How Pinochet's economic model led to the current crisis engulfing Chile

Kirsten Sehnbruch. The Guardian. October 30, 2019

After 12 days of mass demonstrations, rioting and human rights violations, the government of President Sebastián Piñera must now find a way out of the crisis that has engulfed Chile.

Analysts have correctly interpreted the wave of protests as a reflection of discontent with the material, political and social inequalities engendered by the economic model imposed by the country’s former dictator Augusto Pinochet.

That model deregulated markets and privatised social security systems, and was widely emulated by other countries in the region.

Now the Piñera government has the chance to transform the exhausted Chilean model and lay the foundation of a real welfare state, giving Chile a chance to become a genuinely developed country – not one which has merely seen an increase in GDP per capita.

Chile is notorious for its income inequality: the gap between rich and poor has widened in recent years as the combined wealth of its billionaires is equal to 25% of its GDP.

But inequality is multidimensional: Chile’s employment rate languishes at 55%, while employment conditions are so precarious that 50% of the workforce cannot possibly accumulate enough savings to fund a minimally adequate pension.

Thirty per cent of formal contracts are short-term and last an average of just 10 months, interspersed with lengthy periods of unemployment, leaving workers one step away from poverty if they become ill or unemployed.

They feel excluded and ignored by political power, which is highly concentrated among the elite. They feel cheated and exploited by firms and retailers, who have fixed prices for basic consumer goods.

Many Chileans live with high levels of debt and thus pay more for the same services (such as higher education or healthcare) than rich people, who get discounts because they can pay in cash.

But perhaps most importantly, they feel discriminated against and humiliated in all these areas as they battle with inadequate public services that fail to level the playing field.

The result is that the expectations for a better and more secure life have outpaced the opportunities for social mobility that the Chilean model actually delivers.

By now it should be obvious that in a (thankfully) fiscally balanced country, these inequalities cannot be overcome by patching up the deficiencies of the economic model through the country’s limited fiscal resources, which have stagnated at approximately 20% of GDP, compared with the OECD’s average of 34%.

Reforms such as increasing minimum wages or pensions through fiscal resources will fail to make a dent in inequalities generated by privatised social protection systems that barely share risk between their beneficiaries.

Nor will they help informal workers, who desperately require an earned income tax credit to motivate them to engage in formal and stable employment, while giving a significant redistributive boost to their disposable income.

The legacy of Pinochet’s economic model underlies existing social protection systems largely because political elites have refused to contemplate structural changes.

A significant proportion of contributions to social systems must now go towards sharing risk equally among the population so that rich and poor can receive the same level of care in hospitals, receive pensions that are a guarantee of old-age security and have the same chances of obtaining a good education.

This is the basic premise of public services as they exist in every developed country in the world.

But structural reforms are difficult to implement in any country, especially when the government does not command a majority in Congress. Most importantly, they require a social and political consensus.

The rage felt by marginalised youth explains – although does not justify – the violence that erupted during the protests, and it is accompanied by sharply declining credibility and trust in institutions, including all political parties.

Piñera now has a tremendous opportunity to generate the kind of social pact that could sustain such reforms, as requested by representatives from over 300 civil society leaders.

This week, he took an important step in this direction by reshuffling his cabinet to include younger and more liberal ministers, who have the ability to think creatively, establish a social dialogue and engage with civil society in a way that generates a new social pact. However, they should not be in this task alone.

Politicians from across the political spectrum must support such a pact. But it will be up to the president to lead the country in this process and make use of the opportunity that this crisis has generated.



Kirsten Sehnbruch is a British Academy global professor and a distinguished policy fellow at the International Inequalities Institute at the London School of Economics and Political Science, working on Latin American labour markets and social security systems. She has lived and worked in Chile for more than 10 years and was a founding board member of the Centre for Social Conflict and Cohesion.

Chile protests sharpen as calls for constitutional change grow

Naomi Larsson. Al Jazeera. October 30, 2019

Santiago, Chile - Protesters in Chile rejected President Sebastian Pinera's political concessions as major demonstrations continued across the country demanding greater equality and constitutional changes.

Central Santiago was covered in smoke on Tuesday evening as a fire raged by the hill in Santa Lucia during unrest against social inequality and police violence.

Thousands more gathered in the streets in cities across the country, from Puerto Montt in the south to Antofagasta in the north.

In the coastal town of Valparaiso, demonstrators gathered to the sound of banging pots after another volatile night during which police fired tear gas.

Protests erupted again on Tuesday despite Pinera's decision to reshuffle his cabinet on Monday, as part of his moves to quell a weeklong uprising against his administration.

Pinera replaced one-third of his cabinet, including Andres Chadwick, the right-wing interior minister who was heavily criticised for calling protesters "criminals" last week.

