves led by 3.4 percentage points, slightly above the survey’s margin of error of 3.1 percent.A separate poll published by the University of Costa Rica on March 1 found that only 13 percent of voters thought that harassment accusations against Mr. Chaves were false. But 45 percent said that the accusations would not influence their vote.Mr. Chaves has benefited from the unpopularity of his opponent, Mr. Figueres, who has been marred by accusations of corruption during his first term in office in the 1990s. Mr. Figueres, who leads the country’s oldest and largest political party, the National Liberation Party, is accused of receiving payments in the early 2000s from a French telecommunications company in return for preferential treatment while he was president.Mr. Figueres has denied the accusations, and prosecutors who investigated the payments, which occurred after he stepped down, did not press charges.However, in the eyes of many Costa Ricans, Mr. Figueres and his party have come to represent the venality and elitism of the country’s political system, which many believe is no longer able to solve the country’s economic problems, said Ronald Alfaro, who leads the University of Costa Rica’s Center of Political Studies and Investigation.José María Figueres, the presidential candidate for the National Liberation Party, after advancing to the Costa Rican presidential runoff in February.Arnoldo Robert/Getty ImagesCosta Rica’s tourism-reliant economy suffered greatly from the pandemic — in 2020, its gross domestic product saw its greatest drop in four decades. While parts of the economy bounced back, the country is struggling to rein in rising food and fuel costs.“The accusations end up canceling each other,” Mr. Alfaro said. “Voters end up casting their ballots not for the candidate they like but against the candidate they believe has more fleas than the other,” he said.Turned off by the scandals around both candidates, most Costa Ricans appear to have lost interest in the election. Only a quarter of all registered voters cast their ballots for either Mr. Chaves or Mr. Figueres in the first round of elections, which had the lowest turnout in 70 years.Documents from the World Bank’s internal tribunal and labor union show that Mr. Chaves was punished in 2019 after two female employees filed harassment complaints. At the time, he was the bank’s country head for Indonesia, a director-level position overseeing billions of dollars of lending to one of the world’s largest developing economies.Costa Ricans heading to polling stations in San José in the general elections that took place in February.Ezequiel Becerra/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesThe women said Mr. Chaves made attempts to kiss junior employees on the mouth, made sexual comments about their appearances and repeatedly made unwelcome invitations to hotel rooms and dinners. The identities of the women have not been made public.One woman, who reported to Mr. Chaves, told the tribunal that he “commented that he liked it when she bent over, then proceeded to drop an item and ask her to pick it up for him,” a request she said she refused.Mr. Chaves was demoted and his salary was frozen, but the bank stopped short of explicitly calling his behavior sexual harassment. He left the organization days later and returned to his native Costa Rica to become the finance minister for the president, Carlos Alvarado.The Costa Rican Communication Ministry said the current government had been unaware of the harassment case, and that Mr. Chaves told its members at the time that he returned because he wanted to spend his retirement with his elderly mother. Within six months, Mr. Chaves left his ministry position and announced a presidential bid with a little-known political party, promising to “return power to citizens” by holding referendums on important policy topics.Despite Mr. Chaves’s departure from the World Bank, his accusers brought an appeal to the internal tribunal to review the bank’s misconduct investigation.Women demonstrating on International Women’s Day in San José, in March.Mayela Lopez/Reuters“The facts of the present case indicate that Mr. C’s conduct was sexual in nature and that he knew or should have known that his conduct was unwelcome,” the tribunal said in its June ruling. A World Bank official said the bank did not dispute the facts of the case as presented in the ruling.Even before the ruling was issued, in January 2021, the organization banned Mr. Chaves from its premises