The (anti)American caravan: the beginning of a sick love

Rainer Maria Baratti
18/01/2021
No Comments
Latin America

The Migrant Caravan is knocking at the doors of the United States to warn them “it’s your fault we were forced to leave.” This is yet another chapter in a difficult relationship between the United States and Latin America. A story more than a century long. It is a story that began in the early 1900s with the United States’ intent to establish itself as a regional and world power and to transform the Caribbean into the desired “American Lake.” It is a story that saw Latin America’s dependence increase between the two world wars. It is a story of multinationals, investors, U.S. administrations, international organizations, doctrines, revolutions, coups, and the myth of Pan-Americanism. It is also the history of the Cold War, drug trafficking, development projects, the CIA and terrorism. Our Caravan can now set off on a historical journey to discover a history where anti-Americanism has been transformed into hope.

American interventionism historically developed under the Monroe Doctrine, whereby the United States would not tolerate intervention by European powers in the Western Hemisphere’s affairs.

The first major act, as a regional and emerging world power, was to wage war against Spain over the Cuban question in 1898. The war ended after 4 months and led to the acquisition of the Philippines, Puerto Rico and Guam. These outposts were vital to extend the American power in the Chinese market, where the Japanese rise had begun to threaten the liberty of trade in the region. Another important effect was to have a greater grip on the Caribbean with a de facto nominal independence of Cuba.

In 1904 Theodore Roosevelt, president of the United States between 1901 and 1909, added a corollary to the Monroe doctrine that claimed the right of the United States to intervene in the affairs of an American republic if it ran the risk of occupation or intervention by an European state.

Roosevelt was a firm believer of the doctrines of Mahan and of Social Darwinism.

Social Darwinism is a theory according to which the history of human societies responded to the logic of survival of the fittest. This theory provided the foundation for numerous theories of racial supremacy and for advocates of the “white man’s burden”, that is the role of the “white man” as a civilizer.

The ideas of Mahan, a U.S. admiral, on the other hand, focused on the position of the naval power and on the assumption that the development of trade is essential in terms of power increase.

He also believed that, because the sea is the fastest and cheapest means of transporting goods it is in the interest of a state to develop a commercial fleet and to ensure its security through an adequate navy that can prevent the routes from being destroyed by any external threat.

These two theories have been translated, on the one hand, into the desire to export “progress” through investments and capital, and, on the other, to ensure that these investments were made in countries which were important from the point of view of trade routes.

With these objectives in mind, the administration of the time, obtained the independence of Panama from Colombia with a treaty that authorized the United States to build and control what would later become the Panama Canal in 1913; fundamental to reduce the timing of trade routes.

Moreover, to further consolidate the American dominance over the Caribbean, the Platt Amendment was included in the Cuban constitution. This amendment established the criteria for intervention in Cuban affairs and allowed the United States to maintain a naval base in Cuba (Guantanamo).

The United States used this amendment by intervening in some Cuban affairs in 1906, 1912, 1917, and 1920. The amendment was repealed in 1934 but control of the Guantanamo military base remains to this day.

The United States also took control of the finances throughout the Dominican Republic and Haiti – requiring these two countries to ratify the Platt Amendment.

Woodrow Wilson’s administration (1913-1921) intended to abandon direct armed intervention in Latin America because it had not brought the desired results.

Indeed, for instance, shortly before his election there had been an intervention in Nicaragua, which ended with the rise of General Chamorro. The intervention had been dictated by the need to protect the growing investments of the United Fruit Company, since 1984 Chiquita Brands, in the Caribbean region.

Moreover, already in the second decade of the 1900’s the United States had succeeded in transforming the Caribbean into an “American Lake” and, to maintain control over the area, armed interventions had been necessary.

The same fate occurred to Mexico, which saw the presence of armed troops from 1914 until 1917, the year in which new elections were held and a new constitution was ratified in which a strong anti-American sentiment was easily discernible.

It should be noted that in the 1920’s the economic influence of the United States was relevant in Latin America.

The United Fruit Company and the Standard Fruit Company (today Dole Fruit Company) in fact, controlled most of the profits in the region. These two companies competed for dominance in the region and held strong control in countries that came to be known as the “banana republics”, namely: Honduras, Costa Rica, and Guatemala.

Time and again, Latin American journalists have accused the companies of bribing national governments for preferential treatment or to consolidate their monopoly.

In addition, there have been accusations of environmental degradation, deforestation, drainage and depletion of water systems, and devastation of biodiversity.

Moreover, they often practiced monoculture which, by exhausting the fertility of the land, eventually led to economic collapse as well as dependence on the export of that product. Exportation that often did not create profit for the nation.

In Cuba, the United States owned 2/3 of the sugar production, practically the only product of the island.

