The Washington Post and LA Times top stories from the Americas examine drug violence in Mexico. First, the WaPo writes that drug-related killings have plummeted since the army took over public security in Ciudad Juarez. According to the paper, during the first two months of this year 434 people were killed in the city—nearly half of all murders in the entire country. However, since 5,000 additional troops entered in early March, the death count dropped to 51 for that month. So far, 22 have been killed in Juarez in April. The report goes on to say that with the entry of 10,000 soldiers and federal agents now patrolling Juarez’s streets, so too has come a steep increase in human rights complaints. A special city office created for such complaints said 170 allegations of human rights violations were reported in its first three weeks, including claims of illegal detentions and beatings. Interestingly, the report explains that the army is authorized to make arrests only when a suspect is believed to be in the process of committing a crime. But, as the WaPo writes, “the government has erected a largely secret legal apparatus that allows commanders to conduct raids, arrest suspects and initiate wiretaps after presenting evidence to local prosecutors. The prosecutors, in turn, submit petitions for arrest and search warrants over a secure Web site to a panel of anonymous judges in Mexico City.” And, in the LAT, a report on drug violence directed at Catholic priests in Mexico. Father Manuel Corral, a spokesman for the Mexican Bishops Conference, said Monday that priests in eight Mexican states have been threatened with harm or death, most often for trying to turn congregation members away from drug use and trafficking. A recent statement by a Mexican archbishop who said “everybody knows” where the nation's most-wanted trafficker lives now brings new fears. According to the report, the Catholic Church finds itself in a paradoxical position at times. The Church “officially supports the Mexican government's war on drug traffickers but laments the spiraling violence. In some parts of the country, priests have been willing to use money from traffickers to pay for church repairs or other community projects.”
Meanwhile, in the New York Times and Wall Street Journal a report and an opinion on U.S. Cuba policy. In the NYT, a report says that a majority of Cuban Americans, approx. 67% according to a new poll released Monday, now support the removal of all travel restrictions to Cuba. That figure represents an 18 point jump from just three years ago when the same question was asked. Moreover, the poll shows that despite the Cuban American community’s Republican tendencies, 64% supported President Obama’s new policies on travel and money sent to relatives while an even larger majority, 67%, said they had a favorable or somewhat favorable opinion of Mr. Obama--the highest rating among Cuban-Americans for any president since Ronald Reagan in the mid-1980s. In the WSJ, an opinion piece by former Mexican foreign minister Jorge Castaneda argues that the U.S. should unilaterally end the embargo while getting key Latin American leaders to both commit to aiding in the normalization process between Washington and Havana and to pressuring Cuba toward a representative democracy and respect for human rights.
And the Miami Herald reports that, after the Summit, the U.S. must now use the momentum to forge new relationships with Cuba and Venezuela. The MH writes that if Raúl Castro now moves to release political prisoners or remove fees on remittances, the U.S. might restart migration or drug interdiction talks, rescind rules that restrict Cuban diplomats from traveling more than 25 miles from the D.C.-based Interests Section, authorize more U.S. travel to Cuba, give more licenses to U.S. companies to operate in Cuba, or end a Bush policy that forces Cuba to pay cash for goods from U.S. farmers. On Venezuela, the paper writes that the U.S. wants the Chávez government to “cooperate with U.S. anti-drug efforts, begin issuing visas for U.S. diplomats to enter Venezuela, and halt the buying spree of weapons from Russia.” Venezuelan officials are said to want respect from the Obama administration and a muted response to Chávez's moves against his political opposition.
In other news, more from Venezuela in the MH where the paper writes that opposition leader Manuel Rosales skipped a court appearance Monday to avoid being tried on corruption charges. He is now allegedly seeking foreign asylum to escape what he says is political persecution. Venezuelan investigators say Rosales cannot explain why his declared worth at one point was $66,000 less than what his bank accounts showed later. In the LAT, a story on Hugo Chávez’s gift to Barack Obama: Uruguayan writer Eduardo Galeano’s Open Veins of Latin America. According to the LAT, the book—now at No. 2 on Amazon’s best-seller list—traces the continent's problems to Western imperialism and resource exploitation and “has long been considered a bible for the Latin American left.” Andres Oppenheimer in the MH goes so far as to provocatively equate giving the book to Obama with “presenting Mein Kampf to an Israeli President.”
More opinions on the Summit in the MH, where an editorial writes that “there can be no ‘equal partnership’ in the hemisphere until achieving political freedom -- as opposed to trading with a dictatorship -- becomes the true measure of progress.” Meanwhile, in an MH opinion piece, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) says the Summit “could have offered a valuable opportunity to stand up to the region's despotic leaders” and “an opportunity to move forward on further agreements toward the realization of the Free Trade Area of the Americas” but was rather “hijacked by repressors, tyrants and regime leaders who deprecate democratic principles and ideals.” And in the WaPo, columnist Eugene Robinson writes that while “Obama was right to show respect for the leaders of neighboring countries,” “a flash of presidential anger from Obama would have been in order” after the speech of Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega and Hugo Chávez’s book theatrics.
And, finally, Mexico approved the U.S. pick for ambassador to Mexico, according to an AP report in the NYT. It is widely speculated that Carlos Pascual is the U.S. choice, although the Obama administration has yet to formally announce the decision which the U.S. Senate must also approve. Pascual was the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine from 2000 to 2003 and also served as coordinator for reconstruction and stabilization at the U.S. State Department. He has most recently been vice president and director of foreign policy for the Brookings Institution.
Photo: Henry Romero/Reuters
No comments:
Post a Comment