Correa: Popular, not populist

Via Machetera

In this interview with Argentina’s Mario Wainfeld, Ecuador’s president, Rafael Correa says, “…the policies of George Bush have been so clumsy in the region that they’ve favored us. The progressive governments have a lot to thank him for, he’s helped us a lot.”

Also in this interview, this breaking news: An Ecuadoran who survived the Colombian/U.S. bombing of the FARC camp in Ecuador on March 1 was killed with a blow from a rifle butt to his neck, not by gunfire or the bombs themselves.

Winning Elections is Not the Same as Winning Power

Mario Wainfeld - Página 12

Translation: Machetera

In an interview with Página 12, Ecuador’s president spoke of his opposition’s coalition, the role of the media and banking. As well, he spoke of the relationship between democracy and power factions, and his socialist project and its limits. Of the influence of the dollar and remittances. Of the relationship between countries in the region, with Colombia, with the United States. And much more, even a goal made in overtime.

Carondelet Palace, the government seat, is located in Plaza Grande, an archetypal colonial plaza. The Spanish interior patios are beautiful, overflowing with flowers. The room in which the interview takes place is, like its surroundings, manorial. The carved wood sets the tone. There are portraits of Simón Bolívar and Marshal Sucre. White roses in full aromatic bloom adorn the table where the voice recorders are set. The interview, a new experience for the writer, is filmed by the government. Once it is published in Página 12, it may be used for internal dissemination. Rafael Correa gives a friendly and concentrated interview. His seduction is in his energy, in the spoken word. He’s courteous, warmly welcoming, understated. His attention is fixed on the reporter (and the camera), his eyes more reflective of his feelings and emphasis than his hands.

How many languages do you speak, President?

I speak Spanish, more or less, still not perfectly. I mangle French a little. And a bit of Quechua, I understand Quechua.

You speak English well.

I speak.

You studied in Europe and the United States; you’ll be in contact with your former colleagues…

Yes.

If one of them were to see you (the Europeans, who are more conceptual, or the gringos who are more empirical) and ask you, “What kind of president are you? You’re changing the Constitution, arguing with the rice producers, telling them that they can’t export freely if they don’t guarantee supply and pricing for the local market, disputing the oil royalties, in conflict with the mainstream media,” how would you answer?

That I’m an idealist with his feet firmly on the ground. We aim high, we know where we want to go, but we’re also pragmatic. We know how to negotiate, we know how to take measures but without losing sight of north. This north: we’re socialists, we want a more equitable society, we want a developed country, with development measured by the amount of poverty.

You won the presidency, through the constituent assembly. Won by a wide margin. In September, there’ll be a referendum to approve or discard the constitution. Is this necessary for governing, and aren’t the elections and referendums to follow, too risky for your legitimacy?

The constitution of ‘98 was a neoliberal institution. Its economics were ridiculous. It gave the Central Bank autonomy. The constitution is the pillar of our citizens’ revolution. We are tremendously democratic. The people were asked if they wanted a constitutional assembly: the “Yes” was resounding; 82 percent, against the 11% who said “No.” They were the most democratic elections in Ecuadoran history. Equity in media access was guaranteed. Gender equity was guaranteed. Before, there were “alternatives” but the first three candidates were men, the last three women, although they never made it. Today there’s one for one, we have a constituent assembly with 45% women. Migrants may vote and be elected. Now we’re going to a referendum. The constitution of ‘98 was so happily accepted that it was never submitted to the people; ours will be.

You’ve been seen speaking at events in the language of the plains, arriving at the events on horseback, wearing ponchos. Is that populism or caudillismo (strongman behavior)?

I do these things because it’s what the people are looking for, it’s something one has to do. I’m not a caudillo nor a populist. Often in Latin America there’s a confusion between being popular and being a populist. So I’ve indoctrinated myself: to be a technician, not a populist which is to be (truly) sadomasochistic. The more cruel one was with the people, the more technical one was with the packages. But it’s not like that: one can be very technical, very responsible and popular at the same time, because people recognize the authenticity and the delivery. We are a very popular, not populist, government.

I’ve heard you say this week that if the oil companies are very angry, that’s good news…

…It’s said, by way of complaint, “the oil companies are upset.” Well of course, it’s very simple: because we’re doing things well. If they were content, it would mean that they were paying less than market price.

The weight of these powers is important enough to force a permanent conflict with them?

Maybe it’s my way of being that exacerbates the conflict: I’m irascible and direct. But we are realists: winning the elections here is not the same as winning power. The power factions go on, many of them intact. And the struggle is to change this power relationship. The constitution is going to prohibit financial institutions from owning other kinds of businesses outside the financial system. Today, of the seven national television channels, five are owned by the bank. You speak on a regular basis about the interest rate or lowering the costs of bank services…and you’ll see what a campaign you’ll have against that. That’s the big step, changing the correlation between forces. The force should belong to the citizens, the large masses, the population at large, not forever with elite groups. The power factions aren’t going to submissively relinquish their powers forever. Do you think that if I was a president functioning within the status quo, the press would treat me so badly? Would I be the head of my government if I functioned that way?

Could you describe the arc of your opposition, for the Argentine reader?

The party-ocracy, the traditional parties, have been destroyed. It’s believed that there’s no opposition but it’s a big mistake. To the contrary, we have a fierce opposition that comes from the communication media. As Ignacio Ramonet says, they are the guard dogs of the current economic system. In Latin America they’re the greatest defenders of the status quo…businesses that, under the pretext of freedom of expression, defend their private interests. Of course there are exceptions, honorable exceptions. We have economic powers, a bank that knows we’re taking away its privileges which are connected with the communications media. We have certain areas of production that are closely connected with political parties but call themselves business guilds. Big capital. Unfortunately, there are certain intransigent radical leftist groups who’ve always been allied with the right-wing and the status quo. With infantile, ridiculous positions: no payment of external debt, expulsion of the oil companies…everything and nothing. Let the last to leave turn out the lights. All of this creates an important arc of opposition. One of the problems with this country is that there’ve been many groups with veto capacity and none with the capacity of making a forward gesture. Now there is, with 70% of the votes from every corner of the country in the last elections. But these groups are still around, with power.

Could you mention a general goal and objective, in numbers, for the end of your mandate?

We’ve got various indexes in the National Development Plan. Resolving the energy problem…we’re on the right track, we’ve already started four mega-projects and we’re going for three more. Until now only one has been built; that’s the citizens’ revolution. We have clear goals in nutrition, education…Next year we hope to declare Ecuador a country free of illiteracy. Perhaps we’ll achieve that a bit ahead of time.

The Region, Colombia, the FARC, the United States

Regional integration; is it possible today, with the historical confrontational framework, the balkanization?

It’s very likely, very feasible. Unfortunately there’s the Colombia-Ecuador conflict, because of Colombia, but comparatively speaking, this is a period in Latin America with less conflict than ever, above all in South America. There’s more will to integrate. The challenge is for this integration to manifest itself in benefits for the people.

A flag is traditional and useful. But it’s been difficult to translate into cooperation and economic integration. Similar resonances are being heard from different political figures…

This has been an era of change. Progressive governments, empathy between presidents and political decisions, with a newly formed integrative purpose. Not what we saw in the ’90’s, where they wanted to turn us into a big market. We want to turn ourselves into a big nation.

What’s the present situation with Colombia, following the international aggression some months ago?

We were attacked, we have to fix things. We’ve taken a step, repairing relations at the business level. We have a very hot border and it’s good to have fluid communication. But in order to establish full relations, we’re going to demand that this attack be fully clarified. The bombs were North American and, according to the reports from our armed forces, could not have been launched from Colombian planes. Three of the wounded, according to forensic reports, were in all likelihood, killed after surviving the bombing. The Ecuadoran who died there was hit on the neck with the butt of a rifle, not struck by bullets or bombs.

What is the relationship of the Ecuadoran government and its president with the FARC?

