tv Inter- American Dialogue Annual Development Bank of Latin America... CSPAN September 27, 2019 3:03pm-4:28pm EDT
a woman here, i'm here, get used to it. >> explore our nation's past on "american history tv" every weekend on c-span3. the house will be in order. >> for 40 years, c-span has been providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court and public policy events from washington, d.c. and around the country so you can make up your own mind, created by cable in 1979. c-span is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. up next, experts from latin america talk about recent political movements in their nations during a panel discussion. afterwards representatives from facebook's corporate office join the conversation and talk about
how social media and messaging platforms played a role in recent political unrest in venezuela and brazil. good morning. buenos dias. i'm glad to see that most of you survived the aztec patio last night which was very good. we have a tremendous panel this morning and a great subject. it's not news to say that the world is facing a time of change, uncertainty, the liberal, multilateral order that we were accustomed to is
fraying. nationalism and populism are on the rise. the geopolitics is back, autocracy has been on the rise, liberal democracy has been on the defensive in many ways. latin america is no stranger to those trends. this year, last year marks the 40th anniversary of the beginning of the third wave, what samuel huntington called the third wave of democratization and latin america was a big protagonist of that, moving very swiftly from dictatorship as the predominant form of government to democracy. in the last couple of years we've had many elections in the region, and i think two things stand out from those elections. one is a return of populism. and by populism i mean kind of
leadership in which a leader purports to be a national savior who has a unique relationship with the people defined as the leader likes to define them and is contemptuous of other centers of power, of checks and balances and so forth, and indeed of organized civil society. we've seen populist leaders very distinct, elected in brazil and mexico and in general in the region there has been a weakening of the broad democr democratic center, and those election results correspond to a sense of disillusion amongst voters in latin america. these elections took place against a background that was
not very propitious. on the one hand, let me give you two numbers. from 2005 to 2013, latin america taken as a whole grew economically at an annual average rate of 4%. from 2013 to 2019 it will have grown at less than 1% which in per capita terms means a small shrinkage. latin america represents 8% of the world's population and sees 33% of its murders. so crime is another big concern. and then we have corruption. as you all know there have been a series of very prominent oversized and big corruption scandals in the region. all of that, if you have to add another factor which will be the subject of the next panel which is the influence of social
media, the corrosive influence of social media in undermining an agreed national narrative based on facts, and i think those factors explain what is a worrying divorce between voters and their concerns, on the one hand, and political systems and political leaders on the other. that said, if you look in the world context where there's been what some people have called a democratic recession over the last dozen years or so, in latin america there are two clear cases of democracies having become dictatorships, venezuela and nicaragua. venezuela is the subject of another panel so we won't discuss it much. elsewhere democracy las held up with all the caveats i
mentioned. i think what we should focus on is the quality of those democracies and their ability to generate effective democratic governance and the changes that latin americans want. to discuss this we have a fantastic panel. president laura chin chia, president of costa rica, before that vice president, minister, et cetera and chair of the -- of our host, the inter-american dialogue. we're delighted to have her at the fiesta on the panel. and rosanna fuentes bare yen, a very distinguished mexican journalist. i think it's accurate to call rosanna an institution in the best sense of the word. she has worked for everybody who matters in the mexican printed
media. she's currently vice president at grub rex. she teaches at a university in mexico city and she set up a project called the mexico media lab. daniella pineiro is -- because brazil is much less well known than it ought to be, and you probably haven't heard of powi is brazil's answer to "the new yorker," but it's better. going for a dozen years or so. daniella was the store reporter of piowi. did a series of wonderful reports on politics and life in brazil. she's now the editor-in-chief of epocher magazine which is a weekly magazine in brazil. and danielle zovato is also an
institution in the best sense of the word, and having run the latin america program of idea, which is not exactly the idea, it's the international -- international. >> institute for democracy and electoral assistance. an intergovernmental body which has done a lot of work in latin america on electoral assistance and helping to make sure that elections are properly run in latin america. i think on the whole they still tend to be. that's something that we should value. and daniel is also the brains behind the province of cordova in argentina where he's been a consultant and done various things there. so we have a great panel. we have two microphones here
where in due course you can ask questions. we have headsets. president chin chia and daniel with talk in spanish. rosanna and daniella will talk in english. so daniel has followed this election cycle that we've had in the region over the last few years very closely. i'm going to ask him to start us off by giving up a very concise, kind of conceptual summary of what we should take away from these elections. daniel. >> [ speaking spanish ]. >> translator: thank you for this invitation. it's a pleasure for me to be here in front of such a high quality audience and also great
panelists. as michael represented, i don't think there's a better moment for us to put our finger on the pulse of what's taking place in latin america. this is a region in which we can say pretty much everything is happening. in addition to the 40th year anniversary of the beginning of this democratic wave, there are two other milestones that are very important. we are at the end of what was called the decade of latin america. you may recall the letter that idp president moreno sent in june of 2010 to -- we were going in latin america and we close the decade, if we're lucky, we'll budget at 1.6%. now we're talking about a decade in which clearly as michael just said, characterized by among other things -- growth. at the same time we're at the end of what i call the super
electoral cycle, super cycle of elections which i define as 15 presidential elections that have been held or will be held over the course of three years from 2017 to 2019. of these 15 elections, 12 have already been held. three will be held in october. on the 20th bolivia is running again. and then in argentina and a very difficult context that will seek re-election and 27th as well as uruguay -- seeking a fourth consecutive mandate. the super cycle left three countries out, peru, the dr and nicaragua whose electoral processes, elections were held before 2017. the vast majority of the region has been a part of this super cycle of elections.
