Pensando en la COP21: Una economía centrada en el biorregionalismo
por Leonardo Boff
La COP21 que se encerró en Paris en el dia 12 de diciembre, se ha concentrado in una visión global de los problemas de los cambios climaticos de la Tierra mediante la adaptación y la mitigación con el auxilio de la ciencia, de la tecnología, de transferencias tecnologicas, de capacitación a los necesitados y de la finaciación por parte de los paises ricos con referencia a los paises menos desarrolados. Practicamente no se habla de soluciones a partir de la configuración que la misma Tierra ha hecho mediante la configuración de los rios y de las montañas.
Aqui, ofrecemos, prolongando un reflexión anterior sobre el bioregionalismo, lo que seria una economía centrada en esta perspectiva. Lo que se observa es que por todas partes se buscan alternativas al modo de producción industrial/mercantilista /consumista, ya que los efectos sobre las sociedades y sobre la naturaleza se están demostrando cada vez más desastrosos. El caos climático, la erosión de la biodiversidad, la escasez de agua potable, la quimicalización de los alimentos y el calentamiento global son los síntomas más reveladores. Este modo de producción es todavía dominante, pero no sin críticas.
En contrapartida, aparecen por todas partes formas alternativas de base ecológica de producción como la agricultura orgánica, cooperativas de alimentos agroecológicos, granjas familiares, ecoaldeas y similares. La visión de una eco-economía de la suficiencia o del “buen vivir y convivir” da cuerpo al biorregionalismo, como ya hemos explicado aquí.
La economía biorregional se propone satisfacer las necesidades humanas (en oposición a la satisfacción de los deseos) y realizar el bien vivir y convivir, respetando el alcance y los límites de cada ecosistema local.
Previamente hemos de preguntarnos sobre el sentido de la riqueza y su uso. En vez de centrarnos en la acumulación material más allá de lo necesario y decente, debemos buscar otro tipo de riqueza, esta sí, verdaderamente humana, como el tiempo para la familia y los niños, para los amigos, para desarrollar creatividad, para deleitarnos con el esplendor de la naturaleza, para dedicarnos a la meditación y la recreación. El sentido original de la economía no es la acumulación de capital, sino la creación y re-creación de la vida. Ella se ordena a satisfacer nuestras necesidades materiales y crear las condiciones para el logro de los bienes espirituales (no materiales) que no están en el mercado, pero se derivan del corazón y de las relaciones justas con los demás y con la naturaleza, como la convivencia pacífica, el sentido de justicia, la solidaridad, la compasión, la amorización y el cuidado de todo lo que vive.
Al centrarnos en la producción biorregional, minimizamos las distancias que los productos tienen que recorrer, ahorramos energía y disminuimos la contaminación. El suministro de las necesidades puede ser satisfecho por las pequeñas industrias y tecnologías sociales fácilmente incorporadas por la comunidad. Los residuos pueden ser fácilmente manejados o transformados en bioenergía. Los trabajadores se sienten conectados con lo que produce la naturaleza local y al trabajar en fábricas pequeñas consideran su trabajo más significativo.
En esto radica la singularidad de la economía biorregional: en lugar de adaptar el medio ambiente a las necesidades humanas, son estas las que se adaptan y se armonizan con la naturaleza y por lo tanto aseguran el equilibrio ecológico. La economía usa mínimamente los recursos no renovables y usa racionalmente los renovables, dándole tiempo para descansar y regenerarse. Los ciudadanos se acostumbran a sentirse parte de la naturaleza y sus cuidadores. De ahí nace la verdadera sostenibilidad.
En lugar de crear puestos de trabajo, se busca crear, según afirma la Carta de la Tierra “medios de vida sostenibles” para ser productivos y dar satisfacción a las personas.
Las computadoras y las modernas tecnologías de comunicación permitirán a la gente trabajar en su casa, como se hacía en la era pre-industrial. La tecnología no sirve para aumentar la riqueza, sino para liberar y asegurar más tiempo, como recuerda siempre el líder indígena Ailton Krenak, para la convivencia, para la recreación, para la restauración de la naturaleza y para celebrar las fiestas tribales.
La economía biorregional facilita la abolición de la división del trabajo basada en el sexo. Los hombres y las mujeres asumen juntos las tareas domésticas y de crianza de los hijos y velan por la belleza del medio ambiente.
