On March 3, 2009, the U.S. House Committee of Foreign Affairs held a hearing to discuss present and future relations with Bolivia. Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL-14) set the tone and focus of the hearing during his opening statement when he asked, “Is there still hope for a better relationship with Bolivia or is Evo Morales bound and determined in the stance that he is in?” Other members of the committee expressed their concern with the government of Morales; Rep. Albio Sires (D-NJ-13) also posed a similar question, “Why would I [a foreign company] invest in a country with all the rhetoric coming out of it?”

Although the witnesses unanimously agreed that relations have deteriorated since the inauguration of Evo Morales in December 2005, they had different opinions on how, when and at what level to resolve them.

Peter DeShazo, from the Center for Strategic and International Studies, was pessimistic about the possibility of the U.S. and Bolivia rekindling their relationship in the near future. The United States should be the first to take a step, and through various USAID programs.

Kathryn Ledebur, from Andean Information Network, believes that both governments must express their willingness to work together to repair their relationship. She also stated that both governments should work towards a more bi-lateral relationship with less focus on counter-narcotic policies. Regarding USAID, the amount of aid does not need to be increased, but rather restructured and reviewed by both governments.

Ivan Rebolledo, from Bolivian-American Chamber of Commerce, Inc., began with the statement that “abandoning Bolivia at this point in time would be a serious error”. The U.S. should migrate towards multi-lateral relations with institutions such as EU, UN Office on Drugs and Crime, so that the U.S. can be more neutral, leading to better bi-lateral relations.

Dr. Jaime Daremblum, from the Hudson Institute, expressed his concern that Bolivia has become a “bubbling cauldron” of insecurity due to the division among the Bolivian people. Although U.S. trade preferences are important to many Bolivians, before they are restored, Morales’s government must agree with minimal anti-drug cooperation.

Marcos Iberkleid is the Chief Executive Officer of Ametex, an apparel firm that was a “beacon of hope” for thousands of Bolivians. Located in El Alto, the poorest and fastest-growing city in Bolivia, Ametex provided the 50,000 people who enter the job market every year the rare possibility of a dignified and sustainable job. He testified how the suspension of Bolivia from the ATPA (Andean Trade Preference Act) this past fall has led to massive layoffs and the firm facing the real possibility that it must close completely. The U.S. must reinstate ATPA benefits to Bolivia, in order to prevent people from turning to illegal sectors in order to make a living.

The full statements from each witness and opening statements from the members are available on the Committee on Foreign Affair’s website.

Recent news stories such as "Mexican cartels plague Atlanta" and "Mexican cartels infiltrate Houston" bring home the idea that Mexican drug violence is having an effect on the United States. Coupled with the statements made by key Administration officials last week on increased cooperation with and aid for Mexico, stories such as these show that everyone is paying more attention to Mexico.

In addition to the comments made by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanel (see last week's blog post), the chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff, Navy Adm. Mike Mullen joined the ranks last week and reported on possibilities for increased cooperation. On Friday, Adm. Mullen spoke with President Obama about "the situation in Mexico and the military capabilities that could assist the country", according to a Department of Defense press release. Adm. Mullen had just returned from a trip to Mexico, where he met with Mexican Secretary of National Defense Gen. Guillermo Galvan and Secretary of the Navy Adm. Mariano Francisco Saynez.

New levels of concern about the violence on the border and its potential impact on the United States can also be seen on Capitol Hill, where five hearings will be held on the subject over the next two weeks - four of them this week. The hearings (which are listed below) will cover everything from the Mérida Initiative and U.S. aid to the region to the Department of Homeland Security's response to the United States' role in fueling the violence through arms smuggling and demand for drugs. That so many different committees would hold similar hearings simultaneously indicates a surge of concern about Mexico and the United States' role. What will be interesting, however, is the tone that these hearings will take - and the solutions that the witnesses and Members of Congress propose.