now, something else i would say about this, this has taken place in a very adverse context with challenges. pointing out social unrest and also malaise vis-a-vis traditional parties and politics which was made worse by things michael pointed out, corruption, crime, organized crime and there is fatigue of democracy if you look at the 2018 data, browner data says support for democracy has been dropping to 48%, the lowest point since 2001 when it started to be measures, dissatisfaction with democracy has grown by 20 points, from 51 to 71 whereas satisfaction went from 44% to 24%. that is satisfaction with democracy. now, this toxic environment in
which this super cycle is taking place, and a little footnote here, every time we speak of latin america, we have to do so in five minutes, we make the mistake of not underscoring the diversity and heterogeneity in the region. not all countries are the same. but just to give you a regional review. now, for our aspects, i would like to refer to the super electoral cycle is characterized by what i have called the vote of anger. there's a clear vote of anger rejecting official or ruling parties of elections that have been held -- two stayed in power, ecuador and costa rica and there was continuity in two. this was forced by elections with fraud and irregularities. we have a clear trend toward
altered -- change of power. and also candidates against the system. anti system candidates. michael said this. we're talking about people who have spoken out against traditional parties, populist in nature, simplifies solutions to very complex problems, focusing -- passing themselves off asthma sigh yea messiahs why with problems in short order. we don't have strong institutions to really contain these successes. most are minority governments. a president who doesn't have majority support. mexico being an exception. he has majority in both houses. it was a landslide victory with which he won. there are others who don't have
such support. we're seeing a greater fragmentation of the political parties. the second wave -- we see another problem here. there are challenges in governance due to a lack of support in the congress and difficulties for creating consensuses in the congress to get the support for the necessary reforms, pensions, tax reform, labor reform and other things that the executive would want to push through. reshaping of the political map. macri in 2015, that was followed in peru and chile in 2017, and bolsonaro in 2018. created the sensation that latin america was going from central left governments to center right governments. we started to say, well, this is a cyclical change.
now, i think it's too soon to say that. the try um fs in mexico and puerto rico and panama, ultimately we're going to have to see what's going to happen. is macri going to be re-elected? or if the kitchener duo, if they win, what's going to happen in uruguay. let's not ring the bells to say we're seeing a shift towards the center right. we're going to have a region with a greater degree of political heterogeneity. the jury is out on this. we'll have to wait for these three elections that are way too important to get a more accurate understanding of what's happening. >> thank you for your discipline on the time. let's come back to argentina. i think there will be a lot of interest in that and whether macri's seeming or likely defeat
is a special case or a new trend. daniella, yesterday michele bash lay, the u.n. high commissioner for human rights said there has been a shrinking of civil and democratic space in brazil in the eight months of the government of bolsonaro. the former president of the central bank said in an interview a couple days ago that he thought there had already been a reverse for democracy in brazil. is that right? tell us how you see it and how worrying is the outlook for democracy in brazil? >> good morning everyone, and thank you for having me here. i think it's early to say
democracy in brazil is under threat. there's no way that checks and balances, but i think there's something very dangerous happening there. it's all about the way the population are feeling the changes in our daily basis life. for example. it was not bolsonaro who said burn amazon. but in the moment he fired the scientists who just came up with the figures about these burnings. this is a sign that you're allowed or you're entitled who who were there, to do whatever you want. in the moment bolsonaro said his
policy of security, for example, is shoot people and shot people, whatever. if you're a criminal, you will be shot. we can say the mall security guard, the guy who is in the mall and he's a guy who basically needs to take care of people in the shopping malls, but now he's entitled to do whatever he wants. it happened to me recently in rio where i'm based. i was having a lunch with joel anderson from "the new yorker." he was there to write a profile of bolsonaro. we heard this noise. some guy was running, a black guy, and the policeman was running to catch him up.