and imposed a rehiring ban. The bank’s sister organization, the International Monetary Fund, said it also restricted Mr. Chaves’s access to its premises.In the months since, Mr. Chaves has denied or misrepresented the findings; instead, he’s said that the World Bank found little more than an allegation against him, referring to the bank’s initial decision not to call his wrongdoings sexual harassment.He has also said that he can freely visit the World Bank’s offices — contradicting the bank’s ban on his access — and that as president he will continue doing business with the bank, which has $2.3 billion in outstanding loans in Costa Rica.Mr. Chaves has also promised to “revise” the laws on in vitro fertilization and abortion, which have been made more accessible by recent presidential decrees. Abortion is legal in Costa Rica when the pregnancy threatens a woman’s health.These measures threaten to derail the slow but noticeable advances in women’s reproductive rights under the recent governments, said Ms. Arroyo, the human rights lawyer. She said the proposals also would damage Costa Rica’s role in the advancement of social rights in a deeply socially conservative region where abortion is largely banned and where violence against women goes mostly unpunished.El Erizo, a low-income neighborhood, and the modern neighborhood of Ciruelas, in the province of Alajuela, Costa Rica.Luis Acosta/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesCosta Rica’s political stability and strong democracy have long made it an outlier in a region dominated by authoritarians and organized crime, and the country has achieved one of Latin America’s highest levels of social inclusion, in areas ranging from access to education and health care to civil rights.“If Costa Rica declines in its protection of women’s rights,” Ms. Arroyo said, “it’s most likely that the rest of the neighboring countries will not have this example to keep moving forward.” More

    • 213 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Xiomara Castro lidera en Honduras con una promesa de cambio a pesar de sus vínculos al pasado

      by

      La candidata de izquierda, que consolida la ventaja en la contienda, ha prometido desterrar la corrupción del país pero su transformación podría estar limitada por sus lazos políticos y la oposición conservadora.CIUDAD DE MÉXICO— La candidata de oposición, Xiomara Castro, se acercó más a una sorprendente victoria presidencial el lunes. Ha prometido una nueva era de inclusión democrática en un país donde en años recientes la desesperación ha expulsado a cientos de miles hacia la frontera con Estados Unidos en busca de refugio.Castro, de 62 años, tenía 20 puntos porcentuales de ventaja por encima del candidato del Partido Nacional oficialista al contabilizarse el 51 por ciento de las actas de votación. Los resultados de los comicios del domingo parecen mostrar un repudio a 12 años de gobierno del Partido Nacional, caracterizado por la corrupción, el desmantelamiento de las instituciones democráticas y acusaciones de vínculos con los carteles del narcotráfico.Miles de hondureños salieron a las calles para celebrar lo que consideraban una ventaja irreversible de Castro. Encendieron fuegos artificiales y cantaron “JOH, JOH te vas”, en referencia a las iniciales del muy impopular mandatario saliente, Juan Orlando Hernández.Muchos expresaron la esperanza de que, de ganar, Castro lograría solucionar las dolencias crónicas que durante décadas han sumido al país en la pobreza y la desesperación: corrupción generalizada, violencia, crimen organizado y migración masiva.También temían que el Partido Nacional podría intentar un fraude electoral en los resultados que seguían sin contarse, dado que los líderes del partido pueden enfrentar cargos de corrupción o incluso de tráfico de drogas después de dejar el cargo.