Elections in South Korea, Denmark, Pakistan, and Australia, constitutional reforms in Latin America, peace mediations in Colombia, decriminalization of abortion in Uruguay, strikes in France, congress of Germany’s SPD, conferences in Bali and Annapolis, dispute over South Africa’s ANC presidency, protests in Myanmar, and the rapprochement between the two Koreas are the Periscope newsletter #20 highlights.


Constitutional reforms in Latin America
Uribe undoes peace mediation in Colombia
Uruguayan Senate passes decriminalization of abortion, yet Tabaré may veto the bill
USA – The war and the country’s future
Strikes and riots in France
Decisions by Germany’s SPD Congress prompt changes in the government
Parliamentary elections in Denmark
Putin strengthens his power in Russia
Turkey – far from the European Union and teetering on the brink of war
Stalemate in Lebanon proceeds, but there is light at the end of the tunnel The Annapolis Peace Conference
Contest for the presidency of the ANC toughens in South Africa
Pakistan – Musharraf reinstated, legislative elections confirmed, but outlook still uncertain
The rapprochement of the two Koreas and the elections in South Korea
Protests in Myanmar continue
Labour wins parliamentary elections in Australia
UN – Holding of the Bali Conference on Climate Change

Constitutional reforms in Latin America

At present three processes for reforming national constitutions are under execution in Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela.

There are great similarities between the ongoing processes in the two first countries, for there have been elections to compose their respective National Constitutional Assemblies in the hopes of approving new Constitutional Charters that come to outweigh the current anachronistic rules and regulations that usually just favor the Bolivian and Ecuadorian elites, as well as depriving the majority of the population, composed of poor workers and indigenous populations, of most basic rights.

The proposals emanating from these Assemblies will be submitted to popular referendums. However, the similarities cease there.

In Ecuador, the National Constitutional Assembly, which is overwhelmingly composed of members of President Rafael Correa’s Country Alliance party, was installed on November 30 with the additional role of Legislative Branch for as long as its proceedings last. It has a 180-day mandate, extendable for another 60 days, to draft the new Constitution.

In Bolivia, the already once adjourned deadline is December 14. Though President Evo Morales’ party and its allies have a majority, they do not have two-thirds of the National Constitutional Assembly and are the minority in the Senate by a slight difference.

Thus, the rightwing opposition has managed to obstruct proceedings so far, while the country’s political situation has polarized between provincial governments supporting the federal government and those opposing it. Sucre for instance claims its right to headquarter all federal bodies and become the capital of the country, and not just the legislature’s home as it is today, since parliament functions there.

As the more radical Sucreans succeeded in their filibustering tactics and kept the Constitutional Assembly from functioning, the initiative by the MAS, Evo Morales’ party, was to meet separately with its allies and pass some of the items of the new Constitution. It also pledged to submit a full package with alterations based on Evo Morales’ MAS program by December 14, which they intend to submit to a popular referendum, regardless of their not having achieved the two-thirds of the votes as set forth by the Constitutional Assembly’s rules.

In Venezuela, the picture is different. The incumbent Chamber of Deputies, overwhelmingly composed of allies of the Chávez government because the opposition parties decided to boycott the last parliamentary election, passed a bill calling for a new Constitution to be submitted to a referendum on December 2.

The Constitution to be replaced is the one that was also approved by a referendum in 1999, during President Chávez’s first term. The new proposal contains several interesting aspects such as the regulation of different forms of property ownership and popular participation, in addition to instituting a six-hour working day and universal social security. The right and the big media, however, only highlighted the part that would enable President Chávez to run for an unlimited number of presidential terms of office.

Meanwhile Chávez’s proposal was rejected in the referendum by a narrow margin of votes. Despite his popularity in the rise, 51% of those who voted preferred the “No”, which meant that among the citizens who support the government some also backed the “No”, while many abstained from voting, as the members of the Podemos, a party in the ruling coalition who criticized the process and the lack of more debates on the contents of the reform, though not necessarily against them.

The table that follows, containing the results for the December 2006 presidential election and the December 2007 referendum, reinforces this interpretation, since this time some three million people abstained from voting:

Result of the 2006 presidential election and the 2007 constitutional referendum

Source: CNE, 2007.

That is, some three million Venezuelans who voted in Chávez one year ago did not feel motivated to turn out to vote in favor of his proposal for a constitutional reform. The president declared that he accepts the result, but that he will not give up the idea of passing the new constitution.

Uribe undoes peace mediation in Colombia

Three months ago had start a sweeping compromise involving the Colombian government, Senator Piedad Córdoba of the Alternative Democratic Pole (PDA), the main opposition party in Colombia, and President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela in an attempt to seek a mediation with the FARC that allowed the release of some 45 hostages held captive by the guerrilla group, some for nearly ten years, and possibly resuming negotiations aiming at a peace accord.