During my lifetime, I’ve known someone from the FARC. That’s an outrage: that we should be attacked, then we are slandered and must justify ourselves.

Until what point can Ecuador control that border, in military terms?

Impossible. It’s a very porous border. The United States can’t even control the passage of immigrants into its territory and is building a wall. And there’s no jungle there. Here there are 400, 500 kilometers of Amazon jungle. The world has to understand that the problem is not Ecuador, the problem is Colombia, and every time that a FARC patrol infiltrates Ecuador, it means that it came from Colombia. We have 13 military posts on the border, when we ought to need (in peacetime) a quarter of that. Colombia has two. Colombia’s strategy is to resolve the problem by leaving its southern border unguarded, they want to engage us.

The hypothesis is that Ecuador was a kind of wall…

It’s an anvil strategy: they attack from north to south, leaving their southern border undefended so that we incur the cost. This is also an outrage. Do you know how many Colombians we have seeking refuge in our country? Four hundred thousand Colombians, seventeen thousand with refugee status, with many more applications. The problem is not with the Colombian people, the problem is with Uribe.

In Ecuador there’s a North American military base. You’ve said that next year, the treaty will not be renewed. I’m not a geopolitical expert, but I’m guessing that this might encourage the base to move to a neighboring country. Has your government analyzed this possibility?

It doesn’t concern us. In 2009 this infamous treaty that was signed by the pliant government of (ex-President Jamil) Mahuad in exchange for nothing, will expire. Sovereignty means not having foreign solders on homeland soil. Let them go to a neighboring country. It’s their problem.

One of the current advantages of the region, as you say, is its relative peace. I have the impression that there’s another; after September 11, 2001, the United States began to pay less attention to the region due to its greater interest in the Middle East. This lack of attention, maybe, served us well.

I share that. What’s more, the policies of George Bush have been so clumsy in the region that they’ve favored us. The progressive governments have a lot to thank him for, he’s helped us a lot.

Do you think a new government will be different? Could there be differences depending on whether the new president is McCain or Obama?

I imagine a democratic president could be different. But America has to count on her own strength. It’s up to a certain inconsequential point of view how much the United States can change. Which is not a lot.

Once a current Argentine official, who you know well, told me “Rafael Correa is a son of the middle class, a practicing Catholic, with a university education, who threw himself into politics. Here, in the ’70’s, he’d have been part of the Peronist Youth.” Have they ever told you that?

(Smiling) They’ve never said that to me. I have a lot of admiration for Perón and the Peronist movement…Now, yes, I’m further left than the Peronists.

Peronists can be found anywhere on the spectrum…

But there were and are some right-wing Peronists.

I can attest to that. I thank you and will leave you with the last word, should you wish to communicate something more to the Argentine reader.

Only that in the future, [soccer] games should run out in 45 minutes, not 49. (laughs)

But the overtime was within legal limits, President.

But not four minutes of it…(laughs)

Machetera is a member of Tlaxcala, the network of translators for linguistic diversity. This translation may be reprinted as long as the content remains unaltered, and the source, author, and translator are cited.

Ecuador's Bonds Fall After Patino Says Government May Default

By Lester Pimentel

Aug. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Ecuador's bonds tumbled after Reuters reported the head of a commission auditing the country's foreign debt said the government has sufficient evidence to default on ``illegitimate'' debt.

The yield on Ecuador's benchmark 10 percent bonds due in 2030 jumped 61 basis points, or 0.61 percentage point, to 11.65 percent at 4:36 p.m. in New York, according to JPMorgan Chase & Co. The bond's price plunged 4.5 cents on the dollar to 87 cents.

Minister of Politics Ricardo Patino said creditors would be forced to accept the government's decision to cease payment on debt ``even if some don't like it,'' Reuters reported Aug. 15. President Rafael Correa has roiled debt markets with threats to default since he took office last year. The debt commission he appointed will announce it recommendations next month, Reuters said.

``The market is focused on the mantra that the government has been echoing that they will not pay illegitimate debt,'' said Gianfranco Bertozzi, an economist at Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. in New York. ``The tone was not surprisingly aggressive with regard to future payment of debt.''

Telephone calls by Bloomberg News to Finance Ministry spokesman Victor Carvajal and Santiago Diaz, Patino's spokesman, weren't immediately returned.

The risk of owning Ecuador's bonds rose to the highest since July 29. Five-year credit-default swaps based on the country's debt climbed 10 basis points to 7.10 percentage points, according to CMA Datavision. That means it costs $710,000 to protect $10 million of the country's debt from default.

`Overdone'

Credit-default swaps, contracts conceived to protect bondholders against default, pay the buyer face value in exchange for the underlying securities or the cash equivalent.

``The government continues to take a very ambiguous stance on willingness to stay current on its external debt service obligations appealing recurrently to subjective and dogmatic language on this issue,'' Alberto Ramos, an economist with Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in New York, wrote in a report.

The extra yield investors demand to own Ecuador's bonds rather than Treasuries widened 10 basis points to 6.97 percentage points, according to JPMorgan's EMBI Plus index.

The move in Ecuador's bonds is ``overdone,'' Lehman's Bertozzi said. The current levels offer a ``buying opportunity'' for investors because the risk of default this year is low, he said.

Emerging-market bonds overall yielded 3.02 percentage points more than Treasuries, up 2 basis points from Aug. 15.

Plan Ecuador: Practical Ideas or Lofty Ideals?

Para ver la versión en español, dirígase a Plan Ecuador: ¿Ideas prácticas o sobreestimadas?

Currently, Ecuador is confronting a wave of violence previously unknown in the country. Organized crime, sicariatos (brutal contracted killings), drug trafficking, and kidnapping contribute to increased violence. The internal conflict in neighboring Colombia has been a determining factor in the region’s growing instability that has begun to infiltrate Ecuadorian society. In response to the alarming situation that both countries are now facing, the Ecuadorian government has generated Plan Ecuador to provide for increased security and reliable development along its northern frontier region.

On April 24, 2007, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa formally introduced Plan Ecuador, which is based on the idea of “oponer la paz a la guerra” (“replacing war with peace”). The plan consists of a series of key elements that focus on strengthening international and regional relationships, social development of the area, and defense of the population and Ecuador’s national territory.

Given Ecuador’s current surge in criminal activity, the creation of a focused program to address relevant national social and security issues was considered necessary to maintain the country’s security and sovereignty. However, Correa’s proposed plan has invited criticism for failing to apply specific initiatives capable of achieving the idealistic goals built into the proposal’s grand design. Furthermore, the lack of specificity in Ecuador’s plans is unlikely to impress potential providers of international aid, whose funding is considered essential to effectively implementing the project.

The Challenging Reality of the Ecuadorian Frontier
Ecuador’s northern frontier encompasses five provinces: Esmeraldas, Carchi, Imbabura, Sucumbíos, and Orellana. According to documentation found in the 2001 report of the National Statistics and Census Institute (INEC), approximately 1.1 million people live on the northern frontier, which is predominately indigenous and spans the Colombian-Ecuadorian border.

Although its abundance of natural resources represents a potential for significant development, the region remains intrinsically poor. Despite oil found in the area, the overwhelming economic activity is subsistence farming. The unemployment rate in the region has now reached 69 percent, about 20 percent higher than the national average (INEC 2006). Unfortunately, the population has limited opportunities for education, which is essential to industrial development and attracting investment. Only half of the region’s population finishes primary school, and just a small percentage of those continue on long enough to obtain a university or technical degree (INEC 2001). These statistics demonstrate the precarious state of Ecuador’s frontier. Given the influx of drugs and organized crime infiltrating the border from Colombia and a lack of stable jobs, employment possibilities, and education in the region, its inhabitants are more likely than not to turn to some form of delinquency in order to achieve an adequate income.