“Vamos a recuperar Honduras porque ahora estamos gobernados por delincuentes”, dijo Mariela Sandres, una estudiante que celebraba fuera de la sede de campaña de Castro la noche el domingo.El Partido Nacional se ha negado a conceder la derrota y asegura que, una vez que se cuenten todos los votos, obtendrá la victoria. Sin embargo, el presidente del Consejo Hondureño de la Empresa Privada, en una señal favorable para Castro, la felicitó por su aparente victoria y se ofreció a trabajar con ella en la reconstrucción de la economía del país.De cierto modo, Castro representa un quiebre en la política tradicional de Honduras. Su liderazgo imponente en lo que ha sido una elección sobre todo pacífica hasta el momento, también parecía un aplazamiento a la ola de autoritarismo que arrasa Centroamérica.Si los resultados actuales se confirman, será la primera presidenta mujer en un país profundamente conservador y la primera líder electa democráticamente con una plataforma socialista.Ha prometido reconstruir la debilitada democracia del país e integrar a todos los sectores de la sociedad hondureña para reformar un Estado que ha servido a los intereses de un pequeño grupo de élites desde la época colonial. En un discurso el domingo por la noche, Castro dijo a sus partidarios que comenzaría inmediatamente a conversar con aliados políticos y opositores para formar un gobierno de unidad nacional.“Nunca más se va a abusar del poder en este país”, dijo.Castro dijo que consideraría legalizar el aborto en casos limitados y que volvería a llamar a los investigadores internacionales anticorrupción que fueron expulsados por Hernández luego de que empezaron a indagar a su círculo cercano por sospechas de corrupción.No obstante, Castro también tiene profundos vínculos al sistema político de Honduras. Y su capacidad de cumplir sus promesas de campaña probablemente enfrentará el desafío de la oposición de los sectores más conservadores del Congreso y de su propia coalición política.Durante los mítines de campaña, Castro capitalizó el repudio generalizado hacia el gobierno de Hernández. Pero no ha sido específica sobre lo que su gobierno haría, más allá de llenar a Honduras de nuevos subsidios y rechazar las medidas más impopulares de la gestión actual.Durante el mitin de clausura de su campaña, en San Pedro Sula, la capital empresarial del país, le costó trabajo recordar cuáles eran esas medidas. “¿Cuál es esa otra ley?”, le preguntó a la multitud, mientras intentaba enlistar las políticas de Hernández que revocaría.La candidatura de Castro estuvo moldeada por su matrimonio con Manuel Zelaya, un terrateniente adinerado de Honduras y expresidente que fue depuesto por un golpe militar en 2009 luego de intentar emular las políticas de Hugo Chávez, quien entonces era presidente de Venezuela.Zelaya, quien sigue siendo un personaje polarizador en Honduras, es el fundador y líder del partido político de Castro y ha fungido como su jefe de campaña. De confirmarse su victoria, se espera que ocupe un papel protagónico en el gobierno liderado por Castro, quien desde el golpe estuvo viviendo en gran parte fuera de Honduras.La posibilidad de un gobierno liderado tras bambalinas por Zelaya podría generar tensiones con los partidarios más conservadores de Castro, quienes votaron por ella para sacar a Hernández pero están inquietos sobre la posibilidad de que Honduras renueve su alianza con Venezuela y Cuba.Las ambiciosas propuestas socialistas de Castro también podrían complicar las relaciones con Estados Unidos, país al que muchas personas en Honduras culpan por haber respaldado las controversiales elecciones que llevaron al Partido Nacional al poder después del golpe de Estado.En su plataforma electoral, Castro llamaba a crear una Asamblea Constituyente para reescribir la Constitución. El esfuerzo de Zelaya, mientras estuvo en la presidencia, de crear una nueva constitución fue una de las razones principales del golpe por parte de las élites conservadoras militares y empresariales, que temían que un gobierno de izquierda se consolidara en un país que se había aliado profundamente con Estados Unidos.Castro ha intentado sosegar los temores de las élites al cortejar a empresarios, incorporar a asesores tecnócratas a su equipo, aliarse con partidos de centroderecha y reunirse con diplomáticos estadounidenses.También ha reducido su agenda social progresista de manera significativa para frenar los ataques conservadores. Si bien al inicio apoyó exenciones a la prohibición del aborto y respaldó la educación sexual y de cuestiones raciales en las escuelas, recientemente dijo que estas decisiones deberían someterse al debate público y comenzó a enfatizar su crianza católica.Las promesas de Castro de reducir la desigualdad y disminuir el costo de vida no serán sencillas de cumplir debido a la pesada carga de la deuda que deja el gobierno de Hernández. Y sus planes para erradicar la corrupción podrían resultar comprometidos por las acusaciones de corrupción contra la familia de Zelaya y los vínculos personales del expresidente con las élites políticas desacreditadas.Las perspectivas de cambio en un gobierno de Castro dependerán en gran medida de la solidez de su coalición en la nueva legislatura. El consejo electoral aún no ha anunciado ningún resultado de las elecciones al Congreso.