The initiative had the support of President Nicolas Sarkozy of France because one of the prisoners, Ingrid Betancourt, a Colombian senator who is also a French citizen. The rationale underlying Sarkozy’s initiative is that contributing to her release would gain him the support of the French public opinion.

This mediation was making progress –so much so that there was the possibility that Chávez had a personal meeting with one of the FARC main leaders–, yet suddenly Álvaro Uribe, the president of Colombia, aborted the initiative and dismissed the help of the Venezuelan president under the allegation that Chávez was disregarding his authority and making direct contacts with the Colombian Armed Forces (FARC) chief commander.

The senator’s version is that she was the one who telephoned the Colombian guerrilla commander, and that she only passed the call to President Chávez to greet him.

Still the unfoldings generated a profound diplomatic crisis between the two countries, while Senator Piedad herself has been victim of several death threats, which most certainly come from Colombia’s rightwing forces, uninterested as they are in any peaceful outcome.

Uribe, for his turn, once again yielded to the pressures of the military and the right, for in addition to their advocating a military solution, the process would be granting the FARC international coverage, since the guerrilla group started to be acknowledged and treated as a belligerent political force and not merely as a terrorist group, as the American and Colombian governments would rather have it.

A few days after the suspension of the mediation, Colombia’s security forces announced the arrest of three FARC guerrillas in possession of letters and videotapes that prove that the hostages, including Ingrid Betancourt, are alive. According to the PDA, the appearance of such material was due to the previous efforts, for one of Chávez’s requests to the FARC was proof of the prisoners’ conditions.

Uruguayan Senate passes decriminalization of abortion, yet Tabaré may veto the bill

On November 6, the Senate of Uruguay passed by 16 votes to 13 legislation decriminalizing abortion. The Sexual and Reproductive Health Bill, which allows abortions to be made up to the 12th month of pregnancy, will be sent to the Chamber of Deputies, where it is also expected to be approved.

However, the bill is bound to be vetoed by Uruguayan president Tabaré Vasquez, an oncologist doctor by profession, who declared being against it for philosophical and biological reasons.

The president’s veto to the Sexual and Reproductive Health bill may be overridden should the total votes of the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies add up to three-fifths, though the Chamber is not expected to reach the necessary quorum to override the veto.

The bill, which has mobilized feminist militants and anti-abortion groups, divides Tabaré Vásquez’s ruling Broad Front party and the opposition. Part of the Broad front is even considering submitting the question to a public consultation, a proposal that the president is avoiding to comment on.

Most of the Uruguayans are favorable to the decriminalization, according to an opinion poll done in May by Cifra Consulting: 49% back the measure while 39% are against and 4% have no opinion formed about the issue. Feminist groups celebrated the passage of the bill.

In Latin America, abortion is only permitted in Cuba, Guyana and Mexico City, whose local legislature approved the decriminalization in April 2007. Read more at http://www.cifra.com.uy and http://www.parlamento.gub.uy.

USA – The war and the country’s future

After several weeks of controversial statements by Michael Mukasey with regard to torture, he was confirmed as the new US Attorney General in mid-November in replacement of outgoing Alberto Gonzalez.

Gonzalez resigned and stepped down from the post last September as a result of his well-known positions in favor or conniving in the torture of war prisoners, the dismissal of prosecutors non-aligned with his ideas and perjury before Congress.

Michael Mukasey, who is a close friend of Rudolph Giuliani’s, one of the Republican presidential candidates seeking the party’s nomination, received 53 votes in favor (46 Republicans, 6 Democrats and 1 independent) and 40 votes against (39 Democrats and 1 independent) his appointment to the office.

The Democrats’ key accusation against the new attorney general is that in his Senate hearing, he refused to define waterboarding, an interrogation technique that simulates a prisoner’s drowning and which Americans have frequently applied in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantánamo, as torture.

The five senators contesting the presidency of the United States – Joseph Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Chris Dodd (Democrats) and John McCain (Republican) – abstained from voting. The Democrats released a statement against his appointment because of his positions in relation to torture, while John McCain, himself a Vietnam prisoner of war, declared he would ratify Mukasey’s appointment regardless of the new attorney-general’s positions.

The candidates’ absence at the voting session is a demonstration of their unwillingness to take a clear stand in relation to the war in Iraq, torture and George Bush’s alleged “war against terrorism”, since the topic is highly sensitive electorally.

Hillary Clinton still exhibits high figures with regard to voting intentions, while simultaneously abstaining from making any controversial statement and positioning herself in the center-right in a bid to lure Republican voters dissatisfied with the shortage of stronger candidates within their own party than divorcée Rudolph Giuliani and Mormon Mitt Romney.