and then we realize what is happening. we're in there and we start to ask the police guy, what is happening here? the guy was yelling he's not a criminal, he works in the supermarket nearby. and then i asked the policeman, what are you doing? what are you doing that? he looked at me and said, go wash your dishes. this is for me, it's a sign of bols snar row's era. all of us, we know the region. we know how this class thing is, in another period in time it was impossible to imagine a police guy talking to someone like this. so when you're in power, the mall security guard, you open pandora's box.
i think in brazil, parliament is trying to fill this vacuum of power and they are reshaping the rumgs of the game. for example, bolsonaro, one of his main ideas was approved, this law that makesi easier for ordinary citizens to buy guns. the parliament response was quickly and fast and precisely no. you can't do that. so the supreme court did the same recently. so that's why i'm saying institutional -- brazilian institutions, they're working, but there is still a hope that the economic are getting better because of the reforms. but there's no touchable sign yet that it's going to happen. on the other hand people --
bolsonaro has a very precise agenda. he wants to destroy everything the past governments did. it's all about, if the leftist did that, we are going to do the opposite. and this is -- for us it's complicated because we can't understand or foresee which country bolsonaro has in his mind because having this strategy of destroying, it's not something that you know -- it doesn't mean you have an idea of the future. in saying that, i think we are in very troubled times. the media, my field, we are
suffering with economical pressures from the government because unfortunately brazilian media is still very dependent from public money, advertising and everything. for example, the magazine i work for, we are very critical to bolsonaro. and since february we didn't get any advertising. but since apple he longs to largest brazilian media group in the country, we're doing okay. >> so code does is functions as a check on the president, the media is, but it has problems. the supreme court, on the face of things it looked very worrying when a supreme court justice ruled that the state financial investigation body
should not investigate suspicious payments involving one of bolsonaro's sons. is that a sign of the general weakening of the independence of the supreme court or not? >> i think we can't say that because, on the other hand, as i mentioned before, last week, the supreme court approved -- had decide to undermine an investigation of one of the guys -- the main guys. so it's something more linked with a specific judge in the court. >> so one of the members of the supreme court? >> yeah. >> individually. >> yeah. so i think the whole idea and
the feeling is we need to believe in this institution because the other option is trying to believe in the militaries who are backing bolsonaro from the beginning and which for us, it's very hard to understand their thoughts and their intentions because modell, for example, his vice president, he did a brilliant media training, and he speaks to all journalists in the beginning. he was the most open end source ever. the rest of the cabinet doesn't speak to any journalist, any media. so modeell got this attention and very good press in brazil. but we forgot that modell was expelled -- was not expelled, but he got his -- because he
praised one of the biggest torturers in brazil. so these people, they have an agenda, a hidden agenda, and with the thoughts about conservative conservatives [ speaking spanish ]. >> thank you very much. there's a lot to come back to. rosan rosanna, unlike bolsonaro, still extremely popular. he's on the face of things in some ways quite moderate. he said he will maintain fiscal discipline, for example.
but many people in mexico are worried about the way he is changing the state and turning the state into an instrument of his own power. are we right to worry about that? what's your kind of balance sheet after nine months of anders manuel? >> first and foremost, thank you, michael, thank you for having me here. and just the position on fact checking because facts do matter. i know longer work for -- time warner decided to sell its investment in mexico, and i left when that happened. so i'm a recovering journalist, and in that sense i have been able to be on the sideline of the coverage of the presidency.
