proci1001

PROCESO — WEEKLY NEWS BULLETIN — EL SALVADOR, C.A.

Center for Information, Documentation and Research Support (CIDAI)
E-mail: cidai@cidai.uca.edu.sv

Central American University (UCA)
Apdo. Postal 01-168, Boulevard Los Próceres
San Salvador, El Salvador, Centro América
Tel: +(503) 210-6600 ext. 407
Fax: +(503) 210-6655

Proceso is published weekly in Spanish by the Center for Information, Documentation and Research Support (CIDAI) of the Central American University (UCA) of El Salvador. Portions are sent in English to the *reg.elsalvador* conference of PeaceNet in the USA and may be forwarded or copied to other networks and electronic mailing lists. Please make sure to mention Proceso when quoting from this publication.

Subscriptions to Proceso in Spanish can be obtained by sending a check for US$50.00 (Americas) or $75.00 (Europe) made out to 'Universidad Centroamericana' and sent to the above address. Or read it partially on the UCA’s Web Page: http://www.uca.edu.sv
For the ones who are interested in sending donations, these would be welcome at Proceso. Apdo. Postal 01-168, San Salvador, El Salvador.

Proceso 1067
October 1, 2003
ISSN 0259-9864

INDEX

Editorial: One of the crowd

Politics: The manipulators of the truth

Economy: An approach to the 2002 Annual Report of the World’s Bank for Latin America and the Caribbean

Editorial

One of the crowd

He was gathered with the presidents of the most powerful countries, but he was just one in a crowd. That is how President Flores looked when it was his turn to speak before the General Assembly of the United Nations. Others who also gave a speech were, the Secretary General, who opened the meeting, Bush, Chirac, Schroder, and Lula. However, the Salvadoran President did not stand out. The press did not notice his discourse. Only the Salvadoran press gave him credit for his words. And it gets worse, when he was introduced, they confused him with the President of Guatemala.

In his intervention, Flores included a couple of issues and he said that Taiwan had the right to be officially acknowledged as an independent nation. This was a necessary reference, because of the economic support that Taiwan gives to the Central American governments. One of the issues that Flores referred to was the invasion in Iraq and the present situation. Far from belonging to the debate of the world’s most powerful countries, he stood by the United States. Bush did not say anything new, and he did not change his perspective, but he asked for soldiers and for money, because he does not control the present situation.

The Secretary General criticized the American doctrine about the preventive war that Bush used to justify the invasion. He said that a preventive war can lead to the proliferation of the unilateral use of force, with or without a legitimate justification. On the other hand, Flores criticized the United Nations; he considered that the UN was not at the height of the circumstances because it did not stood by the United States. Flores asked for the reorganization of the UN, in other words, that the UN becomes a branch of the American government.

Several European nations denounced the fact that the invasion created a terrible crisis in the UN, that no one could act alone in the name of everyone, and that no one could accept a society without rules, a clear allusion to the United States. These European countries wish that the Iraqi population takes control of its own society, and that the troops that have occupied the territory finally leave. They would be willing to collaborate with the United States if this country allows them to participate in the decision making process. However, Flores justified the unilateral actions of Washington with the pretext of the attack against terrorism. It should not seem odd if, except for El Salvador, no one noticed the words of a President who just kept repeating the discourse of the master of the empire. Differently from Flores, Lula explained that you can win a war in an unilateral fashion, but that you cannot create peace without the participation and the approval of the nations. Brazil has its own opinion and a suitable approach.

As for the second issue, President Flores adopted a provincial perspective. He began his intervention by presenting El Salvador as a successful model of the Neoliberal experiment. No one paid attention to him. That was not a suitable issue for a debate of such dimensions, for a group of countries worried by the imperial demands of the United States. However, since the podium is free, every President talks about whatever he wants. In the assembly, no one was enthusiastic about the alleged Salvadoran achievements. The Salvadoran President was not at the height of the circumstances, he just was, again, one of the crowd.
The Brazilian President, for example, proposed to create a world-wide commission to fight hunger in the globe, a commission integrated by the chiefs of the states and a member of the United Nations. The proposal seemed interesting for the President of France, who proposed to tax the benefits of the globalization (investments and trade). Hunger affects one fourth of the world’s population, including 300 million children. However, this is not an important issue for the Salvadoran President, despite that in El Salvador, according to the records of the United Nations, there is hunger, malnutrition, and several illnesses related to those topics. The average height of the Salvadoran population has decreased, and the population’s academic performance is deficient because of malnutrition. Nevertheless, President Flores painted an idyllic picture of the country using some unknown statistics. Out of all those statistics he mentioned, only the infancy death toll is correct. The rest of them have nothing to do with the ones of the United Nations’ Program for Development, and not even with the official sources.