Such strategy has granted Hillary Clinton the edge in every poll done. In the poll carried out by CNN in mid-October, she would obtain 46% against Rudolph Giuliani’s 27% of the votes; in the survey conducted by Gallup, Hillary Clinton would have 49% against 40% for Rudolph Giuliani and would keep the lead against any other Republican candidate. For more information, check the opinion poll conducted by CNN on October 12-14, site Polling Report (several polls by different sources grouped together) and a poll carried out by YouGov/Polimetrix for The Economist.

In light of this, the Republican National Committee launched a major smear campaign against the Democratic candidate. According to an article published by The Nation, on a single day (November 30), five email messages were sent containing attacks against the couple Bill and Hillary Clinton containing embarrassing photographs. The way things are going it seems that the Republican Party is already anticipating that she will be the presidential candidate nominated by the Democrats on upcoming February 5, after the primaries and caucuses are held in the states.

Despite the great odds in favor of the election of a Democratic president in 2008, many of the challenges faced by President George W. Bush will still haunt the new occupant of the White House.

The biggest of them continues to be the war in Iraq, which, though not endorsed by any of the democratic candidates, is likely to remain its course with no drastic change in the short term. None of the three main Democratic candidates – Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John Edwards – is willing to commit him/herself to fully redeploy the American troops on Iraqi soil before 2013. For more information on these issues, read the US presidential candidates’ opinions on international themes.

A study done by the US Congress Bipartisan Economic Committee, released in mid-November, shows that expenditures with the war operations in Iraq and Afghanistan will amount to US$ 1.6 trillion in the 2002-2008 period, nearly twice the Brazilian GDP, including funds requested by the government and additional costs with payment of interest on loans, write-offs, long-term public health expenditures and the cost of the impact of the wars on the oil market.

Just in federal government funds, some US$ 804 billion were spent on operations in both countries. It is estimated that, should the wars continue, expenditures will rise to US$ 3.5 trillion in the period comprising 2003 and 2017.

The White House and the Republican Party reacted by stating that the report is biased by partisanship and replete with miscalculations. At the same time they asked US$ 760 billion to be removed from the document, for the report was released just a few days before another session during which the Democrats would strive to tie the approval of some additional US$ 50 billion for the war in exchange for the establishment of a timetable for the redeployment of the US troops in the region.

Harry Reid, a Democratic senator, told newspapers “this report is yet another reminder of how President Bush’s stubbornness to change his strategy in Iraq brought about real consequences for the pocket of all Americans”.

From the outset of the conflicts, the oil barrel has risen from US$ 37 to US$ 90, which demonstrates its direct effect on the people’s lives. The Democrats’ idea is to show that the danger of the economic slowdown that is affecting the US economy today is certainly linked to the waste of resources on military operations devised and carried out by order of President Bush and his cadre.

Strikes and riots in France

The Sarkozy administration is trying to undertake what the Juppé government failed to achieve in 1995, namely to slash a wide array of France’s social security benefits, plus cutting university educational budget.

With regard to the first issue, this is a new attempt to eliminate the country’s special retirement for train and subway drivers, under the allegation that the motives that justified this type of retirement plan in the past, due to the steam furnaces that powered the trains, no longer existed.

As historically, French workers reacted by mobilizing and calling a 24-hour strike that practically brought to a standstill the country’s entire rail transportation system. The strike quickly extended its duration and was only ended after negotiations were held. Nonetheless, such negotiations seemed inconclusive.

Still during the first week, the strike was fueled by student demonstrations that brought to memory the popular reaction to the former government’s attempt to annul labor legislation establishing the 30-hour working week.

In late November, another ghost haunted the government. The deaths of two young immigrants that crashed their motorcycle into a police car resurrected the revolt in the Paris metropolitan region and in Toulouse, with several cars being torched in the streets and clashes with the police that resulted in 110 police officers being sent to hospital.

So far, this movement has not been able to convince the government to reconsider its proposals, though it does have made it difficult for the new administration to govern. The course of the neoliberal reforms that Sarkozy intends to implement is still undefined. For more, read Strikes in France – The street fights back.

Decisions by Germany’s SPD Congress prompt changes in the government

Franz Müntefering, ex-president of the German Social Democratic Party (SPD) and former right hand of Gerhard Schroeder, resigned the offices of Vice-Chancellor and Minister of Labour in the incumbent CDU-SPD coalition government led by Angela Merkel. The official justification is his wife’s infirmity, though the political defeat he suffered at last month’s SPD Congress ­­–when the party decided to fight for some traditional banners of the welfare state– weighed on his decision. Read more in Periscope 19.