This logic also applied to raw materials and consequently the United States in Venezuela owned almost half of the oil and in Chile the price of copper, the main export product, was directly decided by Washington.

It should also be noted that a company such as the United Fruit Company did not only deal with fruit but had invested in transnational railways and telecommunications. In addition, at this time, Latin America received 20% of total US exports and in most cases Latin American states exported up to 90% of their production to the US. In practice, that of Latin American states was to all intents and purposes a strong economic dependence.

The impossibility of bringing stability to the region and the need to have “allied” governments, as well as the strengthening of Japan in the Pacific Ocean, led the United States to support the so-called “Strong Men” (such as Batista in Cuba, the Somoza family in Nicaragua and Trujillo in the Dominican Republic).

For this reason, with Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1933-1945) the “good neighbor” policy was established, with “eminent” people who continued to see their wealth increase increased while the population was forced to live in the most terrible poverty.

The folklore assigned to the American President the slogan “He might be a son of a bitch, but at least he is our son of a bitch”, which, beyond the veracity or not of the message, represents the figure of dictators, representatives, or guardians, of American influence.

Special case, however, was that of Mexico, which saw the achievement of compromises due to friction over oil.

With the constitution of 1917 Mexico wanted to nationalize the resources, causing the alarm of the American company Standard Oil (from which later ESSO and Chevron were born).

In this first case there were international negotiations that ended with the United States being granted the property rights in exchange for diplomatic recognition of Mexico in 1924.

A second incident took place in 1938 with the nationalization by Cardenas. This sparked a lobbying action by Standard Oil, which saw it accuse the Mexican president of being a communist.

Also, in this case there new negotiations were held that led in 1941 to the recognition of Mexico’s right to control raw materials in exchange for compensation to be paid to the American company.

It should be noted that this has been possible only because the United States were preparing for war and needed allies with many raw materials. This, in fact, was also dictated by the fact that between 1930 and 1940 the purchases of Mexican oil by the Axis powers had increased.

In the wake of this view of “war opportunities”, Roosevelt tried to consolidate the Pan-American movement.

The United States exploited the activism of the Nazis in Latin America (especially in countries such as Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay) to justify greater cooperation and to revitalize the Pan American Union born in 1910.

With the Panama Declaration of 1939, a security perimeter around the Western Hemisphere was outlined and an economic coordination committee was established. This made it easier for the United States to block transactions between Latin America and future enemies.

In addition, the United States with the “rent and loan” law became, at first, the “arsenal” of Great Britain. By doing so, they guaranteed profits from war production using Latin American raw materials.

But the situation worsened, and the United States had to enter the war dragging the Latin American countries with them. The latter were fundamental to the war effort because of their easy access to raw materials.

It was in this way that the fires of war became vivid throughout the world, representing the only glow in a long night. In half a century, the United States had managed to establish a controversial relationship with a vast region. A relationship that was initially economic, then political and finally a necessity for the war against the Axis powers. But now our caravan must rest. The journey is still long. The seeds of anti-Americanism have been sown and have yet to sprout. Soon we will resume our journey….

Rainer Maria Baratti

Conoscere è resistere!

Condividi questo articolo e aiutaci a diffondere i nostri contenuti

Torna all'Atlante delle migrazioni

Paesi del mondo

Approfondimenti tematici

Puoi continuare ad approfondire attraverso i nostri articoli:

Carovana-migranti-America-Latina-Large-Movements-02

(Anti) American caravan: a jealous love

Rainer Maria Baratti 18 January 2021

The Migrant Caravan is knocking on the doors of the United States to warn them: “it’s your fault we were forced to leave”. The sun is rising, and we must continue our journey through history. It is the story of a sick love between the United States and Latin America. It is a story more than a century long. It is a story that begins in the early 1900s with the intent of the United States to establish itself as a regional and world power and to transform the Caribbean into a coveted “American Lake.” It is a story that saw Latin America’s dependence increase between the two world wars. It is a story of multinationals, investors, U.S. administrations, international organizations, doctrines, revolutions, coups and the myth of Pan-Americanism. It is also the history of the Cold War, drug trafficking, development projects, the CIA and terrorism. Our Caravan can now set off on a historical journey to discover a history where anti-Americanism has been transformed into hope. With the end of World War II, the United States found themselves in position of dominance with respect to Latin America. The conflict had made commercial transactions between Latin Americans and the rest of the world virtually impossible, and the war had destroyed, or severely weakened, the power of nations that might have posed a timid threat to American supremacy in the region. Roosevelt wanted to translate this strong dominance into an international organization, and this theme flowed into the discussions of the Pan American Conference in Chapultepec, Mexico, in February 1945. Here it was declared that any attack on any American state represented an attack on all states in the region. The final act marked the first step in the direction of a post-war military alliance in the Western Hemisphere. All states at the Chapultepec Conference took part in the establishment of the United Nations Organization (UN). The United States believed that, prior to the conference, a historic conflict had to be healed: that between the Monroe Doctrine – according to which the United States did not tolerate intervention by European powers in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere – and what was supposed to represent the internationalism of the UN. Originally, in fact, the UN should have had strong powers on regional issues and the problem was that any intervention of the United States in Latin America could have been prevented by the veto of Great Britain or the Soviet Union. In the end, four articles, from 51 to 54, were inserted in the UN statute, which in effect safeguarded the ability of the United States to exercise its influence in the western hemisphere without breaking the rules of the new organization. The articles protected the right of regional collective organizations to resolve disputes and opt for individual or collective self-defense. In this regard, in 1947, with the United States at the height of its power, the American Republics signed the Treaty of Rio: a collective defense pact that became a model for many other military alliances formed by the United States in the first decade of the Cold War. The Rio Treaty thus legitimized American intervention and gave a new internationalist emphasis to the Monroe Doctrine. So in 1951 the Organization of American States was formally constituted to promote coordinated economic, political and military action and to resolve inter-American disputes. However, there was a strong problem for the United States: nationalism and anti-Americanism were growing in Latin American countries. For many, the logic of dependence and the dominance in the commercial sphere of American multinationals were considered the main culprits of the serious levels of inequality. For example, in 1950 the GDP of all of Latin America was one-seventh that of the United States which had the same population. In the same year, Latin America accounted for 28% of total exports and 35% of U.S. imports. It should also be noted that the American share of exports from Cuba, Nicaragua and Guatemala was between 70 and 80% of the total. In practice, the “South” depended on the “North” and this trend was destined to increase during the Cold War, even though the US gaze was focused on Asia and Europe to keep the Soviet Union at bay. Another important issue was the Soviet Union itself. The policy adopted by the United States was one of containment. This policy was coined by George Kennan towards communism as a whole and the main concept was to contain the USSR (i.e. to keep it within its current borders) in the hope that internal divisions, failure or evolution of the political context could put an end to what was perceived as the threat of a persistently expansionist force. In this perspective, it is worth mentioning the case, in 1951, of the new president of Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz Guzmán, who tried to introduce a progressive taxation system, a new welfare system and to increase workers’ wages. To this was added the expropriation of 400,000 uncultivated agricultural lands of the United Fruit Company, an American company with interests throughout Latin America which became Chiquita Brands in 1984. The reaction of the company was to put pressure on the U.S. government with the result that the Eisenhower administration approved a CIA plan to overthrow the regime with the help of Guatemalan exiles trained by the U.S. in bases located in Nicaragua and Honduras. In the same vein, between 1953 and 1954, the United States sponsored a resolution of the Organization of American States which declared that the communist control of any country in the Western Hemisphere was a threat to the security of all members. The resolution was passed by 17 votes to one-the vote of Guatemala. As a last desperate move, Arbenz turned to the Soviet bloc in search of weapons. In May 1954, Czechoslovakian-made weapons arrived, but the following month a small contingent led by Castillo Armas attacked from Honduras. Meanwhile, American planes bombed Guatemala City. Conseqeuntly, lands were returned to the United Fruit