Esta renovación económica propicia también una renovación cultural. La cooperación y la solidaridad se hacen más factibles y la gente se acostumbra a actuar correctamente con los demás y con la naturaleza, porque es claro que es en su propio interés, así como en el de la comunidad. La conexión con la Madre Tierra y sus ciclos suscita una conciencia de mutua pertenencia y una ética del cuidado.
El modelo biorregional de la pequeña ciudad inglesa de Totnes, es seguido hoy por unas 8.000 ciudades, llamadas Ciudades de Transición: transición para lo nuevo. Tales hechos generan esperanza para el futuro.
~ ~ ~
Estos anuncios son interactivos. Toque en ellos para seguir a las páginas de web
Editor’s note: The blog links are heavily skewed toward that which is published outside of Panama, much of it about Panama, Latin America or the Caribbean. On our Facebook pagewe post a lot more clippings of other people’s work from Panama in the mix of news, culture and commentary.
~ ~ ~
The announcements below are interactive. Click on them for more information
Saturday, December 19 will be 36 years after a savage beating in which I was the victim at the hands of agents of the military dictatorship, for protesting the presence of the bloodthirsty Shah of Iran in Panama, who was the guest of the ruling military regime.
The peaceful demonstration was convened in front of the Don Bosco basilica, where some 100 citizens gathered and nearby, numerous radio patrols and motorcycle cops of the Guardia Nacional, all dressed for combat. Also present were a great number of G-2 agents, disguised as civilians.
When we gathered to march, more than 20 motorcycles moved in on us. That caused a panic, with the demonstrators running back to the sidewalks.The motorcycle cops stopped a few meters from where I was. Bullhorn in hand, I walked toward the guardia for the purpose of talking with them. In seconds, with a shocking ferocity, a man with a hose in hand and shouting a torrent of vulgarities, shouted “Here’s Bernal — hit him, kill him,” and pounced on me, supported by numerous G-2 and other armed elements. They jostled with each other to hit. They hosed, punched, kicked and fell on me with brutal fury. What’s more, to their great disgrace they hit and hit without any scruples, then raised their victim when he fell to continue the beating.
The brutal beating also extended to Victor Navas King, who intervened to try to pull me from the circle of death, and also to Doña Elvia Lefevre de Wirz and another woman who is still unknown to me. The voices of the executioners repeated: “Hit him, kill him!” The fiercest of all, the one who commanded the attack, was Fritz Gibson Parrish, known by the nickname “Sangre.” There is no forgetting.
Later, they brought me unconscious to the central headquarters and much later, to Santo Tomas Hospital, where the doctors gave me the assistance that saved my life.
Those directly responsible for the attack were duly denounced before judicial authorities in 1990. I still await justice.
~ ~ ~
The announcements below are interactive. Click on them for more information
Such was the extent of the crowd of Martinelli supporters that were mustered for his Supreme Court date. Martinelli himself did not show up, but sent his wife and eight lawyers, and issued a communique complaining that his physical and emotional “integrity” can’t be guaranteed if he gets thrown in jail. Photo from Martinelli’s Twitter feed, apparently from his TV station.
What may happen to Ricardo Martinelli, here and in the USA
by Eric Jackson
There are fascinating possibilities for the legal scholar, but what happens to Ricardo Martinelli depends on a complex matrix revolving around laws and political wills in two countries. At the moment Panamanians Supreme Court gears are in motion to get an order for Martinelli’s arrest, but he’s in Miami, beyond the unassisted reach of Panama’s jurisdiction. There are half a dozen criminal investigations pending against the former president, but the one that matters at the moment is the invasion of privacy case revolving around the former regime’s warrantless electronic eavesdropping activities.
Magistrate Jerónimo Mejia is the acting prosecutor in this case, and Magistrate Harry Díaz is the acting judge. Article 490 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that to order the arrest of somebody with the status of a legislator — as Martinelli has, because he’s a member of the Central American Parliament — it takes a majority of the nine-member plenum of the Supreme Court. When Martinelli didn’t show up at his December 11 court date, he was held in contempt of court, Díaz wouldn’t entertain any motions from the ex-president’s lawyers and Mejía adjourned the hearing. Later that day Díaz and private attorney Carlos Herrera Morán (who represents several of those whose conversations, movements, homes and families were electronically monitored without a court’s authorization) filed requests to have a plenary session to consider an order to arrest Martinelli. Acting magistrate Abel Zamorano — the suplente for former magistrate and now prison inmate Alejandro Moncada Luna — asked Supreme Court president José Ayú Prado to schedule such a session on December 14 but Ayú Prado, who has been recused from this case because his activities when he was acting Attorney General create an apparent conflict of interest, passed the request on to the court’s vice president, Luis Ramón Fábrega.
