Mexico celebrates Presidenta Sheinbaum

by Jim Hodgson

For the first time, Mexicans have chosen a woman to be their president. She is Claudia Sheinbaum, 61, a climate scientist who previously served as mayor of Mexico City. 

“The transformation continues!” A campaign billboard promotes the campaign of Claudia Sheinbaum in the southern state of Chiapas. The slogan refers to the ‘Fourth Transformation‘ of Mexican political institutions and the economy begun by her predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

That a woman is president is no minor detail. It was only in the middle of the last century that women in Mexico won the rights to vote and to run for public office. Even now, only 14 of 193 nations have women in power as presidents or prime ministers.

Sheinbaum can be expected to continue the generally progressive approaches taken by her predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (known as AMLO). Her leading opponent was businesswoman and former senator Xóchitl Gálvez, candidate of a centre-right coalition. 

CBC News report days earlier said that neither Sheinbaum nor Gálvez actually committed themselves to “real change for women” on issues such as pay equity, reproductive rights, or violence against women. 

One of Mexico’s leading journalists, Blanche Petrich, wrote that three women (Michelle Bachelet in Chile, Cristina Fernández in Argentina, and Dilma Rousseff in Brazil) who were representative of the progressive “pink wave” governments in Latin America did not “leave a legacy that would definitively reverse gender inequality.” 

A CBC News report on the quality of feminism represented by Mexico’s two leading candidates, and Blanche Petrich’s review in La Jornada of past experiences of women as presidents in Latin America.

Bachelet, notes Petrich, once said: 

“What does it mean to be a woman in public office? Is it to be the same as a man, but with a skirt? No. When a woman arrives alone in politics, the woman changes. When many women arrive in politics, politics change. And clearly, one of the challenges and needs of our democracy is to improve the quality of politics.”

In the Mexican election, Sheinbaum and Gálvez tended to address issues of concern to women within a range of economic, social and criminal justice proposals. Framed this way, there were sharp differences between the two.

Sheinbaum will continue to give priority to social programs, pensions and scholarships that benefit the least advantaged, as well as concentrating on investment in infrastructure to support industries that create jobs. The approach by Gálvez was that of conservatives everywhere: keep taxes—and wages—low and let the market take care of the rest (though she did promise to maintain AMLO’s social programs).

At her victory celebration late Sunday night, Sheinbaum affirmed her movement’s commitment to democracy. “By conviction, we will never make an authoritarian or repressive government. We will also respect political, social, cultural and religious freedoms, and gender and sexual diversity.”

Regarding criminal justice issues (which media tend to subsume under the heading “security”), Mexico obviously has serious problems. At least 34 candidates were killed during the election period that included national as well as some state and municipal elections. 

There are still about 30,000 homicides per year, though the government says the number has been dropping by about five per cent per year. 

AMLO tried to turn back the violence unleashed by one of his predecessors. In 2006, then-President Felipe Calderón, with backing from the United States, launched a military-led offensive against the drug cartels to curb their violent turf wars. Instead, the violence became much worse. 

AMLO promoted an approach he called “abrazos no balazos”–hugs not bullets. It meant addressing the social roots of violence by giving people the education and other resources they need to avoid being drawn into the drug-trafficking cartels and their systems of power. Over the long term, the approach should lead to reduced levels of violence.

But it has been controversial and is subject to manipulation, even in mainstream media like The New York Times, and has led to threats of military intervention from various U.S. politicians, including the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump. 

Even within the AMLO-Sheinbaum coalition, there is agitation. When Eduardo Ramírez–a former AMLO opponent who, like too many others, opportunistically shifted loyalties–celebrated his victory as governor of Chiapas Sunday night, he said: “There will be hugs, but no impunity.”

United States takes modest step towards easing its long embargo against Cuba

By Jim Hodgson

A modest step forward in the long struggle to end the failed U.S. embargo came this week when the United States removed Cuba from its short list of countries it alleges are “not cooperating fully” in its fight against terrorism. “This move… could well be a prelude to the State Department reviewing Cuba’s designation as a state sponsor of terrorism,” William LeoGrande, a professor at Washington’s American University, told Reuters.

Left: Reuters coverage. Right: As reported by CubaDebate – “State Department recognises the lie, but does not remove Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism.” President Miguel Diaz-Canel told interviewer Ignacio Ramonet that many of Cuba’s economic woes begin with the U.S. blockade, tightened in 2021 with “the inclusion of Cuba in a spurious list determined at will by the U.S. government of countries that supposedly support terrorism.”