Compounding such matters is the area’s lack of basic services. Waste sanitation, drainage systems, and water piping need to be improved in order to combat the spread of communicable diseases affecting the region. Furthermore, public hospitals and the rest of the health infrastructure are often unable to deal with the growing demand for medical treatment. Since the majority of clinics are private, the population is generally unable to pay for essential health services.

A growing source of stress on this already tenuous situation is the increasing influx of Colombian refugees to the region. According to the Office on Refugees in the Ministry of Foreign Relations, 45,381 immigrants applied for refugee status in Ecuador between 2000 and 2007. In addition to registered refugees, there are close to 250,000 foreign residents in the country without formal legal status. These residents do not pay taxes, exploiting Ecuador’s public health care and education systems, which already face woefully inadequate funding. Moreover, as these residents are largely undocumented, it is difficult for the state to monitor the illegal activity found in the immediate region.

Plan Ecuador is viewed as a necessity due to the aforementioned problems. The risk posed by insurgent groups and drugs entering Ecuador has increased, bringing with them a significant impact on the local economy. These complex elements make it necessary to develop an effective plan to protect the border while engaging the rural population sufficiently to discourage the entrance of the Colombian conflict into the daily life of the area’s residents.

Strategies with Little Substance
Plan Ecuador is based on seven principle ideas that together aim for the development of the provinces bordering Colombia as a non-violent method of addressing the problem of organized crime and narco-trafficking in the region. However, the strategies put forward to execute each of the seven points are idealistic and non-comprehensive, and often fail to lay out specific plans that will guarantee the effectiveness of the program. It remains to be seen whether or not it will be dependable enough to serve as a basis of public policy and to warrant international aid.

1) Institutional strengthening for peace and development
Plans for community development and a new system of political management are laid out in the initial section. While this is a commendable idea, the scheme does not name the specific steps that the government will take in order to implement this strategy, leaving the process vulnerable to later corruption and failure. In addition, creating coordinated networks that connect society with a development model have been proposed. Finally, the government aims to increase confidence in the judiciary by strengthening social movements and improving the transparency of government function and spending. However, this idea lacks sufficient clarification of the social movements capable of increasing judicial confidence, not to mention the difficulty of strengthening a legally established system through these movements.

2) Reinvigorating the economy and increasing employment
Plan Ecuador describes the strategies that will be used to reinvigorate the economy by attempting to grant easier access to credit for small businesses at lower interest rates and to supply the necessary technology and resources to spur development. It is important to note that this process can provide the economic base for the creation of new businesses and, consequently, increase employment.

3) Improving the basic social infrastructure
This section lays out two strategies to “boost the design, preparation, and execution of programs and projects through sectional governments” with the aid of regional, national, and international cooperation. Rather than presenting a clear proposal for improving the border area’s social infrastructure, the Ecuadorian government has simply laid out a very broad description of the three steps necessary to reach this desired goal. The idea is followed by their intention to promote citizen participation and observation in the “design, preparation, and execution” process needed to assure the quality of basic services. Once again, however, the government has not described how it will promote citizen participation, much less how it would potentially function in the light of Ecuador’s current high risk economic system.

4) Sustainable management of natural resources
Strategies in this segment aim to offer incentives for sustainable development and the maintenance of the various ecosystems found in Ecuador’s northern region. To achieve this, the government also hopes to protect certain ecological zones and national parks, as well as financially support technical assistance and training programs for sustainable development. These goals are all possible; however, they will be difficult to achieve. Due to high levels of poverty and unemployment in the region, the people are more concerned with day-to-day survival than with protecting the environment. Changing this attitude will require implementing an aggressive educational campaign, which will be challenging due to chronic low attendance rates in schools. Furthermore, the government has failed to specify how it will provide aid, be it in subsidies for cleaner technology or by sending technical experts to the area to aid in the transition to sustainable development.

5) Administration of justice and control of illicit activities and products
Correa’s administration hopes to strengthen preexisting regulations meant to prevent crime and to reduce delinquency will be particularly focused on narco-trafficking, arms possession, and money laundering. These measures also modernize the institutions that investigate and process illegal activity and provide them with the required financial resources to accomplish the task. Plan Ecuador only outlines the form in which the government hopes to strengthen the financial resources for these new programs, and leaves out the more detailed plans that will effectively influence and contribute to the reduction of illegal activity.

In relation to the energy sector, the government has mandated the application of the Plan de Soberanía Energética (Sovereign Energy Plan), which works toward reducing the smuggling of oil by-products, and the Seguridad Integral del Sistema Hidrocarburífero

6) Human rights, humanitarian assistance, and sheltering refugees
The government hopes to expand the recognition of human rights across the region, as well as the technology and engineering skills necessary to ensure their implementation and enforcement. Instruction on basic human rights observance and protection also will become an integral part of military training procedures, which should lead to a greater understanding on the part of the armed forces regarding the conflicts they are likely to confront. Moreover, the government hopes to promote transparency and justice with respect to any violations of civil rights taking place on the frontier. This point shows the government’s general idealism, but also, in failing to explain how it will achieve transparency and justice, is likely to breed skepticism within the population concerning government intent.

7) Protection of national sovereignty and the integrity of the state
Quito aims to strengthen the presence of the military on the northern border in order to protect the region’s cultural and governmental institutions, which would allow them to function more effectively, while at the same time permit increased development to take place. The military will also contribute to preserving the environment. Meanwhile, local authorities are planning to update the civil registry, which will allow a more complete analysis of the population in the area and its needs. The government continues to stress that programs in San Lorenzo, El Dorado de Cascales, Tulcán, Sucumbíos, Lago Agrio, and Putumayo will be prioritized. With the exception of Sucumbíos, none of these areas are mentioned previously in the document. For the first time, the plan provides details as to where specifically it will be implementing these programs; however, it does so without ever citing statistics or providing concrete evidence as to why these areas are prioritized over other underdeveloped areas.

Ecuador hopes to resolve the problem of overlapping zones of political power in state institutions, clearly defining the legal limits of each governmental body. This will likely cut down on superfluous bureaucracy, allowing the government to function more efficiently and to increase the government’s transparency. Separately, the Ecuadorian government will work toward improving the nation’s recently strained relationship with Colombia and increasing the level of trust between the two countries. (Integrated Security of the Hydrocarbon System), which protects oil industry operations.

High Expectations
Plan Ecuador’s goals are germane to the needs of the Ecuadorian population. The proposal targets security and humanitarian ideas, evidenced by the president’s efforts to take action against the proliferation of violence in the country’s northern frontier. However, when working for a society that has suffered through innumerable difficulties, it becomes crucial not to rely on vague formulations, but to present an effective and meticulously thought-out plan to solve the problems. With this in mind, the principal weakness of Plan Ecuador is that it fails to present a proposal practical enough to reach the planned objectives.

Over a ten-year time span, Plan Ecuador hopes to increase production and employment though small-scale industrialization. Although necessary for the region, this goal represents a potential contradiction to another stated goal of the plan – conservation of the various ecosystems on the frontier. Extending agriculture, oil drilling, and industrialization will negatively affect under-protected and fragile ecosystems, unless approached in the most environmentally-conscious manner. While educating the people on green technology will aid in preservation, training and providing the appropriate technical tools will undoubtedly be more expensive than Ecuadorian officials appear to be prepared to spend.

Even so, the quest to improve the quality of basic services such as water piping, sewage systems, and solid waste processing are included in the plan.

Within the next four years (coinciding with the presidential term of the current administration) Ecuador will create and impose a Strategic Operative Plan, which will allow the progress and results of Plan Ecuador to be measured. The plan will be carried out with the participation of the principle leaders from each province, under the oversight of public opinion.

Financing Plan Ecuador
Plan Ecuador will be financed through the country’s various ministerial institutions, sectional governments, community resources, and international aid. According to declarations made on July 24, 2008 in Washington D.C. by the Minister Coordinator of Internal and External Security, Gustavo Larrea, the country can afford to spend close to US$140 million on Plan Ecuador. This year, Ecuador has received US$43 million in designated international aid.