If a hearing is held on the 14th, most of those hearing and voting on the matter will be suplentes (alternates) rather than full magistrates. Due to their roles as acting prosecutor and judge, Mejía’s and Díaz’s seats would be filled by their respective suplentes, Luis Carrasco Mandevile and Wilfredo Sáenz. Ayú Prado is recused, and his suplente, Gabriel Fernández, died on December 5. As Mejía, Díaz and Ayú Prado are the court’s three-member Criminal Bench, a suplente from one of the court’s other chambers would have to fill in for Ayú Prado. Two-thirds of the Administrative Bench are suplentes — Zamorano in the wake of Moncada Luna’s incarceration and Nelly Cedeño de Paredes who is acting as magistrate after Víctor Benavides was forced to resign under the pressure of a criminal investigation. Fábrega is the remaining full magistrate from that bench. The three magistrates of the court’s Civil Bench, Oydén Ortega, Harley Mitchell and Hernán De León, would round out the plenum, were it held on December 14. That is, unless there are further recusals, disqualifications or someone is absent due to illness.
The court need not have its plenary session right away, and once it does there is no set time in which a decision must be rendered. December 14 is also the start of legislative hearings on President Juan Carlos Varela’s nominations of jurists who would replace magistrate Mitchell and acting magistrate Cedeño, whose terms end on December 31. Might high court politics favor a delay until new magistrates are seated? Perhaps. On the other hand, there might be a sense of urgency. For ethical reasons and to maintain such mystique in which an institution held in low public regard can shroud itself, magistrates rarely talk about business before the court until they have released their decisions.
If it is decided to hold a plenary session without delay and to issue a prompt decision, one of two things is likely to happen. Five or more votes in favor of ordering Martinelli’s arrest continues the Supreme Court case on this matter, and leads to a request for INTERPOL to issue a “red notice,” an international request to arrest and extradite Martinelli. Five or more votes against ordering the former president’s arrest effectively ends this case as to Martinelli. It would not directly affect any of the other pending cases against Martinelli or the proceedings against several other people, including two former national security directors, in the ordinary courts.
So how is it likely to go? This reporter can’t read minds, does not personally know those who would decide and would not rely on partisan math. There is a 5-4 majority of Martinelli appointees on the high court, but due to Ayú Prado’s recusal and his suplente Fernández’s death those political numbers may not describe the nine judges who would hear a motion for the former president’s arrest. Martinelli’s communique from Miami accused Harry Díaz — one of his own appointees — of being a tool of President Varela’s vengeance. Varela could have moved to replace Zamorano at any time since Moncada Luna was removed early this year but has chosen not to and is considering appointing him to finish the disgraced former magistrate’s full term. Most of the Cambio Democratico caucus in the National Assembly now disregards orders from their party’s founder and boss and it’s highly unlikely that he has an effective loyalist majority on the Supreme Court either. In the event of an arrest warrant call it bribery and intimidation if you are Ricardo Martinelli or judicial independence if you are not.
And then, in Miami…
Presume that Panama’s Supreme Court orders Martinelli’s arrest, and further presume that an annoyed and weary high court summarily brushes off the former president’s multiple habeas corpus motions, such that in effect there is no more time for the accused to buy in Panama. (Those are highly speculative presumptions, not prophesies.) Then you get into a matrix of decisions that INTERPOL might make, things that Martinelli might do, positions that the Obama administration might take with or without the advice and consent of the Varela administration, US law and international law.
