On Thursday, Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas Llosa was awarded the 2010 Nobel Prize in Literature. The New York Times describes Peruvian author as “an anti-totalitarian intellectual whose work covers the range of human experience.” It describes his writing as an examination of the “perils of power and corruption in Latin America.” The Economist, meanwhile, quotes the words of the Nobel committee which praised the Vargas Llosa for “his cartography of structures of power and his trenchant images of the individual’s resistance, revolt, and defeat.” The Economist:
“While novels about dictators are a staple of Latin American literature, Mr Vargas Llosa took the genre beyond political denunciation, crafting subtle studies of the psychology of absolute power and its corruption of human integrity.”
While his literature has long-received universal praise in Latin America and beyond, the politics of Mario Vargas Llosa have frequently elicited more mixed – and indeed impassioned – opinions. Interviewed after Thursday’s announcement Mexican writer, Paco Ignacio Taibo II, maintained that while the award was “absolutely deserved,” Mr. Vargas Llosa himself remained “deplorable as a citizen and as a person.” [As an aside, in the most famous altercation involving personal and political differences Vargas Llosa punched his then-friend Gabriel Garcia Marquez in the eye at a Mexico City theater in 1976. The two are said to have never spoken again, but somewhat fittingly, it was Garcia Marquez who was the last South American writer to win the Nobel Prize, having done so in 1982.]
Vargas Llosa was supporter of the Cuban Revolution in his youth, but today he is considered one of the regime’s most vocal critics, having adopted an unbending faith in both individual and market freedom. The Washington Post says he’s been described as “an intransigent neoliberal, a man with unshakable convictions that his country and people need strict economic discipline, membership in the world market and tough austerity measures at home.” For his part, the Mexican historian, Enrique Krauze characterizes the cosmopolitan, anti-nationalist Vargas Llosa as the quintessential “liberal intellectual” – the opposite of a “conservative.”
More on Vargas Llosa and the Nobel Prize from the Wall Street Journal, the Miami Herald, Reuters, the New York Times, and Peru’s El Comercio.
To other news:
· In Colombia, former President Alvaro Uribe says he assumes “responsibility” for the actions of his former personal secretary Bernardo Moreno. This week Moreno, along with handful of others, were barred from Colombian politics for 18 years for their role in the country’s wiretapping scandal. EFE reports yesterday that Uribe will now put himself at “the disposal of Congress and the Supreme Court so they can investigate him in connection with an illegal wiretapping scandal.”
· In an interview with the AP, Mexican President Felipe Calderon called the fight against drug cartels in Tijuana a “success.” A key ingredient to progress there, in contrast to other areas near the US-Mexico border? The fact that people “trust authorities to help keep them safe” — at least more so than other Mexican border cities still plagued by implacable violence. Nevertheless, there seems to be less certainty about whether or not drug trafficking through Tijuana has decreased at all since Calderon took office. And, also from the AP, Calderon worries that California’s potential legalization of marijuana next month could have negative impacts on the prosecution of the “drug war” in Mexico. Calderon to the AP:
“For me, it reflects a terrible inconsistency in government policies in the United States.”
· In Bolivia, there is growing controversy over an anti-racism law which journalists argue would limit freedom of speech in the country. This week various Bolivian papers protested the government-backed racism bill with front pages that, according to the AP, were left blank except for the words: “There is no democracy without freedom of expression.” According to the Knight Center for Journalism (quoted in the LA Times), an initial draft of the measure says “media outlets that empower or publish racist or discriminatory ideas could be subject to fines and the suspension of their operating license.” More on the journalists’ position in an editorial from Bolivia’s La Razon. Meanwhile, a recent post from the Andean Information Network argues “there is a public forum underway to discuss the press corps objections to this law, and thus far there are no limits to ‘free speech.’”
· In Nicaragua, the latest on issues of judicial (non) independence. The Tico Times says “Sandinista judges and ex-judges attempted to ‘legalize’ their de facto takeover of Nicaragua’s highest tribunal Wednesday by electing Sandinista judge Alba Luz Ramos as the new president of the Supreme Court.” Judicial analyst Sergio García, who recently tore up his license to practice law in protest against “lawlessness” in Nicaragua, contends the country has become “a complete de facto state,” potentially “only one step away from a coup or civil war.”
· The Economist reports on Mapuche struggles against the Pinochet-era terrorist law in Chile. The Economist: “On September 30th Congress changed the law so that a presumption of terrorist intentions no longer trumps the presumption of innocence. Defence lawyers will be able to question protected witnesses. The penalties for arson, a common Mapuche practice, will be reduced. Yet the conflict is not over: ten activists are still refusing food.”
· At World Politics Review, Roque Planas of Latin America News Dispatch, has an excellent piece on UNASUR and the new role it has played in mediating regional conflicts and disputes – mostly recently, the crisis in Ecuador.
· Time interviews Ingrid Betancourt.
· More positive news about Latin America’s economic performance. The IMF predicts the region will enter out of the financial crisis even stronger than previously expected. The Fund predicts growth of 5.7% this year. However, that growth could slow down slightly next year. The Miami Herald, meanwhile, looks at how emerging economies, including Brazil, are fueling global economic recovery.
· And, finally, Collin Laverty, formerly of the Center for Democracy in the Americas, with a balanced assessment of Venezuela’s parliamentary elections, at Progreso Weekly. The takeaway:
“Campaigning opposition politicians ventured into poor neighborhoods they have traditionally ignored. Whether they are genuinely concerned about their poorer constituents can be discussed elsewhere. The important takeaway is the following: At a time when nearly 70% of the electorate shows up for a Congressional vote, politicians on both sides of the aisle focused their campaign efforts on issues that poor and middle class Venezuelans (the majority of the society) see as their new found rights: equal access to quality healthcare, education and employment and security. Previously marginalized sectors of society now believe their vote matters and exercise their right to suffrage.”
No comments:
Post a Comment