SOCIAL CONFLICTS NEVER SOOTHED: El Salvador falls into a new wave of violence

Martina Bossi 10 July 2022

Saturday, March 26, 2022 will remain in the memories of Salvadorans as the most violent day in the last twenty years. In just a few hours, 62 homicides were reported nationwide in El Salvador. To deal with the serious emergency, on March 27 the Legislative Assembly approved the Regime of Exception, at the initiative of President Nayib Bukele expressed in the Council of Ministers. This Regime was to last for a period of thirty days but was renewed month by month and is still in effect. Through this Decree, constitutional guarantees typical of a truly democratic society were suspended, such as: freedom of association and assembly (Article 7 of the Constitution of the Republic, p. 2-3); the right to information (Article 7 of the Constitution of the Republic, p. 2-3); the right to information on the grounds for detention and defense (Art. 12 inc. 2 Cn, p. 3); the 72-hour limit on administrative detention (Art. 13 inc. 2 Cn, p. 3-4); and the inviolability of correspondence and telecommunications (Art. 24 Cn, p. 5). To try to understand how this rapid escalation of events came about, it is necessary to give an overview of the actors involved. THE SALVADORAN MARAS The origins of these organized criminal groups date back to the end of the civil conflict that culminated with the signing of the Peace Treaties in 1992. Within a few years of abandoning violence as a political means, the U.S. government, which had taken a central role in the Salvadoran conflict, initiated a policy of deporting criminals to their countries of origin. The members of the California gangs who thus returned to El Salvador brought with them the organizational patterns typical of U.S. crime, and these inevitably ended up influencing the criminal groups here, transforming them into a more organized, complex and violent phenomenon. The new gangs, known as “maras” or “pandillas,” grew rapidly, deeply marking the postwar period in El Salvador. The violence associated with the Salvadoran mara phenomenon flows in four directions: war between rival gangs, gang violence against communities, state violence toward maras, and violent responses of maras toward the state. Living in a given territory defines membership in one pandilla rather than another, even if it is only a few blocks away. These spaces are out of state control and this is where Salvadoran criminal life develops. Access to the areas is controlled and limited to certain times of the day, punctuated by a strict curfew. The people who live in these areas are forced to pay the constant extortion that fuels the maras phenomenon economically. This coercive power that has gone unchallenged, combined with violence and constant threats, forces thousands of people to leave their neighborhoods, their cities or their countries. The undeniable impact that pandillas have on daily life in El Salvador has meant, over the years, periodic attempts at negotiation conducted by the government with the aim of countering the phenomenon. PREVIOUS GOVERNMENTS’ APPROACH Public institutions address the problem on a daily basis, but have so far failed to solve it definitively. In 2003, when the ARENA Party – of nationalist, conservative and neoliberal orientation – was in government, repression was first introduced as a strategy to eliminate maras. Thus, for the next five years, leading members of the criminal groups were imprisoned. The political reaction caused, in addition to the overcrowding of prisons, a forced redistribution of power within the criminal gangs, which, right from inside the prisons, reformed their internal system, even to the point of strengthening it. In 2011, the first government of the FMLN – the current leftist political party inspired by revolutionary Augustin Farabundo Martí, a former guerrilla in the conflict that ended in 1992 – experimented with a new approach to dealing with the problem of the maras: a kind of détente that included, among other interventions, the transfer of leaders to less secure prisons in exchange for their commitment that the murder rate perpetrated by their affiliates would decrease. Although this truce promoted by the then ruling party did indeed lead to an exponential and unprecedented reduction in the number of murders in El Salvador, it was never accepted by the public and the political establishment-including some officials and leaders of the FMLN itself. Distrust also justified by the fact that the politicians who had promoted this strategy never fully clarified the government’s actual role in this arrangement with the maras, thus dispelling once and for all doubts about the total transparency and bonhomie of the operation. In 2014, another change of government returned the pandillas to maximum security prisons, giving them the status of terrorist organizations. The response of these criminal groups was not long in coming. Indeed, 2015 was marked by major violence and killings, especially of Salvadoran police and military personnel. In turn, the police and military began to adopt strategies increasingly typical of a country at war, going so far as to perpetrate territorial control procedures that were not entirely legal. NAYIB BUKELE AND THE WAR AGAINST TERRORISM The 2019 presidential elections saw the victory of Nayib Bukele, an independent candidate of the Nuevas Ideas party – promoter of a social conservatism diametrically opposed to the political system that had been established so far among the previously mentioned parties. The overwhelming victory, also won thanks to his promise to fight hard against the violence of the maras, allowed Bukele to change Salvadoran politics from within, implementing economic reforms – very famous, also and especially for the criticism he drew on his presidency, is the one related to Bitcoins – but also judicial and pertaining to the national security sector. Last 2021, on the occasion of the debut of the new Legislative Assembly, Bukele ordered the dismissal of five magistrates of the Constitutional Chamber and the Attorney General’s Office through what has been dubbed a “Self-Coup.” In their place were inserted trusted officials from Nuevas Ideas. In general, the political strategies undertaken so far by Bukele have proven to be imprudent, reckless, and

