Source: Miguel Rojo/AFP/Getty Images
Dear Editor:
I invite you to reread my articles regarding the current Paraguayan political crisis recently referred to in a July 6 article by Saul Landau. In the piece, Mr. Landau wrote that I condoned the actions undertaken by the Liberal and Colorado Parties to remove Fernando Lugo from the presidency. Quite the contrary, I sharply condemned the impeachment. Although Lugo had been losing support due to his failure to aggressively liberalize land tenure, the Paraguayan Congress clearly removed the democratically elected Lugo in defiance of due process and thus violated Paraguayan constitutional legitimacy.
Furthermore, the United States would be wise to pay attention to the events in Paraguay for two primary reasons. As a self-proclaimed bastion for democracy, Washington has now set an alarming trend of allowing Latin American governments to ignore democratic practices. This “wait and see” policy has negatively affected Washington’s plummeting influence in the region. Furthermore, the Paraguayan crisis has quickly triggered an escalating showdown between Asunción and the likes of Unasur, Mercosur, and Venezuelan-led ALBA, testing the region’s allegiance to the promotion of democratic values. Therefore, the State Department cannot simply stand idly by while many South American governments ignore the democratic rights of their own citizenry. Paraguayans hopefully will resolve this conflict with free and fair elections next April, but that does not excuse Washington pretending to have a policy when none in fact can be seen.
Sincerely,
Eric Stadius
Research Associate, Council on Hemispheric Affairs
Peasants occupied idle arable land before the overthrow of Lugo, the constitutional president, who was elected by people, not by the legislature.
Some peasants are continuing and increasing their occupations after the recent overthrow of democracy.
Does anyone foresee collisions between the state and landless peasants? If so, which side of the battle will one be on?
The issue in the looming battle seems to be whether the concentration of landed property in hands of local and foreign bourgeoisie is largely consequence of land theft from the peasants. The state, of course, is a bigoted ally of the bourgeoisie.
Paraguay is not in Africa, but it is in Latin America where the overthrow of democratic regimes is a US imperially imposed norm, except for brief period of the last 30 years. What happened to Lugo is a Latin American as well as an African norm.
Why did you condemn the impeachment? Lugo was giving my country, Paraguay, a bad reputation. Paraguay is extremely unknown as a country and people's ignorance of Paraguay is shown in the title of this article. Being one of two landlocked countries in all of South America, Paraguay is already at a disadvantage, and when you consider the fact that its surrounding countries refuse to pay them for their hydroelectricity, then they are very much a struggling nation. More than half of the people there live in poverty, and those who are considered well off would be considered to be at the bottom of the lower class here in the United States. Lugo, used to be a bishop. He has over 10 announced and declared illegitimate children. He is a leftist, and has put my country in even more economical turmoil and distress. As he sits in the office, the Bolivians are taking more and more of el Chaco from the West, and the Brazilians from the East are always demanding more electricity for their ever growing population. Meanwhile, the people of my country struggle to get by. You have the audacity to say that you condone the impeachment? No, Paraguay needed a political change and it is about time that it happened. A popular adage here in the United States: out with the old, in with the new, seems very appropriate. I did, however, agree with you in regards to the United States policy of "wait and see". They need to change. The United States has been so self involved, and has been incessantly involving itself with middle eastern affairs, that it has all but nearly forgotten of its Southern enemies and threats. Paraguay has always been a supporter of democracy and helped the United States eradicate Nazi's who fled there from Germany. They also helped the United States with their fight against Communism, and is one of the few countries in Latin America who openly dislike Venezuela and Hugo Chavez. Paraguay has been nothing but an ally to the United States, and in its time of need the United States was no where to be found. Instead, they decided to wait and see what other latin american countries would do. This action showed how poorly involved and informed the United States Government is when it comes to Latin American politics and affairs.
Also, I forgot to mention that the United States also was about to impeach Nixon, and if I recall he too was voted in a democratic way. So please look into your own countries political actions before openly criticizing another's.