it's worrisome from the fact that we're looking into politician that really wants to do a solo act. we are known for being a cadillo prone country. this is the definition in many senses. he started an organization, not a political party, an organization called morena. i'm speaking in english because that's the way we've divided the panel. morena is the -- anders manuel [ speaking spanish ]. everyone in mexico, my jewish friends, myself, everybody is
very much guarded by morena. we are all morena in that sense. but morena is morena, also out of the pantone of colors in mexico which has been at the forefront of discussions as of lately. so religion and color, race is brought back to the forefront of the discussion because the man who is now the president is clearly very tied to deep-rooted sociological debates in mexico that went on untold. and now we're facing those on a
daily basis. in terms of the democratic institutions that were built -- yesterday we had a conversation about 1994. and going back to what you were signaling, the 40 years of the democratic wave, 30 years of economic reform, 40 years of democratic reform. now i get it. we're in the middle of a mid life crisis and that mid life crisis is being deeply felt in mexico. amongst investors of national -- within the mexican ruling entrepreneurial class. but he's very popular in the
rest of the country. he has three problems that one has to look at. the first one is security. the criminal element has grown in this nine months very, very clearly. kidnaps up more than 15%. murders up. women being murdered in mexico is -- is worrisome phenomenon. and it's coming up to be part of the protests that are growing. the economic -- the economy is not growing. we're at zero and zero means
zero. >> the president says he has other information. >> yes. the president says time and again that he has other information, but zero is zero. but then again, we have become the number one trading partner of the u.s. that's because of china and whatever -- a bigger geopolitical scheme. but reare number one. that means that many of the investments, multinational investments done in mexico are solid and growing because they have to substitute some of the things that were bought in china. the third element that i want to put in front of the audience and
maybe have a larger conversation here or outside of the scenario is polarization. polarization, i think it's a trait that in all of our societies, but from the mexican nice -- the mexican nice is the mexican nice. it's very worrisome because we have become a very polarized society, and time and again the fact that the -- from the president pulpit, there's a lot of name calling towards the media. i'm no longer part of an established institution, media institution, but the fact that you were referring to using the presidential or the government budget on a very pointed manner
to either make somebody that is in his definition an enemy of the people. have you heard that? an enemy of the people suffer or somebody that is on the side of his side happy, has become the usual and standard practice. also polarization in terms of what i was referring to, race and the clr olor of the skin. we have asked the spaniards to send us a note saying that they are sorry that they conquer mexico. he refers to people, accordingly to the color of their skin, our skin.
so some people are good and are part of the people, and some others are not because of the color of the skin. and the conservative factors that he also ties to being part of the mafia -- that can be either economic, social or being part of previous governments. public servants have suffered as they did in the states because they have to represent somebody that is constantly saying that everything that happened before he came to power was part of
corrupt scheme, that most of the people that were related to the institutions that were built from the '90s to the two decades of the 21st century have to be scrapped, be it the competitiveness institutions, the access to information institutions, the electoral body s. so the deconstruction is a trait that can be also linked to this moment. we'll talk about what the construction means, because there are some very interesting things that can be constructed with this majority. >> that's wonderfully clear, the
position of this. president chin chia, you think a lot about issues of governance in latin america as a whole. tell us what you think, how worrying the situation is, how hopeful it might be in terms of the ability of latin america to develop better gov nangs and the rule of law and so forth? >> translator: i'm measured to be part of this panel. i have to denounce our moderator. we have -- that you would call me loud da and not former president because that is the worst presentation that we can have nowadays in latin america, being vice president. indeed it is a great pleasure to be in the company of this wonderful, excellent colleagues.
we're in the midst of a very windy situations, not only meteorologically speaking but also politically. we look at this global pan ram rah, this picture that daniel shows us very clearly and we add to that the analysis of the two largest democracies in latin america being brazil and mexico and that as a consequence very much tend to explain what is the pathway which is established in the region in political terms. so precisely, this highly turbulent times confirm that situation. the hurricane tends to express itself with greater strength and force where it is unleashing its forces, in the cases of venezuela and nicaragua.
