More stories

  • in

    Seeking Truth and Reconciliation in America

    After over 50 years in the US as an immigrant from the UK, of which 40 have been spent in Washington, DC, I thought I had seen it all. Clearly, I was wrong. The mob invasion of the Capitol on January 6 was a historic first. Thankfully, it was followed by President Joe Biden’s peaceful inauguration on January 20. Democrats went on to achieve a majority in both houses of the US Congress. With the change in the political wind, America has a unique opportunity to borrow from three previous truth and reconciliation commissions (TRCs) to bring harmony where there is discord.

    Will American Democracy Perish Like Rome’s?

    READ MORE

    The most famous TRC was instituted by South Africa’s 1995 Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act. The goal of the new TRC was to uncover the truth about human rights violations during decades of apartheid. The emphasis was on finding the truth from both victims and perpetrators, not on prosecuting individuals for past crimes. In this regard, it differed from the Nuremberg trials that prosecuted Nazis for their crimes.

    Societal Schism

    The events of January 6 have exposed societal schism to the world. Now, the US needs actions, not words, to form a fully representative, multi-party equivalent of the South African TRC to deal with enduring injustices across the nation. The current American social problem is complex, multi-generational and multi-dimensional. As such, it is not likely to be easily or speedily ameliorated. However, admitting the problem in the style of alcoholics anonymous is a necessary first step to avoiding a looming cultural and economic civil war.

    The fundamental problem in America is its broken education system. According to Pew Research Center, a large percentage of Americans still reject the theory of evolution. As per the National Center for Educational Statistics, 21% (43 million) of American adults are functionally illiterate — e.g., lacking the basic ability to use reading, writing and calculation skills for their own and the community’s development. The US may be the world superpower, but its poorly educated citizens often lack critical thinking and judgment. Seduced by demagogues, they have drifted into warring camps.

    Embed from Getty Images

    Many thoughtful Americans are worried about divisions in society. The December 2019 issue of The Atlantic was a special report titled “How to Stop a Civil War.” It examined “a nation coming apart.” The magazine brought together the nation’s best writers to confront questions of American unity and fracture. That issue has proved to be prescient.

    Since the 2020 elections, the rhetoric in the US became increasingly toxic. Disinformation was rife, calls for insurrection came right from the top and the pot of anger boiled over on January 6. It may not be 1861, but disunity reigns in the United States. A TRC that digs out the truth might be exactly what America needs in a post-truth world.

    Truth and Reconciliation Commissions

    There have been three significant TRCs since 1990 in South Africa, Chile and Canada. The results of these appear to be mixed. In balance, they seem to have had a positive impact on the arc of the history of their respective societies.

    The story of South Africa’s TRC is too well known to be told in full here. Archbishop Desmond Tutu, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1984, investigated crimes during apartheid to record the truth. The TRC offered amnesty to perpetrators of many crimes and rehabilitation as well as reparations to the victims. It might be fair to say that the work of the TRC allowed South Africa to make a peaceful transition from a horrendously unjust apartheid regime to a plural, democratic society.

    Chile’s TRC predates the South African one. It operated from May 1990 to February 1991. The mandate of the Rettig Commission, as Chile’s TRC has come to be known, was to document human rights abuses that resulted in death or disappearance during the years of military rule from September 11, 1973, to March 11, 1990. Notably, investigating torture and abuses that did not result in death did not form part of the mandate of the Rettig Commission. Nevertheless, there is a strong argument to be made why Chile’s TRC was the first step that led to last year’s referendum in which Chileans voted to rewrite the military-era constitution.

    Canada’s TRC emulated the Chilean and South African ones. Between 2007 and 2015, it provided those directly or indirectly affected by the legacy of the Indian residential school system with an opportunity to share their stories and experiences. The TRC spent six years traveling to all parts of Canada and recorded experiences of 6,500 witnesses. It recorded the history and legacy of the numerous injustices perpetrated by the residential school system to the indigenous peoples. Its six-volume report with 94 “calls to action” has been accepted by the Canadian government and marks a watershed in the country’s history.