Until this week, the administration of President Joe Biden had made only minor reforms—easing some restrictions on travel and family remittances in May 2022—but had scarcely budged from the harsh measures taken by his predecessor, Donald Trump, much less attaining Barack Obama’s level of engagement.

It was just days just before the end of Trump’s administration in January 2021 that Cuba was added to the list of “state sponsors of terrorism” (SST)—because Cuba was hosting peace talks between the Colombian government and one of the guerrilla armies, the Ejército de Liberación Nacional (ELN). Despite occasional setbacks, the Colombian peace process moves forward slowly.

Biden’s new move comes after three years of non-stop advocacy by churches and other non-governmental organizations to end the embargo and to have Cuba removed from the SST list.

Efforts by churches, unions and other groups are driven by a sharp deterioration of the Cuban economy that is partly a consequence of the SST and other measures as banks and other corporations fear running afoul of the U.S. measures. The economic downturn is also related to reduced tourist visits to the country during the Covid pandemic and Cuba’s abandonment of its former two-currency system (one tied to the U.S. dollar, and the other that effectively subsidized local transactions).

In April 2023, an informal alliance of more than 20 Canadian churches, trade unions, development agencies and community solidarity groups wrote to Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly and to then-International Development Minister Harjit Sajjan to express alarm at the “deterioration of the Cuban economy and consequent impacts on the Cuban people.”

They called on the government to press the United States to ease sanctions and to remove Cuba from the SST list. They also asked that Canada “scale up its efforts to provide immediate food, medicines, and medical supplies to Cuba” (whether directly with the Cuban state or via NGOs and multilateral organizations). 

Canada has made some efforts, notably the announcement March 6 of a $540,000 contribution to the World Food Program to support provision of 150 tons of milk that will assist Cuban children. Canada’s response followed just two days after the Cuban government had made its first-ever request to WFP for food aid. Canada continues to fund the work of NGOs such as Oxfam and CARE Canada in Cuba.

The Canadian letter echoed earlier calls from Cuban and U.S. churches. In a joint letter sent Feb. 18, 2021, they asked Biden to to restore travel, remittances and trade with Cuba; to remove Cuba from the list of “state sponsors of terrorism;” to rescind Trump’s mandate to use extraterritorial provisions of the Helms-Burton law; and to rebuild U.S. diplomatic presence in Cuba. On March 13, 2023, more than 20 U.S. faith groups wrote to Biden to ask that Cuba be removed from the SST list.

The SST designation, along with Trump’s application of measures contained in the 1995 Helms-Burton Act, have extraterritorial impacts. Foreign-owned ships won’t dock in Cuba and foreign banks are reluctant to transfer funds for fear of running afoul of the U.S. laws. To understand better the impact of the SST in Cuba, please read a long report by the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA).

The extraterritorial features of the Helms-Burton law provoked anger in Canada and Europe, but those features were effectively waived by Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama. In April 2019, Trump revived them. Canada repeated its objection, and reminded Canadians that amendments in 1996 to Canada’s Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act (FEMA) stipulate that any judgment issued under Helms-Burton “shall neither be recognized nor enforceable in any manner in Canada.”

But Canada, to my knowledge, has yet to say anything publicly about the SST list.

Meanwhile, churches, NGOs and solidarity groups continue to provide aid to Cuba, including in response to damage caused by Hurricane Ian in western Cuba in 2022 and after the oil storage facility fire in Matanzas in 2022. 

Vancouver-based CoDevelopment Canada is collecting material to send in a container to Cuban trade unions later this summer. 

The U.S. Cuba Normalization Coalition has a fact sheet about U.S.-backed attacks on Cuba. “Cuba has endured 64 years of a U.S. economic blockade.This intensified when President Trump unjustifiably put Cuba on a list of so-called State Sponsors of Terrorism (SSOT).President Biden has continued that listing. Companies worldwide that want to sell medicines or food to Cuba often can’t because their own bank refuses to accept Cuba’s payment under threat of enormous fines from the U.S.treasury for dealing with ‘terrorists’.”

Amid controversy and offers of support, Haiti has a new transitional council

by Jim Hodgson

More than 40 church, labour and aid organizations called on Canada to support Haiti’s transitional council (CPT) and to provide additional aid.

