This special edition of Latin Pulse includes an opportunity to hear a Cuban perspective on politics and diplomacy, along with an analysis of what derailed the peace process in Colombia.
The October 2nd plebiscite and its stunningly low voter turnout demonstrated the inherent weaknesses of popular referenda and the need to think creatively about how to restore people’s participation in the electoral process.
Last Sunday Colombians shocked the world by voting against the peace agreement that President Juan Manuel Santos and the FARC leaders have been negotiating for four years.
The October 2 vote does not reflect Colombia’s rejection of peace, but rather, of an accord that many Colombians believed would bring neither peace nor justice.
The idea that the rebels would not face justice for their crimes was too hard for voters to swallow.
Colombians have the opportunity on October 2nd to vote on the historic peace accord signed last month between the Colombian government and the FARC. Despite overwhelming international support, the vote is controversial and looks like it will be close. The question is, what other choice is there really?
Despite totaling more than 45 million people in Latin America, indigenous people’s and their leaders are woefully underrepresented in national legislatures. How has this affected attitudes of indigenous toward their political systems and their governments?
The peace agreement in Colombia may mark the end of the hemisphere’s longest running civil war. Let’s face it: being witness to an historical moment like this is exciting, even if there are difficulties ahead.
Beyond a few nice sounding phrases and curious omissions, the Democratic Party platform mentions Trump more than it mentions Latin America.
After being celebrated as the most successful case of democratic consolidation and economic development in Latin America since 1990, Chile has now lost its appeal. In the meantime, other countries in Latin America have embraced market-friendly policies and have experienced sustained growth.
