Putting Latin America on the map at last!

Hugo Chavez hosts summit of new regional group minus US


Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is hosting a summit of a new regional bloc that brings together 33 nations of Latin America and the Caribbean.

The general aim of the group, which does not include the US or Canada, is to foster regional ties.

Mr Chavez has described the bloc as a counter to US influence in the region.

The two-day summit is Mr Chavez's first big international event since he was treated for cancer and forced to postpone the original meeting in July.

The summit in the Venezuelan capital, Caracas, will be the inaugural gathering of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, known by its Spanish initials, Celac.

It will be a further addition to regional groupings that include the Organisation of American States (OAS), Unasur, Mercosur, Alba and the Caribbean Community (Caricom).

Unlike the long-established OAS, Celac does not include the US or Canada.

And unlike the OAS, it will include Cuba, which in 2009 rejected an invitation to rejoin the Washington-based body after a long exclusion.

Power play
Mr Chavez has described the summit, with some rhetorical flourish, as "the most important political event to have happened in our America in 100 years".

For the Venezuelan president, Celac forms part of his dream of realising Latin American unity and also creating a counterweight to Washington.


The US and Canada were deliberately excluded from this summit, but Cuban President Raul Castro has been welcomed with open arms.

The heads of state of 32 countries in the region have come to Caracas for the inauguration of the new organisation.

Only President Humala has stayed away, amid continuing protests over mining in Peru.

While US exclusion from the meeting is clearly a snub to Washington, the Venezuelan government says the new organisation will foster regional ties and look at ways of insulating the region from economic problems in the US and Europe.

But for other regional leaders, the aims are less grand though no less important, correspondents say.

These include examining the region's response to the global financial crisis, promoting economic development and discussing joint efforts to tackle drug-trafficking.

And Celac's birth does not herald the demise of the OAS, analysts say.

"[The OAS] has clearly defined purposes and principles to guide it. Its procedures are in place. And it has a budget - most of which comes from the US and Canada," Peter Hakim, president emeritus of the Inter-American Dialogue think tank, told the AFP news agency.

The inaugural summit was due six months ago but was postponed because Mr Chavez was recovering from surgery to remove a cancerous growth.

The talks on Friday and Saturday will be watched for indications of Mr Chavez's current health.

The Venezuelan president has said he is completely recovered after four rounds of chemotherapy.

He is expected to run in next October's presidential election for another six-year term.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-16002671


S.

WELL GOOD FOR HIM ! things will be better now hah !

I can see nothing wrong in having a latin american bloc ..there are probably so many egos at the meeting that nothing much will be decided and now Brazil is the real power house ...they will probably not be invited in the future because of their success.

Nothing like associating yourself with the 172nd(10 place above the worst) Nation on the Planet!!!!

http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2011/results/#CountryResults


FYI the D.R. is # 129

South America and the Caribbean is poised to become a much more important power block led by countries with socialist leaning governments.

S.

Not with the widespread Corruption in Countries like Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia and the D.R.

There is widespread corruption also in the US and it goes undetected for yeays. Also many corrupt activities connected with the multi billion dollar drug trade.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-01-03-abramoff-side_x.htm

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gJy9Rww9q63tf7qFTrqhhaQmr2Fg

S.

That's great to hear. Now, if only Venezuela were a nation worth bragging about?

You call that free?

Here's a remarkable article I recieved from one of my news sources just yesterday:

Venezuela es el país más corrupto de Latinoamérica y Chile el menos, según Transparencia Internacional

EFE – jue, 1 dic 2011


Miembros de la Guardia Nacional venezolana cortan el acceso por carretera a las inmediaciones de la cárcel El Rodeo II. EFE/Archivo