According to the presidential calculations, throughout the three ARENA administrations, poverty would have been reduced to half (from 60% to 33%); however, the United Nations sustains that, by the year 2000, 45% of the population lived under the line of poverty, and it is not very probable that such an index could have been reduced by 12%. There were earthquakes, recessions, and hunger along the way. Extreme poverty would have also been reduced by 50%, when it went from 30% to 15%. However, the United Nations indicate once again that almost 20% of the population lives in extreme poverty. Illiteracy is another index that was allegedly reduced to half, going from 25% to 13%, however, the UN indicates that it is a 21%. The same thing happened with potable water, electricity, and unemployment. The unemployment level is much higher than the government thinks. The actual unemployment level is 17%, while the President indicated that the unemployment level was 6%. Only the sub-employment reaches a 30%, and it tends to affect the women more than it can affect the male sector of the society.

If it were true that the Flores administration had built 106 houses per day, the housing deficit would be almost gone; however, the vice-minister of this branch says something completely different. If it is true that the Flores administration has built a kilometer of roads every day, in the last four years, the country would have now more than 1,400 additional kilometers, and the people would not have to ask the candidate of ARENA to build so many roads and bridges. If it is true that every five days this administration builds a health clinic, and that every three days it builds a school, the country would have now 292 clinics and 4,380 additional schools. Perhaps the President is confusing reparations with constructions, and classrooms with schools. However, the presidential Commissioner for the Social Area explained that these percentages are a way to measure the effort made in those sectors. That is certainly a strange way to measure it. Definitively not at the height of the circumstances, Flores was present at the General Assembly of the United Nations as a President who was just one more individual in a crowd. He was not even consistent with the truth, the right of the truth that he proclaimed in same discourse, since he hid the truth about the country he administrates.

Politics

The manipulators of the truth

President Flores went to the UN to say that El Salvador is a wonderland where poverty and unemployment are issues related with prehistoric events. Bush said to the people of the United States and to the entire world that Saddam Hussein had hidden weapons of massive destruction, and that was why it was necessary to destroy Saddam’s country and kill thousands of innocent people. Blair told his compatriots that it was important to act fast because 45 minutes were enough, in case of a threat, for Saddam to bombard London. These three men, with such different professional backgrounds –Bush is a conservative politician, Blair is a leader of the so called modern left wing, and Flores comes from the most recalcitrant right wing, the heiress of a rancid nationalism-, shake hands when it comes to manipulate the truth and spread, in such a natural manner, despicable lies.

Most of the American people, with a wish to get a revenge for the attacks of September 11th, approved of the invasion to Iraq. The government in London, however, went to the war without the support of its citizens; later, however, when the hostilities started, many people decide to support the troops. Nevertheless, a few months before the end of the war, the political effects of the manipulation are already in the air. Blair and Bush are questioned by their citizens. Many American and British citizens were deceived. Everyone knows by now that Saddam did not represent a dangerous threat for those who attacked him, and that it seems that he did not even count with those “dangerous weapons”.

In Blair’s case, it has been necessary to use certain fuses to save the First Minister. After the suicide of a member of the laboring government, the authorities have not only had to admit a sort of a judgment over the behavior of the Executive power in this issue, but also Blair’s main advisor of communication had to leave. Bush, on the other hand, even if he is not well aware about the levels of disapproval that surrounds his main ally, is also about to be questioned because of his political decisions, and because of the way he administrates information.

In either case, the shameless manipulation of the public opinion has been seriously questioned. Many British citizens say that they hate the communication strategy of the present governmental team. That is why the government has promised to make some changes because of the crisis. In the case of Bush, several analysts restlessly observe the alliance that has been established between a government of war men and a conservative press at their service. However, it is also necessary to notice that, in both cases, thanks to the strength of the democratic institutions of these countries, the truth and the dishonest informative actions have come out to the public light, and both of these governments are being questioned.