Migranti-venezuelani-colombia-large-movements

Venezuelan migrants in Colombia

Martina Leigheb 18 January 2021

With 4.6 million people leaving Venezuela as a result of the political and economic crisis of recent years, an unprecedented migration crisis is underway in Latin America. At a time of hostility, closure and the erection of walls, neighboring Colombia has absorbed some 1.8 million Venezuelan migrants, practicing, so far, a policy of solidarity obviously not without contradictions. The Venezuelan crisis Gone are the years of the Venezuelan economic boom, when the Caribbean country represented, according to the International Organization for Migration (IOM), one of the preferred destinations for Latin American internal migrants. The situation has reversed; now people flee from the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Some 4.6 million people have done so in just a few years, and the UNHCR estimates that it will reach 6.5 million by the end of 2020, almost 20% of Venezuela’s population. The reasons for the exodus, second in the world only to that of Syria, seem obvious when one considers that the Venezuelan economy shrank by two-thirds from 2013 to 2019 and that the country has, in the last few years, entered a period of profound political, as well as economic, instability. Significantly, the Venezuelan president, Nicolás Maduro, a sustainer of Hugo Chávez’s so-called Bolivarian socialism, is not recognized by most of the international community and last year the main opposition leader Juan Guaidó proclaimed himself president in a failed attempt to seize power. The causes of the current Venezuelan situation are complex and multiple: hyperinflation, sanctions dictated by the United States, debt accumulated over the years, lack of democracy in government policies and an economic system which has been based for a long time almost exclusively on oil production; fortune and doom of the country. The geopolitical roots of a crisis are never easy to trace in Latin America, perhaps the greatest terrain of ideological clash between capitalism and socialism, historically torn apart by hoarding, corruption, and external interference. What is certain are the facts: the political-economic crisis has forced Venezuela into a condition of extreme poverty and lack of basic necessities, such as food and medicine, and the population is abandoning the country en masse. Migration to Colombia Almost 80% of Venezuelan migrants are in Latin America and the country that has absorbed the most is neighboring Colombia, on the western border of the Caribbean country, followed by Peru, Chile, Ecuador, Brazil, and Argentina. According to official data from Migración Colombia, as of December 2019 there were more than 1,771,000 Venezuelans present in the country, of which about 220,000 were minors. Unlike other South American countries, Colombia was not used to receiving migrants, on the contrary it was Colombians who emigrated in search of a better life, far from the civil war that tore the country apart for decades. Venezuela, more than any other country, has welcomed Colombian refugees, who were attracted by its past economic prosperity. Although a 2019 UNHCR report shows how, in recent years, Colombian expatriates to Venezuela have increasingly returned home, Colombia’s people historical memory has not forgotten the welcome they received. The idea of returning the favor, linked perhaps to an awareness of the inevitability of the Venezuelan migration phenomenon, has led Colombia to adopt fairly open migration policies. In 2016, for example, Special Permanence Permits (Pep) were established, allowing Venezuelan migrants to enjoy basic rights, such as access to work, health and education. These permits were even more useful due to the inability of Venezuelans to renew their documents, given the halt of diplomatic relations between Colombia and Venezuela and the subsequent closure of the embassies. Dating back to the summer of 2019 is another measure of the Colombian government praised by humanitarian organizations, namely the granting of citizenship to 24 thousand children born in Colombia to Venezuelan women, with an ex-post effect also on births that will take place in the next two years. The figures that Colombia is investing to manage the recent migratory phenomenon are high, and difficult to sustain for a country facing the consequences of a die-hard conflict. Nevertheless, mechanisms have been established at the regional level to coordinate and facilitate the legal, social, and economic inclusion of Venezuelan citizens. In fact, the governments of the Latin American countries most affected by the arrival of Venezuelans have jointly launched the Regional Humanitarian Response Plan for Refugees and Migrants 2020 (RMRP), an instrument intended to coordinate and raise funds to manage the flow of migration. A delicate balance The Colombian population initially reacted positively to the reception of Venezuelan migrants, but it seems that cases of xenophobia and stigmatization have increased in recent months. In a society like Colombia, strongly striven by the armed conflict and by a growing social stratification, Venezuelan migrants have added themselves to the most marginalized segment of the population, the one that populates the suburbs of the big cities. According to Colombian authorities, 90% of Venezuelans in Colombia work in the informal economy. On the other hand, according to the National Administrative Department of Statistics, 47.2% of Colombians themselves work in informality and precariousness. The new emergency situation created by the COVID-19 pandemic has further complicated the situation of Venezuelan migrants. Colombian President Ivàn Duque on March 13, 2020 temporarily closed the borders to stem the spread of the new coronavirus, but the more than two thousand kilometers of border separating the two countries, in part isolated areas affected by armed conflict, are difficult to control. The risk is greater for migrants not legally registered in Colombia, about half of the nearly two million present in the territory, according to an estimate by Migración Colombia. The latter thus lack access to health care, in addition to being constantly at risk of violence, exploitation, child labor, recruitment by armed groups and trafficking. Lastly, a consequence of COVID-19, concerns groups of Venezuelan migrants who have been trying to return home in recent weeks. The quarantine measures adopted by the Colombian government, for the moment scheduled until April 27, have blocked the informal economy and some migrants, now