According to the Ministry of Foreign Relations, the country hopes to receive a total of $129,603,928 in international aid. The amount is apparently the product of a minute analysis of the projects that the government hopes to put into effect; however, there is not a single mention of a detailed action in the document that would lead to the justification of this sum. Without a detailed strategy laid out for scrutiny, it is impossible to know if Ecuador’s requested funding is appropriate for the desired earmarked reforms, or no better than a pipe dream.

Following in the Footsteps of Plan Colombia?
On June 8, 1998, then-Colombian President Andres Pastrana proposed Plan Colombia in an attempt to launch “A Peaceful Policy for Change,” addressing the hugely complex drug cultivation and pattern of violence instigated by Las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (The Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces, FARC) and the Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia (United Colombian Self-defense Forces, AUC) paramilitary vigilantes.

The initial Plan Colombia focused on a peaceful strategy to develop the southern region of the country through economic, social, and environmental initiatives. The proposal was clearly spelled out by President Pastrana, who called for “an agricultural frontier that will be respected… offering different alternatives to drug cultivation to the campesinos (rural workers)… [and] increasing investment in the social and agricultural sectors and in regional infrastructure.” The initial proposal also promoted taking a hard-line approach to human rights violations.

Despite the gradual militarization of Plan Colombia by the end of the Clinton administration, it is impossible to ignore the similarities between the two plans, particularly at inception. Although Colombia had a much larger emphasis on coca eradication (due to the lack of symmetry in cultivation magnitudes between the two countries) both plans aimed to strengthen and modernize their security forces in order to fight drug trafficking.

Ecuador, like Colombia, will aspire to promote industrialization of the region in order to generate employment. Strengthening the judicial system and other governmental institutions to eliminate corruption and reduce impunity, especially in regard to punishing human rights abuses, is central to both plans. Finally, both plans seek international financial help and participation.

Proposals
Below is a series of proposals that might enhance the concept of Plan Ecuador:

• Increase productivity in the region by studying the potential output of the area’s present enterprises in order to design more efficient pathways to economic development and increased employment.

• Carry out specific studies to identify markets that work well in the region and provide residents the greatest amount of benefits, given the capacity of the population and the available natural resources.

• Explore the possibility of aid from the Inter-American Development Bank, the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, United Nations Environmental Program, and the Food and Agriculture Organization, to learn which new technologies can best help integrate the population with the environment.

• Improve the country’s penal system so that drug traffickers cannot influence or control the system after capture and detention, and work to establish a rehabilitation program to reintegrate such individuals into society upon their release.

• Provide adequate protection for witnesses and judges in cases pertaining to human rights violations to guarantee their safety against threats and provide justice through a fair trial.

• Strengthen a specialized anti-kidnapping police force.

• Promote respect for human rights through the mass media and, if possible, train journalists in basic international human rights law.

• Follow the recommendations of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ June 1998 Plan Nacional de Derechos Humanos del Ecuador (National Human Rights Plan for Ecuador), which includes proposals to increase protection of civil and political rights, foreign residents, minorities, women, and the media.

While Plan Ecuador presents numerous admirable goals, the proposal itself lacks the strong detailed structure necessary to attract international aid. Compounding the issues are amiable relations between the Ecuadorian government and such Washington adversaries as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez and Bolivia’s Evo Morales. President Correa will have to somewhat distance himself from their more conceptualized socialist policies in order to gain substantial support from the White House. With Plan Ecuador, the Correa administration has the opportunity to prove to the people, as well as Latin America’s other governments, that peaceful methods of dealing with the conflict along Ecuador’s northern frontier can be successfully implemented.

This analysis was prepared by COHA Research Associates Lydia Pardini and Raylsiyaly Rivero
August 18th, 2008
Word Count: 2900

Chevron Paying Heavy Price For Texaco's Mistakes in Ecuador, Says Amazon Defense Coalition

Talk of Settlement Reflects Dwindling Legal Options After Court Expert Finds Damages in Billions

QUITO, Ecuador, Aug 18, 2008 (via Amazon Watch) -- Chevron's surprise announcement on Friday that it would be open to talks to resolve a possible $16.3 billion liability for environmental damage in Ecuador reflects the company's dwindling legal options in a long-running lawsuit over who pays for the clean-up of what even Chevron now acknowledges is a huge disaster, the Amazon Defense Coalition said today.
It also reflects how boxed in Chevron has become by a series of questionable legal and operational decisions made years ago by Texaco, a company Chevron bought in 2001 eight years after the Ecuador case had been filed in U.S. federal court. Even though it had never operated in Ecuador, Chevron has assumed defense of the case and will bear any liability.

Chevron voluntarily subjected itself to jurisdiction in Ecuador in 2002 as a condition of the case being transferred out of the U.S. court and is likely bound by any ruling there. Chevron's statement on Friday - that it would be open to "a fair and complete resolution" to the Ecuador lawsuit if Ecuador's government also meets certain conditions - was a marked departure from previous statements made by company management that rejected all possibility of an out-of-court settlement. It came after Ecuador's President, Rafael Correa, said in a speech that the government would be willing to mediate talks between the Amazon plaintiffs and Chevron.

Correa said Chevron had approached his government about trying to resolve the case, which went to trial in 2003 in the town of Lago Agrio in Ecuador's Amazon region.

Pablo Fajardo, the Ecuadorian lawyer for the plaintiffs, said he and other representatives of the 30,000 Amazon plaintiffs welcomed Chevron's statement but said they were fully focused on the actual trial, which is expected to result in a judgment in 2009. A court-appointed Special Master recently fixed damages at between $7.2 billion and $16.3 billion.

Although Chevron claims it is the victim of an unfair judicial process - a charge disputed by the plaintiffs, who blame the company for years of delays and political interference in the trial -- there is much more to Chevron's problems in the Ecuador case than the company has let on publicly. For example:

-- The evidence in the trial increasingly points to Chevron's guilt. The court's special master reviewed more than 70,000 chemical sampling results and concluded that three different entities -- Chevron, the plaintiffs, and his own court-appointed technical team - had separately verified extensive levels of toxic contamination in soils and waters at 100% of Texaco's former well sites in Ecuador inspected by the court. Some of the sites operated exclusively by Texaco contained toxins thousands of times higher than the maximum amounts permitted by law. Chevron, in other words, has helped to prove the case against itself.

-- Texaco's original decision in the 1960s to dump highly toxic "produced water" into Amazon waterways instead of re-injecting it into underground wells is now haunting Chevron. All told, Texaco dumped 18.5 billion gallons in just over two decades - in the process, killing off much aquatic life and poisoning groundwater that the population relies on for drinking. The practice was not considered customary in the industry at the time and it had never been done in the Amazon rainforest, considered a highly delicate ecosystem.

-- Texaco's decision in 1995 to try to end-run the pending lawsuit brought by Amazon communities in U.S. courts and pay $40 million to Ecuador's government for a so-called clean-up and release has backfired almost completely. Not only did the clean-up fail to address most contaminated sites, but trial results demonstrate clearly the sites that were "remediated" still have extensive levels of contamination. Texaco was given a "release" before any work was done. Two of Chevron's representatives are being investigated for fraud and corruption relating to the clean-up.

-- The release Texaco received for the so-called clean-up - and on which Chevron hinges its defense -- has caused various problems for Chevron in various courts. The release specifically carved out the claims of private citizens who were not a party to the agreement. Chevron's claim to the contrary has never been accepted by any court, and its legal prospects on this important point seem dim.


About the Amazon Defense Coalition
The Amazon Defense Coalition represents dozens of rainforest communities and five indigenous groups that inhabit Ecuador's Northern Amazon region. The mission of the Coalition is to protect the environment and secure social justice through grass roots organizing, political advocacy, and litigation.