Upcoming Hearings:

Senate:

U.S.-Mexico Border Violence
Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee
March 25, 342 Dirksen Building, Time TBA

Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (Chairman Lieberman, I-Conn) will hold a hearing on the national and homeland security consequences of violence along the U.S. border.

A similar hearing will be held in Arizona on a future date in April.

House

The Mérida Initiative
March 10, 10 am, 2362-A Rayburn Bldg.
State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Subcommittee (Chairwoman Lowey, D-NY) of the House Appropriations Committee will hold a hearing on the Mérida Initiative. The Mérida Initiative, which provides financial aid and other assistance to Mexico, is an element in a broader strategy of growing cooperation between the United States and Mexico to address a shared threat presented by organized crime involved in drug trafficking.

Witnesses:
Thomas Shannon, Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs
David Johnson, Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement
Rodger Garner, Mission Director for Mexico, United States Agency for International Development
Lisa Haugaard, Executive Director, Latin American Working Group
Joy Olson, Director of the Washington Office of Latin Ameica
Ana Paula Hernandez, General Director of the Colectivo por una Politica Integral hacia las Drogas

U.S.-Mexico Border Violence
March 10, 11:30 am, 2358-C Rayburn Bldg.
Homeland Security Subcommittee (Chairman Price, D-NC) of House Appropriations Committee will hold a hearing on the Department of Homeland Security's response to violence on the U.S.-Mexico border.

Witnesses include:
Mark Koumans - deputy assistant secretary of Homeland Security for INternational Affairs
Jayson Ahern - deputy commissioner, Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Marcy Forman - director, Office on Investigations, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, DHS
David Aguilar - chief, U.S. Border Patrol

Border Violence: An Examination of DHS Strategies and Resources
March 12, 10 am, 311 Cannon Bldg.
Border, Maritime and Global Counterterrorism Subcommittee (Chairman Sanchez, D-CA) of House Homeland Security Committee

The hearing will examine Department of Homeland Security resources and strategies for combating and responding to violence (and related issues such as narcotics trafficking, weapons smuggling, and bulk cash smuggling) in the U.S.-Mexico border region.

Witnesses:
Vice Admiral Roger T. Rufe Jr. (USCG Ret), Director, Office of Operations Coordination, DHS
Alonzo Peña, Department of Homeland Security Attaché, U.S. Embassy, Mexico
John Leech, Acting Director, Office of Counternarcotics Enforcement, DHS

Money, Guns, and Drugs: Are U.S. Inputs Fueling Violence on the U.S.-Mexico Border?
March 12, 10 am, 2154 Rayburn Bldg.
National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee (Chairman Tierney, D-MA) of House Oversight and Government Reform Committee

Today, defense ministers from the 12 South American countries that make up UNASUR are meeting to mark the beginning of the South American Defense Council (CDS) - a body that becomes official tomorrow. Unlike NATO, the Council "does not aim to create a military force that operates internationally," Chilean Defense Minister José Goñi told EFE. Instead, it hopes to serve as a forum where the 12 nations can come together to improve confidence, communication and military cooperation in the region.

Brazilian President Lula da Silva first proposed the CDS last year in response to the tensions that emerged between Colombia, Venezuela, and Ecuador after the Colombian military bombed a FARC guerrilla encampment on Ecuadorian soil in March 2008, resulting in the death of FARC Secretariat member Raúl Reyes. While the Council aims to avoid similar events in the future and to create more confidence within the region, its official inauguration this week comes at a time when relations between Ecuador, Colombia, and Venezuela continue to deteriorate.

In an interview last week reported by the BBC, Colombian Defense Minister Juan Manual Santos argued that "Colombian had a right to self-defense that allowed it to attack what Bogota sees as 'terrorists systematically attacking the country even if they are not located inside its own territory.'" Over the weekend, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez responded to these comments on his television show 'Aló, Presidente', calling Minister Santos "a threat to the peace of South America" and warning Colombian President Álvaro Uribe that any Colombian incursion into Venezuela would trigger a military response.