INTERPOL would have to decide whether to issue a red notice. This organization has its internal politics and a long and often sordid history. While the ultra-right in the United States likes to portray the institution as this shadowy world government outfit that Barack Obama has deputized to come into the United States to arrest Americans, its authority is actually limited to passing on requests for arrests and extraditions, which may or may not be honored by national governments. INTERPOL has various red notices about Americans charged with torture or kidnapping under the aegis of the CIA or other US governmental or mercenary organizations and these are not honored by the United States or nations subject to US persuasion. Generally INTERPOL looks at due process of law issues more than political considerations these days. If Panama’s high court issues a warrant for Martinelli’s arrest and asks INTERPOL for a red notice, it will probably be issued — but it would not be automatically issued.
When Martinelli sees a red notice coming, does he remain in Miami and fight, accept extradition to Panama or run to a third country? If he tries to run, will the US government allow this?
Presume that he stays in Miami and resists extradition. Perhaps the first legal principle is that the United States and Panama have a 1905 extradition treaty, which contains no provision for extraditing those accused of invasion of privacy or any other electronic eavesdropping offense. But Panama and the United States are also parties to other treaties, such as the UN Convention Against Corruption. Article 19 of that treaty — which is not self-executing — encourages states to criminalize public officials’ abuse of their public functions. The more binding Inter-American Convention Against Corruption might be attacked as only applying to public officials with pecuniary motives but that limitation is not specified and Ricardo Martinelli’s political use of eavesdropping information is arguably the “improper use by a government official… for his own benefit or that of a third party, of any kind of classified or confidential information which that official… who performs public functions has obtained because of, or in the performance of, his functions.” The hemispheric treaty specifically provides for extradition. There are also “War on Drugs” and anti-terrorist mutual legal assistance treaties between the United States and Panama upon which extradition might be based. The law of an extradition for illegal eavesdropping case against Ricardo Martinelli in the United States is vague, complicated and varied enough to generate large attorney fees. He probably can be extradited as a matter of law.
For this particular offense, and with respect to the Obama administration, the political will to extradite is the more important question. Isn’t what Ricardo Martinelli is accused of doing remarkably like what Edward Snowden, supported by many documents, has accused The National Security Agency and other governmental entities of doing on a global scale under Barack Obama’s direction? A Martinelli defense might want to raise that argument. In a US court it would be held to be irrelevant and an attempt to introduce evidence about it an attack on US national security worthy of a gag and non-disclosure order. It the court of public opinion it could play differently.
In the US political realm, it is believed that Obama personally dislikes Martinelli. In the smaller world of right-wing Miami politics, US Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen appears to get along well with Martinelli, while US Senator Marco Rubio has been one of Martinelli’s critics.
And does what Panama thinks figure into Obama’s political calculations? We don’t actually know whether Varela wants his predecessor returned to Panama and adding another distraction to our public discourse. For all we know Varela may have quietly told Obama to let Martinelli spend years on end and much of his fortune fighting in the US courts, or to just let him stay in Miami unmolested.
Presume that Obama prefers to be rid of Martinelli. There would be ordinary extradition proceedings that could be time-consuming, and it could be expected that the former Panamanian president would interpose a request for political asylum, arguing that he would face political persecution if forced to return to Panama. But there are other proceedings far quicker than an extradition fight in the courts.
Did Ricardo Martinelli flee Panama last January with the protection of a diplomatic passport that he had as a member of the Central American Parliament? US presidents have the summary power to declare any diplomat or purported diplomat persona non grata and expel such a person from the United States. The courts have no jurisdiction in those cases.
And what is Martinelli’s immigration status in the United States anyway? Washington does not comment about such things. For all we know he could be a naturalized US citizen or possessed of a green card. Very likely, however, he has a visitor’s visa which he may have already overstayed. The US State Department has the summary power to deny or revoke any foreigner’s visa, but once in the USA such a person would ordinarily have access to the courts.
Would it be such a wonderful opportunity for delay and the continued easy life in an upscale Miami condo if Martinelli decided to resist an extradition effort or a move to deport him for lack of a visa? Perhaps. But the guy would be a flight risk and could be obliged to reside in a jail cell while fighting to stay in the United States.
Moreover, would immigration and extradition law be Martinelli’s only legal concerns in the United States? The contents of Italian criminal case files describe a plan to launder funds from a kickback scheme through a company in Miami. Witnesses and document in the Financial Pacific affair indicate Martinelli’s participation in an insider trading scheme with respect to Petaquilla Minerals gold mining stock. If that commercial paper was traded on Canadian and European but not US exchanges, it was sold over the counter in the United States and there are US laws about stock swindles that happen overseas. American criminal law being as extremist as it notoriously is, a “nuclear option” that the Obama administration probably has if it wants to use it is to indict Martinelli for financial crimes in the United States. The prison terms there are substantially longer than they are here.