we're already at cat 5 lifl. there is no doubt whatsoever that those gusty winds are battering the entire region equally. they hardly got any of the democracies, even those of us that boast of greater stability, such as my small costa rica, may not be suffering in one way or the other as a result of this situation with this weakening of the democratic variables. i would like to add something more in terms of the perception of what daniella told us, to go into some institutional reflexes and ideas and some of the notions regarding the political culture. in regards to what daniel told us he clearly referred to a group, a series of toxic variables. i would add one more which in one way or another comes to
explain in many instances the very giddy deterioration that the presidential figure and government is undergoing in spite of the fact that many of these leaders have been elected only a few months back. although it is indeed true that the people have had evermore negative understanding and feeling about democracy it self-and the functioning of the institutions, presidential institutions which tend to pay the price, the political parties and the congress itself. within this electoral cycle as daniel told us, it was a vote of punishment. it was truly loud speaking. people did want change. they didn't know exactly what for but they acknowledge they wanted change. the expectations go in accordance with the latino
barometer, grew up tremendous in those countries for they thought the future of the country would become better as a result of change. the economy is now on a downward trend. the front has made an adjustment and said growth will be 0.6%. these high expectations, some of the highest that we may recall in the region recently will never ever be met with that very weak economic growth. therefore, there is a job in the popularity, matters that are quite drastic. that is the only country perhaps where the president and the exception in this case i think is in mexico, being -- their mandates clearly debilitated and therefore, we see that times of
tremendous institutional turbulence are before us. let us move back to the institutional topic. we tend to center and we are concerned with the type of leadership which is indeed important and no doubt that populism as opposed to other countries is not a circumstantial situation. in costa rica it is a structural element which is substantial to the policy and politics themselves. this konls hand in hand with another of the ooechls which is clientalism, populism which go along the same pathway. but it's also a matter of concern that the institutions continue to show high levels of wooe weakening. although the peoples have not received a vaccine against the
will to elect a pop listic leader as we're seeing even in clearly established democracies, people are going be lined this type of leadership, at least in the case of some democracies, the institutions manage to oppose and to resist that kind of gusty winds which pass before them. the leadership is so, where the institutions in spite of everything manage to subsist. latin america we have seen they ravage to the institutions. they become established -- they conduct constitutional reforms. the people never manage to get out of them. and as a consequence the effects are truly devastating. in that regard let me quote the most recent study of the global economic forum wherein the institutional pillar regarding
competitiveness, when it reaches -- when the analysis goes to latin america, it tells latin america there are levels of institutional vulnerability, at the very same level as those of sub-saharan africa. after 40 years of a democratic spring, it is too shame, it is terrible that we find ourselves in that situation. we continue to grapple with problems where, of course, we have problems with legal fairness, security. let me move back to the strength thenning of the public ministries, the judges, having greater independence, all of the procedural reforms. you see a decline in the levels of impunity in many countries, but we continue to have tremendous lax. we have executive branches of
government which are extremely weakened having very serious veto problems with a democracy which has imposed their political will. we have the rigidity of the presidentialist systems whereby people wager to the expectations of the president, but the way in which some of the elections have been designed is truly within the suicidal framework. let us see the case of el salvador. we have an exceptional communicator in the president who has managed to maintain the support of the people. but el salvador, elections to congress go back many years before the president took office. so we have now a new person who doesn't have a legislative majority. whenever we see what has been happening in france, it is the other way around, the opposite. in order to strengthen consensus and the possibility to forge ahead in the decision-making process, despite the fact we see
a strengthening of the judiciary which is indeed something positive, we are concerned that they may exceed their mandate. and we see judicial powers nowadays which defined the rules of the game on the fly along the electoral process such as what happened in brazil and guatemala only recently. we saw branches were co-administering such as the case of costa rica. so there we have a tremendous task as regards the relationship of the public and branches of government, the design of our presidentialistic systems, the tremendous challenges from the standpoint of the decision-making process of the administration. and i would like to conclude by telling you about the way in which we latin americans tend to make the role of culture invisible, to shun it.
and here i'm referring to the political culture. most of the valuable material that regional surveys provide us with is telling us and warning us about matters latin-american see vis-a-vis corruption. they think that through corruption they can solve the problems. tremendous number of latin h latin-americans continue to agree to disorder than democracy. and that we have not done it. very form alistic approach vis-a-vis social change makes whenever we grapple with a challenge, we go into find the constitution approving new legislation and we never think of going back which is the most important thing. the civic information and the development in political culture which is, indeed, much stronger
eventually everything will depend on the will of the peoples. and it is there where the future of leadership will be defined. and not only that, but where the administration of expectations vis-a-vis democracy take place. >> the rule of law, the first 500 years are indeed the most difficult ones. the first 500. yes, we are approaching that, aren't we? so 40 years is, indeed, nothing. so what we have heard is truly extremely clear and how things are changing. so we'll be talking about that. >> daniela, tell us about
argentina. is argentina -- let's assume for the sake of argument that fernandez gannon, what change is that going to mean for argentina and for the region? in two minutes. [ speaking in foreign language ] >> translator: however, i do believe that there is a really high probability they will have a punishment vote. and indeed this is an important element going back to what we were told in regard of institutional design. argentina which had been having the situation of tremendous economic lax had a weakening in this open and mandatory elections. type of election which have been
distorted in the utilization. but on august 11 where the first round would be left argentina and the situation of brutal vulnerability. why is this? because an election which in institutional terms represents nothing because fernandez continues to be a mere candidate. gives tremendous political symbolic power and places him practically as the next president. so sort of a virtual president elect. politically things did change in terms of expectation. who continues to be the president should be so until december 10. destroyed his political capital. therefore it generated a s summation of anger and terror and panic.