Chadwick, who is Pinera's cousin, was openly supportive of Augusto Pinochet's regime during Chile's dictatorship that ended in 1990.

"Chile has changed and the government, too, has to change to confront these new challenges in these new times," Pinera said as he announced the replacement of his cabinet, which also includes the finance and labour ministers.

"These measures won't solve all our problems but they are an important first step. They reflect the firm will of our government and the strong commitment of each of us in favour of a socially more just and equitable Chile."

But the cabinet changes fell flat as new protests erupted after the announcement.

What started as a demonstration against a four percent increase in Santiago's metro rail fare earlier this month has evolved into a wider dissent against decades of growing inequality.

Many protesters say they are angry with the "neoliberalism" that has led to poor public services, including the almost complete privatisation of pensions, health and education.

Call for new constitution
Others are demanding a new constitution, which remains as a hangover of the Pinochet regime.

"A new constitution is the only way. All the past governments couldn't change the constitution, and this is what we need. The Chileans are clear," Patricia, a 62-year-old protester in Santiago, told Al Jazeera, adding she struggled to survive on her stagnant salary.

"The repression has to change because this social movement isn't going to stop."

On Tuesday afternoon, a peaceful march formed in Santiago's Plaza Italia, while vandalism and looting took place elsewhere in the city.

Armed police fired water cannon at protesters gathered along the Alameda, the main highway leading towards the presidential palace.

One staff member of the national human rights institute, the INDH, was wounded by armed forces during the clashes.

The incident took place following the arrival of rights watchdog Amnesty International to investigate allegations of human rights violations against the demonstrators. The UN Human Rights Commission will also send a team to Chile this week.

"Even though the eyes are on Chile, the president hasn't stopped the repression on the streets, and mobilisation continues to be massive," Amnesty's America director Erika Guevara told Al Jazeera.

"The demonstrators are not seeing genuine commitment from the government to really address their demands."

Allegations of rights abuses
At least 20 people have died since the unrest began.

Currently, 3,712 are detained and the INDH has filed 138 judicial cases of alleged violence, including sexual harassment and other forms of abuse.

Pinera has pledged full transparency in the investigations, and lifted the state of emergency that granted the state special powers to control the right to assembly and movement.

"It's quite clear there have been instances of human rights violations - if the reports are true about the nature of the injuries, and the video evidence," said Saladin D Meckled-Garcia, senior lecturer in the department of political science at University College London.

"People are unhappy and an authoritarian government that seems to respond with violence isn't going to solve it."

Opposition parties are reportedly working on a proposal to change the constitution, and are expected to present on Wednesday a case against Chadwick, the former minister of the interior.

Chilean Protestor: I Was Raped by Police

EFE. October 29, 2019

SANTIAGO – As Chile grapples with a wave of protests that show no sign of abating, allegations of police brutality have grabbed headlines.

Joshua Maureira was allegedly subjected to a sadistic attack by police and has become the face of victims of human rights violations.

The 23-year-old medical student reported he was beaten unconscious by officers, sexually assaulted with a baton and subjected to homophobic abuse and death threats.

He was imprisoned for allegedly assaulting police.

Maureira has spoken out about his alleged ordeal despite reportedly receiving threats from his attackers.

“It is so that never again in Chile any person sees their human rights violated,” he said during a statement at the prosecutor’s office.

He spoke to a crowd of hundreds of people who gathered on Monday in front of the building to show support for him and demand justice.

“It is a rather long and painful statement,” he added.

NIGHT OF HORROR

The attack allegedly took place at dawn on 21 October.

Maureira said he was standing outside a looted supermarket during a curfew and went into the shop after hearing cries for help.

The police arrived soon after, confiscated his phone and beat him until he lost consciousness, he stated.

He said he woke up in a police car and that the beatings continued until they reached the police station in the Pedro Aguirre Cerda municipality. It is one of the stations that has been accused of the largest number of sexual crimes since the protests started, Beatriz Contreras, head of the National Institute of Human Rights (NHRI) for the Santiago region, told Efe.

HOMOPHOBIC ABUSE

At the police station, the violence was allegedly stepped up when officers noticed he was wearing red nail polish and realized that he was gay.

Maureira said he was forced to repeatedly shout “I’m a fag” while officers hit him.

He said that four officers, including at least one woman, were directly involved in the physical attacks whilst six others witnessed events without attempting to stop the assault.

There were photographs of his bruised body but a medical evaluation that was issued during his detention classified his injuries as minor.

RAPED AND JAILED

Maureira said that the worst was still to come.

After the initial attack, officers continued to beat him until they broke his nose and then raped him.

“Two of them took me by the waist and lowered my pants and underwear,” he said.

The officers then sexually assaulted him with a baton, he continued.

When he went to court, Maureira learned police had accused him of stealing from the supermarket and attacking officers, so he spent several more days in jail.