Support for New Constitution at 48% in Ecuador

(Angus Reid Global Monitor) 17 August 2008 - Almost half of urban voters in Ecuador are willing to ratify a new constitution, according to a poll by Informe Confidencial. 48 per cent of respondents would vote "Yes" in next month’s referendum.

In addition, 31 per cent of respondents would vote against the proposed body of law, 16 per cent would cast a blank ballot, and six per cent would annul their vote.

Rafael Correa, a former finance minister, ran for president as an independent leftist under the Alliance Country (AP) banner. In November 2006, Correa defeated Álvaro Noboa of the conservative Institutional Renewal Party of National Action (PRIAN) in a run-off with 56.69 per cent of the vote. He officially took over as Ecuador’s head of state in January 2007, and vowed to change the country’s Constitution. Correa’s party nominated no candidates to the National Congress.

In April 2007, Ecuadorian citizens participated in a referendum to enact a Constituent Assembly. The president’s proposal was backed by 82 per cent of all voters. In September, Correa’s supporters—running under the Movement Country (MP) banner—secured 80 seats in the 130-member Constituent Assembly, enough to enact changes without seeking compromises with political opponents.

In November, Ecuador’s Constituent Assembly officially began its work, and suspended the National Congress. The proposed Constitution must be ratified in a nationwide referendum in 2008.

On Jul. 18, a full constitutional draft was approved by the pro-government majority in the Constituent Assembly. Opposition members had stopped working on the document a week earlier and have said they will officially oppose it even if they cannot influence the final decision. The text includes a clause allowing for one consecutive presidential re-election. Two articles that would have legalized same-sex unions and given the indigenous Quechua tongue the status of official language were pulled out at the last minute.

The Electoral Court of Ecuador has scheduled the referendum for Sept. 28. The proposed constitution can only be ratified if the "Yes" side garners the support of more than 50 per cent of all participating voters.

Earlier this month, the "Yes" and "No" sides launched their respective campaigns. Patricio Donoso, head of Ecuador’s Chamber of Commerce, announced that he will be calling for a "No" vote. Donoso stated that the proposed body of law is "centralist, establishes that the State will have exclusive control over everything, and pushes us towards totalitarianism."

Polling Data

How would you vote in the referendum to ratify the new constitution?

Yes	48%
No	31%
Blank vote	16%
Null vote	6%

Source: Informe Confidencial
Methodology: Face-to-face interviews with 3,800 Ecuadorian adults in urban areas, conducted on Aug. 2 and Aug. 3, 2008. Margin of error is 3.2 per cent.

New Mining Law to be approved after referendum

WASHINGTON
Petroleumworld.com, Aug 18, 2008

Ecuador's new mining law will be approved in the next few weeks, right after the September 28th constitutional referendum, which will also give the green light to create the nation's Assembly. The legislative body will uphold the mining code currently being reviewed by President Rafael Correa, said MMP minister Galo Chiriboga in a meeting with Canada's International Trade Minister Michael Fortier yesterday, in Quito. Read Presidential Press Release

The MMP's 110-page draft is available on the ministry's website. So far it reveals that the Ecuadorian government favors open pit mining, creates a new royalty of 5 percent maximum, and leaves open a door to apply the feared 70 percent windfall tax – even though the WFT is not specifically mentioned in the draft. Read draft excerpts translated by EMN below
Read the draft Mining Law Draft [Spanish only]

One of the positive things proposed in the mining law is a provision to allow—and even to facilitate—open pit mining. Former MMP minister Alberto Acosta committed to halting the technique and later, as speaker of the Constituent Assembly convened to rewrite the constitution, he wanted to include such a restriction in the new constitution. This is one of the disagreements that Acosta had with Correa that may have forced his resignation as speaker. Read Reuters article

Royalties will be taxed over processed minerals and will not exceed five percent. Three percent royalties will be applied for processed minerals valued under USD 50 million per year, four percent for those valued at between USD 50 and 100 million, and five percent for minerals valued over USD 100 million. Also, the law details how the royalty revenue will be distributed. Most will be spent in the communities where the development takes place, facilitating the mining project's acceptance among locals and, indirectly, cultivating a pro-administration constituency.

The idea that the government will head up social responsibility projects was also discussed by MMP Undersecretary of Mines Jose Serrano during his recent speech to the LatAm Mining Congress in Miami. It is becoming clearer that the government wants mining firms to focus only on developing projects with the best environmental standards, and paying taxes. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) projects are to be the domain of the government. International mining firms are accustomed to including CSR projects, but their exclusion from such didn't alarm company executives who attended the Congress.

“We are the only face the locals see in these remote communities. For them, we are their government,” said one executive in an informal exchange. “Sure, the corporate responsibility projects help us to get credit lines, but it's not something we should worry about,” he added.

One red flag that EMN identified in the mining law draft is the General Provision, which changes the terms "mining title" to "exploration contract.” In the Reformed Tax Law, approved last December 2007, Art. 166 provides for “a tax revenue over the extraordinary income earned by companies that have signed contracts with the state to the exploration and exploitation of non-renewable resources.” The switching of the terms, then, leaves open the door for the application of the WFT. Read EMN article on WFT Read Equities Analyst Mark Turner Article “Why the WFT Would be Bad for Ecuador and its Industry”

Other articles in the law reveal the government's position to prevent land speculation by domestic owners buying up land in the hopes that mining firms will seek to explore there, and an article to prevent the arbitrary revocation of concessions, now contracts. Furthermore, the number of years for exploring is reduced from 30 renewable years to 20 non-renewable years, a minimum investment per hectare is required, and permissions will be granted through best bid, not first come first serve as it was before. These provisions seem to rid the marketplace of speculators rather than affect international mining companies. Read Inca Kola News about the mining law

# # #
Extracts from the Mining Law – under President Correa's review

General Provision:

Throughout the Organic Mining Law text, change the words "mining title" to "exploration contract”, and "mining exploration/exploitation", "mining concessionary" for "contractor" and "concession" by area.

ANNEX

ROYALTY

Royalty definition: State payment for mineral resources exploitation. It is paid based on the value of the processed mineral.

Royalty Payment ranges:

From USD 1 to USD 50 million per year pay 3%
Between USD 50 to USD100 million pays 4%
Over USD 100 million pays 5%.
Small producers and artisan miners do not pay.

What the royalty will finance:

• 40% of this tax is intended for Parish Councils development plans
• 25% for the Provincial Council
• 25% for the Municipality
• 10% for public universities

Art. 6: The concessions will no longer be awarded by first come first serve, but by auction.

Art. 8: Establishes a minimum investment for exploration concessions of USD100 per hectare within the first two years.

Art. 16: The state runs mining operations through the National Mining Company, which may set up mixed companies, associations, join ventures, strategic alliances, and in general, all contracts permitted by national laws in order to meet its social goals.

Art… (p. 24): Reduction of the 30-year exploration concession period, automatically renewable, for a maximum of non-renewable 20 years. Each mining concession may not exceed 5,000 contiguous mining hectares, and will have a term of non-renewable 20 years, and 20 years renewable for exploitation concessions.

Art… (p. 25): Administrative fees will increase from USD 100 [one-time] to USD 100 per concession per hectare requested.

Art… (p. 30): If the project is an open pit mine, the company must request in writing state intervention (through the MMP) to assist in a fair negotiation of purchasing land, but only if the contractor has not been successful in purchasing it to be used for the operation.

Art. 48: The state mining company, through alliances, JVs, partnerships, etc. will manage the construction of one or two plants benefit, smelting and refining for mineral processing of artisan mining and small scale with a capacity of no more a 5000 MT / day.

Story by Silvia Santacruz from Ecuador Mining News
Ecuador Mining News 15 08 08

Copyright© 2008 respective author or news agency. All rights reserved.
We welcome the use of Petroleumworld™ stories by anyone provided it mentions Petroleumworld.com as the source. Other stories you have to get authorization by its authors.