vis-a-vis the possible arrival. all of that within the scheme of tremendous economic weakness determined this indead debtedness in place of stable equilibrium. and it has to do with we have to deal with rerigidity of this. but i believe what people want to know, what is your viewpoint as to whether supposing that the fernandez -- is this a return to the past or will this be something new and different? i think it's impossible to go back to the past. indeed, that was a key element for the campaign in order to polarize this other tendency that the panel was discussing. they thought that if christina came back, alberto fernandez would be going back to full in
the past and converting argentina to venezuela. that's because of a clear political reality in argentina with the regional context also changed. third the international contest was also modified. not with the heavy wad of money trying to make big investments. this is an illustration that will come in with tremendous economic weakness. i don't think they have majority in both houses. probably not. something did have in the past and the regional context today is completely different. what will be the consequence of this? already told us. for example, if fernandez are the winners, they could review, revise the possibility of staying in. would like to see what will be their policy of greater ideological agreement in the region. but the last elections will be
paramount. not just in argentina but also those in bolivia and uruguay. but we'll see what happens, michael. it is not clear yet. >> after eight months, approval rating is below 30%. he -- we shall see. but his project is not necessarily going to be successful, i should say. he won because of the collapse of the center in brazil. after 15 years of rule by the pt, 14 years of rule by the pt, there was a very widespread sense of rejection towards the pt. so my question was in many ways became the kind of scapegoat for all of the failings of brazil corruption do you see the possibility of rebuilding that
center? or is brazil condemned to a politics of polarization between the project and a return of the pt? >> yeah. i think this is a clear response from the population about this weird or crazy behavior in statements. it's not something that we can attribute to economy or political decisions. it's something personal. so -- and this is something that i think we need, because yeah, we all here are talking about how we are navigating in turbulent times and how we need to, you know, learn or come up with new ideas and behaviors. but something that i think -- i
was thinking about when talking, first of all we need to keep our sanity. because we've been here for a long time. doing that for almost 30 years. and this people, they come and go. so we need to focus on that thing. because i feel many times -- [ speaking in foreign language ] because bolsonaro mimics everything trump does. tweet, like crazy -- his ministers tweet crazy things. his sons do terrible things as well on social media. and i realize us as journalists, we we are completely surrounded by these noise and distraction.
we're not seeing the real important and vel varelevant th. we sign up this huge, important agreements with european union. and no paper and no magazine. because the trip was about bolsonaro tweet, his minister this and that. it wasn't an agreement that was being negotiated for 20 years. so it's crazy. >> 20. >> 20 years. so how could we allow this happen? so we are lost and we need to bring us, you know, together. bring our energy together. and focus on the important things. saying that about the center, i
think it's very complicated and very early now to try to figure a political scenario for the next 33 years. because it's crazy. it's almost nine months and we have this sensation, the feeling that we are, you know, in this debate for, like, five years. but it's only nine. so some names are, you know, popping. as a tv show host. one of the guys who very friends with the former president who is here in the board. and because his stepfather used to be the minister. and there is another name, sao pau paulo's governor, he's a kind of --
>> isn't he a bolsonaro-light? >> he's a -- yeah. they are struggling now, but in the beginning he was supporting him. yeah, but he's a very -- a wealthy man with a liberal agenda. he comes and go, depends on the window of opportunities. so the names are not on the table yet because it's too early. but one thing we know is the left, it's completely lost. it's impossible to think about a revival of a leftist force. from the jail insists in control. all the political chests from his jail which is crazy.