Gonzalo Cid, leader of the Sexual Diversity Movement, told Efe: “Here the most serious thing is that they are agents of the state.

“It is the National Police of Chile that is doing that, and that generates a lot of fear.

“Who do you denounce if it is the police itself that tortures upon learning that one is homosexual?”

ALLEGATIONS OF UNPRECEDENTED BRUTALITY

Until now there was no precedent in Chile for institutionalized brutality towards homosexuals.

The only incident that came anywhere close was the murder of Daniel Zamudio who was killed by neo-Nazis 2012.

The crime paved the way for the Zamudio Law which banned discrimination based on race, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, gender, appearance or disability.

Maureira’s complaint has shocked the country.

The Ministry of Justice and Human Rights has expressed its “greatest concern” over the alleged attack.

Police have been removed from the investigation into Maureira’s report.

Sergio Micco, director of the NHRI, told Efe there may be more people who have suffered similar attacks and remained silent out of fear or shame.

The organization has been encouraging any victims who have not yet done so to come forward to seek advice from NHRI on how to issue their reports.

REPORTS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE

So far 17 reports of sexual violence have been filed.

The protests in Chile have been marred by human rights violations and 20 people have died, including three Peruvians, two Colombians and an Ecuadorian national.

The deaths include five homicides allegedly committed by police officers.

All of the reports will be assessed by the United Nations mission for human rights which this week will evaluate the allegations that have been made since 18 October when the protests started.

People have taken to the streets to demand better salaries and pensions and fairer electricity and gas prices as well as improvements in education and healthcare.

In Argentina, a "Right Turn" That Wasn't and Left-Peronism's Unlikely Comeback

Santiago Anria and Gabriel Vommaro. NACLA. October 29, 2019

Latin America’s “left turn,” which started in 1998 with the election of Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, is not over, even though its obituary has been written several times. Rather than turning in any clear direction, political winds in the region appear to be blowing in all sorts of directions, with no discernable underlying pattern.

In particular, the victory of left-Peronism in Sunday’s elections in Argentina suggests that writing an obituary on the Left may have been premature. The winning formula, which includes former president Cristina Fernández de Kirchner as vice-presidential candidate and her hand-picked running-mate Alberto Fernández as presidential candidate, obtained 48.1 percent of the votes, well above the 40.3 percent of incumbent Mauricio Macri, who was running for re-election. With two antagonistic camps capturing almost 90 percent of the vote, Sunday’s elections were probably the most polarized elections since Argentina entered its democratic transition in 1983—a polarization that is likely to stay.

Macri’s 2015 electoral victory in Argentina was widely seen as a bellwether of a broader “right turn” in the region—a turn that also spread to countries like Brazil and Chile. In Argentina, it meant something even deeper: For the very first time since the country’s democratic transition, a right-wing political party, in alliance with other parties, gained national power via democratic elections.

Macri’s 2015 victory also signaled the return to power of non-Peronist forces. Since the country’s transition to democracy, not a single non-Peronist president had been able to finish a regularly scheduled term in office. To avoid that fate and build broad societal bases of support, Macri formed a national coalition called Cambiemos (Let’s Change), which united his party, Republican Proposal (PRO), the Radical Civil Union, and the Civic Coalition Ari (CC-ARI). While Macri placed second in the 2015 first-round vote, by uniting the disparate opposition parties he secured 51.34 percent in the second round.

In light of Cambiemos’s victory and the subsequent election of conservative parties and leaders in the region, analysts anticipated the consolidation of a region-wide rightward wave.

Today, however, it is less certain that such a systemic shift was ever truly underway.Today, however, it is less certain that such a systemic shift was ever truly underway. Instead, Latin American electoral politics appear to follow a routine alternation-of-power type of logic between left and right explained by retrospective, anti-incumbency voting driven by broad societal discontent. In the case of Argentina specifically, moreover, electoral politics appear to have aligned around a left-right axis of competition with two major coalitions structuring the electoral supply. This new configuration, moreover, is marked by high levels of polarization— today, there are two major antagonistic poles that dispute the center.

In light of Macri’s defeat and the comeback of a left-center coalition led by the Peronists, and backed by progressive parties and movements, it is useful to reflect on the factors that impeded the consolidation of a “right turn” in the country. What explains the failure of Macri’s first experience of government and the weakening of his support coalition? What are the reasons behind the strengthening of opposition forces on the left? And finally, what are the relevant domestic and regional implications of these trends?

The Failure of the Pro-Market Project

Cambiemos’s electoral defeat expresses the loss of a "historic opportunity" for a center-right party to carry out its desired free-market reforms aimed at dismantling the statist economic model hitherto in place—one based on the domestic market, wide social protections, and state intervention in the economy.

