With the announcement by Norway and Ireland that they have recognized Palestine as an independent state, and Spain expected to follow suit by the end of May, it appears that international momentum for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is growing.
The concept has long been supported by the United States and its allies, as well as most Arab states and the United Nations. In 2017, Hamas amended its charter to accept the existence of Israel based on borders established after the six-day war in 1967. It reportedly indicated recently a willingness to disarm if a Palestinian state were established. But the present Israeli government led by Prime Mister Benjamin Netanyahu remains implacably opposed to a two-state solution.
Could things be different under different leadership? To answer this, we need to know whether the Israeli and Palestinian people could be persuaded to accept such a plan. Here it’s worth taking a look at what polling tells us.
Politicians all too often find it convenient to blame the public for their failures. This is particularly true of failed peacemaking. The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) has tracked the ups and downs of support for the two-state solution from a high of 51% and 53% for Palestinians and Israeli Jews in polls taken in 2016 to a low of 33% and 34% respectively in 2022.
But pollsters in both Israel and Palestine, who do excellent work to the highest technical standards, sadly have had little or no opportunity to measure public opinion in support of a successful peace process. They measure the situation as it is – in the context of failure. Instead they need to measure what could be, how attitudes could change given proactive political leadership determined to get to peace. With such leadership the numbers change significantly.
Most recently, on the Palestinian side the Institute for Social and Economic Progress asked the two-state solution question in March 2024 in the context of “serious negotiations” and got a 72.5% positive response. This contrasted with PCPSR results a few months earlier in December 2023 which registered support for the two-state solution at only 34% among Palestinians when framed without the context of serious negotiations. Clearly “serious negotiations” are the key.
On the Israeli side, a poll run for the Geneva Initiative in January 2024 got a result of 51.3% support for the two-state solution. Specifically, this was framed in the context of a “return of the hostages agreement, to establish in the future a non-militarized Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and total normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia.” This was only two percentage points below the high point of support at 53% recorded by the PCPSR in 2016.
Security has always been the top priority for Israelis and when that is factored in, success in negotiations can be assured. And significantly demilitarizing a future Palestine is not a deal-breaker for the Palestinians, according to the Institute for Social and Economic Progress March 2024 poll.
A PCPSR poll completed for the Palestine Peace Initiative also in March 2024 found that 50.4% of respondents said the two-state solution would be acceptable to Palestinians providing they also get security and an independent state free from occupation.
The solution then to the implementation of the two-state solution appears to be to combine all the elements that can make it a success.
Additionally the scale that is used is also important. In real negotiations it is important to know where the “red lines” are and what the people can be persuaded to accept given positive political leadership.
In Northern Ireland, where public opinion polls were used to detail every element of a peace agreement, the people were asked what was: “essential” (a red line), what was “desirable” or “acceptable,” what was “tolerable” (not wanted but with political leadership could be made into a “yes”), and what was “unacceptable” under any circumstances (another red line).
When we used this scale to gauge support for a two-state solution in 2009, only 21% of Israelis and 24% of Palestinians considered it “unacceptable.” This compares very favorably with equivalent results for views of power sharing in Northern Ireland in polls I conducted in January 1998 that found it was “unacceptable” for 52% of Protestants and 27% of Catholics. Despite this, with political leadership from the UK, Ireland, the US and EU working together, peace was made.
Clearly the same can be done for Israel and Palestine with the full support of the international community.
Positive polling
Just to make sure, Mina Zemach – the pollster I work with in Israel – ran the 2009 two-state solution (TSS) question for me again in May 2024. The findings are published here for the first time. The result among Israeli respondents was 43% “unacceptable.” It was not as good as the 2009 result – but still better than the result for Northern Ireland where peace was achieved.
Critically then, the two-state solution needs to be tested along with all the positive elements of incentives and process, both international and domestic, that can be deployed to maximize the potential for getting to peace. And when we know what that magic formula is – do it. Turn fiction into fact and end this forever war.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
¡Qué rápido cambian la historia! Esta abogada mafiosa, cuando ejercía para el grupo de delitos financieros Marc M. Harris, solía trabajar en legislación con la perredista Balbina Herrera en sus tiempos como diputada. La hija de este maleante está casada con el hermano de Gaby Carrizo. Disparó y mató a dos activistas laborales, pero en las páginas de el Metro Libre fueron los manifestantes quienes mataron a la gente. A medida que avancemos, podemos esperar que se falsifiquen las realidades de las elecciones del 5 de mayo, la historia legal y la naturaleza de la concesión que el tribunal anuló y los motivos y el carácter de las protestas de 2023. Fotograma de un vídeo anónimo del tiroteo. Pie de foto de Eric Jackson.