“Va a ser sumamente complicado gobernar sin la mayoría en el Congreso”, dijo Pedro Barquero, el jefe de campaña del Partido Salvador de Honduras, que se alió con Castro.Castro ha rechazado a través de su equipo de campaña varias solicitudes de entrevista antes y después de la votación.Por su parte, Zelaya dijo que quería reconstruir buenas relaciones con Estados Unidos, país al que calificó como un socio crucial de Honduras.“Hoy el mismo Estados Unidos entendió que sectores de su gobierno han llevado al país al abismo”, dijo Zelaya, refiriéndose a los años que siguieron al golpe de Estado. “Esperamos que la administración de Biden haya aprendido la lección y pueda trabajar con nosotros”.Sin embargo, Zelaya se negó a describir su postura actual sobre Venezuela, que se ha sumido en el colapso económico y en el autoritarismo después de su salida del poder. Lo único que dijo sobre la crisis venezolana es que “los pueblos tienen los gobiernos que merecen”.Anatoly Kurmanaev More

    • 150 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Xiomara Castro Vows New Era for Honduras but Is Tied to Past

      by

      Xiomara Castro, headed toward becoming her country’s next president, promises to expunge its legacy of corruption, but change may be tempered by her establishment ties and conservative opposition.MEXICO CITY — The Honduras opposition candidate, Xiomara Castro, inched closer to an astounding presidential victory on Monday, promising a new era of democratic inclusion in a nation where despair has driven hundreds of thousands to the U.S. border seeking refuge in recent years.Ms. Castro, 62, held a 20 percentage point lead over the candidate of the incumbent National Party with 51 percent of the ballot boxes counted. The results of the Sunday vote appeared to show a stunning repudiation of the National Party’s 12-year rule, which was shaped by pervasive corruption, dismantling of democratic institutions and accusations of links with drug cartels.Thousands of Hondurans poured into the streets to celebrate what they believed was Ms. Castro’s insurmountable lead, shooting fireworks and singing “JOH, JOH, and away you go,” a reference to the initials of the deeply unpopular outgoing President Juan Orlando Hernández.Many voiced hopes that Ms. Castro, should she prevail, would be able to cure the chronic ills that have mired the country in poverty and desperation for decades — widespread graft, violence, organized crime and mass migration. They also remained wary of the National Party possibly trying to commit electoral fraud in the results that remained uncounted, given that the party’s leaders may face corruption or even drug trafficking charges after leaving office.“We will recover Honduras, because we are now governed by criminals,” said Mariela Sandres, a student, who celebrated outside Ms. Castro’s campaign headquarters on Sunday night.The National Party refused to concede defeat, asserting that it will win once all the votes are counted. But in a positive signal for Ms. Castro, the president of Honduras’s business chamber congratulated her on her apparent victory, offering to work with her on rebuilding the country’s economy.Supporters of Xiomara Castro in Tegucigalpa on Sunday.Moises Castillo/Associated PressMs. Castro in some ways represents a break with Honduras’s traditional politics. Her commanding lead, in what has been a largely peaceful election so far, also appeared to present a democratic reprieve from a wave of authoritarianism sweeping Central America.If the current returns stand, she will become the first female president in a deeply conservative nation, and its first leader to be democratically elected on a socialist platform.She has promised to rebuild the country’s weakened democracy and bring in all sectors of Honduran society to overhaul a state that has served the interests of a small group of elites since it was a Spanish colony centuries ago. In a speech on Sunday night, Ms. Castro told supporters that she would immediately begin talks with political allies and opponents alike to form a government of national unity.