The difficulties of Cambiemos's reformist program can be explained by three political factors:

First, the Macri administration did not have enough political resources to carry out its program. Its electoral coalition was not consistent in programmatic terms, and coalitional partners were among the first ones to block and/or promote substantial modifications to some key government proposals, including the pension reform. They also opposed measures implemented by the government, such as the dramatic reduction of subsidies to public services.

This meant that Macri and his inner-circle had to embrace “gradualism”—a slow-paced approach to market reform. Applying this gradual approach entailed high political costs for Macri and his inner circle.

After the 2018 crisis, a non-trivial part of Argentina’s business class asked Macri to not run for re-election. Second, the business world, which formed a core societal ally for Macri’s coalition, did not provide consistent political support to the Macri administration. Instead, business owners maintained a short-term, particularistic, and poorly coordinated behavior. For instance, business owners did not carry out any coordinated action to support the reforms that the government wanted to carry out. In addition, business was not a consistent financial support in terms of increased private investment. After the 2018 crisis, a non-trivial part of Argentina’s business class asked Macri to not run for re-election. They proposed both an alternative candidacy within the Cambiemos coalition, as well as one outside of the coalition, noting a declining electoral support for Cambiemos.

Third, the policy legacies of the previous Kirchnerist governments weighed in as severe obstacles to Macri’s reformist project. On the one hand, social policies implemented during the Kirchnerist governments constrained attempts to make drastic cuts on public spending, given the visibility and popularity of some of those policies. On the other hand, trade unions and social movements representing informal popular sectors retained a high mobilization capacity and blocked attempts to remove state protections—the inability of Macri to pass labor reform is an egregious example of this.

These three factors, when combined, formed a perfect storm. And once the government lost access to international credit and asked the IMF for a bail-out—the largest in the IMF’s history—the government began to lose its capacity to maintain expectations and support from social sectors that had been important to its rise, including large segments of the middle-class.

Cambiemos ends its four years in government with a dire economic record and unable to consolidate a viable economic model.Cambiemos ends its four years in government with a dire economic record and unable to consolidate a viable economic model. Though weakened, it leaves office with a relatively high level of support among the electorate, especially in the country’s metropolitan area. Cambiemos won big in Argentina’s “metropolitan” region—including in the provinces of Entre Ríos, Santa Fe, Córdoba, and Mendoza, and in the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires. It also did very well in the agricultural productive core of the country. Precisely, the agrarian vote has been identified as part of the Cambiemos’s core constituency, which was validated in these elections. This socio-economic anchor, as well as Cambiemos’ electoral and legislative strength, configures a force that the future government will have to reckon with.

Has “the Left” Returned?

It’s the economy, che! Cambiemos’s defeat in the 2019 presidential elections can be largely explained by its poor economic performance. This was particularly damaging because Cambiemos led a government that presented itself as the only one capable of redirecting Argentina toward a path of sustained economic growth.

But it’s not just the economy. In spite of its terrible economic performance, Cambiemos maintained a significant level of support.

The strategic ability of the opposition, dominated by center-left Peronism, must be taken into account to explain the success of the Left. Thus, Cambiemos’s defeat also offers an account of the Left’s continued vitality. Parties widely discredited a few years ago, especially due to corruption allegations, were able to maintain a relatively high core of adherents while in opposition—and from that base they built alliances with moderate actors.

How, then, can we best explain the continued vitality of the Left?

Kirchnerist Peronism left power in 2015 with a high degree of discredit among its non-core supporters. Accusations of corruption and judicial convictions against some of its leaders created the image of a retreating force.

However, Kirchnerist Peronism remained a weighty actor in opposition. First, it maintained strong ties to its core constituency, which consists of informal sectors of the popular classes and progressive sectors of the middle classes. It kept strong connections with its societal core not only through the memory of the good old days of redistributive policies associated with the commodity boom, but also because there was no major shift in the political orientation of its main leader, Cristina Kirchner. In fact, representatives of Kirchnerism in Congress were among the most visible opponents of the bills proposed by the Macri government. This programmatic alignment runs counter to the conventional wisdom on Peronism—which would have anticipated more leadership pragmatism and ideological eclecticism.

Second, after the defeat of Kirchner Peronism in the 2017 midterm elections, Kirchnerist leaders began to rebuild relations with non-Kirchnerist Peronist leaders to form a coalition. Cambiemos’s failed economic policy enabled this approach. It also facilitated alliance-building with other center-left parties.

By 2017, the Kircherist Left that governed until 2015 became, rather quickly, the new core of a broader opposition coalition.By 2017, the Kircherist Left that governed until 2015 became, rather quickly, the new core of a broader opposition coalition. The coalitional character of this opposition must be stressed, since all its components are not necessarily a part of the Peronist movement—and some splintered from Peronism during the Kirchnerist governments.