The status of women within the peace transition process in Colombia

Elena Di Dio 18 January 2021

In the context of the civil war and the resulting transition to peace that is taking place in Colombia, women have taken on a far from marginal role. Both as protagonists and as victims of the violence, Colombian women have certainly influenced the course of the conflict, and thus have actively carved out a space, for themselves, at the peace negotiation table. This result has been achieved mainly thanks to the contribution of decades of debates and analysis on the subject carried out at a global level within the United Nations Organization. Women, peace and security The gender issue has made its way into debates on human rights and, more generally, on the sustainable development of nations in recent decades. The main international organizations have decided to adopt a gender approach in relation to the most varied areas, which until then had never specifically mentioned women. Recent studies have shown how, in the context of post-conflict reconstruction, women’s participation is significant in achieving a more stable and lasting peace. The economic and social recovery of the community also benefits from the integration of women and their political participation. To support this, tools such as the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) Index, which measures and ranks the well-being of women in each country, are being created. Even the United Nations Security Council, in 2000, has recognized the centrality of the role of women in the reconstruction of post-conflict societies. With the establishment and approval of seven resolutions on women (dealing with peace and security) and the drafting of the recommendations of the CEDAW Committee, it creates the framework that countries must consult and adopt to achieve a sustainable and inclusive peace. Women’s participation not only ensures that the rights violated during conflict are returned to women, but also contributes to the structural transformation of society towards participatory democracy and security for all citizens. The gender approach in the Colombia peace agreement: the role of women During the decades-long conflict between the Colombian government and the FARC-EP guerrilla group, women have been protagonists in various ways. They have fought in the ranks of the revolutionary group (just think about the guerrilla “Negra Karina”, considered one of the fiercest fighters and now actively participating in the peace process). But above all, Colombian women have suffered the conflict on their skin, through sexual violence, or seeing themselves forced to flee their homes with their children. The gender issue in the conflict was not an isolated event. In fact, it is estimated that between 1958 and 2016, 54% of victims and more than half of those displaced by the conflict were women, while between 25 and 26 thousand suffered sexual violence. In line with the recommendations of the CEDAW Committee, the end of the conflict in Colombia has become an opportunity for women victims to become peacemakers. Thus, in 2014, during the negotiations, the first gender subcommittee in a peace process was inaugurated. This specific branch of the commission is responsible for integrating specific measures to improve women’s lives into all agenda items. Formed by representatives from the national government and FARC, the subcommittee inserts women’s perspectives within the agreement itself, through the effort of 18 organizations specializing in women’s rights and in rights of the LGBT+ community, as well as 10 former guerrilla women of various nationalities and 10 sexual violence experts. As a result, since 2014, 60% of the victims who presented testimony to the commission in Havana, where the negotiations took place, have been women. The gender approach, therefore, is implemented in all parts of the peace agreement, through more than one hundred specific measures and outlining eight thematic axes. Equal access to rural property between men and women and guarantee of the rights of agricultural workers with different sexual orientation and/or gender identity are included in the Integral Rural Reform. The political and representative participation of women is guaranteed through measures to prevent the specific risks they may encounter in their work within the decision-making bodies created by the agreements. Access to truth, justice and reparation for the crimes committed during the conflict is also and especially allowed to women, who most of all have appealed to the Truth Commission. Gender victimization has been publicly acknowledged in all its modalities through the strengthening of women’s organizations and their effort towards political and social participation. Thus, the peace agreement, in its gender approach, seeks equality and universality as characteristics of the transition to peace and post-conflict Colombian society. The subcommittee acts concretely in the peace process through the allocation of resources and the regulation of the principle of alternation within autonomous parties and organs. With regards to gender-based violence, various forms of prevention and protection of women are established, as well as measures against impunity for war crimes. Through these interventions, the agreement and the commission aim at the development of a sustainable, stable, and lasting peace. The Colombian woman today Despite these remarkable steps forward against gender discrimination, women in Colombia are still not considered equal to men. In the aforementioned WPS Index, in 2019 Colombia scored 0.691 on a scale of 0 to 1 (where 1 represents the highest level of inclusion), ranking 104th in the world. Women’s political participation, hampered by insurmountable economic constraints for many, is low at all levels: from individual city halls to Congress. Moreover, the high estimates of gender-based violence shed light on a society that, despite good intentions, struggles to detach itself from its internally rooted patriarchy (or machismo). Especially in rural areas, levels of gender insecurity remain remarkably high, surpassed only by those faced by human rights defenders, whose rates of victimization increased further during the quarantine imposed by the spread of the new coronavirus. In this context, the normalization of this type of violence is worrisome: in Colombia, a woman’s testimony against her attacker is not considered legitimate. On gender impunity, local activist Francy L. Jaramillo Piedrahita argues that: “here a man is more likely to be tried for stealing a