Un voto castigo al oficialismo, que no modifica la base del régimen político
por Olmedo Beluche
Edición de las palabras pronunciadas en evento organizado por la Facultad de Humanidades de la Universidad de Panamá, el 15/5/2024.
En primer lugar, queremos recordar que este evento se realiza el día que conmemoramos un año más del fusilamiento de El Cholo Guerrillero, Victoriano Lorenzo, en 1903. Durante la Guerra de los Mil Días, Victoriano y sus huestes representaron la lucha indígena y campesina contra la oligarquía latifundista panameña que le arrebata sus tierras y explotaba inmisericordemente. Su fusilamiento fue una venganza de la oligarquía panameña por atreverse a confrontar el orden social existente en nuestros campos, así como una advertencia a quien se atreviera a manifestarse ante la traición que estaba a punto de consumarse con la separación de Colombia y el Tratado Hay Bunau Varilla.
Entre Weber y Marx
Entrando en materia electoral, uno tiene que preguntarse: ¿Cómo hacer para no caer en la unilateralidad? Cómo hacer este balance sin parcializarse a uno de los dos extremos posibles: ser tan optimistas, que caigamos en la ingenuidad. O ser tan sectarios, que nos lleve al pesimismo de creer que “nada ha cambiado”, “todo sigue igual”.
Como estamos entre sociólogos y sociólogas, creo que podemos recurrir a los enfoques teórico-metodológicos de dos grandes de las ciencias sociales: Max Weber y Carlos Marx. Como siempre digo a mis alumnos, teorías distintas se pueden combinar en el análisis, siempre que se haga con cuidado.
Para analizar los resultados de las elecciones del 5 de mayo pasado podemos tomar de Weber su “sociología de la acción social”, según la cual, la sociología debe buscar “el sentido” con el que las personas orientan su acción social, ¿cómo explican o justifican sus actos? Aunque, hay que aclararlo de salida, el enfoque weberiano era individualista, no lo usaba para explicar fenómenos colectivos, sino casos particulares. De modo que, aquí estamos estirando a Weber más allá de sus límites.
El análisis de los hechos electorales requiere del aporte de Carlos Marx: quien propone el análisis de las estructuras profundas, sociales y económicas, que explican a cada sociedad concreta. La estructurada política, económica y social organizada para asegurar la explotación de clase. Mientras se mantengan las estructuras del capitalismo, las relaciones políticas son un producto de la lucha entre las clases, en que los oprimidos pueden lograr victorias parciales, ventajas democráticas o atenuación de la explotación económica, pero en esencia el régimen político más democrático sigue siendo la junta directiva de los intereses de los empresarios.
El enfoque weberiano, nos coloca en el plano del “imaginario”, de las creencias, de la cultura política, que pueden ayudarnos a comprender por qué votó como lo hizo el pueblo panameño el 5 de mayo. El enfoque marxista nos conduce al análisis estructural profundo para saber qué efecto tienen los resultados electorales en la formación económico – social panameña.
¿Qué sentido le dio a su voto la ciudadanía el 5 de mayo?
El primer hecho que salta a la vista es que la gente salió a votar masivamente: 78% de participación electoral. Las personas acudieron entusiastamente a las urnas con deseos de expresar algo, de dar un mensaje con su voto. ¿Con qué “sentido” orientaron esta acción social? La respuesta no deja lugar a dudas: expresar su rechazo al gobierno de Laurentino Cortizo, a su vicepresidente y candidato presidencial, José G. Carrizo, y al partido oficialista, el PRD.
El deseo de repudiar o castigar al gobierno saliente es fácil de verificar hablando con los votantes, o viendo los resultados electorales: el PRD, de ser el principal partido político del país fue llevado al borde de la extinción, obteniendo menos del 6% de los votos. Pasando de una bancada con mayoría casi absoluta a una representación diezmada en la próxima Asamblea Nacional.
Un voto castigo claro, pero disperso
Ese descontento o voto castigo se expresó a través de diversas alternativas, según el segmento social al que pertenece el electorado:
Los más golpeados por la situación económica desastrosa que deja el gobierno PRD y su gestión de la pandemia de la COVID-19, en especial el 60% de trabajadores en el desempleo o la informalidad, parecen haber creído en la promesa de la nómina de José R. Mulino (R. Martinelli) de que pondrán “más chenchen en su bolsillo”. Un cómodo 34% del electorado se decantó por esta candidatura del partido RM, con la esperanza de que su situación mejore.
