By Victor Atencio G .
In 2009 occurred (among others) 2 political events worthy of analysis, in our hemisphere. Barack Obama and Ricardo Martinelli was elected president in their respective countries. Both were favored by voters who bought his promise of change (the change we can trust and if we were slogans of Obama, and it was real change Martinelli), in scenarios marked by institutional crisis, financial, security among others.
U.S. crisis is a product of the quagmire of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, which generates an economic crisis aggravated by the international financial crisis, the Panama is part of that epilogue, and is also tainted by the perception insecurity, caused perhaps by the success of plans and Colombia Merida.
To date, having been more or less a year after the coming to power of Obama, and seven months of the Martinelli what is the level of acceptance of two presidents?
Obama has a mere 50% approval of the surveys, representing a drop of 20 percentage points 70% of the beginning of his mandate [1] . Martinelli
last Ditchter & Neira poll of February 10, 2009 suffered a decrease of 17.3 percentage points, occurred in the last two months of his administration.
The obvious question is: Does that render the low acceptance rate of both presidents?.
If Obama is not only the wear resulting from Iraq strategy and the need to send more troops to Afghanistan, but is the result of unpopular measures to rescue those responsible for the financial crisis, to now failed health care reform, and faces opposition from Republicans.
So Obama has lost about 1.6 percentage points per month of management in its first year.
For Martinelli is particularly serious since the fall of 17.3 percentage points are given in the last 2 months [2] . And although it tried to break in first seven months in office, this low would represent about a loss of 2.47 percentage points per month, which is not the case, although it remains higher than Obama, and in less time.
This means that management is dispensed by the government since December 2009 the appointment of judges of the Supreme Court, the separation of the attorney, the appointment by the Cabinet Officer Bonissi Attorney, and attack and disqualification for civil society and media, is comparable in terms of acceptance, if Martinelli has gone to Afghanistan and Iraq, and has faced the crisis of Obama, all together in just 2 months.
This is extremely serious in political terms, as it not only shows that despite the accumulation of power, the government has no hegemony, given the obvious counter-hegemonic capacity of civil society and media, but squandered an important political flow will not be able to be recovered quickly due to the coming tax reform efforts, the Social Security Fund and educational common sense that we understand that it will be welcomed by many.
it does not seem accurate analysis, or the commitment of the Minister of the Presidency to reject the percentage drop, or medicine for evil: increased government advertising because he is poor and insufficient.
Putting myself in the place of devil's advocate, recommend which way to wade Martinelli management crisis?
An alternative to the lack of government hegemony passed to redirect the course, and open spaces for dialogue and engagement with civil society. And this is a recipe that would applaud even a political realist as Machiavelli, who understood that politics is an art to adapt to situations, recalling also the good and bad uses of evil, and there are moments of being a man or beast, lion or fox, and so should be able to determine when it's time to fight with law or force. Not understanding this is the key to the misfortune of many leaders (and in this case presidential acceptance bassoon), who persist in using force alone, which would not approve of Machiavelli, because as noted in The Prince:
" From all this we must conclude that those who can not change his approach when times require it, no doubt thrive while they are in accordance with the fortune, but lost after she moved, not knowing to follow in his frequent changes " [3] .
For example, the Foreign Ministry would be helpful to enhance the space of civil society participation, facing the introduction of Universal Periodic Report to the Human Rights Council United Nations, especially when civil society organizations are an important part of the front against hegemony.
But it must also mean that the space is transparent and inclusive dialogue, and that the Final Report (which should cover the last four years) did not disappoint the expectations of civil society, and benefiting the most important proposals by human rights organizations in the humanitarian field.
not doing so would leave an area of \u200b\u200bweakness against which Machiavelli called "big" among those who today are members of opposition parties under investigation and criminal prosecution or the affluent who may be affected by tax reforms, not to mention the local and foreign criminal groups, who may be fearful, facing the certainty of law enforcement .
And we know that the Florentine ally recommended to the people (civil society sectors), to resist the onslaught of the powerful, bold and violent.
[1] See the Introduction Bulletin No. 121, January 28, 2010 of the Real Instituto Elcano in http://www.realinstitutoelcano.org/boletines/boletin121_imprimir.htm
[2] See Note Papadimitri justified drop in popularity of the President, published in the newspaper La Prensa on February 11, 2010, visible in http://www.prensa.com/uhora.asp?Id=20100211local_2010021110512859. asp
[3] Nicolas Machiavelli. The Prince. Editorial Edaf. Spain. 31ava Edition, 2005, page 121. Quote taken from Chapter XXV What influence is fortunate in the things of this world, and that way you can cope with being adversely?
0 comments:
Post a Comment