because people needs to rekorz themselves. >> so it's a dynamic situation which we'll have to watch closely. rosana, you said this is a very personal project in mexico of the president. i always remember that in a village near mexico city, there is a street call eed -- [ speaking in foreign language ] which was the slogan underneath which was launched. fran kmcesco who launched that slogan is one of the heroes. does this mean that changing the constitution to allow is a bridge too far or not
necessarily? >> we'll see. he has specifically and repeatedly said that he will not seek re-election. but you remember george bush father -- read my lips, i will not raise taxes. when you're saying that, the lady speaks too much. huh? protests too much. we'll see what happens in 2024. i believe that honestly he's trying to work on his political change that has some constructive points. and i wanted to stress those now. if he could raise -- the
standards of living in those spaces, it will help a lot, the country. it will mean that in equality and poverty is addressed differently. if, indeed, let's go back to what ambassador, a career diplomat said yesterday. and pointed out the root causes of the migration coming from central america are somehow considered in the development plans that both mexico and other spaces in the world look towards and hopefully the u.s. eventually will get to its senses and come back and be part
of the region in a more constructive way. if that is to happen, that's very, very constructive. also for the region. and the fiscal discipline. others should not estimate the fact that we have autonomous central bank since the '90s. and that institution has not been rattled. it has been criticized by the president. but so has the federal reserve here. presidents that are very strong do not like reserve banks because they do what they do and they should keep on doing it. take care of the macroeconomics. but, that said, the direct
democracy that is -- the direct democracy if turned not into manuel salda exercise but another exercise of direct democracy that we're looking into because the president is very interested in that could maybe through social media or other mechanisms could give voice to people that felt not listened to. and going back to the political culture, if we change that in a society that is as divided as the mexican society and people felt cared for and listened, that could very well strengthen the democracy. [ speaking in foreign language ]
>> translator: when we hear him speak, there's no doubt that he seems to have a direct line of communication. he has the ability to speak to and be understood by the people of mexico. what about non-populist democrats of the broad center? how can they rekindle ties and relationships with people? do you have any recommendations along those lines? >> translator: without a doubt, communication means communication or mechanism of communication are important. the way people communicate, our leaders communicate with people are important.
given the mistakes we made, remember the great communicators of the region, two great communicators in the region, you may recall that both represent ed opposed views but nonetheless oftentimes it's not so much what you say but how you do it. people react to the way a message is expressed. i do believe from the standpoint of the challenges of a response of the outlook, we have to think of the effectiveness of communicating, how to communicate. can't lose sight of that. and certainly from that standpoint, social networks are a great opportunity for
politicians. if you think that is a result of this, it's not true. they have afailed themselves of social media. and now have direct communication. they use tv more than social networks at the time. i think social networks without a doubt as said are for a huge responsibility for communication but also to build citizenships because it's not just a one-way communication. it's a two-way. that comes back to the politician that has to be wise enough to listen to they don't like. and adjust to demands expressed to them by the populous. now, one of the good things i see happening in the region and we have to see some of this, a
ray of hope where are these rays of hope pointed. we have to look at the transformation because of social network. i think that is a great opportunity to breathe fresh breath, shed light on the decision making process. that's important. but that said, can't overlook importance of content. but the content, and i do feel that that is where to a certain degree we have failed. these are being so radical. we have to stand up for the principles of democracy. we ourselves have to be radical in defending democracy through and from democracy otherwise we are not going to be heard. this moderation that we sideline
itself, freedom of expression, for example. on that occasion, we see an attempt of trying to rein in rights or even the court as far as a generation rights. henceforth. i know rosana is very focused on that as well. what we will do now because we only have 15 or 20 minutes left. let's hear your questions. please identify yourself and we'll take two or three questions. i'm from argentina. i have a question i'd like to
ask. i'd like to know what you think about this process that we observe in the u.s. the america first message. as i see it, trump's presidency is very detached from what's happening in latin america. my sensation is that there are some things in latin america, people that you think are his followers. as examples. much money has been given by the imf to argentina now that is in default. so what's happening with trump? that's what i'd like to have you address within the context of democracies. he doesn't understand latin america. he's not interested in latin america.
we're not hearing any messages of growth, inability, or ensuring that the u.s. becomes a different -- >> i have a question regarding corruption. and the role that it's playing in the region and how it's affecting organized crime and weakening the institutions and i know in particular has been dealing with all the problems that we've been having and all the massive migrations. spoken kind of like the cancer of the region. once and for all to see the area the region deserves. >> thank you very much. one more?