The events of 2019 and their impact on the war in Colombia

Elena Di Dio 18 January 2021

In Colombia, the transitional phase that sees the incessant civil war acquiesce towards peace knows an abrupt halt during 2019, just three years after the signing of the bilateral agreement. What are the new obstacles standing in the way of the peace agreement between the government and the revolutionary armed group FARC – EP? To answer this question, we need to take a step back. Colombia entered the new millennium in a situation of great instability. The guerrilla groups that rebelled against the state, which was considered non-existent in large rural areas of the country, had reached the height of their power. Chief among these armed groups were the FARC-EP (Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia – Ejército del Pueblo). With the presidency of Álvaro Uribe Vélez (not coincidentally nicknamed “the warlord”), the situation was quickly reversed. His controversial counteroffensive strategies, over the course of his two terms in office, brought remarkable results including the beginning of the FARC’s decline. Since his election to the presidency in 2010, Juan Manuel Santos has begun to depart from his predecessor’s political ideas by promoting dialogue with revolutionary forces until a peace agreement is reached. The bilateral treaty addresses numerous issues considered the fundamental causes of more than 50 years of internal conflict. The document lists the various measures that, by mutual agreement, must be taken by both parties to establish peace between the government and the FARC group. However, a few months later, the end of Santos’ term of office calls into question all the efforts made until then. The election of Iván Duque Márquez, a close ally of Uribe, and his manifest intention to modify the agreement, puts former FARC combatants on notice. In addition, the events that have been making the situation in Colombia even more tense since 2019 hint at a concrete threat of a return to war. The FARC: from armed struggle to political struggle and back again First of all, the disarmament of the guerrillas, supervised by a UN commission created ad hoc, is completed by the majority of FARC members, but not by all of them. Some thousands of fighters, in fact, have refused to come to terms with the government. These never came out of the jungle and never abandoned the armed struggle. Their actions have scaled down, in parallel with the number of their members, but their existence endures the peace process. The most recent information on this subject, claims that these groups have sought refuge in Venezuela, while some speculate that they may be affiliated with other guerrilla groups such as the Ejército de Liberación Nacional (ELN). What is certain is that, due to the current circumstances of Colombian politics, the group of demobilized is growing stronger thanks also to the affiliation of those who, after embracing civilian life, have decided to return to live in the jungle as clandestine fighters. Critical issues in the peace process If implemented, the treaty could meet the demands of revolutionary groups and avoid further casualties. However, its implementation is encountering numerous obstacles, as has happened in the past in the history of the Colombian conflict. First of all, the political participation of the ex-members of the FARC has not been assured in the last elections. The new political party has had little prominence, perhaps due to the bad reputation the group has earned through the decades. More importantly, since embracing civilian life, many repentants have seen death at the hands of hit men. Now a widespread practice in Colombia; systematic assassinations of political opposition have claimed the lives of some 200 FARC members and more than 600 social leaders, indigenous tribesmen, and human rights activists since the signing of the treaty. Land cultivation and property management was the main issue that caused the outbreak and prolongation of the conflict over the decades. The Integral Rural Reform and the reconversion of lands previously used for cocaine cultivation are therefore at the core of the peace treaty. Nonetheless, implementation and financing are slow, and peasants are not benefiting at all from the new conditions. The shortcomings of the Truth Courts The issue of victims of the conflict is not being satisfactorily addressed. The frightening figures remain far-fetched, and there is speculation that the actual numbers are much higher. The Truth Commission, not being imperative with its sanctions, struggles to carry out its duties. And so, the victims remain without justice, the perpetrators unpunished and the corpses unnamed. But not only that; the greatest defect of the Integral System of Justice that has been established since the signing of the agreement is that it does not guarantee any kind of protection to those who want to testify for the truth, and the sad tradition of murders in Colombia makes this system seem like a trap for those who want to contribute to peace and justice. The circumstances listed so far make the period of dialogue and mutual concessions that characterized former President Santos’ two terms in office seem like a rip-off of Colombia’s violent rule. Instead of strengthening the foundations of peace, his successor and current president Duque directly undermines them, directing his political propaganda against the agreement with the FARC and financing it with the Fund for Peace, thus making use of international funds for electoral and personal purposes. The threat of a return to civil war in Colombia is therefore becoming more and more concrete as we move into 2019. Some encouraging signs Nevertheless, the support of the international sphere that the peace agreement with the FARC has received cannot be ignored. In addition to the UN and its Security Council, individual states have also been advocating for peace in Colombia, committing to the bilateral ceasefire and as members of the Truth Commission. In addition, there are the citizens who are showing that they have grown tired of the violence and of the systematic murder of the political opposition, which inevitably leads to the death of democracy. This part of the population, with a strong and fresh