    An American Truth and Reconciliation Commission

    Unlike South Africa, Chile and Canada, America’s injustices and even its divisions are messier. There is no equivalent of an apartheid or military regime to investigate. Investigating only the injustices against the indigenous Native Americans or formerly enslaved African Americans would be too narrow a remit to renew the American social fabric.

    America’s schisms include, but are not limited to, those in education, culture, geography, politics, religious beliefs, skin color and immigration. Just as Catholics and different Protestant sects interpret the Bible in various ways, Americans have radically different interpretations of the Constitution and its amendments. Like many reports, articles and documentaries have now recorded, social media has exacerbated the fractures in American society. Truth itself is in question and distrust in institutions is dangerously high.

    The purpose of establishing an American TRC is to slow down, and potentially reverse, the steady rupturing of a fundamentally decent society espousing equal opportunity for all. To avoid the growing risk of a dystopian cultural war, the US needs to identify the problems it faces. If social media is exacerbating divisions, how exactly is it doing so? Is polarization in America based on resentment of the white working class against metropolitan elites, or is it the rural versus urban divide? If so many Americans are functionally illiterate, what exactly is going wrong in the education system? If social mobility is now below that in my home country of the UK, why is that so?

    For a truth and reconciliation commission to be credible, it must not only identify problems but also provide solutions. Like its Canadian counterpart, it could come up with “calls to action.” Members of an American TRC must come from all walks of life, different political, cultural and religious philosophies, and have a reputation for integrity. In a partisan democracy with tribal political loyalties, they must not belong to any political party. Their core task must be to diagnose what ails America and what can heal it. Only then can this nation, which I have made my home, can be restored to its much-haloed promise.