The Left might return to power with the Fernández-Fernández formula, but it will look and govern differently than it did during the Kirchnerist governments. It will be a broader center-left coalition formed by the Peronists and backed by a wide array of progressive parties and movements.

The new leftist government will face many challenges. It will be especially hard to keep the governing coalition together and to maintain broad electoral support in a society that accumulated so many pressing demands during the ongoing Argentine economic crisis. Macri will leave office in the midst of a profound economic recession, and Fernández will inherit extraordinarily high levels of debt, soaring inflation, and rapidly rising unemployment and poverty levels. Fernández’s “honeymoon” period, as some of his allies openly say, will be short. In addition to having to reconcile the multiple demands from his coalitional partners, he will likely encounter strong opposition from Cambiemos.

An Unlikely Comeback

Macri’s loss, the resilience of left-Peronism and its unlikely comeback have far-reaching regional and domestic implications.

Clearly, the political winds in the region have shifted when compared to the early 2000s, when about two-thirds of all Latin Americans lived under some form of leftist government.

Since 2015, left parties and governments have experienced a number of electoral defeats in a number of former stronghold—not only in Argentina, but also in Chile and Brazil. Right-wing presidents govern today in Colombia, Guatemala, Paraguay, Honduras, Panama, and Peru, as well. In light of the series of victories by conservative parties in the region, and particularly after the election of Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, astute observers proclaimed a region-wide shift to the right.

However, the counter-cyclical election of Andrés Manuel López Obrador in Mexico in July 2018 suggested that it was premature to write the obituary of Latin America’s “left turn.” The recent Fernández’s victory in Argentina adds a further challenge to that thesis and defies any notion of a systemic rightward shift in Latin American politics.

Rather than a rightward shift, trends in Argentina—and probably beyond—are better understood as a reinforcement of the post-neoliberal left-right programmatic structuring of political competition. In our assessment, both right and left turns in the country—in 2015 and 2019, respectively—followed a routine alternation-of-power dynamics explained by anti-incumbency voting in contexts of deep economic crises after the end of the “commodity boom,” strong inflationary pressures, and broad societal discontent.

Despite all the drama in the lead-up to these 2019 elections, in short, electoral politics in Argentina appear to have aligned around a left-right axis of competition with two major rival coalitions—Peronists and non-Peronists. It remains to be seen if the high degree of political polarization in the country will allow either of these coalitions to govern with broad consensus and redress postponed needs.










Santiago Anria is Assistant Professor of Political Science and Latin American Studies at Dickinson College.

Gabriel Vommaro is Full Professor of Political Sociology at the National University of San Martín and Researcher at CONICET. His last book is La Larga Marcha de Cambiemos (Siglo XXI Editores, 2017).

Can Alberto Fernandez woo China and ease Argentina’s economic woes?

Albert Han. South China Morning Post. October 30, 2019

Alberto Fernandez may have won the presidency in Argentina but he still has work to do if he wants to nurture a successful relationship with China that could help him lift the country out of its economic doldrums, observers say.

Latin America’s third-largest economy is crippled by rising inflation and a plummeting currency, and those things could see it moving ever closer to Beijing, they say.

“The way the global chessboard works, Argentina might fall into the arms of China,” said Nicolas Saldias, an expert on Argentina and senior researcher at the Wilson Centre, a think tank in Washington.

“Cristina [Fernandez de Kirchner] supporters tend to see China very favourably and perceive it as a counter-hegemonic power to the US,” he said, referring to Argentina’s former president and Fernandez’s vice-president, whom some regard as the real power in the pairing.

China is Argentina’s largest lender, the biggest buyer of its exports, and since 2007 has invested almost US$17 billion in infrastructure projects in the country.

However, Margaret Myers, director of the Asia and Latin America Programme at the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington, said Beijing was being more cautious about its investment decisions given its slower economic growth at home and fears Argentina might default on its debts.

“What China is looking for now is a degree of stability and some return on those investments and outstanding debts,” she said.

Despite multiple deals signed under previous administrations and projects under construction – including two hydroelectric dams in Patagonia and a stalled nuclear power plant – Argentina has yet to sign up to China’s Belt and Road Initiative.

Lin Zhimin, a professor of political science and international relations at Valparaiso University in Indiana, said this would be a priority for Fernandez, if he was serious about boosting Argentina’s economy.

“To join the BRI is a matter of when and under what terms,” he said. But Fernandez’s government may “ask for other concessions from China, especially ways to reduce the trade imbalance as one of the conditions of joining”.

The fact that none of Latin America’s three largest economies – Brazil, Mexico and Argentina – have signed up to Beijing’s ambitious infrastructure development plan could be indicative of their reluctance to upset the United States, which is wary of China’s growing presence in its “backyard”.