But then the Obama administration, for whatever reason, might decide to tolerate Ricardo Martinelli’s continued presence in the United States. Any such policy decision would be subject to review starting in January of 2017, when the next US president takes office.
~ ~ ~
The announcements below are interactive. Click on them for more information
Sends Marta and eight lawyers to court for him, gets held in contempt
Martinelli wimps out
by Eric Jackson
Ten and a half months after he fled the country and after countless delaying motions before the Supreme Court and the Electoral Tribunal, Ricardo Martinelli had a court date on the morning of December 11. The subject was a series of invasion of privacy charges arising from his warrantless electronic eavesdropping activities directed against at least 150 people. He stayed in Miami and sent in former first lady Marta Linares de Martinelli and eight lawyers instead of appearing in court as ordered.
This time the court wouldn’t entertain any of his motions.Supreme Court magistrate Jerónimo Mejía summarily held the former president in contempt (en rebeldía) and adjourned the hearing. Supreme Court magistrate Harry Díaz, the acting prosecutor, said that he would petition a nine-member court plenum to obtain an arrest warrant, which if issued would then lead to a request to INTERPOL for an international “red note” requesting Martinelli’s arrest and extradition. It would then be up to Barack Obama to decide whether to honor the warrant.
~ ~ ~
The announcements below are interactive. Click on them for more information
The Cabinet Council quickly approved the president’s high court nominees. The National Assembly might not, but it has been an unusual event when such appointments have run into significant opposition. Photo by the Presidencia.
Cedalise and Russo nominated
for Supreme Court posts
by Eric Jackson
On December 10, after a screening and public input process that elicited a bit of public criticism, President Juan Carlos Varela chose Ángela Russo Maineri de Cedeño as a magistrate for the Supreme Court’s civil bench and Cecilio Antonio Cedalise Riquelme for a vacant seat in the court’s administrative chamber. Russo, tapped to replace Harley Mitchell, is an attorney in private practice who has served as a family court and civil appellate judge and teaches family law at the nation’s Catholic university, USMA. Mitchell’s term expires at the end of the year. Cedalise is a labor lawyer who advises the Ministry of Labor Development and teaches labor law at several universities. He was one of Panama’s negotiators for the US-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement. If approved he would replace Víctor Benavides, who was forced to resign while under criminal investigation by the legislature earlier this year. When Benavides resigned the National Assembly lost jurisdiction over his case to the regular prosecutors of the Public Ministry and those matters are still pending unresolved.
The legislature’s Credentials Committee will begin hearings on the nominations in special sessions starting on December 14 and that process is expected to take about one week. Although there had been some criticism of the process by which the field of 164 applicants had been narrowed down to 10 finalists by a committee composed of Minister of Government Milton Henríquez, Minister of the Presidency Álvaro Alemán and presidential adviser Francisco Sierra, there was little initial criticism of the nominees themselves. Varela, however, does not control the legislature and the appointments could become embroiled in political power plays. However, both the PRD and Cambio Democratico parties, which might have reason to embarrass Varela, are themselves internally divided.
The appointments leave several high court nominations outstanding. The president will have to appoint alternates — suplentes — for both of these nominees, plus replace magistrate José Ayú Prado’s late suplente Gabriel Fernández, who died on at his home of undisclosed causes on December 5. The seat vacated by the conviction on assorted corruption charges of Alejandro Moncada Luna is now occupied by his suplente Abel Zamorano. That post is on the court’s administrative bench. President Varela has yet to make a decision whether to promote Zamorano to occupy Moncada Luna’s post, replace Moncada Luna with somebody else and leave Zamorano as suplente or appoint both a new magistrate and his or her alternate.
Varela insists that he does not interfere in judicial business and does not make any public show of doing so as his predecessor did. But both within the legal profession and among the general public there is a widespread belief that the executive branch does pull strings with the judiciary. It might be a matter of people having become so accustomed to corrupted and manipulated courts that they would not recognize judicial independence if they saw it. But just after he was elected in May of 2014 Varela called upon some magistrates to resign, two people have been forced off of the court and there is an unabated public clamor for accountability for public corruption, including in the courts.