Despite sustained tensions between the three countries, each country's defense ministers are attending the meeting today in Chile and plan to take part in the Council. What remains to be seen is whether the Council will be successful in stopping diplomatic tensions before they start, and thus contribute to improved relations and cooperation in the region.

On Sunday, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press. In addition to talking about Iraq and the difference between President Obama and President Bush, Gates spoke about the current security concerns in Mexico and the potential for more U.S. – Mexico cooperation in the fight against the drug cartels (watch the video here).

Gates mentioned that the current climate of U.S. – Mexico relations is one such that more cooperation will be possible, including a possible increase in U.S. aid in the form of military hardware, training and intelligence support. Gates also praised Mexican President Felipe Calderon for his courage to stand up to the well-armed and organized drug traffickers – stating that one of the reasons the situation is so bad today is that Calderon’s predecessors did not fight back.

Gates’ comments come at a time when all eyes seem to be on Mexico: drug-related deaths topped 6,000 in 2008 and have already surpassed 1,000 in the first two months of 2009; everyday, reports of murders or threats against the lives of police officers and civilians are in the news; and last week, 5,000 extra soldiers and 1,000 additional federal police officers were deployed to Ciudad Juarez and Texas Governor Rick Perry announced his request for 1,000 more ‘boots on the ground’ on the U.S. side of the border in response to the increased levels of violence.

The surge in violence south of the border has placed Mexico high on the United States’ security agenda, with Defense Secretary Gates, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano all mentioning in the past week the importance to the Obama administration of working with Mexico to stem the flow of drugs to the north and the flow of arms to the south.

Below is the transcript of Gates’ comments on Mexico during his interview on Meet the Press.

MR. GREGORY: We've got a few more minutes, and I want to go through as quickly as we can some other really important topics. The first is Mexico, a major threat on the border with Mexico because of a widening drug war there. The Economist magazine wrote this startling synopsis, and they call it "Who's in charge? The police chief in Ciudad Juarez, on Mexico's border with America, resigned after drug gangs, who had murdered his deputy, threatened to kill one of his officers every 48 hours until he quit." What's going on there, and how big of a national security threat is this for the U.S.?

SEC'Y GATES: Well, I think that what is important is that President Calderon of Mexico, perhaps for the first time, has, has taken on the battle against these cartels. And because of corruption in the police and so on, he sent the federal army of Mexico into the fight. The cartels are retaliating. I think we are beginning to be in a position to help the Mexicans more than we have in the past. Some of the old biases against cooperation with our--between our militaries and so on I think are being set aside.

MR. GREGORY: You mean providing military supporting?

SEC'Y GATES: Providing them with, with training, with, with resources, with reconnaissance and surveillance kinds of capabilities; but just cooperation, including in intelligence. But it clearly is a serious problem, and, and--but what I think people need to point out is the courage that Calderon has shown in taking this on, because one of the reasons it's gotten as bad as it has is because his predecessors basically refused to do that.

The U.S. Congress is nearing completion of the 2009 federal budget. On Wednesday, the House passed the "omnibus" spending bill, which combines ten sections of the budget, with a recorded vote of 398 - 24. The Senate will take it up next week.

One of the bill's ten sections is the 2009 Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Appropriations Act. This section funds U.S. foreign assistance programs, including most of the military, police and economic aid programs tracked on this website.

The House-Senate Conference Committee, which developed the omnibus bill, offers non-binding instructions for how Congress intends to see some of this foreign aid distributed, country by country. For some aid programs, the committee's narrative report includes recommended aid levels for specific contries.

Below is a table that compares the aid allocated in 2008, the 2009 budget request the Bush Administration issued in February 2008, and the 2009 budget provided in the omnibus spending bill. As can be seen, the 2009 aid bill is smaller than the Bush Administration request, but greater than that allocated in 2008.