So the spotlight would be on Fernandez’s ability to manage “the two most important foreign relations for any Argentine government – the US and China”, Lin said.

In October last year, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo warned Latin American nations against accepting Chinese investment, saying that “when China comes calling, it’s not always to the good of your citizens”.

And US Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross said in a meeting with Latin American leaders last year that Washington had no intention of ceding leadership in the region to “authoritarian states”.

Nevertheless, according to a study carried out by the Wilson Centre last year 76 per cent of Argentines expressed a positive view of China, while 54 per cent said they would choose Beijing over Washington if forced to opt for one or the other.

Jorge Malena, director of the graduate course on contemporary China at Catholic University of Argentina in Buenos Aires, said that given Argentina’s economic woes, geopolitical concerns may have to take a back seat.

“Strategy isn’t just talking about China, they need to do something about investments,” he said.

While Argentina might be able to cash in on the US-China trade war – by selling more soybeans to the world’s most populous nation – Malena said that Fernandez’s Peronist political stance – named after former Argentine leader Juan Peron – might also be a positive.

“Peronists still see China as both a champion of the third world and a growth engine,” he said.

'This will not stick’: Brazilian president lashes out over alleged links to left-wing politician’s killing

Terrence McCoy, Marina Lopes and Teo Armus. Washington Post. October 30, 2019

RIO DE JANEIRO — For months after Marielle Franco was killed last year, Rio de Janeiro wrestled with questions about who had targeted the city councilwoman — and who had ordered her mysterious, execution-style death.

Authorities seemed to answer one of those questions in March, charging two former police officers with the murder of the leftist politician, a rising star and an advocate for the city’s blacks and poor.

But now their alleged plot appears to have embroiled a new figure: Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro.

Late Tuesday night, local media reported that hours before Franco’s murder, one of the alleged killers had visited the other at a tony seaside complex in Rio’s far west side. On the complex’s security books, however, the man allegedly was logged as a visitor to Bolsonaro.

Following the report, the right-wing president — who was in Brasilia the night of Franco’s killing, but has denied any involvement — erupted in a live stream on Facebook. In more than 20 minutes of freewheeling attacks against the “foul, lowlife, immoral media,” he denied any wrongdoing and accused the media and rival politicians of trying to undermine his government.

“I had no reason to kill anyone in Rio de Janeiro,” he said, filming the video at 4 a.m. in the Middle East, where he has spent this week on a diplomatic trip. “This will not stick.”

With his voice breaking at times, Bolsonaro threatened to take away the broadcasting license for Globo, the media organization that first reported the alleged ties between him and the men charged with killing Franco.

“Why this scheming?” he yelled at one point. “Let me govern Brazil! And you, TV Globo, you make my life hell dammit.”

“I shouldn’t lose it,” he said, with a tear trickling down his cheek. “I’m the president of the republic.”

The explosive media reports linking Bolsonaro to Franco’s killing, coupled with his emotional and profane response, threaten to further isolate him at what was already a vulnerable time in his presidency. The country has lurched from one environmental disaster to another. He’s openly feuding with the president-elect of Argentina, one of Brazil’s most important trading partners. He was assailed this week for posting — then quickly deleting — a video that showed him as lion being attacked by a pack of hyenas representing his critics in the media and government, including Brazil’s Supreme Court.

Now that court has to decide whether to open an investigation into Bolsonaro, who has immunity from being tried in the country’s lower courts. Supporters of Franco are calling for an inquiry.

“We demand immediate clarifications,” said Juliano Medeiros, president of Franco’s Socialism and Liberty Party. “Brazil cannot live with any doubt about the link between the President of the Republic and a murder. We demand answers."

Some observers here are beginning wonder whether Bolsonaro is in control of his impulses.

“Bolsonaro’s first reaction to the case may even gain him the support of his base, but a more impartial observer saw an uncontrolled president saying he didn’t kill anyone,” columnist Igor Gielow wrote in the Sao Paulo newspaper Folha.

Lucas de Aragão, director of a political risk company in Brasilia, said the negative publicity could further damage Bolsonaro’s approval ratings, mired in the low 30s. “This is a moment of extreme tension in the government,” he said. “They go hard and they go aggressive and those that like him like this attitude and those who dislike him think he is losing his mind.”

Questions already had circulated about connections between the president and the two men charged with Franco’s killing: Ronnie Lessa, 48, a retired officer who allegedly fired the bullets that killed Franco, and Élcio Vieira de Queiroz, 46, who had allegedly driven Lessa to the scene of the crime.

Before Bolsonaro’s election in 2018, the president and Lessa both lived in the same upscale condominium in Rio de Janeiro. Their children had once dated, according to police reports. In March, scandal erupted when a photo of de Queiroz and Bolsonaro emerged on social media, showing the two men in a friendly embrace.