El 25% del electorado, al parecer de capas medias ilustradas, votó por la nómina de Ricardo Lombana y su partido (MOCA), que tuvo como eje la denuncia de la corrupción de los partidos tradicionales. Otro segmento, una buena parte de votantes tradicionales del PRD no lo hicieron con esta sigla sino con la candidatura de Martín Torrijos (PP) o la diputada Zulay Rodríguez, por libre postulación, 16% y 6% respectivamente. Tan solo el 11% eligió a Rómulo Roux, abogado de la minera canadiense First Quantum M.
El deseo de cambio y castigo que la gente expresó el 5 de mayo también explica el éxito de las candidaturas de la coalición Vamos, en la libre postulación, que lograron la mayor bancada en la nueva Asamblea Nacional, con 19 curules, así como una multiplicidad de representantes de corregimiento, y algunas alcaldías, aunque no indicaron el voto a la Presidencia de la república.
Un núcleo duro del movimiento sindical, popular y la izquierda se decantó por la candidatura de Maribel Gordón y Richard Morales, poco más del 1%. Aunque hay personas que fotografiaron al sistema TER del Tribunal Electoral que, en algún momento de esa noche, le atribuyó 85 mil votos a la profesora Gordón, y luego los rebajó a 25 mil, de manera inexplicable.
No tenemos que creer en la total pureza de estos resultados dada la gran cantidad de irregularidades que siempre presenta el sistema electoral panameño, pero de manera exacerbada en este año: desde la demora en impugnar la candidatura de Martinelli, cuando ya estaba condenado por blanqueo de capitales, hasta la postulación irregular de Mulino, pasando por las disputas en el conteo y asignación de curules en circuitos plurinominales, la asignación desigual de recursos entre los partidos y la libre postulación, y un largo etc.
¿Cómo se explica el voto mayoritario a candidatos de la derecha?
Así como el voto castigo al PRD es casi incuestionable, lo es también que la población vota sistemáticamente por candidatos ubicados a la derecha y extrema derecha del espectro político y teme votar por candidaturas situadas a la izquierda. En algunos casos, aún manifestando simpatías por las candidaturas y programas de izquierda, algunas personas terminan dejándose llevar por el llamado “voto útil” o al que puede ganarle al oficialismo, la gente le llama “votar a ganador”. Lo que habla de un bajo nivel de conciencia política.
Al ser Panamá una excepción en Latinoamérica donde no existe representación política de la izquierda a nivel parlamentario, esto nos habla de un problema histórico y, por ende, estructural que tiene que ver con su condición de formación económico social transitista, con escasa industrialización, volcada a los servicios, con desempleo crónico e informal.
Esa estructuración “transitista”, nacida como apéndice del sistema militar norteamericano en 1903, ha producido una población que flota entre la informalidad, sobreviviendo de cualquier “rebusca”, a otra estructurada pero dependiente de un puesto como funcionarios del estado, por ende, víctimas del clientelismo político. La debilidad de la clase obrera industrial y el hecho de que, aún cuando existe, es mayoritariamente estacional o temporal, como en la construcción, son a nuestro entender parte del problema de la conciencia política de la población panameña. Esa realidad social tiene su correlato en la conciencia de clase dispersa.
A lo cual se suman arrastres históricos desde las propuestas de la izquierda panameña: por un lado, un sector significativo vinculado al Partido Comunista (del Pueblo) que ha terminado absorbido por el PRD, siguiendo el supuesto proyecto “torrijista” que la dirección de ese partido perdió hace rato; por otro lado, problemas fraccionalismos sectarios que han retardado el surgimiento de una propuesta creíble y unitaria.
Pero también influye la degeneración de la democracia liberal mundial
Panamá no escapa tampoco al proceso de degeneración y crisis del sistema capitalista mundial y de su régimen político preferido: la democracia liberal. La pauperización creciente, incluso en países europeos y en Estados Unidos, llevan a enormes contingentes de la población mundial a descreer de las promesas de una vida mejor y más democrática por parte del sistema político liberal burgués.
Los gobierno y partidos políticos tradicionales rápidamente se desgastan y pierden el respaldo popular, cada vez mayores contingentes de votantes eligen candidatos ubicados fuera o recién llegados al sistema político (“outsiders”) generalmente provenientes de la extrema derecha, aupados por los medios de comunicación de masa y que le echan la culpa de la crisis social a un supuesto “enemigo” (migrantes o comunistas) al cual prometen acabar.