The 2009 bill slices into the Bush Administration's request for the Mérida Initiative - allocating only $299 million in lieu of the $499 million requested. The budget justification states that the International Narcotics Control funding allocated to Mexico "does not provide or permit any funds to be used for the purchase or lease of UH-60 transport helicopters, equipment, training or related assistance; such funding will be considered at a later date."

Aid to Colombia remains close to the FY 2008 allocations, and below the higher, more military-focused request submitted by the Bush administration. A more detailed analysis of Colombia-specific aid provided by this bill can be seen on the Center for International Policy blog.

The new bill also allocates a greater percentage of foreign aid to economic and social aid programs than the Bush administration request would have done. In the Bush request, economic and social aid made up 26% of the total allocations, while the 2009 spending bill allocates 39% of the budget to economic and social aid. The amount of economic and social aid also increased from FY 2008 by $132.4 million - which is a factor in why this year's bill is higher than the 2008 bill.

On February 26, the Obama administration issued the broad outlines of its 2010 budget request. It calls for an overall increase in the foreign aid and diplomacy budget, but no details beyond that overall amount are expected until at least April.

The Obama Administration has not announced its appointments for important Latin America-focused posts, including assistant secretary of State for Western Hemisphere affairs, deputy assistant secretary of Defense for Western Hemisphere affairs, or National Security Council senior director on Latin America. However, that does not stop the speculation.

Foreign Policy magazine's The Cable blog has been a frequent source of the latest rumors. Here are their speculations about who might get these top Latin America jobs. While these names are not official, most of the rumors that we have heard run along similar lines.

From the February 23 post, "Names: The ambassadors":

Jeff Davidow, the former assistant secretary of state for Latin American affairs, has taken a leave from the Institute of the Americas to serve as the envoy preparing for the next Summit of the Americas, sources confirmed....

Tom Shannon, the assistant secretary of state for Western hemispheric affairs, is expected to stay on the job through the spring, when he is likely to be succeeded by Arturo Valenzuela. Afterwards, Shannon is expected to be named ambassador to Brazil or Argentina.

From the February 11 post, "Names: Latin America, NEA and DoD":

Sources tell The Cable that former Clinton-era NSC official Arturo Valenzuela is likely to be tapped as assistant secretary for Western hemispheric affairs, but that he is not expected to take up the post until after the spring semester ends. Valenzuela, professor and director of Georgetown University's Center for Latin American Studies, did not respond to a query.

Still undecided is who will get the job of NSC senior director on Latin America. Among the top contenders, Latin America watchers tell The Cable, former NSC official and veteran CIA analyst Fulton Armstrong, now an aide to Sen. Chris Dodd, and Dan Restrepo, a former aide to Lee Hamilton (an informal Obama advisor) on the House International Relations Committee now with the Center for American Progress. Neither could be reached for comment. Armstrong's bid is said to be complicated by bureaucratic rules involving drawing a government pension while taking an executive branch salary.

Today, Colombian and Bolivian newspapers covered the release of a new report by the International Narcotics Control Board of the United Nations. However, it appears that the majority of the information being reported on, such as the increase of coca cultivation in Bolivia, Peru and Colombia, is based on old data that can be found in the UN Office on Drug Control's Coca Cultivation in the Andean Region report released in June 2008 and 2008 World Drug Report.

The report will be available online tomorrow (February 20th), according to the INCB website. Below are some highlights from the press packet released today, which is available on the Semana website.

Central America and the Caribbean:

• This region continues to be one of the principle trafficking routes for illicit drugs traveling from South America to North America and Europe. As vigilance of maritime trafficking routes has increased, traffickers have started using low-flying light aircraft.
• Street gangs continue to be linked to international narcotrafficking networks.
• Trafficking of illegal substances that contain ephedrine or pseudoephedrine is going to increase in Central America as organized crime groups take advantage of lax controls over goods near the border region with Mexico in order to acquire pharmaceuticals that contain these precursors.
• The Board encourages national authorities to act energetically against international narcotrafficking networks, including those linked to street gangs, and that they adopt other measures, among them the promulgation of laws on civil confiscation and against corruption.