Ecuador Starts Campaign for Referendum

Quito, Aug 14 (Prensa Latina) At least 128 Ecuadorian organizations and political parties began on Thursday an electoral campaign for a referendum about a new constitution, to be held on September 28.

The TSE (Supreme Electoral Court), said that from Thursday until September 26, the political participants registered to run campaigns will be able to hire publicity in favor or against the referendum, while the electoral authority will have to publish the new Constitution.

The campaign will conclude on September 26, 48 hours ahead of the referendum, according to the Electoral Law, currently in force.

Around 60 organizations have said so far that they would support openly the Yes option in the referendum, according to sources of the TSE secretary's office.

The call on Wednesday through several media reminded the citizenry that going to the polls would be compulsory, to answer Yes or No to the question: Do you approve the text of the Republic's new Constitution, elaborated by the Constituent Assembly?

The TSE will distribute around a million copies of the new constitutional text, together with the newspapers of greatest circulation in the country and the streets.

The new Constitution has 444 articles and over 20 temporary regulations.

Ecuadoran president pushing young people to resist guidance from the Church

Quito, Aug 14, 2008 (CNA).- President Rafael Correa of Ecuador has lashed out at the Church again this week, encouraging young people to refuse to be taught by those who want to leave the country “in darkness”—a reference to the campaign by the bishops to vote responsibility during the upcoming referendum on the new constitution.

During the inauguration of a government program for young people, Correa said his project “is the last chance for peaceful change in Ecuador, for democratic and constitutional change, and yet there are some who want to keep us in the past.”

Although some of the president’s closest collaborators said this week the bishops should “tone down” their comments, Correa attacked the bishops, who said they would begin offering guidance to parishes to instruct the faithful about aspects of the new constitution that are incompatible with the faith.

“Let them catechize 6 or 7 year-olds, because we should reflect on this and not have to put up with sermons or instructions from anybody,” Correa said. “We need to say ‘yes’ to the future, without being afraid and without the old fear of the clergy or the vengeance of the devil,” he added.

He called on young people to take note of “who is lying and who is telling the truth, who wants to move the country forward and who wants to leave it in the darkness in which it has always existed. Think about it and don’t let them teach you,” he told them.

“Those arrogant people who want to give us orders, instructions, catechesis, have the answer they deserve,” Correa said, referring to recent radio program in which he said he was not going to discuss the issue anymore.

At least 10,000 gallons of crude residues spill in Ecuador

QUITO, Aug. 13 (Xinhua) -- At least 10,000 gallons (37,854 liters) of petroleum residues were spilled into a river in Ecuadoralong the border with Colombia, local media reported Wednesday

The accident occurred when a tanker traveling from the industrial region of Shushufindi to the Ecuadoran capital Quito tipped over in the Aguarico river, local TV Ecuavisa reported.

The crude spilled over an area of 800 square meters contaminating both the water and the tideland along the river. The possible consequences for the communities living in the area were not mentioned.

The Environment Protection Management of Petroproduction, a subsidiary of the national oil company Petroecuador, activated an emergency plan and sent two cleaning groups to set restraint barriers and absorbent materials to prevent the crude from further expanding and to minimize the environmental impact.

Last June, a petroleum leakage affected an area of 4,000 square meters in the Amazonia river when a oil pipe broke some 190 km east of Quito, Petroecuador said.

Another oil spill occurred last year in the province of Sucumbios, contaminating the Cuyabeno Fauna Reserve lagoons which boasts 14 unique ecosystems in the country, some of them even rare in the world.

In August 2007 in the Cuyabeno river, Petroecuador lost in a oil leakage some 600 barrels, about 0.3 percent of their daily production. The economic loss was estimated at 35,000 U.S. dollars while the cost of environmental recovery amounted to 910,000 dollars.

Chevron Rebukes Own Washington Lobbyist for Embarrassing Comments on Ecuador Legal Case

Suggested U.S. Government Shouldn't Allow "Little Countries" to "Screw Around" with Big Companies

From AmazonWatch

Contact: Karen Hinton

703-798-3109

karen@hintoncommunications.com

Washington, DC–With pressure mounting from a major environmental lawsuit in Ecuador, Chevron has publicly rebuked one of its Washington lobbyists who had suggested "little countries" like Ecuador shouldn't be allowed by the U.S. government to "screw around" with large companies by letting lawsuits proceed against them in foreign courts.

The anonymous lobbyist was quoted in a Newsweek article about Chevron's high-pressure campaign in Congress to cut Ecuador's trade preferences for allowing the lawsuit to proceed in Ecuador's courts. A court-appointed Special Master in Ecuador recently submitted a 4,000-page study that found that Chevron faces a liability of up to $16.3 billion for dumping 18.5 billion gallons of toxic waste into Amazon waterways, causing an outbreak of cancers and the decimation of five indigenous groups.

Scientific experts have called the area of the rainforest where Texaco (now Chevron) operated from 1964 to 1990 the "Amazon Chernobyl". Ironically, much of the evidence of contamination relied on by the Special Master – which includes tens of thousands of sampling results verified by independent laboratories -- was provided by Chevron's technical team from sites that had been operated exclusively by the company.

For nine years Chevron's lawyers had pressed a U.S. federal judge in New York, where the case was originally filed, to send the matter to Ecuador over the objections of the plaintiffs. When the U.S. judge granted Chevron's motion in 2002, the company voluntarily submitted itself to jurisdiction in Ecuador and is likely bound by any ruling.

According to the Newsweek article – titled "A $16 Billion Problem" and written by Michael Isikoff – once the damages assessment became known Chevron hired a team of A-list Washington lobbyists to "squeeze" Ecuador by convincing Congress to cut free trade preferences for the four Andean nations (Bolivia, Peru, Ecuador, and Colombia). The trade preferences expire on December 31 unless Congress votes to extend them.

Newsweek reported that Chevron's lobbying team on the issue includes Wayne Berman, national finance director of the McCain campaign, former Senators Trent Lott and John Breaux, and Mac McLarty, who served as Chief of Staff in the Clinton White House.

In a letter to Newsweek signed by Dave Samson, Chevron's General Manager for Public Affairs, the company said "comments attributed to an unnamed lobbyist working for Chevron do not reflect our company's view regarding the Ecuador case. They were not approved by the company and will not be tolerated."

The comment by Chevron's lobbyist was blasted by an indigenous leader in Ecuador, who accused the company of trying to undermine the rule of law.

"We believe that the arrogance reflected in the anonymous comment accurately reflects a pervasive attitude within Chevron's culture that led to the destruction of our precious rainforest," said Humberto Piaguaje, a leader of the Secoya indigenous group.

The comment also "confirms how Chevron cares little for the rule of law in any country where it might be held accountable, be it Ecuador or the U.S.," he added. "No court that actually hears the evidence appears to be good enough for Chevron."

Leaders of the 80 communities and five indigenous groups behind the lawsuit plan to travel to Washington, DC in September to meet with members of Congress and the U.S. Trade Representative. The leaders have accused Berman of misleading Congress by claiming a release Chevron received in 1995 from Ecuador's government covers private claims of the sort being used in the current lawsuit, when in fact it does not.

No court in either the U.S. or Ecuador ever has accepted Chevron's expansive interpretation of the release.

Indigenous leaders also charge that Chevron's so-called remediation (for which the limited release was given before any work was actually done) covered less than 1% of the actual damage and in any event simply amounted to dumping dirt over open waste pits. Chevron's remedial work has been the subject of a fraud investigation in Ecuador.

"Not a single court in the world ever has agreed with Chevron's interpretation of this release, but that has not stopped Chevron's lobbying team from playing judge and jury to the U.S. Congress," said Pablo Fajardo, the Ecuadorian lawyer for the plaintiffs.