Bolsonaro had denied knowing both men personally, and police had previously discarded connections between the president and the suspects. But Tuesday night’s reports dragged Bolsonaro yet again into the infamous killing.

A doorman at Bolsonaro’s gated community told Jornal Nacional, a well-respected TV news program, that on March 14, 2018 — the day of Franco’s killing — de Queiroz identified himself as a visitor to Bolsonaro’s residence. When the doorman called that house to confirm, a man he had identified as “Mr. Jair” said to allow the visitor through.

The doorman kept watching de Quieroz’s car on security cameras and saw that the vehicle was heading to Lessa’s home inside the complex instead. So he called the apartment back. Yet “Mr. Jair” said that he knew where de Quieroz was going and to let him continue, the TV news program reported.

Bolsonaro was in the country’s capital of Brasilia that day for two plenary votes, the report said. Prosecutors say they are searching for audio recordings of those phone calls to identify who the doorman talked to that day — and who was in Bolsonaro’s home.

Later that evening, as Franco was in a car heading home, two other vehicles pulled up to hers. Someone began firing at the councilwoman, who died almost instantly. Nine police-issue bullets were lodged in her body.

Franco, who was 38, had been elected in 2016 as the only black woman on Rio de Janeiro’s 51-person city council. A left-wing lesbian activist and champion for the rights of Afro-Brazilians, she emerged as a powerful critic of Brazil’s security forces — and a voice for the civilians who had been killed in a crackdown on poor neighborhoods, much like the one she was raised in.

Following her death, her name became a worldwide symbol of the fight against racial oppression. Crowds around the globe protested her murder with the chant, “Marielle Presente”: Marielle Is Here.

All the while, Bolsonaro remained nearly silent on the matter as he ascended to the presidency, taking office in January after a campaign that polarized the South American country. And his critics noticed.

“The execution of Marielle, and the election of the current president, revealed to the world that we are racist, that we are sexist, misogynist, LGBT-phobic,” Franco’s partner, Mônica Benício, told the New York Times earlier this year.

Brazilian officials took nearly a year to unravel the case, finally charging the two alleged hit men in March. But further details — namely, who ordered the killing and why — remained unanswered.

In his video early on Wednesday morning, Bolsonaro also pointed fingers at the Wilson Witzel, the governor of Rio de Janeiro state, accusing him of leaking details of an investigation by Rio’s police.

Witzel denied those charges outright. “I’m being unfairly attacked,” he said in an emailed statement to Bloomberg News. “Yet I’ll continue to seek balance and common sense in personal and institutional relations.”

The president’s lawyer, Frederick Wassef, also appeared on TV to deny the new claims about Bolsonaro.

“It’s a lie, a typo, something,” Wassef said. “I say with absolute certainty and challenge anyone to prove otherwise. It is a lie, a fraud, a scam, to attack the president of the republic."

As Climate Crisis-Fueled Fires Rage, Fears Grow of an 'Uninhabitable' California

As activist Bill McKibben put it, "We've simply got to slow down the climate crisis."

Jon Queally, staff writer, Jessica Corbett, staff writer

Wednesday, October 30, 2019

Common Dreams

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2019/10/30/climate-crisis-fueled-fires-rage-fears-grow-uninhabitable-california

With wildfires raging across California on Wednesday—and with portions of the state living under an unprecedented "Extreme Red Flag Warning" issued by the National Weather Service due to the severe conditions—some climate experts are openly wondering if this kind of harrowing "new normal" brought on by the climate crisis could make vast regions of the country entirely uninhabitable.

Lack of rain coupled with powerful Santa Ana winds in the state, some gusting with hurricane-level force, have left officials warning residents in many communities that the worst is yet to come even as firefighters already report being stretched to the max.

Reflecting on the current and recent devastating fires in California, climate activist Bill McKibben wrote in an op-ed for The Guardian Tuesday that what the state has been experiencing "starts to feel like the new, and impossible, normal" for both residents and victims as well as those witnessing the destruction from afar.

Citing an article in the San Francisco Chronicle published Tuesday—which described how the fires had "intensified fears that parts of California had become almost too dangerous to inhabit"—McKibben wrote: "Read that again: the local paper is on record stating that part of the state is now so risky that its citizens might have to leave."

Writing for The Atlantic, journalist Annie Lowery detailed the dynamics leading increasing numbers of people to believe the state has become "unlivable":

Wildfires and lack of affordable housing—these are two of the most visible and urgent crises facing California, raising the question of whether the country's dreamiest, most optimistic state is fast becoming unlivable. Climate change is turning it into a tinderbox; the soaring cost of living is forcing even wealthy families into financial precarity. And, in some ways, the two crises are one: The housing crunch in urban centers has pushed construction to cheaper, more peripheral areas, where wildfire risk is greater.