Esta realidad internacional, que explica fenómenos como Trump, Bolsonaro, Bukele o Milei, no es ajena a Panamá, donde la extrema derecha “martinelista” que eligió a Mulino ha pretendido focalizar la culpa de la situación en la “migración”, aunque aquí el fenómeno es solo muy parcial, porque somos país de paso no de llegada. Aquí ese voto antisistema expresado hacia un derechista es de Ricardo Martinelli, a quien parte del electorado lo considera el instrumento para castigar la corrupción de los políticos tradicionales, no importa cuantas acusaciones por delitos graves tenga. Martinelli es nuestro Donald Trump.
Mulino, al igual que Lombana, prometieron “mano dura”, es decir, represión y eso también encanta a un sector del electorado que ingenuamente cree que la inseguridad se acabará con más policías y menos estado de derecho.
Una consideración aparte merece el hecho de que, no sólo en Panamá, a la izquierda le cuesta mucho atraer el voto popular o ganar el imaginario popular, y en ello influye la situación social de proyectos como la crisis profunda que atraviesa Cuba producto del bloqueo, o la pauperización que se vive en Venezuela y, peor aún, la degeneración dictatorial del sandinismo en Nicaragua.
La gente votó castigo, pero sin cambio real
Si bien la intención de castigo al gobierno saliente y su partido es bastante clara, el hecho es que la mayoría del electorado se “equivocó” si creía que votando a Mulino o Lombana iba a producir un cambio de fondo. Al menos el tercio de los votantes que lo hicieron por José R. Mulino, eligió un candidato que dará continuidad a las políticas neoliberales y así quedó expresado en la conformación de gabinete ministerial, claramente conformado por representantes de la oligarquía financiera.
Se destaca ahí Felipe Chapman en el Ministerio de Economía, un agente de los gremios empresariales y defensor de la mina de First Quantum. La Cámara de Comercio y el Consejo Nacional de la Empresa Privada, así como la embajadora de Estados Unidos, celebran su triunfo: nada ha cambiado, sólo las caras, el sistema funciona.
El voto consecuente con un deseo de cambio, aparte del 1% de la nómina Gordón-Morales.
El voto hacia los candidatos de la coalición Vamos, fue un voto por el cambio, por cuanto eran candidaturas por fuera de los partidos (libre postulación), eran jóvenes que no han sido parte del sistema, eran críticos a la corrupción imperante, la mayoría participó de las movilizaciones anti mineras de 2023. Pero la debilidad de la coalición Vamos es no tener una concepción clara de la formación económico social panameña, ni un programa de transformaciones, sino que todo lo reducen al tema de la corrupción y que “deben gobernar los mejores”. Esta ingenuidad política unida a una falta de disciplina partidaria pronto producirá fisuras internas. La prueba de fuego empezará cuando deban decidir sobre: si pactan con otras facciones la composición de la directiva de la Asamblea, sobre la reforma al sistema de jubilaciones, la ampliación de la cuenca del canal o la continuidad de la mina.
Se viene un gobierno oligárquico, antipopular y represivo
Lo dicho por Mulino, durante la campaña electoral, en sus discursos posteriores a su triunfo, así como con la escogencia de sus ministros, no hay lugar a dudas: el suyo será un gobierno “empresarial”, cargado de medidas económicas neoliberales y claramente represivo.
El respaldo de los gremios empresariales, los medios de comunicación de masas y las calificadoras de riesgo como Fitch son un mal augurio para el pueblo panameño. No se olvide que las calificadoras de riesgo lo que miden es la posibilidad de que los bancos y dueños de los bonos de la deuda soberana del país cobren su plata por encima de todo. Y en el marco de crisis fiscal esto significa sacrificio al gasto social y a los salarios de los empleados públicos, para asegurar el servicio de la deuda, que ya este año se come entre el 18 y el 20% del presupuesto gubernamental.
Sólo el Plan para una Vida Digna, de Gordón/Morales, propuso una alternativa para enfrentar los retos económicos sin más sacrifico popular: una reforma fiscal para que paguen más impuestos las grandes empresas, revisar las exoneraciones fiscales que son un subsidio a los ricos y perseguir la evasión fiscal. Los empresarios y los medios ya empezaron su campaña por la reapertura de la mina de Donoso, con la excusa de la crisis del empleo. “Abrir para cerrar” es el cuento. Mientras, la empresa francesa sigue controlando la mina. La solución del problema debe empezar por la expulsión de First Quantum M. y la nacionalización de sus propiedades.