South America:

• Colombia continues to be the largest producer of coca, which increased 27%.
• 55% of the total area of illicit coca cultivation is in Colombia, 29% in Peru and 16% in Bolivia.
• The Board is concerned about the September 2008 agreement the Government of Bolivia signed with coca farmers in Yungas which allows them to cultivate more coca than permitted in the Chapare region.
• International crime groups continue to use Venezuela as one of the main points of departure for shipments of illicit drugs from South America.

On Sunday, President Hugo Chávez bolstered his "mandate" in Venezuela when the "Yes" vote triumphed in a referendum to lift constitutional limits on presidential and political terms - despite the failure of a referendum that included the same question only a year ago. This victory resulted in many congratulatory remarks from governments in the region - ranging from a close friend, Bolivian President Evo Morales, to even closer sometime foe, Colombian President Álvaro Uribe - and even led to a statement from the U.S. State Department noting the "civic and participatory spirit of the millions of Venezuelans who exercised their democratic right to vote."

With 54.4% of the population voting 'yes' on the referendum, President Chávez is already preparing for his bid for the renewal of his presidency when the current term ends in 2012. However, in order to maintain current levels of popular support, Chávez must overcome many hurdles - such as high levels of crime, 30% inflation, sagging oil prices, and a sizable opposition. According to an article in the New York Times, Chávez's victory speech showed that he too was ready to tackle these domestic issues, "focusing on more mundane tasks like improving government efficiency and combating violent crime, as if acknowledging the criticism leveled at him during the campaign and the limitations likely to be imposed on any grand plans for the time being." With President Chávez needing to focus on domestic issues for the time being, the question remains how this is going to affect Venezuela's foreign policy, which has been focused on using the country's vast oil wealth, bolstered by high oil prices, to provide grants and loans to other governments in the region.

Below are links to and excerpts from different editorial boards from the United States and throughout Latin America. Other news coverage on the referendum and its consequences can be found in Just the Facts' news archives.

Views from the United States:

New York Times: Venezuelans' Right to Say No (written on Feb. 13, before the election)

"Hugo Chávez apparently doesn't believe Venezuelan voters, who just more than a year ago rejected his bid to eliminate the term limits that are blocking his continued rule. On Sunday, he is giving them another chance. For the sake of Venezuela's democracy, they should again vote no on changing the nation's constitution."

Los Angeles Times: Hugo Chávez's staying power

"Venezuela just took a democratic step closer to dictatorship.... Although the balloting was deemed valid by opposition leaders, who have said they will not contest the results, the victory came about because of Chávez's gross misuse of government funds, government workers and federal facilities for the campaign, and neighborhood enforcers to "persuade" voters to support him.
...
As much as we deplore what looks like the incremental disintegration of democracy in Venezuela, the U.S. must reengage with Chávez. There are many issues of mutual interest and importance to both countries: trade, immigration, economic development, drug policy and a resolution to the leftist guerrilla conflict across the border in Colombia."

The Dallas Morning News: Venezuela's Chávez digs deeper hole

"On Sunday, he used the democratic process to advance an undemocratic goal - his own perpetuation in power. .... This is a dictatorship with a democratic patina. ... Chávez now has more time to dig himself deeper into a hole. Obama would be wise not to interfere with this work in progress."

Views from Latin America:

Ecuador
El Comercio: Hugo Chávez and the future of Venezuela

"The possibility [of being reelected in 2013] will not only depend on Sunday's victory, but instead on what happens during the three years leading up to the elections: different than what has happened until today, the world economic crisis will oblige Chávez to be austere in the management of the money that comes in from petroleum sales. Additionally, he must fight against the grave levels of citizen insecurity, 30% inflation, food insecurity, high foreign investment, high levels of bureaucratic corruption and the 'new Bolivarian bourgeoisie....' If he is to be part of Venezuela's future, Chávez will have to lower the tone of his belligerent discourse and must be rigorous and realistic in his local management and his international position. The responsibility is immense."