The state's "housing crisis has exacerbated its wildfire crisis, and its wildfire crisis has exacerbated its housing crisis," explained Lowery, and that "vicious cycle is nowhere near ending."

For many critics, the state's largest utility PG&E remains a chief corporate culprit in the mess. As Common Dreams has reported, the company's has failed to adequately respond to the increased fire dangers—choosing to reward investors and seek profits instead of making the kind of changes and safety investments that communities and experts have demanded.

Meanwhile, as the following Now This video details, the scenes created by the California wildfires in recent weeks depict a hellscape fueled by the climate crisis—the scale and destruction of which fulfill some of the dire warnings scientists have been making for years:

In response to the video, climate activist group Friends of the Earth declared: "Thanks to the climate crisis, this is the new normal in California. To save lives, communities and wildlife, we must #ActOnClimate."

After a new fire broke out in Simi Valley on Wednesday, fire crews spent the day protecting—among other homes and structures—the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library.

Speaking to Democracy Now! on Tuesday, Leah Stokes, assistant professor of political science at the University of California, Santa Barbara, criticized the corporate media for ignoring the role of the climate crisis in the fires and explained that the scientific research about what's happening in California is crystal clear.

"There is research that says that fires have gotten 500% more risky as a result of climate change and that two times more area has burned because of climate change," Stokes explained. "We know that the drought that California has recently come out of was also caused by climate change. And yet some of these deeper stories about what is happening in California, what is happening across the United States with climate change, are not told by the media."

In California, the threat to residents and wildlife as well as the loss of property has been devastating. As The New York Times reported Tuesday:

California's catastrophic wildfires have not discriminated between rich and poor. In recent years tens of thousands of people lost their homes, from trailer parks to mansions. But the aftermath of the fires has produced a spectrum of misery and recovery, ranging from the wealthy, who with insurance money rebuilt houses sometimes worth more than the ones that burned, to those who lost everything and years later still have nothing.

Like access to quality education and clean water, natural disasters are another prism through which California's vast income inequalities can be viewed.

A lawyerly knowledge of the peculiarities of the insurance industry, a pool of savings to fall back on, and the time and grit to deal with the state's labyrinthine regulations have helped some in California bounce back from the infernos. Others have not been so lucky.

For example,  44-year-old Gina Wheeler "lost her uninsured trailer that she rented on family land" in the Camp Fire that devastated Paradise, California and the surrounding area late last year.

"Every place I've ever set foot in has been touched by fire," Wheeler told the Times. "I don't think anybody that's not gone through this will ever, ever understand what it's like to lose your entire community."

"I can't even describe the empty feeling that we have," she said. "I talk friends and family members out of suicide, and they talk me out of it."

Jenn Wilcox, who worked at residential care facility in Paradise and lost the uninsured cabin where she lived, has also struggled in the year since the fire. "I'm a refugee," she said. "I'm broke."

This week, PBS aired its one-hour documentary, titled "Fire in Paradise," which details what happened on November 8 of last year as the flames ripped through the California town. While the community was not unfamiliar with the threat of wildfires—and had done more than most, local officials claimed, to prepare for such an emergency—the episode details just how quickly the strength of the fire overwhelmed detailed evacuation plans and made fighting the flames an impossible task.

Watch the trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-Dj1a1ZTck

At the conclusion of the film, Capt. Matt McKenzie, a member of California Fire Station 36, offers an ominous warning in the context of what the people of Paradise suffered that day and what scientists say are conditions across the country that will make wildfires more frequent and more ferocious in the decades ahead.

"Everything was perfect that day for a massive, destructive incident to do what it did and it's in place everywhere—everywhere in California, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon," McKenzie says. "And you don't even wanna think about what's next. Can it be worse than that? And the answer is: Yes."

In his op-ed, McKibben said the idea that California may one day be a place where fewer and fewer people can live should come "as no real surprise" to anyone who has been paying attention to global trends and the warnings of scientists.

"My most recent book, Falter, centered on the notion that the climate crisis was making large swaths of the world increasingly off-limits to humans," McKibben wrote. "Cities in Asia and the Middle East where the temperature now reaches the upper 120s—levels so high that the human body can't really cool itself; island nations (and Florida beaches) where each high tide washes through the living room or the streets; Arctic villages relocating because, with sea ice vanished, the ocean erodes the shore."

Speaking with USA Today, Beth Fulton, a resident of Sebastopol who was evacuated this week from her town as the Kincade Fire approached, said more and more people are deciding to leave the area and never come back.

"People are naturally resilient, but to deal with this year after year can be traumatizing," Fulton said. She explained that several people who lost their homes in previous fires moved off to New Mexico and Oregon.

"This seems like it'll be a yearly thing," she said, "and some people say, 'I've had enough.'"