~ ~ ~
The announcements below are interactive. Click on them for more information
Felicito a toda Venezuela por la manera en que lograron desarrollar su reciente proceso de elecciones parlamentarias. La calma demostrada, a pesar de algunos desafortunados incidentes, es algo digno de admirar.
Respetuosamente presento unas reflexiones acerca de lo acontecido y de los resultados, que a la luz de los informes ofrecidos hasta el momento, parecen favorecer a los sectores de la oposición política al gobierno actual.
1. Es importante ser conscientes de que hasta el momento, nada ha cambiado: las dificultades continuarán y posiblemente la situación empeorará, hasta tanto no se haya establecido la nueva Asamblea y se puedan aplicar los correctivos necesarios para mejorar el presente estado de cosas. Los triunfadores deberían explicar al pueblo cómo planean, desde el poder legislativo, impulsar mejoras a corto y largo plazo, de manera que la población pueda recuperar el optimismo.
2. Ahora la oposición debe convertirse en una fuerza de propuesta, para la construcción de una nueva realidad para el país. Ahora tiene acceso al poder, desde donde comenzar a producir resultados positivos para todos. Tanto ganadores como perdedores deben dejar a un lado el encono y los resentimientos, y tratar de entender que el pueblo hizo su elección porque está cansado de la situación de tensión, zozobra y parálisis nacional, el caos económico y la inseguridad pública. Se debe asumir que los votantes venezolanos han escogido a los candidatos que consideran pueden actuar como el antídoto para contrarrestar el veneno que se ha vertido hasta ahora y para superar la incompetencia gubernamental, la de ahora y la de antes. El pueblo no perdonará la utilización de su confianza para propósitos de revancha o de oportunismo codicioso. Este es el momento para la calma, el análisis y la acción cívica ejemplar.
3. El momento no es para triunfalismo, sino para ser magnánimos en la victoria. La oposición corrió el riesgo de ganar la elección y así ocurrió. Ahora es el momento de cumplir con las expectativas de un país que de manera abrumadora, y a pesar de las presiones y amenazas, decidió apoyar la posibilidad ofrecida por esa facción. Han heredado un soberano lío administrativo y una población con la paciencia ya agotada. Y todo esto, dentro de un escenario muy difícil, pues el Ejecutivo continúa en el poder, como contrincante y no como aliado.
4. El apoyo popular continuará siendo el fiel de la balanza, de manera que han de explicar al pueblo, claramente, qué es lo que intentan hacer y por qué es necesario hacerlo. No prometan lo que no pueden cumplir. Aclaren inmediata y públicamente cualquier acusación que pretenda confundir y dividir al país. Digan la verdad siempre. Confíen en el alma de su pueblo.
5. No olviden que sin el apoyo popular jamás hubiesen logrado esos resultados. El pueblo quiere un cambio y también exige respeto. Esta es una oportunidad para demostrar la grandeza del espíritu venezolano. Espero que el ejército nacional continúe siendo el garante de la Constitución, de la Voluntad Popular y de la Ley.
Felicitaciones y arriba Venezuela!
~ ~ ~
Estos anuncios son interactivos. Toque en ellos para seguir a las páginas de web
John D. Feeley, career diplomat, former Marine helicopter pilot, Latin Americanist, the man who controlled Colin Powell’s and Condoleeza Rice’s information inflows and who ran the Merida Initiative “War on Drugs” in Mexico. Photo by the US State Department.
John D. Feeley confirmed as American ambassador here
his presentation to the US Senate
Editor’s note: On December 9 the US Senate approved the nomination of John D. Feeley as the next American ambassador in Panama on a voice vote. The following is the transcript of his presentation to the senators.
From the oath I swore as an Eagle Scout, to the one I took upon commissioning as a Second Lieutenant of Marines, and the oath by which I have lived and worked for the last 25 years as a foreign service officer advancing American interests in the Western Hemisphere, my life and career have been marked by public service.
This is an enormous privilege. I thank the president and the secretary for the confidence they have shown in me by their nomination. And it is in that spirit of gratitude that I come before you today to seek your approval that I might continue to serve our great nation as ambassador in Panama.