[ speaking in foreign language ] >> translator: what can be done from the standpoint of a coordination across such organizations who support democracy in the region? this is a worrisome problem often times we -- that might be viewed as political meddling. if you look -- when can support be effective? what are the effective strategies? when are they not effective? the strengthening democracies in the region. >> choose which ones you want to answer. you don't have to answer all of
them. >> translator: i'll leave the trump question for them to answer. i just want to talk about this being overlooked. at the issue of crime. and the northern triangle is being hardest hit in the case of mexico. let me just say there are some hopeful situations you see over the last five or six years. crime rates or murder rates that have gone down in nicaragua. you see also high rates of reduction of murder. yet to see a study that seeks to understand why that's actually happening. we have a number of working hypotheses. none of which are substanceuated. so we have this opportunity for us to understand what have we
done differently. that's worked. so that we can rally our efforts behind that which has already exceeded. in the northern triangle it's the closest to as far as the number of deaths that we've seen people being expelled through the region. this is a region that calls for ourself prior attention. so what is happening? now, in support of the national community, i speak a lot about th this. our programs, investments to bolster the rule of law. the administration of justice, anything that goes toward
shoring up minister of justice. that is what works. you have to ensure that impunity isn't a given. that something will be done so we have to reform, overhaul the administration of justice to go toward the system to give more to the prosecutors office. and have career judge a career bench judgeship. >> no, he does not understand latin america or care for latin america. he watches fox news. and the four mexican countries get under his skin. no? mexico certainly was part and an important part of his looking presidential.
when he was not considered to be an option. let's not forget about where he comes from. let me say that he is clearly not a accompanied by professionals. which were there at the beginning. because the u.s. had invested in professionals, diplomats, and foreign and civil service types that meant well for their country and for the relationship. but many have left because this is, again, a president that is -- we'll talking about in latin america. but this is as close as you get to that in this country. and let me just briefly touch upon pence. mike pence and evangelicals.
because this is something that we have talked about. the recent element that has been pointed out, in brazil clearly the evangelicals are making their claims a political problem. they did so in your country with candidates. and they are very close to manuel in our country. so we have to take that into consideration. because that comes to stop a long tradition of church and state that were each on its own space. and we will see that changing. >> okay.
very good. can international pressure on brazil in erm thes of democracy and human rights be helpful? or is it counterproductive? does it stimulate nationalism? >> no. i think we should speak out loud about everything that happens there. because people are so overwhelmed and lost in the middle of these noises and everything. so i think it's very important and i think international media is covering the things very well but i would love to add something to your point about evangelica evangelicals. because i think evangelical voters are probably the strongest of power to they have a large political power now in brazil. but as it happened here during trump elections, when people here and the media mostly didn't
know how to address the west virginia people and then they were all shocked when the maps, you know, became red during the election night. so we can't and we don't know how to address evangelicals in brazil. i think politicians were atheists don't know either. so it's always with this vision, a pate nicing vision on them. because they gave nothing about this. and try to understand and make them part of the political gain which is very hard for us to understand. >> thank you very much. before going to daniel, we have five minutes left. of course we've only had three questions. if somebody has a burning
question, can they -- yes. then we'll take it. >> thank you. >> translator: coordinator of the tax force women's leadership. i would like to congratulate the organizers of this given a great representation of women on the different panels. [ applause ] this shouldn't surprise us that there are such talented women who can be a part of the discussion, the important panels. but it's worth mentioning this. we're not going back to the kitchen. the results of the last elections we've seen in the region, my question is for
dani dani daniela who's been working hard on this subject matter. but also for our female colleagues, panelists as far as the systems and the proposals for electoral reform leading toward greater party in the region. that has the lowest female representation where the system is not working. it seems like no one is even about the topic. what's your understanding of what's happening throughout the region? >> three minutes. okay. >> translator: the bad news of this cycle is latin america is going to emerge from this without one single woman
president. so the next presidential photo of latin america is going to be a 19th century one. not a 21st century one. and that there will not be women presidents. we have many vice presidents. progress has been made as far as those in the congress that says we have a long path ahead. and that's a priority. if wanting a better doctors policy, that democracy has to have greater parity. so this is a very important aspect. >> thank you. let me just say three things that i've taken from this discussion. firstly, that we should not underestimate the gravity of -- i mean, it is serious. it's worrying. and it needs to be confronted. secondly, latin america has a
lot of long-term problems. but the long-term starts tomorrow. and you -- and the region have tackled thaez things. some of these questions are of institutional design. design of political systems. and some deeper things which take longer but you have to start somewhere. and thirdly, that of a cheap hope, let's say. but i am struck just in the last little while that is around the world. but there is to use that great american phrase, pushback going on. you look at turkey, hong kong, russ russia. look at brazil. look at my country. yesterday was a rather good day