Berlín, 1 dic (EFE).- Chile y Uruguay son los líderes en transparencia de América Latina, mientras que Venezuela y Paraguay son percibidos como los más corruptos, según un informe publicado hoy por la organización alemana Transparencia Internacional (TI).
En la edición 2011 de su ya tradicional Índice de Percepción de la Corrupción (CPI), tan sólo tres de los veinte países del área latinoamericana aprueban en transparencia percibida de su sector público.
"Chile marca la línea y el resto de países de América Latina le siguen poco a poco. Esto es una felicitación para Chile, pero también una recomendación, para que se impongan barreras más altas", aseguró en declaraciones a Efe el director para las Américas de TI, Alejandro Salas.
A su juicio, la mayoría de países latinoamericanos que puntúan bajo en la tabla sufren de una "institucionalidad débil", donde el gobierno o actor político principal -"independientemente de que sea de izquierdas o derechas"- es "muy fuerte", por lo que "no hay balance de poder".
En una escala de 0 (muy corrupto) a 10 (muy transparente), Chile (7,2) ocupa el puesto 22 de los 183 países analizados, Uruguay (7,9) el 25 y Puerto Rico (5,6) el 39, mientras que Nicaragua (2,5), Paraguay (2,2) y Venezuela (1,9) ocuparon el vagón de cola, en los puestos 134, 154 y 172, respectivamente.
Próximos al aprobado se posicionaron Costa Rica (4,8) y Cuba (4,2), seguidos por Brasil (3,8) -por encima de China-, Colombia (3,4), El Salvador (3,4), Perú (3,4) y Panamá (3,3).
Argentina y México se quedan en el 3,0 sobre diez -al nivel de Malawi e Indonesia-, y a continuación en el ránking logran situarse Bolivia (2,8), Ecuador (2,7), Guatemala (2,7), República Dominicana (2,6) y Honduras (2,6).
En comparación con el año pasado, la mayoría de países de América Latina analizados experimentan variaciones mínimas, con las excepciones positivas de Cuba y El Salvador, que registran subidas sustantivas, y del descenso de Costa Rica.
Cuba remonta ocho posiciones y cinco décimas, del puesto 69 al 61 y de los 3,7 a los 4,2 puntos; El Salvador salta 47 posiciones y nueve décimas con respecto al informe de TI de 2010; y Costa Rica cede, por su parte, cinco décimas y nueve puestos.
Salas considera que las reformas del presidente cubano, Raúl Castro, han ayudado a la percepción de su país, que el jefe de Estado salvadoreño, Mauricio Funes, está trabajando a favor de una mayor transparencia a nivel nacional y regional, y que la imagen de Costa Rica se ha visto afectada por algunos escándalos de los últimos años y por haber empezado a ser parte de "la ruta del narcotráfico".
A escala global, Somalia (1,0), Corea del Norte (1,0) y Myanmar (Birmania) (1,5) son los países más corruptos según el CPI, y Nueva Zelanda (9,5), Dinamarca (9,4) y Finlandia (9,4) los menos azotados por este tipo de prácticas.
En comparación, España (6,2) quedó en la posición trigésimo primera, sin apenas variaciones con respecto al estudio del año anterior.
TI, referencia global en análisis de transparencia, advierte en su informe de que sólo 49 de los 183 países estudiados aprueba el examen, a pesar de que el clamor ciudadano contra estas prácticas ha ganado impulso en todo el mundo.
"Este año hemos visto denuncias contra la corrupción en las manifestaciones de ricos y pobres. Tanto en la Europa de la crisis de la deuda como en el mundo árabe, los líderes deben atender las demandas de un mejor gobierno", afirmó en un comunicado la presidenta de TI, Huguette Labelle.
TI apunta en su informe que las protestas en todo el mundo, "azuzadas por la corrupción y la inestabilidad política", "muestran claramente que los ciudadanos sienten que sus líderes y las instituciones públicas no son suficientemente transparentes ni responsables".
El CPI se elabora cada año desde 1995 a partir de diferentes estudios y encuestas sobre los niveles percibidos de corrupción en el sector público de distintos países.



http://es-us.noticias.yahoo.com/venezuela-pa%C3%ADs-corrupto-latinoam%C3%A9rica-chile-transparencia-internacional-192238841.html

Actually history shows that all major governments lie and are corrupt. Venez. government has support because for the first time a little is being done for the least privileged in society - not enough - but after a century of sometimes extreme hardship a sufficient proportion feel that goods and services, long denied to them, are becoming available.
It takes a long time for the poor in societies to feel they are empowered and produce actions that pronounce solidarity.
The latest example is over pensions in the UK. Rights that everyone takes for granted in the UK, health services, pensions, social security, education, reasonable wages etc. have taken nearly two centuries or much longer to evolve starting maybe earlier than the Tolpuddle Martyrs, maybe with the Magna Carta.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tolpuddle_Martyrs
In many societies today, including the US, there is an exploited underclass than without good reason are denied the true fruits of their labor.

S.

You might consider me to be judgmental; But, you take a naive approach to the history of the world. As George Santayana said: "He Who Does Not Remember History Is Condemned To Repeat It".

Where has 'government' been more benevolent and more concerned with the welfare of the neediest in society than in the United States and Great Britain?

All the history books I've ever read point to the centuries' old tradition of liberty - beginning with the Magna Charta, then the Bill of Rights. I am not trying to paint a pretty picture here, when it comes to America and England; but, if it were not for the princples that these nations espouse and have defended the world from (totalitarian tyranny) ej. WWI WWII..., we would stil be in the middle ages? I acknowledge the imperialism that these countries have perpatuated upon the world, but, they also have contributed immensely to human rights without a doubt. There has never been a coup d'etat in the U.S. or firing squads for enemies or wholesale persecution of dissedents of the federal government. HOw many other countries have a similar history.

Who has lead the way in civil rights? Women/s suffrage? Minority civil rights, affirmative action? Social Security Insurance? Medicare, Medicaid? Welfare? WIC? Free Education Kinder - 12 grade?

You should perhaps take off the rose colored glasses and see things as they are?

On another note, mankind is not naturally inclined towards treating thier fellow man with kindness; We have only a few instances of such occurences. We can not be so naive that we think that man has ever been a benevolent dictator. What makes you think that a dictator can be benevolent now?
Now, now. reason!