I am joined today by my wife, a senior foreign service officer herself from San Juan, Puerto Rico, Cherie Feeley. My two sons and my grandson couldn’t be with us but I am sure the number of hits on C-Span has gone up as a result of them watching.
In my current position at the State Department, I oversee the daily operations of our 53 embassies and consulates, from Canada to the Caribbean, from Mexico to Argentina. I work on the operating budgets, the foreign assistance programs, and the personnel assignments that undergird American diplomacy throughout this hemisphere.
The food we eat, the energy we consume, and the goods and services we trade with our neighbors in the Americas have more of an impact, I would argue, on the daily lives of our country’s citizens than any other region of the world. So it is vitally important that we know and understand these neighbors and partners to ensure our own security and prosperity. This is the essence of the President’s Strategy for Engagement in Central America.
And Panama, whose destiny has been entwined with ours since its founding, is among the most critical of our partners in achieving the security, prosperity, and governance goals of the strategy.
Panama is a good news story in many aspects, and if confirmed, I will work with this committee to deepen and expand what is an already excellent bilateral relationship. Panama shares our commitment to protecting democratic freedoms and human rights. In 2014, they defied polls and, with the help of robust international election monitoring, elected an underdog candidate as president who has made education and anti-corruption pillars of his vision for Panama’s future.
You will recall that Panama served as the host of the Summit of the Americas earlier this year, where landmark encounters between civil society organizations and the region’s leaders occurred. Given its stability and relative prosperity, Panama — like the United States — is a destination, rather than a source, of immigration. As such, Panama understands the evils of human trafficking and was recently upgraded on our annual Trafficking in Persons Report. If confirmed, Mr. Chairman, I will continue the good work already begun with our Panamanian partners to eradicate this form of modern slavery.
Panama’s geographic location makes it a bridge in both the physical and metaphysical sense of the word. With a robust economy, Panama has leveraged its bridging function to become a logistical center for the region.
The Panama Canal is a vital commercial corridor for the United States: two out of every three ships transiting the canal will stop at a US port. And the global traffic across the bridge that is Panama will be accentuated by the Panama Canal expansion, due to be completed in 2016. This expansion will bring benefits to Panama and to the United States, potentially doubling imports on the US East and Gulf Coasts by 2029.
Put simply: The expansion will lower shipping costs between the United States and Asia, expand our markets, and create jobs for American workers. Another good news story: Panama is among our best partners working on education and innovation. The literacy rate for 15-year-olds is high for the region, around 94 percent. “Bilingual Panama” is the Panamanian government’s ambitious plan to bring thousands of Panamanian English teachers to study at US universities over the next five years, and we support that effort fully.
Now, Mister Chairman, Panama is not without challenges.
Its bridging location renders it vulnerable to organized crime, narcotics trafficking and money laundering — and the corruption that is attendant to those illicit activities — are also threats to Panama’s security and prosperity.
If confirmed, I will work with Panama to address those ills as well as the challenges, and in doing so, I will support US priorities such as:
our significant retiree and expatriate population that lives in Panama,
I will look to support greater foreign direct investment opportunities for American businesses,
and, most of all, I will seek to work with our Panamanian partners to shore up the integrity of our interconnected financial and banking systems.
I thank you for this opportunity and welcome any questions.
Editor’s postscript: For all of you weird conspiracy theorists out there, this is your big chance! Feeley’s official US State Department biographies don’t list a date or place of birth, so you can be creative with your forged birth certificates. (But Kenya is already taken.) From 1983 to 1990 John D. Feeley served in the US Marine Corps, including as a helicopter pilot, and went into civilian life as a diplomat having been a captain. Since 1990 he has been a foreign service officer with postings in the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Colombia, Mexico and Foggy Bottom. He comes to Panama from his job as the State Department’s number two man for the Western Hemisphere. His wife, Cherie Feeley, is from Puerto Rico and is also a US foreign service officer. He is a graduate of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service and the US Navy War College. In 2011 he took over as chargé d’affaires of the American Embassy in Mexico City after Carlos Pascual left as ambassador in the wake of the Mexican government’s wrath over a cable revealed by WikiLeaks, which went into details of the dives the Mexican Army was taking in the “War on Drugs.”
~ ~ ~
The announcements below are interactive. Click on them for more information