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

  • in

    ¿Qué es alta política? Vacunar a todos

    Las vacunaciones en América Latina han sido un desastre, producto de problemas de infraestructura y una dirigencia demasiado ocupada en su subsistencia. ¿Pedimos demasiado si reclamamos hacer lo correcto?Hace unos días escuché conversar a dos mujeres en Barcelona mientras esperaban por su vacuna contra la covid. Una se quejaba del manejo de la pandemia con una amargura ecuménica: no importa si eres catalanista o estás a favor del gobierno central, decía, necesitas dar señales claras. Debe haber un mando único, aseguraba. La amiga asentía y al final soltó la perla: “Así debe ser, pero no puedes derramar vino de un cazo vacío”.Europa aun tienen dificultades para probar que la vacunación puede ser veloz cuando poco más del 4 por ciento de la población continental ha recibido un pinchazo en el brazo. Pensaba en eso —y en las señoras del cazo vacío— cuando revisaba las cifras de vacunación en América Latina. Excluido Chile —donde aproximadamente el 20 por ciento de la población está vacunada y se anuncia inmunidad de rebaño tan temprano como en junio—, el resto de la región no ha inyectado, en promedio, ni al uno por ciento de sus ciudadanos.América Latina no ha sido inmune a la degradación creciente de la política, con dirigencias obsesivamente ocupadas en la próxima elección —o en la perpetuidad— y en peleas menores entre gobiernos y oposiciones mientras pobreza, corrupción, atraso y, ahora, miles de muertes parecen suceder en un universo paralelo. Es ciertamente enervante que la escala de prioridades parezca al revés o, peor, inexistente.Estos son momentos de alta política, y alta política ahora es vacunar pronto a todo el mundo. Los míos, los tuyos, los ajenos. Ricos, pobres. Tener que escribir esto es increíble, porque es evidente, pero vamos: no hay mejor política de Estado que superar la facción y trabajar para todos. Cuando se trata de salud pública en una pandemia, la ideología es una: socializas beneficios.Y, sin embargo, muchos mandatarios y gobiernos parecen más preocupados en ganar las próximas elecciones. El ciclo electoral inició en 2021 con Ecuador y en los últimos meses votaron El Salvador y Bolivia. Este año habrá presidenciales en Perú, Nicaragua, Chile, Honduras, legislativas en México y Argentina y municipales en Paraguay. Toda la región parece en campaña electoral y la pandemia ha resultado una magnífica oportunidad propagandística. Pero las contiendas y las disputas políticas debieran ser secundarias cuando es preciso detener las muertes actuales y evitar la expansión del virus con vacunas. Pronto, sin improvisar y sin opacidad.Es imperdonable que los políticos privilegien sus disputas por encima de las necesidades de las mayorías. Y no es que no deban defender sus intereses sino que la escala de prioridades no admite discusión: la demanda de la facción no puede moralmente anteponerse a la necesidad general. No puede ser votos o muertos.Los problemas son mayores. En toda la región, el déficit de insumos y equipamiento ha sido democráticamente lamentable. Y las imágenes son desastrosas: hospitales desbordados de Perú y Ecuador, falta de información y hasta represión en Nicaragua y Venezuela, un colapso anunciado en Brasil y México es el tercer país con mayor número de muertes del mundo.A los errores de la gestión de la pandemia, se suman décadas de mala gobernanza. Mientras los gobiernos de Corea, Taiwán y Japón implementaron un rastreo minucioso de casos; en muchas ciudades principales de América Latina no hay siquiera padrones digitalizados de la ciudadanía ni bases de datos centralizadas. Unos 34 millones de latinoamericanos no tienen documentos de identificación, lo que significa que ni siquiera figuran en un registro civil. El sistema tiene ineficiencias que preceden a casi todos los gobiernos actuales. Por eso cuando llega una crisis, encuentras enfermeras malpagadas y agotadas atendiendo enfermos envueltas en bolsas de basura pues carecen de equipos. Y observas que algunos gobiernos no se agenciaron suficientes vacunas por incapacidades burocráticas e imprevisión administrativa.De acuerdo, todo esto podría ser achacable al desguace estructural de la salud pública, pero estamos en otro juego cuando episodios de abuso y amiguismo o las agendas políticas de quienes ahora están al mando se interponen entre la vida y la muerte de la población. Si nuestros dirigentes se emplean más en sus guerritas de baja intensidad para acumular poder mientras sus ciudadanos mueren, son miserables.La inversión de prioridades sucede en casi toda la región. Jair Bolsonaro —que cambió cuatro veces de ministro de Salud— entiende la pandemia como un problema personal: entorpeció su deseo de manejar Brasil a placer. Andrés Manuel López Obrador pasa más tiempo empeñado en defender la Cuarta Transformación rumbo a las elecciones legislativas que podrían darle una mayoría absoluta en el Congreso que creando planes de rescate económico a los habitantes de México. En Argentina, el proceso de vacunación está sembrado de dudas: ¿sería tan veloz si el gobierno de Alberto Fernández no tuviera una elección intermedia por ganar? Tampoco en El Salvador, Nicaragua o Venezuela ha habido la integridad de separar el rol funcionarial de la propaganda.En el fondo, la manera en que vacunamos habla de lo que creemos y somos capaces. En Argentina, por ejemplo, una líder opositora sugirió que debiera permitirse a los privados vender dosis y enviar a quien no tiene dinero a la seguridad social o a pedir subsidios. La idea es un absurdo cuando la mayoría de los procesos exitosos de vacunación —y de gestión de la pandemia en las fases críticas— son públicos y centralizados. La evidencia sugiere que una campaña veloz y masiva requiere del Estado a cargo con apoyo de voluntarios de la sociedad civil.El Estado es un elefante —fofo o hambreado— y precisa gimnasia. Por eso es relevante el factor humano para moverlo. Esto es, aun cuando hay infraestructura y enfrentas una crisis de salud pública, la inteligencia de gestión y la capacidad burocrática son capitales. Pero si quienes dirigen lanzan señales equívocas o son cínicos incapaces de hacer alta política, los resultados no pueden ser más que letales. América Latina es ya la región del mundo con más muertos por habitante.Si la opinión pública sabe que las infraestructuras son buenas y sus dirigentes dan el ejemplo, no tendrá una repentina crisis de desconfianza. Las infraestructuras deben soportar; los funcionarios, funcionar.¿Hay sustancia, entonces, o deberemos convencernos de que pedimos vino a una clase política que es un cazo vacío?Diego Fonseca (@DiegoFonsecaDF) es colaborador regular de The New York Times y director del Seminario Iberoamericano de Periodismo Emprendedor en CIDE-México y del Institute for Socratic Dialogue de Barcelona. Voyeur es su último libro. More

  • in

    A Ballot That Could Redefine the Rules of Chile’s Democracy

    One recurring theme in Latin American politics is how regularly the rules of the constitutional game change. On average, Latin American countries rewrite their constitutions every 20 years. Until recently, Chile was an exception. The country’s transition to democracy in 1990 was based on rules dating from the military dictatorship of Augusto Pinochet, but these were thrown into question by widespread social uprising in October 2019. This prompted leaders from across the political spectrum to back constitutional change as an exit route to the crisis.

