Press Releases

PeruPress Releases

The Greater Significance of the 2008 EU-LAC Conference

The fifth biennial summit between members of the European Union and Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) Countries was held in Lima, Peru on May 16-17, 2008. In spite of the regions’ active pursuit of tangible agreements that would address the problems of poverty and development, little progress was made. The lack of progress was a devastating blow to the legitimacy of the conference. Leaders of both regions must be held accountable for this lack of progress, and need to realize that future relations between these two regions depend on the achievement of goals set for summits like Lima.

History of the Strategic Partnership
In 1999, the first summit between member states of the EU and LAC was held in Rio de Janeiro. At Rio, forty-eight heads of state attempted to address some of the issues affecting their respective countries and to find collaborative solutions to those issues. Both regions also aspired to strengthen consensus on international issues so that they could be contentious with other international powers, especially the United States.

For Full Article Click Here

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Kristin Bushby

EU Recognizes Significance of Reforms under Raúl Castro and Inefficiency of Sanctions: Will the US be as Clever?

On June 19, 2008, the European Union (EU) unanimously voted to lift its 2003 diplomatic sanctions against Cuba despite the traditional destructive negativity of countries like the Czech Republic and Sweden who affirm that Raúl Castro has not implemented sufficient reforms to warrant this measure. The sanctions limited the ability of high-level government officials to visit Cuba and participate in its cultural events while establishing amicable relations with Cuban dissidents. This decision, spearheaded by Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, aims to encourage further liberalization through dialogue that is “unconditional, reciprocal, non-discriminatory and results-oriented… in the context of the recent changes initiated by President Raúl Castro.” It calls upon Cuban authorities to protect human rights and release political prisoners while resuming economic aid to the island. In a year, the EU will review the island’s progress and, if this measure proves ineffective, they can reconsider their strategy to further encourage the democratization process.

For Full Article Click Here

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Michelle Quiles

Read More
MexicoPress Releases

Demerits of PEMEX Privatization

American oil companies are salivating as Mexico’s president, Felipe Calderón, tries to push the state-owned oil company, Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX), towards privatization. Mexico’s behemoth oil company is currently suffering and Calderón and his cronies believe that the cure is to open the market to foreign investment by privatizing certain sectors of the enterprise. In opposition, Mexico’s leftist party, the PRD, vehemently advocates maintaining state ownership of the company.

PEMEX has been nationalized since 1938, when President Cardenas heroically expropriated Mexico’s oil holdings from greedy U.S. and British private oil companies. Cardenas’ audacious stand against foreign oil companies is commemorated as a national holiday called Oil Expropriation Day, every March 18. The national pride for Mexico’s publicly owned PEMEX runs deep.

On April 8, Calderón proposed the reform, which will open 37 of PEMEX’s 41 divisions to private subcontractors. Despite his enthusiasm for the project, Calderón’s conservative, pro-business administration has met obstacles posed by the left-leaning opposition PRD, spearheaded by President Calderón’s former presidential opponent, Andrés Manuel López Obredor (AMLO). The PRD has challenged Calderón’s energy reform in a 71 day debate that began on May 13 and is scheduled to end on July 23.

For Full Article Click Here

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Braden Webb.

Canadian Prime Minister Apologizes for “Sad Chapter in Canadian History”

On Wednesday, June 11, 2008, Prime Minister Stephen Harper apologized in the House of Commons for the harm inflicted by these schools on their students. The gesture is part of a larger compensation project undertaken in 2005 called the Common Experience Payments through which former students may receive $10,000 plus an additional $3,000 Canadian for each school year attended. Currently 86,000 students are eligible for compensation. Harper condemned past governments for failing to protect the aboriginal peoples of Canada and their insistence on the inferiority of native cultures and practices. He further recognized that such policies of induced assimilation have no place in a country that respects the diversities of its people.

For Full Article Click Here

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Monica Narula.

Read More
Press ReleasesVenezuela

Colombia’s Historic Moment

    • On 11 June 2008, in a press release titled Chávez’s Blockbuster Proposal: Finally the right message for peace, COHA praised Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez’s statements calling for an end to Colombia’s civil conflict. In the release, COHA urged that thought be given to the major role that Chávez, a leader with significant resources at his disposal, could play in such a scenario. Today, 12 June 2008, COHA appeals to Chávez and all his regional colleagues to take this call for peace one step further, arguing that the situation is ripe for a negotiated settlement and that Chavez’s strong words should be translated into an ambitious peace plan.

Colombia could be facing a historic moment. Under Conservative President Uribe’s wavering guidance, the country is approaching a negative stalemate, the very same scenario which El Salvador fell into just before it experienced the successful negotiation that ended its bitter civil conflict. That struggle accounted for the loss of close to 100,000 lives, including brutal massacres and human rights violations by that country’s armed forces. The United Nations Mission to El Salvador (ONUSAL) was successful at the time not because of the inherent qualities of its peace plan but because of the precise historical moment in which it was launched. The fall of the Soviet Union meant the end of the financial and ideological support upon which the country’s leftist guerrilla group, the FMLN, depended so heavily. It also signified a shift in US foreign policy towards El Salvador. At the height of the conflict, El Salvador was yet another stage on which one of the Cold War dramas was being played out. But with the beginning of the peace talks, it suddenly became an uninteresting skirmish on the periphery of US consciousness. Following a string of very public human rights abuses, including the murder of a number of priests at San Salvador’s Jesuit university in 1989, the US congress voted to cut military aid to El Salvador by half. This left both the FMLN and the Salvadoran Army unable to mount serious military offensives. At that point, the war was, for all intents and purposes, at a stand still.

For Full Article Click Here

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Jessica Bryant

Time for Clarification: Puerto Ricans Need to End their Indecision

On June 9, 2008, the UN Special Committee on Decolonization considered yet again the status of the world’s oldest remaining colony, Puerto Rico. The Committee called on the United States to accelerate the process of self-determination for the island, an action that many Puerto Ricans regard as a crucially important step towards fulfilling their fifty-six year-old quest to achieve a majority opinion on the permanent status of the island. However, this is not the first time the UN has issued the same appeal. For the last eight years, the UN Committee has called upon the United States to grant autonomy to Puerto Rico, but has yet to witness any changes. In response to the most recent resolution, Washington has reminded the international community that Puerto Rico democratically decided to enter into a free association with the United States in 1952. Accordingly, the persisting inconclusive political status of Puerto Rico is a domestic matter that has no place on the UN agenda. The United States has repeatedly stated that only the Puerto Rican people can decide the structure of their future political arrangement. If the United States is willing to resolve Puerto Rico’s status, why are Puerto Rican representatives annually attending a UN Committee that has repeatedly failed to produce results for them?

For Full Article Click Here

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associate Michelle Quiles

Read More