“Never again will the power be abused in this country,” she said.Ms. Castro said she would consider legalizing abortion in limited cases and would bring back international corruption investigators who were forced out by Mr. Hernández after they started examining suspected graft in his inner circle.Yet, Ms. Castro is also deeply tied to Honduras’ political establishment. And her ability to meet campaign promises is likely to be severely challenged by opposition from the more conservative sectors in congress and within her own political coalition.At her election rallies, Ms. Castro capitalized on Hondurans’ widespread repudiation of Mr. Hernández’s rule. But she has been vague about what her own government would do, beyond showering Hondurans with new subsidies and repealing the most unpopular measures of the current government.During the closing campaign rally in the business capital of San Pedro Sula, she struggled to remember what those measures were. “What’s that other law?” she asked the crowd, as she attempted to list Mr. Hernández’s policies that she would overturn.Ms. Castro’s candidacy has been shaped by her marriage to Mel Zelaya, a wealthy Honduran landowner and former president who was deposed in a military coup in 2009, after having tried to emulate the policies of Venezuela’s president at the time, Hugo Chávez.Mr. Zelaya, who remains a polarizing figure in Honduras, is the founder and the head of Ms. Castro’s political party and has served as her campaign manager. Should her victory be confirmed, he is widely expected to play a prominent role in the administration led by Ms. Castro, who had been living mostly outside Honduras since the coup.Hondurans vote during the general election in Tegucigalpa on Sunday.Fredy Rodriguez/ReutersThe prospect of a shadow government led by Mr. Zelaya could create tensions with Ms. Castro’s more conservative supporters, who voted for her to break with Mr. Hernández but are wary that Honduras could renew its alliance with Venezuela and Cuba.Ms. Castro’s ambitious socialist proposals could also complicate relations with the United States, which many in Honduras blame for supporting the controversial elections that brought the National Party to power after the coup.In her campaign program, Ms. Castro called for creation of a Constituent Assembly that would rewrite Honduras’s Constitution. Mr. Zelaya’s effort as president to draft a new constitution was a main reason for the coup from the conservative military and business elites, who feared a leftist power grab in a country that has been deeply allied with the United States.She has sought to assuage the elites’ fears by courting businessmen, bringing in technocratic advisers, allying herself to center-right parties and meeting with the United States diplomats. Ms. Castro has also significantly scaled back her progressive social agenda to dampen conservative attacks. After initially supporting abortion ban exemptions, as well as sex and race education in schools, she recently said these policies should be put to public debate, and began to emphasize her Catholic upbringing.Ms. Castro’s promises to reduce inequality and cut the cost of living will be complicated by the heavy debt burden left to her by Mr. Hernández’s outgoing government. And her plans to root out corruption could be compromised by accusations of graft made against the family of Mr. Zelaya, and the former president’s personal ties to discredited political elites.The prospects for change in Ms. Castro’s administration will depend heavily on her coalition’s strength in the new congress. The electoral council is yet to announce any results from congressional races.“It’s going to be highly difficult to govern without a majority in congress,” said Pedro Barquero, the campaign chief for the Savior of Honduras Party, which is allied to Ms. Castro.Through her campaign staff, Ms. Castro has declined multiple interview requests before and since the vote.For his part, Mr. Zelaya said he wanted to rebuild good relations with the United States, calling it Honduras’s vital partner.“I think the U.S. has understood that sectors of their government have brought the country to an abyss” following the coup, he said. “We hope the Biden administration has learned the lesson and are willing to work with us.”But Mr. Zelaya declined to describe his current position on Venezuela, which since he was deposed has slid into economic collapse and authoritarianism. All he has said regarding Venezuela’s crisis is that “the people have the governments that they deserve.” Supporters of the National Party, which has ruled Honduras for 12 years, before the presidential election on Sunday.Daniele Volpe for The New York TimesAnatoly Kurmanaev reported from Mexico City, and Joan Suazo from Tegucigalpa, Honduras. More