El tercer problema grave es el de las jubilaciones y la Caja de Seguro Social. El centro de la propuesta de los grupos empresariales es mantener y generalizar las “cuentas individuales”, así como desguazar la entidad separando la parte administrativa y de salud, y aumentar las medidas paramétricas (edad de jubilación, cuotas, etc.).
El movimiento sindical, CONATO y CONUSI, han defendido la vuelta al sistema solidario que funcionó bien desde que se creó la institución hasta 2005, cuando las reformas de Martín Torrijos separaron los programas. Así como el combate a la evasión y robo de las cuotas por parte del sector empresarial. La movilización en defensa de la Caja llama a la puerta.
El movimiento popular: a prepararse para la lucha y dar continuidad al proyecto político
Al mostrar sus cartas el presidente entrante, más de lo que ya hizo Cortizo, con el añadido de amenazas de represión, el movimiento popular y sindical debe saber a qué atenerse. Es el momento de reforzar las conquistas organizativas de la lucha de julio de 2022: la Alianza por una Vida Digna y ANADEPO. Es más, habría que pensar en la fusión de ambas alianzas superando las diferencias.
En el plano político, no cabe duda de que la candidatura de Maribel Gordón y Richard Morales, permitió dar pasos significativos, duplicando el caudal de votos de las elecciones de 2014 y 2019 al Frente Amplio por la Democracia (FAD) y la del profesor Juan Jované por libre postulación en 2014.
Estructurar un proyecto político entorno a esta candidatura es una necesidad. Debe ser una propuesta política amplia y democrática, que permita sumar a otros actores del movimiento social panameño.
La situación objetiva de crisis estructural capitalista y del régimen político panameño reclama un programa de transformaciones como el expresado en el Plan por una Vida Digna.
El presidente electo Mulino se reúne con el embajador estadounidense Aponte y el subjefe de misión poco después de las elecciones.Es una situación difícil para ambos lados.La última vez que Panamá tuvo presidentes testaferros atendiendo a alguien a quien Washington había declarado delincuente -un tal Manuel Antonio Noriega- los resultados fueron catastróficos para Panamá.Pero aunque existe este vínculo histórico y un fuerte vínculo económico con los Estados Unidos, ya no hay bases militares estadounidenses aquí y otros actores como los chinos y los brasileños están presentes en caso de que algo como el estrangulamiento económico de los Estados Unidos antes de la invasión fuera a suceder.intentó.El camino de menor resistencia podría ser una ruptura silenciosa de Mulino con Martinelli, tal vez con la partida de este último a Nicaragua.Foto de la embajada de Estados Unidos.Pie de foto de Eric Jackson.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
Para defendernos de los piratas informáticos, los trolls organizados y otros actos de vandalismo en línea, la función de comentarios de nuestro sitio web está desactivada. En cambio, ven a nuestra página de Facebook para unirte a la discusión.
~ ~ ~
These announcements are interactive. Click on them for more information. Estos anuncios son interactivos. Toque en ellos para seguir a las páginas de web.
Para defendernos de los piratas informáticos, los trolls organizados y otros actos de vandalismo en línea, la función de comentarios de nuestro sitio web está desactivada. En cambio, ven a nuestra página de Facebook para unirte a la discusión.
~ ~ ~
These announcements are interactive. Click on them for more information. Estos anuncios son interactivos. Toque en ellos para seguir a las páginas de web.
RSF is at the core of a group of press freedom and human rights organizations rising to Julian Assange’s defense. Did he publish leaked classified documents? He did, like many establishment news corporations have done. Assange’s crimes, however, were the release of a video of US forces killing members of a Reuters news crew, and later, a trove of documents about a US foreign policy based largely upon lies, and yet later, some sleazy political memos from the Hillary Clinton camp. His true offense was embarrassing US politicians and Pentagon brass. RSF graphic.
Monday’s hearing in London could have delivered
Julian Assange to a US prison by now
by Reporters Without Borders (RSF by its French initials)
On the 20th of May, the UK High Court granted Julian Assange the right to appeal his extradition to the United States to face trial and possible imprisonment for life for publishing leaked classified information. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) welcomes the decision, which gives Assange a final chance in the UK courts to stop his extradition and challenge US assurances that he would face a fair trial.
This decision marks an important milestone in Julian Assange’s legal case, opening up a vital new path to prevent extradition. The two grounds for appeal that have been granted mean that the UK courts will consider the issues at the very heart of this case, related to freedom of expression and the First Amendment.