    Will Chile Listen to Its People?

    READ MORE

    Due to the coronavirus pandemic, a referendum scheduled for April 2020 had to be postponed. But on October 25, Chileans will finally go to the ballot box to vote on whether they want a new constitution and, if so, how it should be drawn up. If the option of constitutional change wins, elections will be called for April 2021, with the goal of establishing an assembly that would write a new constitution within a maximum of 12 months.

    Other countries have faced similar challenges in their republican life. Chile’s political party system has hit an impasse, following in the footsteps of Colombia and Venezuela in the 1980s or Ecuador and Bolivia in the 1990s. As outlined in the Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) 2020 report, “the Chilean party system has become increasingly fragmented and polarized in recent years, and is in a period of transition in which new actors are vying with powerful incumbents against a background of low public trust in political parties.”

    Recent protests came against a backdrop of a political elite that was entrenched in their positions of power, an increase in corruption scandals, falling popular trust in the system and a decrease in voter turnout.

    The social uprising in Chile was sparked by people’s high levels of personal debt and their sense of prevailing social injustice. An often-repeated rallying cry since 2019 has been that “Chile woke up,” although, in reality, progressive social activism dates from the mid-2000s.

    An Anti-Elite Uprising

    Inequality is not the only factor behind the recent protests in Chile. As in all of Latin America, socioeconomic inequality has been a constant variable for several decades. Protesters took aim at the powerful elites, voicing criticism at abuses of power in the spheres of politics, business, religion and the military. Over the past decade, price fixing among large private companies took place in pharmacies and supermarkets, altering the cost of toilet paper and a long list of other basic products.

    In addition, there was evidence of illegal financing of political campaigns, involving the majority of Chile’s political leaders. While crimes such as petty theft were punishable by jail, white collar crimes were punished with small fines or ridiculous penalties such as attending “ethics classes.”

    For decades, Chile, along with Uruguay and Costa Rica, stood out from the rest of Latin America because of the institutional strength of its government. But now, Chile is facing the progressive collapse of the traditional political party system.

    Widespread Calls for Reform

    In recent years, Chile’s political center has lost its hold. The left is highly fragmented, the right is more radical and there is a sharp drop in voter turnout, with less than 50% of eligible voters participating in presidential elections and less than 40% in municipal ones. The increased polarization of the elite has created a climate of confrontation. Political parties have stopped fulfilling their role as intermediaries, meaning that the protests are practically the only form of expressing social discontent.

    Faced with the crowds demonstrating on the streets, politicians kickstarted plans for the October referendum. Hopes for change are running high among many Chileans. A recent survey shows that 64% of the respondents are planning to vote and 74% support the idea of changing the constitution.

    Chile is likely to enter an intense period of change, encompassing the next presidential elections — in November 2021 — and the drafting of a new constitution. This offers scope for the elite to reconnect with citizens, who are tracking the process with both hope and suspicion. The next two years will likely involve uncertainty but also renewed politicization. As happened in Colombia in 1991, Chileans, facing a series of social crises, look set to opt to deepen democracy and to overturn their old constitutional guidelines.

    There is already evidence of change. After the October 2019 social uprising, for example, the political elite agreed to review fundamental aspects of the constitutional rule relating to indigenous people and social rights. If October’s ballot opens the door to a new constitution, it will likely include new rules on equality and reserved seats for indigenous peoples. For many Chileans, such a move is long overdue.

    The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

  • in

    Coronavirus: airlines face meltdown as global travel bans multiply

    American Airlines to scrap most long-haul flights while Australia orders all arrivals to self-isolate and Spain goes into lockdown Coronavirus – latest updates The international travel industry faces a widespread shutdown over coronavirus fears after airlines announced new flight reductions and more countries introduced travel bans and isolation requirements. Travel businesses were hit with multiple […] More