What will happen with Francisco Flores, now that the manipulation of information is his presentation card? To begin with, Flores forgot that the international forums are not an adequate place to discuss or to evaluate the economic results of an administration. And that is because from the podium of the UN there is no way to question the achievements that the politicians talk about. That is probably one of the reasons why the interventions have to be attached specifically to the analysis of the international politics, and establish the position of the countries about this subject.

The hallucinating speech given by Flores will have no effect at all in the UN. There will not be any positive political dividends for the President and his administration as a consequence of his alleged qualified performance in the Salvadoran affairs. When the international community is looking for reliable and credible information about the performance of a government or the situation in his country, it does not rely on the official figures. The governments usually put some make up on the economic and the social subject’s results, in order to congratulate themselves with their own citizens. That is why, in order to make a serious analysis of the situation in a country, it is necessary to use at all times the information of the independent sources.

Internationally, it is well-known that El Salvador is a country of immigrants, the citizens usually abandon their families and their land, despite the dangers of their journey in order to improve their economic situation. A reality that, from any angle, crashes with the repeatedly advertised advantages of the Salvadoran Neoliberal model. If the self-pleasing discourse is not changed in the future, it will be very difficult to actually get the international resources to help the poor of a wealthy nation. On the contrary, it is very probable that the international funds go to the countries that do not hide their poverty, and not to those that stand proud speaking about their dreamlands.

On the other hand, if the Salvadoran President expected to give a little push to the presence of the country in the world, he took the wrong turn of the road. Not only because lying will not get him too far, but because the only way out that the small and the less developed countries have has to do with a multilateral perspective. However, Flores vilified the UN precisely because its leading members claimed the respect for the international principles against an overwhelmingly powerful nation. That is why it is very probable that after the speech of the Salvadoran President, the country will keep carrying its international irrelevance, and, in addition, its tag of a lackey of the United States.

Nevertheless, the Salvadoran President could not be completely wrong. His declarations reveal that the United Nations is an organization that has failed to reach its objectives. The certainty of this statement reveals itself in the cynicism used to present the alleged boom in the economy and the society of El Salvador. Only a weak organization can admit that someone says how much it has failed to support the decisions made by the most powerful military nation of the world. Otherwise, someone would have taken the time to put a disrespectful president in his place, who is even more insolent than his mentor. Bush, in this occasion, did not speak about the irrelevance of the UN. On the contrary, he asked the members of the organization to forget the past disagreements in order to help him to resolve a problem that is running out of his hands.

It is not clear if the lying declarations made by Flores will have several consequences for El Salvador. His administration has given more importance to the lies than to the truth, and he has used arrogance as a way to conduct politics. The President forgot before the UN that a considerable part of Salvadorans think that his economic administration has been a complete disaster. Probably Flores expects that an electoral triumph of his party in the next elections can make the people forget about the poor economic and social results, and his frequent attacks against the democratic institutional performance of the country.

Economy

An approach to the 2002 Annual Report of the World’s Bank for Latin America and the Caribbean

During the last decade, the Latin American and the Caribbean economies have experienced a series of contractions that have affected their GNP. According to the 2002 Annual Report of the World’s Bank, from 1998 to 2001, the growth of those economies has found itself trapped in a constant fluctuation mainly due to the recession of the world’s economy, the crisis of the financial markets in Russia and Eastern Asia in 1998, and, finally, to certain events of the region that have distorted several macroeconomic variables: the Argentinean external debt, and the critical droughts of Central America and Brazil.

According to the document, in 1999, the regional GNP had increased only by 0.1% per year. The following year, the same indicator registered an increase of 3.9%. For 2001, the economies of the region went again through a contraction period, and the regional GNP only grew by 0.4%. This is how the Report of the World’s Bank describes that, despite the achievements of the last years, there is still a lot to do in Latin America and the Caribbean.

One of the reasons for the bad shape of the region’s economy, according to the report, obeys to a reduction of 1.4% in the exportation activity during 2001. This reduction is due to a substantial deterioration, during the last years, of the prices of the traditional exports of the Latin American countries. In the same year, the regular account’s deficit of Latin America and the Caribbean increased ($500 million). The deficit, in addition to its connection with the bad performance of the exportation activities, was due to a reduction of the income that came from the tourism and the remittances, a result of the September 11th attacks and the economic recession of the United States.