Fragile Alliances, the “Citizen’s Revolution,” and the Future of Ecuador

by Clifton Ross / August 13th, 2008

From Dissident Voice

Armando, from Mingasocial, a community-based “horizontalist” media organization in Quito, has taken it upon himself to guide me through the complexities of Ecuador. This includes, by necessity, the strange world of cuisine, or better put, home cooking, in the local Parque del Relleno, otherwise known as “Parque de las comidas,” or “Food Park.” We pass by the stands of food cooking in the open air as evening falls and the last bright burst of sunlight shines brilliantly in the background. Someone is passing out pieces of food with pinchers and I take it before I see what it is. I know, from the shape, that it’s some sort of tripe and only when I try to chew it and some strange “sauce” squeezes out into my mouth, does Armando tell me the name for it. It’s known colloquially in English as “goat guts” but the Spanish name is euphemistic and translates as “chicle” or “chewing gum.” In fact, it’s so chewy that I give up and eventually swallow it whole, and then politely pass on a full order of it. We settle instead on “habas” (some sort of fava bean) with “chocho” (some sort of corn) and “queso” (some sort of cheese).

As we eat, Armando continues to guide me through Ecuador as he talks about the reforms taking place under President Rafael Correa with his “Citizen’s Revolution.” He explains this “revolution” (a word we would both put in quotes) by contrasting it, as I will discover is his habit, with the indigenous cosmovision. Armando, like a growing number of Ecuadorans, has come to believe that the only way “forward” is into the “past.” “You see, in the Andean cosmovision, the past is in front of us and the future is behind us.” It’s a conception I still can’t quite grasp intellectually, but I can deeply appreciate Armando’s integration of that cosmovision with a libertarian left ideology. While left politics is generally expressed in terms of ideology, the Andean cosmovision is generally offered in the form of fables and stories, as in Armando’s response to my question about democracy in Ecuador.

Armando tells me that there was a town near Otavalos, a couple of hours east of Quito, where, many years ago, the people decided to build a road. Everyone in the town agreed that the road was to go from here to there,” he says, indicating an imaginary line through the park with his free hand. “Everyone, that is, but an old man. They all went to him hear why he disagreed and he told them that in one direction was a well (ojo de agua) and if they made a road over it, there would be no water for future generations.” Armando finished by offering the moral of the fable. “So the indigenous way is not majority rule, because that isn’t democracy. Democracy is consensus.”

Building consensus in a country like Ecuador might seem a utopian endeavor, given the struggle between an oligarchy determined to maintain control of the country, and indigenous and social movements equally determined to wrest the country from its clutches, a phenomenon currently reflected in the fight over the new Constitution. Between these two forces stands Correa and his supporters, largely drawn from the educated middle class and the former “Forajidos” who overthrew Lucio Gutierrez in 2005. For now, the more radical left has joined forces with the middle class, small business and other center-left reformist sectors that make up the core of Alianza País and that large block is likely to win the support of the majority in voting through the new Constitution this September.

Luis Angel Saavedra, president of INREDH (Fundación Regional de Asesoría en Derechos Humanos), a human rights organization in Quito, offers Armando and me a brief analysis of the social conflicts that have rocked Ecuador in recent years. “For the past thirty years in Ecuador, we’ve seen the consolidation of political parties linked to powerful economic interests,” Luis explained one day in his office. “Each powerful economic group has had two modes of expression: A political party and the media. And so the social movements have had alternatives because the political parties and the media were completely controlled by those powerful economic interests. The only means of expression for social movements was the power of revocation by means of demonstrations, demonstrations aimed at the overthrow of presidents.” Luis went on to explain that the presidents during this period were elected for their leftist discourse, but were overthrown for not following through on it.

Ecuadorans suffer neither fools nor liars. In this Andean culture, the three rules of conduct as preached and practiced by the Incans to the present, are still taken as seriously as, and arguably more so than, the Ten Commandments in Alabama: Don’t lie, don’t steal and don’t be lazy. So far Rafael Correa and the Constituent Assembly he convoked last year to write a new constitution, have passed the first tests of conduct. But greater tests of a more pragmatic nature lie before those proposing a new course for the nation which Correa calls the “Citizen’s Revolution.”

The Ecuadoran constitution, born into public life less than a month ago, already has a group of sworn enemies determined to defeat it when it goes up for a nationwide vote on September 28th of this year. The class lines in this struggle couldn’t be more clear: the Constitution, drawn up by the Constituent Assembly, voted into power last year, has spent its life drafting this document which is broadly supported by social movements and popular opinion. However, the Guayaquil, Quito and other oligarchies, along with the Catholic Bishops and Evangelical Christians, are determined to defeat the new Constitution. This divide between the oligarchy, backed by reactionary Christians, on one hand, and the social movements, the majority of the country’s poor, indigenous, campesino and Afro-descendents, on the other hand, is symbolic of a long struggle that is reaching a new stage in the refounding of the nation through the new Constitution.

Evidently the good bishops of the Church feel that a constitutional protection of human life “from conception” isn’t strong enough to defend a fetus from the wiles of already-born humanity. The bishops, the right wing media (owned by the sectors of the oligarchy) and the evangelicals claim that the Constitution, in the words of the good minister Francisco Loor, is “pro-abortion, pro-homosexual and has taken the name of God in vain so as to get more votes.” But the “No” forces are few even while vocal and their arguments, on a par with the right wing in the U.S., are not likely to convince many.

Still, the fight over the constitution has gotten dirty and, while most of the lies and manipulation have predictably come from an oligarchy terrified of losing control of the country, President Rafael Correa has thrown his share of mud — not only at the “pelucones” (“wig-wearers,” a term referring to colonial oligarchs who wore wigs) but also at his presumptive allies on the left. In his weekly show, Dialogue with the President, a show similar to Hugo Chavez’s Hello President, in which the two national leaders address their respective publics, Chavez on Sunday, and Correa on Saturday, Correa continued his minor tirade, begun the day before in his talk before the National Assembly as he received the Constitution from their hands.

What is little understood outside of Ecuador, is that, despite Correa’s rhetoric of the “Socialism of the 21st Century” for Ecuador, the president seems to be committed to a capitalist dependency model of development for the country. As Daniel Denvir puts it, only outside Ecuador is Correa viewed as a “leftist,” while inside Ecuador itself “conflicts between Correa and the social movement Left—the indigenous movement, environmentalists and unions, among others—have become increasingly heated” (I recommend the full article).

Speaking from Chongón, in the province of Guaya, the day after accepting the new Constitution from the Assembly, Correa again castigated the “infantile leftists” and “infantile environmentalists” and “infantile indigenous” without being more specific about what made them “infantile” and why they caused him so much ire. After all, he’d gotten what he wanted: his people had “edited” the entire Constitution prior to the final vote by the Constituent Assembly, some argued so as to make it more amenable to his “reformed-capitalist extractionist policies” and also to strengthen his own presidential powers. Because his party, Alianza País (Country Alliance) was the majority, all the “infantile” sectors had to choose between approving the illicitly redacted document or voting against it and allying themselves with the oligarchy and its religious lackeys.

These shenanigans on the part of Correa’s people, however, didn’t go unnoticed and Ecuanuri, the largest indigenous organization within CONAIE, called for an “extraordinary assembly” on the following Tuesday, July 29, to consult on whether or not to accept the document as edited.

The theater of the National Museum was filled by the time the meeting began, opening with part of a short film on the mobilizations of indigenous people in 1990 which began a nearly twenty year process culminating in Rafael Correa’s rise to power, the founding of the Constituent Assembly and the writing of the Constitution. The film, although low budget and poor quality, was extremely moving, filled with images of indigenous people rising up at last to claim their rights as humans, disinherited in their own lands.

After the film, several of the members of the Constituent Assembly spoke of the Constitution as having been called into being by those very demonstrations and, indeed, the new social contract describes Ecuador as “plurinational” and “intercultural” and recognizes the rights to communal land and territory and recognizing not only individual rights, but the rights of “communities, peoples, nationalities and collectives.”