But divisions within the council—formed April 12 to preside until new elections can be held—became apparent April 30 after the council chose its chair, former senator Edgar Leblanc Fils, and named an interim prime minister, Fritz Bélizaire. The CPT is made up of a range of political actors, including some who supported the former, relatively progressive, presidents Jean-Bertrand Aristide and René Préval, and others who supported the more recent U.S.-backed presidents Michel Martelly and Jovenel Moïse, along with civil society and business sector representatives.

With the Bélizaire announcement, it became clear that four of the seven voting members of the CPT had formed what they called an “indissoluble majority block.” 

This manner of working, writes journalist Gotson Pierre of Alterpresse, was not foreseen in the multi-party agreement on April 3 nor in the April 12 decree that created the CPT. “Can such a block derail the transition? In such a case, of what use would it be?” he asked. 

Then on May 8, it became apparent that the role of CPT chair will revolve among the four long-time politicians who comprise the so-called indissoluble block. 

This move was strongly criticized as “absurd” and a sign of “a serious problem in Haitian political culture” where “political actors defend their personal and clan interests to the detriment of national interests.” Political scientist Joseph Harold Pierre said the CPT chair needs to have a strong rapport with the international community, something that cannot develop in just five months.

Canadian response to the multidimensional crisis in Haiti

These concerns are important. One might have expected that decisions would be taken by consensus, especially given that the CPT includes two non-voting civil society representatives.

Even so, this transitional council still seems to be the best way forward in the face of an unprecedented crime wave, rulers that no-one elected, and the imminent arrival of an international police force led by Kenya. 

A letter endorsed by about 40 organizations that were brought together by the Association québécoise des organismes de coopération internationale (AQOCI), the Concertation pour Haïti (CPH) and Cooperation Canada calls on Canada to support the CPT, stand against arms trafficking to Haiti, and to deploy appropriate humanitarian aid.

Part of the letter states:

1. Support the political transition process

Canada should recognize and support the recently sworn-in Transitional Presidential Council so that it can implement the “Political Accord for a Peaceful and Orderly Transition” as quickly as possible. This agreement, despite its imperfections, offers the opportunity to restore constitutional normalcy, the proper functioning of institutions and legal order for Haitians. 

Canada should insist on the broad and effective representation of all segments of society, particularly women, youth and the diaspora, within the transitional bodies provided for in the Political Accord. The participants deplored the fact that only one of the nine appointed members of the Presidential Council was a woman (without a deliberative voice). Furthermore, to enable Haitians to take their destiny back into their own hands, Canada should help recall the place and role of the diplomatic corps in Haiti, whose sometimes excessive interference in national affairs offends national dignity. 

Canada should take note of past mistakes and exercise increased vigilance to restore integrity and honesty in governance while preventing the violation of human rights in Haiti. 

2. Take a stand against arms trafficking to Haiti

Canada should engage in courageous and uncompromising advocacy with the United States to stop arms trafficking to Haiti, based on the recent report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 

Canada must encourage international responses guided by the will of the Transitional Presidential Council and the institutions of the Political Agreement for a Peaceful and Orderly Transition to restore security, promote law enforcement and support Haiti’s coastal defense. This requires providing the security forces (police and army) with logistical and financial support, without which the situation will remain precarious, hampering any progress towards democracy. For its part, Canada must be transparent and consider legal proceedings or the imposition of sanctions (seizure of funds or travel ban) against those involved in the transport. 

3. Deploy appropriate humanitarian aid

Any sustainable solution for the well-being of Haitians requires a paradigm shift. Canada must reconsider the current project-based approach to humanitarian aid, which too often fails to reach the most vulnerable people and the most affected territories. Together with civil society organizations, Canada should initiate a new way of coordinating humanitarian and development actions to support local economies, promote local expertise and respect the dignity of populations. To this end, Canada should implement the triple nexus approach, combining interventions structured in the humanitarian, development and peace (including social cohesion) fields. 

Faced with a multifaceted crisis and immense humanitarian needs, Canada should also increase and diversify its funding to reach more of the sectors affected (agriculture, health, protection of civilians, hygiene and sanitation, shelter, education, economic support, etc.), while considering the question of access to the services offered. At a time when the population has witnessed the airlift of diplomats being evacuated and given that almost 50% of the population is at risk of acute food insecurity by June 2024 (IPC, 2024), it is essential to ensure that access to aid is facilitated throughout the country. 

Being Haiti’s second biggest donor is not enough. The above recommendations are part of an overall call for greater coherence in Canada’s foreign policy towards Haiti. Canada can once again demonstrate its values and feminist approach to promoting peace and security in the world by becoming a champion of Haiti’s cause in the international community.