The MERCOSUR summit
Has the retreat already begun?
By Eduardo Dimas
Much has been written about the latest Summit of the Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR), held in Asunción, Paraguay. Most talked about is the fact that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez did not attend it, because of a prior commitment with Russian President Vladimir Putin and a visit to Iran.
Some people say Chávez chose to travel to Russia so he wouldn't be at the Summit, after the Chambers of Deputies in Brazil and Paraguay refused to approve Venezuela as a full member of the MERCOSUR, or postponed their approval. The legislatures of Argentina and Uruguay have already ratified Venezuela's membership.
Has the retreat already begun?
By Eduardo Dimas Read spanish version
Much has been written about the latest Summit of the Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR), held in Asunción, Paraguay. Most talked about is the fact that Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez did not attend it, because of a prior commitment with Russian President Vladimir Putin and a visit to Iran.
Some people say Chávez chose to travel to Russia so he wouldn't be at the Summit, after the Chambers of Deputies in Brazil and Paraguay refused to approve Venezuela as a full member of the MERCOSUR, or postponed their approval. The legislatures of Argentina and Uruguay have already ratified Venezuela's membership.
The Brazilian Chamber of Deputies refused to approve Venezuela's membership on the basis of Caracas' refusal to renew RCTV's broadcast license. RCTV was one of the television networks that promoted and supported the coup d'état against President Chávez in April 2002. The excuse, an internal affair involving only Venezuela, is not strong enough to stop a process of integration.
For his part, President Chávez announced that he would wait until September to secure Venezuela's membership in MERCOSUR. If his nation is not accepted, he said, he will withdraw his application and focus his efforts on the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA).
"We are not at all interested in joining a MERCOSUR that bears the hallmark of capitalism, of ferocious competition, just to please the Brazilian right or the Paraguayan right," Chávez stressed.
"If they don't want us to join the MERCOSUR, we have no problem," he added, "because our priority is to build our own model of development, […] the integration based on brotherhood, cooperation and solidarity, that places the social element first and foremost, as we are doing in Cuba and Venezuela, and now joined by Nicaragua and Bolivia."
In Portugal, where he arrived to sign a "Strategic Alliance on Major Issues" with the European Union, Brazilian President Lula da Silva was asked by reporters about Chávez's position. His answer: "To join, one has to abide by the rules; to quit, there are no rules. If he doesn't want to remain, he doesn't remain."
Nevertheless, Lula did not rule out talking with Chávez, whom he called his friend. Argentine President Néstor Kirchner asked Lula to do everything possible to gain Congressional approval for Venezuela's admission to MERCOSUR. The Paraguayan government asked Parliament to approve Venezuela's admission as soon as possible.
Several senators and deputies of all parties and ministers in Lula's Cabinet stepped forward and said unanimously that Brazil "will accept deadlines from no one." Some right-wing Brazilian senators and deputies announced they will resist all pressure until September and then ask Chávez to keep his word and withdraw from the MERCOSUR.
On July 6, from Brussels, President Lula said that "Nobody can make me argue with President Chávez, who is my friend" and pointed out that, while the MERCOSUR "has problems, just like the European Union," there is no crisis among the bloc members, according to the German news agency DPA.
Meanwhile, some conciliatory statements have been made by Brazilian deputies, after a visit to the Chamber of Deputies by Venezuelan Ambassador Julio García Montoya.
Apart from the anecdotes and the mutual recrimination by politicians, it is evident that there is an orchestrated campaign to prevent Venezuela's admission to the MERCOSUR. That campaign has directors and performers. The baton is wielded not in Latin America but in Washington. The objective: to prevent Latin American integration at any cost.
It is obvious that many counterpoised interests — too many, in fact — are trying to keep the process of integration in Latin America (in this case, the MERCOSUR) from proceeding smoothly, without major obstacles.
Added to the interests of the transnational corporations are the interests of U.S. domination and the national oligarchies, which are trying to maintain one model, the neoliberal model, because it will enable them to retain their privileges.
If Venezuela does not join the MERCOSUR, it is unlikely that Bolivia and Ecuador will. Since Venezuela separated itself from the Andean Community of Nations, it is possible to think that the forces that want to impede integration will do everything possible to isolate the Bolivarian Revolution, to keep it away from the two economic blocs.
The steps taken by the Peruvian government and the statements made by its main leaders so far support that possibility.
Most analysts of the Latin American reality agree that the reason for the conflict is the kind of integration the Latin American governments want: either a scheme of neoliberal continuity, endorsed by the big transnational and national corporations, or a new type of cooperation, on the basis of integration, complementation and transformation — economic, political, social and cultural.
Needless to say, this is an irreconcilable contradiction, because it has no half-tones. Either we change the economic and social model that guides the destiny of Latin America (in this case, the MERCOSUR) or we keep the present scheme, a totally commercial scheme where the asymmetries of development among the various member countries have no solution. By extension, poverty and underdevelopment would have no solution either.
That is the great challenge before the people of Latin America. One striking fact is that the social forum of the peoples, parallel to the Summit, demanded substantial changes in the economic structure and an end to neoliberalism, and asked that the voices of the majorities be heard. To many observers, it was evident that, while the forum was tolerated, at no time did the participating presidents take into account its demands. That's the usual response from representative democracies.
The tired topic of economic asymmetry was again brought up by Uruguay and Paraguay, the affected countries, at this 33rd Summit. It elicited only the well-worn promises, but no solutions.
As usual, the presidents did not touch on the subject of the militarization of Latin America, especially the existence of a U.S. military base in Paraguayan territory. To some analysts, this constitutes an extension of the Plan Colombia, a faithful reflection of U.S. interest in the Guaraní Water Basin and Bolivia's reserves of natural gas.
It remains to be seen what will happen with the plans of endogenous development, such as the creation of the Bank of the South — now scheduled for Aug. 2 — and the Southern Gas Pipeline, in case Venezuela finally does not join the MERCOSUR. I have the impression that the presidents of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina and Brazil will do everything in their power to get the bank operating, given its strategic importance despite its limitations.
The Southern Gas Pipeline is of extreme importance for all countries, especially for the ruling classes and the transnational corporations, because it would guarantee a supply of gas and oil at a time when these fuels are becoming scarce. In any case, let me remind you that many oligarchs base their wealth and power on the underdevelopment of their people.
I have the impression that, far from advancing, this Summit retreated in terms of Latin American integration. This may be only a subjective interpretation. Maybe the contradictions among governments are surfacing now with greater force, which signals their arrival to a decisive moment.
Aiding this are a campaign of division orchestrated by the United States and its local allies and the dissimilar interests that come together in the MERCOSUR, the Andean Pact and any other process of integration. The problems at the core of the European Union are a good example of how difficult it is to unite the economies and objectives of a group of nations.
In the case of Latin America, however, integration is a problem of independence, development and even national dignity because the nations are at risk of being assimilated by the huge U.S. economy and its Free-Trade Agreements (FTAs).
Lula's government has agreed to produce ethanol. The Uruguayan government is moving ahead with an FTA with the United States, even though the pact is called something else. More and more Latin American countries are signing FTAs with the United States despite Mexico's awful experience.
It is possible that they have no alternative, because of their limitations and the commitments made by their leaders. Perhaps everything will be reduced to a neoliberal ideological problem. One question to be asked is whether the process of Latin American integration has begun its retreat. If so, the people will be the worst losers. Another question is whether those people are willing to continue to wait for a well-being that never comes.