It is the first constitution in the world to grant rights to “Pachamama,” or “Mother Earth” and it also grants rights to the indigenous to carry out justice as they see fit in their communities, within the limits of national and international standards of justice. The document emphasizes that “Ecuador is a territory of peace. The establishment of foreign military bases nor foreign installations with military objectives will not be allowed.”

Advocating “quality of life” (from Kichwa, “sumaj kawsay,” el buen vivir), the document guarantees the right to water in an article against privatization of that resource, and it guarantees the “right to secure and permanent access to healthy, adequate and nutritious food, preferably produced at the local level.” This chapter two, article 13 was changed by Correa’s people at the last minute, where “guarantees” became “promote:” “The Ecuadoran state will promote food sovereignty.” Nevertheless, even the redacted constitution has the fingerprints of the indigenous movement, environmentalists and leftist values all over it, especially in the articles guaranteeing free healthcare and education, right to “adequate housing” and social security for all, regardless of whether or not one has paid into it.

Even though many Assembly members expressed outrage over the last-minute changes to fifty articles of the Constitution that Correa’s people made to the final draft, the overwhelming majority of the speakers urged the gathering, mostly indigenous members of CONAIE, to vote “Yes” in the referendum on the Constitution. Among the “infantile left” who spoke was Dr. Albert Acosta, president of the Constituent Assembly until just a few weeks before when he resigned at the urging of Correa and by vote of the assembly because he wanted to prolong the proceedings so that more voices could be heard.

Without a note of bitterness, but rather with an enthusiasm that inspired a prolonged applause, Acosta began by agreeing that the Constitution wasn’t perfect, but that it should be approved with “a ‘yes’ and a thousand times ‘yes.’” He reminded people that the approval on September 28th would be only the beginning of the new Social Contract in which it would be “an instrument for struggle” which represents “a new stage of that struggle.”

The struggle will be sharpest between the uneasy coalition of Correa’s centrist party, Alianza País and the left, comprised mainly of those Correa calls “infantile”: the indigenous, environmental and social movements, all favoring the Constitution, and the Catholic hierarchy, the Evangelical churches and the oligarchy, opposed to the Constitution.

Correa would be wise to recall that all those people, groups and organizations he has categorized as “infantile” and accused of “infiltrating” his Alianza, are his allies in a struggle against the right. He’ll need their help to pass the new Constitution, but also to govern the country afterwards if he wants to continue the gains of what he calls the “Citizen’s Revolution.” Rather than his customary approach to governing by power politics and decree, many believe Correa needs to look at the way the indigenous see democracy as the building of consensus and unanimity. Correa, some would say, is prone to tantrums, and his outbursts against his allies have already alienated many on the left, leading one powerful indigenous leader to say, “We support ‘yes’ on the Constitution, but we no longer support Correa.” Increasing numbers of people from diverse sectors in the social movements would say the same thing, and they are the very ones who have overthrown an entire crop of presidents leading up to Correa. If Correa continues to blur the distinction between his allies and his enemies, he may no longer find himself to be the exception.

Clifton Ross is the translator and co-editor with Ben Clarke of Voice of Fire: Communiques and Interviews from the Zapatista National Liberation Army. He has also written, edited or translated a half dozen other books of poetry, fiction, interviews and translations from Latin America. Ross's documentary, Venezuela: Revolution from the Inside Out was released May 20 of this year and is available from PM Press. He can be reached at clifross1@yahoo.com. Read other articles by Clifton.

Ecuador President Suggests Mediation Possible In Chevron Case

QUITO -(Dow Jones via CNN) 11 August 2008 - Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa said the government will remain at arm's length from a lawsuit that Ecuadorian Indians are involved in with Chevron Corp (CVX) but left open the possibility that he could serve as a mediator.

In his weekly radio address, Correa said that Chevron has asked for a meeting with the government.

"We can't become involved in the case because it is a judicial case and they ( Chevron) will say that the state was pressuring the judges," Correa said.

He added: "If we meet with Chevron, we will meet also with the Frente de Defensa de la Amazonia. If we can help, it will be based on justice, not on power."

Frente de Defensa de la Amazonia is a coalition of groups coordinating the lawsuit against Chevron.

The lawsuit alleges that contamination in the Amazon region was caused by Texaco, which Chevron acquired in 2001. The company is accused of having used out-of-date technology that led to environmental damage.

The complaint was first introduced in 1993 with a lawsuit in New York courts, where it was ruled that the case should be tried in Ecuador. In May 2003, several indigenous groups filed a lawsuit against the company in Lago Agrio, Nueva Loja.

The company had denied the allegations and said that it spent about $40 million meeting all requirements for the environmental cleanup procedures that were agreed upon with the Ecuadorian State oil company, Petroleos del Ecuador, or Petroecuador.

In 1998, Petroecuador released the U.S.-based company from any liabilities regarding cleanup efforts.

Recently, Richard Cabrera, a Nueva Loja Court-appointed expert, submitted a report recommending that Chevron pay at least $8.3 billion, and as high as $16 billion, in compensation for environmental damages in Ecuador.

Chevron has said Cabrera's report isn't impartial because, among other things, he has used technical equipment owned by the Frente de Defensa de la Amazonia.

Ecuador: Chevron battles government, indigenous people

Duroyan Fertl

10 August 2008
From Green left Weekly, August 9, 2008

International oil giant Chevron is lobbying the US government to cancel trade deals with Ecuador over a court case where it faces a US$16 billion fine for polluting the Amazonian rainforest.

Chevron is accused of dumping over 18 billion gallons of toxic oil waste into the Ecuadorian jungle, in what many are calling a “rainforest Chernobyl” and maybe the biggest environmental court case in history.

The pollution has caused thousands of birth defects and deaths, and incalculable environmental damage — poisoning animals, plants and the water table.

The court case, on behalf of over 30,000 affected residents — many of them indigenous — was initiated in 1993 in the US. Chevron spent 10 years arguing it should be heard in Ecuador, renowned for it institutionalised corruption.

Having succeeded, however, they are now stuck in an Ecuador where left-wing President Rafael Correa has pledged to root out all corruption. Correa argued earlier this year that “Ecuador is no longer on sale”.

Apparently fearing that they will now lose the case, Chevron is calling on the US government to cancel favourable trade deals with the small Andean country unless Ecuador’s government forces its citizens to drop the case.

This is only the latest attempt by Chevon to derail the case. Activists in the campaign have been bullied, beaten, and even killed in an attempt to stop the case. To avoid having to pay any damages awarded against it, Chevron has pulled almost all of its assets out of Ecuador.

In response, Correa has threatened to set up an international tribunal to ensure Chevron pays up if required.

According to a July 26 Newsweek article, one of Chevron’s lobbyists in Washington put the company’s position point blank: “We can’t let little countries screw around with big companies like this.”

However, the “little country” of Ecuador is refusing to lie down before one of the world’s biggest companies.

[For more information on the campaign, visit http://www.chevrontoxico.com.]

Ecuador grants free higher education for police, military officers

QUITO, Aug. 8 (Xinhua) - Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa said Friday that higher education for police and military officers will be free with the approval of the country's new Constitution.

The new Charta Magna, which was approved last month by the Constitutional Assembly, promises free higher education for the police, Correa told a meeting of high-level officers of the National Police. The new Constitution will be voted on in a referendum on Sept. 28 before it comes into force.

"Those who enter schools of policemen, of troops and officers, should not be the ones that have money, but the ones who achieve it based on their merits," Correa said.

Better education is necessary for the modernization and restructuring of the National Police, said the president.

A more efficient, human, and committed police force is needed to strengthen social security, Correa said.

Meanwhile, the president said the officers' work and life condition should also be improved.

"We want to improve the life and work conditions of the officers," Correa said, noting that it was difficult to tell a difference between the jails and the police quarters where the policemen live.

Ecuadorian government has been seeking to improve the life conditions of the police under a plan to build communal quarters with new technologies and equipment, Correa said.