Venezuelan women in search of a health that is not there

Francesca Cordaro 18 January 2021

The collapse of the economy in Venezuela has led to a series of internal conjunctures in the country, causing what is now the largest migration phenomenon in Latin American history. As in every crisis, the most vulnerable social groups are those who suffer the most. Among these are women, exposed to a patriarchal culture of violence and fewer employment opportunities. Covid-19 has also complicated access to care for Venezuelan women who, even before the pandemic, had specific needs in terms of sexual and reproductive health. Gender and health in Venezuelan social policies Since 2003, a series of social policies known as Misiones Bolivarianas have been promoted in Venezuela. The Misiones have different objectives: from the fight against poverty to literacy programs, from health to access to credit, from the implementation of cultural and political activities to those in support of the indigenous population and the environment. Misión Barrio Adentro and Misión Madres de Barrio, however, are the two initiatives that have defined the role of women and the Venezuelan health system over the years. The first has led to the construction of health clinics in the most depressed rural and urban areas of the country, while the second has a constitutional justification for its genesis. Article 88 of the Venezuelan Constitution, in fact, underlines the social recognition of female leadership in the management and care of the family unit. Madres del Barrio’s ideological background aiming at female independence was then translated into monetary transfers to support unemployed women. However, while the recognition of domestic work can be considered an achievement for women’s rights, the existence of a difference between the sexes in social roles is admitted, thus leaving out the multidimensionality of being a woman. Some data on women’s health in Venezuela More than social policies, it is the data that help to understand the real situation of Venezuelan women in light of and Venezuelan crisis and the Covid-19 emergency. Therefore, it is possible to reconstruct a general and objective picture of Venezuelan women’s health through the reports of civil society and international organizations. For years, in fact, no official government figures have been published in this regard. First of all, it is appropriate to clarify the state of the Venezuelan health system today. The 2017 Encuesta Nacional de Médicos y Estudiantes de Medicina revealed that 40% of enrollees in Venezuelan medical universities have left the country, determining an important decrease in this human capital. Added to this: a 70% of hospital facilities with intermittent water availability, a 63% of hospitals without electricity, and a 50% of diagnostic laboratories are not operational. With respect to the gender perspective, however, the reality described above becomes even more complicated in the area of sexual and reproductive health. UNFPA reports that Venezuela is now the third country with the highest teenage fertility rate in Latin America and the Caribbean only after Ecuador and Honduras. Human Rights Watch reported that infant mortality in Venezuela has increased by 30%, maternal mortality by 60%. Equivalencia en Acción, a coalition of Venezuelan civil society, has denounced that in hospitals and national pharmacies there is almost 100% unavailability of contraceptive methods in a country where abortion is still illegal. Therefore, the possibility of family planning is quite difficult in Venezuela. This could lead to an increase in clandestine abortions, risking the woman’s life. In addition, the increase in teenage pregnancies undermines the continuation of studies and the regular inclusion of women in the labor market. The consequences for Venezuelan women Given the humanitarian crisis in the country, those who are in the appropriate economic and physical conditions, mainly choose to leave Venezuela. However, once they arrive in the new country, access to care is not an immediate process. For example, in Colombia, the first country of destination with almost 2 million Venezuelans in the territory, the situation is quite complex. In order to gain access to the health system, it is necessary for the migrant to have a regular migration status. Despite hay que quitarse el sombrero for how Colombia has handled the entries of Venezuelans, the system of access to care is still too rigid for thousands of unregularized migrants. For example, regularization through the PEP, which would allow affiliation with a Colombian medical insurance, is not possible for Venezuelan without an identity document or for those who entered in Colombia through unauthorized points. Specifically, regarding the Venezuelan population in hospitals, 7 out of 10 people are women. This dynamic occurs in all Colombian regions whose hospitals record among the main requests: assistance in pregnancy, childbirth, and treatment for sexually transmitted diseases. Often these are pregnancies at risk for lack of prenatal care due to the collapse of the health system in Venezuela. Finally, the Covid-19 emergency. The pandemic has further complicated the possibilities of access to some form of health care. This was confirmed by the International Solidarity Conference on the crisis of Venezuelan refugees and migrants organized by Spain and the European Union on May 26, 2020. The Union has donated 9 million to contain the spread of the virus and 918 million for vulnerable groups affected by the pandemic. These include thousands of Venezuelan women who since 2014 continue to migrate in search of their right to health.

The (anti)American caravan: the beginning of a sick love

Rainer Maria Baratti

Torna all'Atlante delle migrazioni

Paesi del mondo

Approfondimenti tematici

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Puoi continuare ad approfondire attraverso i nostri articoli:

(Anti) American caravan: a jealous love

SOCIAL CONFLICTS NEVER SOOTHED: El Salvador falls into a new wave of violence

Venezuelan migrants in Colombia

The status of women within the peace transition process in Colombia

The events of 2019 and their impact on the war in Colombia

Venezuelan women in search of a health that is not there

Chi siamo

Il nostro Team

L'ecosistema Large Movements

Cambia lingua

Cosa facciamo

Campagne, advocacy e progetti

Un mondo di notizie

Le regole del gioco

Narrare le migrazioni

L'atlante delle migrazioni

Come sostenerci

Dona ora

Attivati con noi

Seguici sui social

Iscriviti alla newsletter

Chi siamo

Il nostro Team

L'ecosistema Large Movements

Cambia lingua

Come sostenerci

Dona ora

Attivati con noi

Seguici sui social

Iscriviti alla newsletter

Privacy & cookie policy