Colombia
El Tiempo: Chávez, unlimited

"The dangers of democracy by the way of questions to voters has been widely studied. What is found is that government take advantage of the official apparatus under their control in order to stay in power, while the parties lose their programmatic and collective role. That way, the leader ends up being more worried about their popularity levels than administrating, and the space for dialogue with the opposition is substituted by permanent calls to 'consult the people'."

Argentina
Clarín: Chávez, net triumph and partition

"Chávez has known how to interpret the poorest and most left-behind sectors of a polarized society. At the same time, as is also known to happen in these processes, he has managed democratic values with authoritarianism and disregard. The crossroad of Chávez and the opposition is to find a formula that attempts to resolve and dodge the dangers of the temptations that are opened to the winners of indefinite reelection and the powerless losers."

Honduras
El Heraldo: A decisive day for Venezuela (published on Feb. 15, before the election)

"Although he has publicly denied marxist-leninism and has even spoken of a 'christian-socialism', there is not a doubt that Hugo Chávez has fed class struggles in Venezuela because he thinks that it is the way to maintain the large majority's support, who continue to be poor, with the goal of continuing his 'revolutionary process' through the electoral path."

Views from the United Kingdom:

The Times: Strongman for now

"For such leaders, hostility from Washington is essential to their grip on power. President Obama would be wise to deprive Mr. Chávez of this external bogey. Unlike his predecessor, Mr. Obama should simply ignore Caracas. He should continue buying the oil, but the falling price will soon produce a sense of realism. No further invitations to Moscow to send a warship will protect Mr. Chávez from popular exasperation with a strongman no longer strong enough to deliver."

In the middle of ongoing discussions about the Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Colombia, the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee held a hearing yesterday, February 12, 2009, on one of the pressing issues regarding the FTA: the rising violence against union labor leaders in Colombia. Although the topic of yesterday’s hearing was not specifically about the FTA, the issue was brought up on several occasions by Committee members. The majority of the witnesses who testified agreed that the issue of violence against union labor leaders must be addressed before the FTA is ratified by the U.S. Congress.

Below are highlights from the witnesses’ testimonies at the hearing. The full statements from each witness and opening statement from Rep. George Miller (CA) are available on the Committee on Education and Labor’s website.

Despite the great emphasis the current administration is placing on security, after a few years of declining murder rates, violence against labor unions showed a steep increase in 2008 of 25%, going from 39 murders in 2007 to 49 in 2008. -Jose Luciano Sanin Vazquez, from the Escuela Nacional Sindical in Medellin, Colombia

The murder rate of unionists in Colombia is five times that of the rest of the countries of the world, including those countries with dictatorships that have banned union activity. -Mr. Jose Luciano Sanin Vazquez

It is a systematic pattern that in all of these criminal acts, the public prosecutor is content to determine the responsibility of the material authors, leaving out the intellectual authors, who are the most important, given that they are the ones who sponsor, order the executions, put up the money, and always remain in impunity. Thus, these crimes will not stop, since the true perpetrators are not prosecuted. Dr. José Nirio Sánchez, former 2nd criminal judge of the specialized circuit of the Republic of Colombia who served the Colombian government for 35 years.

Additionally, Robert Andrews (D-NJ -01) highlighted that out of the 2,695 union member murders, only 1,032 cases are under prosecution and only 73 cases have been resolved by the Prosecutor Generals Office in Colombia since 2001. What kind of message would Washington be sending by committing to a FTA with a country that has such a dismal record?

When asked about the FTA and human rights provisions by Mr. David Wu (D- OR-01), Maria McFarland, from Human Rights Watch, stated that “getting Colombia to do anything about the anti-union violence and impunity has been like pulling teeth and it’s only been with the possibility of non-ratification of the FTA on the table that they have established this special prosecutor unit that is starting to make a little bit of progress”.