If extradited to the United States, Assange faces up to 175 years in prison. He would be the first publisher extradited under the Espionage Act, setting a dangerous precedent that could be applied to any journalist or media organization anywhere in the world.
RSF has been the only NGO to monitor all four years of extradition proceedings against Assange. RSF representatives have also gained rare access to visit Assange in Belmarsh prison, after initially being barred. RSF has also advocated directly with the US government and continues to urge the Biden administration to find a political solution to the case to prevent Assange’s extradition and allow for his release from prison without further delay.
It is thanks to your support that we can sustain such actions to fight for press freedom and all of our right to know.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
Unionized workers at the University of California Santa Cruz walk off the job. We’d take better care of ourselves with policies written by plumbers, housekeepers, and child care workers than lawyers, bankers, and ideologues. UAW photo, from their social media.
What’s the matter with Congress? And most of our state legislatures, too? Why do these so-called representative bodies keep stiffing middle-class and poor families, refusing to respond to the most urgent needs and goals of this vast majority of Americans?
Take lawmakers’ indifference to the child care crisis crushing the finances, health, and spirit of millions of working families. Plus, intentionally denying basic health care for low-income children in this spectacularly rich nation.
These common incidents of child neglect are products of the creeping plutocratic ideology now dominating capitals across America. Most legislatures today push corporate profiteering, including re-legalizing robber baron exploitation of children. Bills to reinstate child labor are being advanced in 28 states, and 12 have already passed!
Why is the workaday majority being ignored and corporate supremacy being imposed over the common good? In a word: class.
Think about it: Who holds nearly all of the seats in Congress and in state legislatures? Not plumbers, mechanics, taxi drivers, trash haulers, hotel housekeepers, computer programmers, farm workers, or child care providers. Instead, it’s bankers, lawyers, corporate executives, lobbyists, millionaires, and ideological goofballs.
Even though half of America’s jobs are working class, barely 1 percent of our nation’s 7,300 state legislative seats are held by the working class people who actually make America work.
As the old saying goes: If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu. And our political system has been rigged by corporate lobbyists, lawmakers, and judges to hold public office hostage to big money — intentionally excluding the working-class majority from its rightful place at America’s policy table.
To start freeing democracy from corrupt corporate money, go to Public Citizen at citizen.org.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
Martinelli is a guy who has been convicted of laundering more than $70 million in stolen public funds to buy himself a newspaper chain. Graphic from Mulino’s Twitter / X account.
National unity?
The same families as usual, salted with some of the usual party bosses without the faux aristocratic surnames? The welcome mat out for the business groups and goons at the door to keep out the left and those who don’t dress expensively enough? An arrangement among parties for which voters overwhelmingly expressed their disdain?
At some point President-elect Mulino might do something that unites the nation but right now a “national unity government” is a bad joke. He does, however, need to reach a set of understandings with most sectors of Panamanian society to govern the country. Even more immediately he needs to establish a working relationship with a legislature that his party does not and will not control.
In the old-style Martinelli fashion that would be a matter of bribery and blackmail to get control over a National Assembly designated after an election in which Mulino got a little more than one-third of the vote and his party won something less than one-quarter of the seats in the legislature. But in 2009 Ricky Martinelli became president with an overwhelming majority.
It’s a different situation now. We have a $50 billion national public debt hanging over us. Panamanians will not be united about how to pay this down.
There are various ways to compromise a deadlocked National Assembly situation that might let us move forward. One of them that Mulino seems to offer, a non-aggression pact by which nobody gets investigated or prosecuted for looting public funds in the lame duck or previous governments, ought to be a nonstarter. But giving one faction of the legislature the National Assembly presidency, another the chair of the budget committee, yet another the chair of the credentials committee, and the selection of a comptroller general whom the entire nation can trust? That sort of national unity won’t get us to agree on what should be done about the Seguro Social pension fund but it might let the government go about most of the mundane tasks or running Panama.
Quite the labor issue, but on the other hand it should boost small media. The boost would be greater but surely there will be monopolistic practices to drive off the media that should grow at the degenerated media’s expense.
So WHEN do we get the first libel case arising from foolish captions on a video, wherein the defendant company blames it on a computer?
As to a public figure the company could plead lack of malice, but opposing counsel might counter by alleging reckless disregard for the truth.
But what about a suspected serial killer whose name gets garbled by unedited artificial intelligence, such that on the caption track another, totally unconnected real person gets named? That’s what I noticed this morning. It can just ruin an “OOOII, The Ripper! Sloice! Chop!” reading experience over morning coffee.