In reference to the social and the economic levels, the information provided by the report of the World’s Bank is not encouraging at all. In 1990, the Latin American population that lived with less than a dollar was a 16.8%. In 1999, there was a 15.1% of the regional population under the same conditions. In other words, throughout the nineties, there were no substantial changes to help the poor. The deficient actions to fight against poverty are due to, according to the organization, the existence of a constant growth of the GNP per capita in the last few years. Central America and the Caribbean could go through an increasing level of poverty in the new millennium. According to the World’s Bank, there is a variety of elements that remain as an obstacle to get ahead with the fight against poverty in those countries. The droughts, the deteriorations of the prices of coffee, and the economic effects of the September 11th attacks are the events that have shaped the behavior of their economies.

In the present, 170 million, out of an approximate total of 510 million of inhabitants of the region, live with less than two dollars per day. There are 70 million people who live in more precarious conditions, because they survive with less than a dollar per day. In reference to the demographic aspect, the situation of Latin America and the Caribbean represents a serious challenge for the governments of the region. According to the Report, the Latin American and the Caribbean cities concentrate approximately 75% of the inhabitants. In other words, during the last years, the number of migrations from the country to the city have increased. This situation represents a serious challenge for the governments, as far as the provisions of water, electricity, transportation, and road constructions are concerned, among other aspects. The investment to achieve these objectives is estimated in $70,000 million.

The World’s Bank, through the International Bank of Reconstruction and Support (BIRF, in Spanish), and the International Association of Support (AIF) have as a goal to reduce, by 2015, the poverty level of 1990 by 50%. In order to achieve this objective, this organization is giving the priority to the education area, the strengthening of the financial sector, the social protection, the reform and the administration of institutions, as well as the environmental sustainability. The World’s Bank revealed that only a sustainable growth together with a transparent performance of the public administration are the most important elements to reach the aforementioned goals.

The areas considered as a priority by the World’s Bank are part of a plan to eradicate poverty, not only in both the Latin American and the Caribbean regions, but in a global scale as well. This institution intends to establish favorable conditions for the investments, to create jobs, and to promote a sustainable development. It will also intend to invest in the poorest sectors of these societies, in order to improve the people’s skills to participate in the development activities. In order to achieve these goals, during the year 2002 and through the BIRF, this institution counted with $3,505.1 million. Through the AIF, the bank withdrew $272.5 million. The areas that counted with more funds for 2002 were the following: the administration of the public sector, the development of both the financial and the private sector, and the development of the human resources. From a different perspective, the sectors that received more funds were those connected with the public administration and the area of justice, as well as the financial sector, and both the health and the education areas.

According to the Report, it seems that the World’s Bank keeps thinking that the only way to promote development is through a considerable participation in the market. According to this institution, these actions will promote a more transparent economic relation and immediately reveal any attempt to use the resources of the state in a fraudulent manner. That is why, not from the perspective of an economic dogmatism, but according to an institutional vision, the World’s Bank proposes certain regulations for the creation of new markets. It seems that this financial institution has slightly changed its investment priorities, going from a technical and an economic approach to an institutional one, focused on the society.

However, a critical vision about the new operating terms of the bank explains that “the bank is presently concerned about supporting political reform projects in order to propose both punitive and reformist legal frames; the democratic governance will stop being, at least for our countries, a lifestyle of social coexistence, in order to become a group of regulations that display, for the foreign investors, a positive image of the country, ideal for their investments, and for the adequate return of the benefits” (See Realidad No. 75, page 350).

The World’s Bank has not only been the object of the critics made by the organizations that do not approve of globalization. It has also been criticized by renowned economists –Sachs, Krugman, Stiglitz, and Dornbusch-, who explain that the Bank’s policies do not contribute to the actual development of the countries. The institutional reforms proposed by the World’s Bank, instead of responding to financial interests, should strengthen the incipient democracies of the region.

Please, send us your comments and suggestions

More information:
Tel: +503-210-6600 ext. 407, Fax: +503-210-6655