Would we hear the defense that to save money and remain competitive the hedge fund that bought the newspaper or television station HAD TO replace editors and translators and transcribers and fact checkers with AI programs, instead of using such software to assist those who were fired instead?
THEN, while writing this petty gripe, the editor noticed how Meta used AI to garble the thing I wrote up top, to change “now use” to “know us.”
Do the tech companies also do this to songwriters and musicians, to inject perversion into closed captions under songs?
Ann Landers Way in Chicago. Photo by Lorie Shaull.
Don’t accept your dog’s admiration as conclusive evidence that you are wonderful.
Ann Landers
Bear in mind…
None but a coward dares to boast that he has never known fear.
Ferdinand Foch
It’s all right letting yourself go as long as you can let yourself back.
Mick Jagger
The problem with people who have no vices is that generally you can be pretty sure they’re going to have some pretty annoying virtues.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
Kidnapped posters with photographs of the hostages and missing held in Gaza by Hamas, at the wall outside of the Kirya military base area. Wikimedia photo by Yossipik.
People gather in San Francisco to honor journalists, storytellers and witness bearers in Palestine and to call for justice, accountability and an end to impunity for all journalists who have been killed. Photo by Peg Hunter.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
Para defendernos de los piratas informáticos, los trolls organizados y otros actos de vandalismo en línea, la función de comentarios de nuestro sitio web está desactivada. En cambio, ven a nuestra página de Facebook para unirte a la discusión.
~ ~ ~
These announcements are interactive. Click on them for more information. Estos anuncios son interactivos. Toque en ellos para seguir a las páginas de web.
At a time when he had more hope and power, Colon Mayor Alex Lee got saved. At least for the moment. Photo from his Twitter / X feed.
Alex Lee defeated at the polls, arrested at Tocumen Airport
from social media with a note by Eric Jackson
What’s a machine politician in Colon to do, once the voters have become sick of all that and ousted him at the polls?
Mayor Alex Lee had great fun beating up on the queers, putting his family and friends on the payroll, and, it is alleged, dipping into public funds for himself. On May 5 Colonenses expressed their annoyance by ousting Lee in favor of independent Diógenes Galván. Lee ran a distant third behind both Galván and the Martinelista candidate.
Lee’s electoral downfall was from a combination of factors, including a ridiculous PRD presidential candidate who scored only single digits in the election returns, an electorate unimpressed by “family values” political pitches this time, and those seeking political patronage crumbs figuring that the Martinelistas were a more likely bet than the PRD.
Then, on Thursday the 16th, the lame duck mayor was all set to take off for Medellin from Tocumen Airport when he was arrested on a warrant from the anti-corruption prosecutors. Details of the accusation — and remember, it’s just that until and unless he gets his day in court and a charge is proven — are sketchy but have something to do with embezzlement from the junta comunal of Barrio Sur, of which corregimiento he’s also the representante.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
President Cortizo and President-elect Mulino in a courtesy visit at the Palacio de las Garzas after the election. The “official” transition period begins on June 3 and the inauguration / changing of the guard for all elected offices happens on July 1. Photo by the Presidencia.
National unity, or just the same old families? Or do we see something actually new?
Just who is going to lead the fragmented new National Assembly is up in the air. The legislature’s leaders will be elected on July 1, and one way to look at Mulino’s cabinet choices could be as how they might attract or alienate a legislative majority with which he’ll likely have to work.
So far it appears that the cabinet will above all come from the wealthy oligarchic fringes of Panama’s small white minority, with some exceptions coming from law enforcement subordinates from Mulino’s days as Ricardo Martinelli’s security minister. Some of the extended clan of the fugitive Ricardo Alberto Martinelli Berrocal and his wife Marta Linares de Martinelli are included, or seem to be. Mulino made his courtesy call on Cortizo accompanied by journalist Rafael Berrocal as well as his transition chief, but we don’t know if either of those two will go on to occupy formal posts once the new government is in place.
Here are the first of his picks:
Minister of Economy and Finance: Felipe Chapman Arias
This 55-year-old lawyer, economist and consultant is the son of a father who occupied a comparable position in the 1994-1999 PRD administration of Ernesto “Toro” Pérez Balladares. Like his father Guillermo Chapman Fábrega he’s known to be an advocate for neoliberal economic theories and consequent government policies. He was early to sound an alarm after the Supreme Court for the second time struck down the mining concession originally granted to imprisoned fraud artist Richard Fifer but ultimately subdivided with a part eventually passing into the hands of Canadian-based multinational mining company First Quantum. The research and consulting company of which he’s a partner, Investigaciónes y Desarrollo SA (INDESA), mostly works for banks and corporations as clients. He’s a partner in the Rosas y Rosas law firm and on the board of directors of Banco del Istmo. In the past he supported the mining colony contract with First Quantum and the privatization of the IDAAN water and sewer utility.
Minister of Foreign Relations: Javier Martínez Acha
60-year-old Martínez is a member of the PRD and of the family that owns the Casa del Mariscos restaurant, where he tends to hang out and hobnob with a variety of political figures. He’s a lawyer, economist and civil engineer mostly educated at Texas A&M, a popular school for rich Panamanians to send their kids. (Family ties are a big thing in Panamanian politics, but Aggie ties are also a factor here.) He has been working as general manager of Geneva Asset Management, SA. Over the years Martínez Acha served on the PRD’s National Executive Committee and in a now-deleted introduction to his Twitter feed he described himself as a social democrat.
As vice ministers Mulino has chosen Florida State University – Panama international relations and political science professor Carlos Guevara Mann, leader of Panama’s pan-Latin American Bolivarian Society and frequent La Prensa columnist; and Carlos Ruiz-Hernández, former Panamanian ambassador at the United Nations in Martinelli times who has since then worked for the Washington-based arbitration firm Allen & Overy LLP.
Minister of the Environment: Juan Carlos Navarro Quelqueju
Navarro, the former PRD mayor of Panama City and that party’s 2014 presidential standard-bearer, is the scion of the Tropigas fortune and was founder of the National Association for the Conservation of Nature (ANCON). In recent years he has been building a solar panels business. Navarro has vociferously embraced a couple of causes in the past year or so: he was strongly opposed to the mining deal with First Quantum and advocates the closure of the border with Colombia for environmental reasons. The consolidation of Benicio Robinson’s power over and within the PRD pretty much coincided with Navarro’s eclipse in that party’s power circles. NOT an Aggie — he’s a Dartmouth and Harvard grad.
Minister of Public Safety: Frank Ábrego Mendoza
61-year-old Ábrego, educated at the General Francisco Morazán Military Academy in Honduras, the old US Army School of the Americas (now called the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation) and the US Army Special Forces Officers’ School, was one of Noriega’s boys, personal friend of the strongman and active-duty Panama Defense Forces at invasion time. A Santeño by birth, he was one of the PDF guys who survived the post-invasion purges and became part of the renewed police force. As a cop he did riot control, anti-terrorist and border patrol duties, then was the founding director of the National Border Service (SENAFRONT) when it split off from the National Police in 2008, until he took his retirement from law enforcement in 2016. However, after his police career Ábrego served as a security consultant to presidents Varela and Cortizo. It is said that one of Ábrego’s heroes is the late General Omar Torrijos. In Martinelli times, with Ábrego as its director, SENAFRONT was brought into the cities as an elite riot squad and was widely criticized for its brutality in Colon.
Minister of Labor: Jackeline Muñoz de Cedeño
She’s the daughter of José Muñoz Molina, founder of the small Alianza Party that was in Mulino’s coalition with the Martinelistas. Currently she’s a deputy in the Central Americana Parliament (PARLACEN) and also alternate representante of the Panama City corregimiento of Tocumen. A Panama-educated lawyer, she practices family and immigration law. She was the running mate of the self-proclaimed “sexual buffalo,” RM mayoral candidate Sergio Gálvez, in an ill-fated run for the Panama City mayor’s office.
Minister of Health: Dr. Fernando Boyd Galindo
Dr. Boyd Galindo is a dentist specializing in periodontics, educated at the University of Panama and the University of Pennsylvania. He taught that specialty at the University of Panama in the 1980s and 90s. he served a chair of the Social Security Fund (CSS) board of directors from 1990 through 1996. He was president of the Panamanian Dental Association in 1987 and 1988.
Chief of the transition team: Aníbal Galindo Navarro
Galindo is an attorney, of the family that created the medicine importers’ cartel. Among his clients was the mining company First Quantum, but it seems that his practice has mostly been offshore asset protection. He was vice president of Cambio Democratico when Martinelli still controlled it and was an advisor to Martinelli and an ambassador in Qatar during that presidency.
To fend off hackers, organized trolls and other online vandalism, our website comments feature is switched off. Instead, come to our Facebook page to join in the discussion.