Walter Steinmeier, the present Minister of Foreign Relations, is poised to become Vice-Chancellor, and Olaf Scholz, the social democrats’ whip in Parliament, will occupy the Labour portfolio. For more, read German vice chancellor Muentefering resigns and New German labour minister sworn in after Muentefering resignation.

Parliamentary elections in Denmark

Denmark’s Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen used his prerogative of convoking parliamentary elections –which were held last November 13–, one year before the end of the 4-year terms of the present MPs.

The outcome favored him, with the government’s ruling coalition holding 90 of Parliament’s 179 seats, and that despite the loss of six seats (down to 46) of his own Liberal (V) party. Still, with a one-vote majority the liberals now are fully dependent on the votes of the extreme-right Danish People’s Party to pass legislation. Campaigning on a xenophobic platform, the People’s Party has become a force to reckon with, with 14% of votes nationwide and 25 seats in Parliament, one vote ahead of last election’s result.

The Social Democratic Party (S) lost two seats –now it has 45–, its worst electoral result in many years, despite the fact that the new party president, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, obtained the second largest individual vote after faring up to her post’s expectations in the public debates. (In Denmark, voting is nominal and in party lists, which alters the order of the candidates in the lists).

The great winner from the partisan and ideological point of view was the Popular Socialist Party, which grew by 7 percent, rising from 11 to 23 seats. It benefited mostly from the votes of the youth and former social democratic voters, discontent over the party’s convergence to the political center.

There is also a recent poll showing the contrariety of the population towards immigrants, while expenses with international cooperation were drastically reduced, further contributing to the migration of votes to the popular socialists, who advocate less Draconian laws to deal with the immigrants.

Conventional wisdom has it that this will be Fogh’s last term as prime minister. Elections were advanced so that they could occur before negotiations of the country’s civil servants’ collective bargaining agreement, due in June 2008, for these workers’ wages were squeezed after Fogh’s six years of neoliberal government, meaning that the agreement is bound to be marked by conflict. Thus, if the November 13 election had occurred according to its normal calendar, the conservative coalition would probably lose. Now, however, independently of whatever might occur, Fogh will remain in power until 2011.

Therefore, in the light of this result, he will govern for four more years and, in a worst case scenario, for him, will have remained in power for ten years. For more, read Denmark’s election – Fogh lights on, Denmark narrowly re-elects Rasmussen and Denmark turns to the Right again as leader’s gamble pays off.

Putin strengthens his power in Russia

In 2008 there will be presidential elections in Russia, and in keeping with the Constitution, Putin cannot run for a third term. Still, everything seems to indicate that Putin has found a formula to remain in power and continue to shape the destinies of the country.

In the parliamentary elections held on December 2, he contested and won a seat for his United Russia party, which won an impressive 60 percent of the votes. In second came the Communist Party of the Russian Federation, with approximately 10 percent of the ballots. Two other parties to win seats in the Duma (parliament), the Liberal Democratic and the Just Russia parties, are expected to ally with Putin’s party.

When Putin leaves the presidency and is sworn in as a member of parliament, he will be able to be elected Prime Minister, which added to the great odds he has of making his successor in the presidency, will make him very powerful and influential, even outside the presidency. As he is still relatively young, there exists the possibility that in future he may return to the presidential office.

The opposition made a series of accusations of electoral fraud and irregularities and harassment to force civil servants to vote and vote in the president’s party. For more on the Russian elections log and read Putin’s party: Russian election marred by allegations of fraud, coercion.

Turkey – far from the European Union and teetering on the brink of war

On November 6 was published a report by the European Commission stating that Turkey is not ready yet to be accepted as a member of the European Union.

According to the European Union, Turkey still has to step up its judiciary system’s reform, fight against corruption and separate the military might from the political steerage. The document says that, if Turkey succeeds in attaining European standards, it may be included in the bloc despite the reservations of several member countries.

At the presentation of the document, the commissioner in charge of negotiations towards the enlargement of the EU, Olli Rehn, declared he believed that the halting of Turkey’s reform process this year stems from the political crisis the country is presently going through.

Some pundits believe this negotiation to be ambiguous, since some of the reforms suggested by the EU do not necessarily mean entrance in the bloc, given that important members like France and Germany are against Turkey’s accession as a full member. And though the European leaders do not agree with the country’s accession they do see its undeniable strategic role. Gas pipelines could supply the continent with gas from central Asia and Iran, reducing the bloc’s dependence on Russia.

The Turkish government replied to the EU document by pointing out the reforms already accomplished and by requesting that any “matters external” to the process should not interfere in the country’s accession, a country that has been an associated member of the European Community since 1964.

Nonetheless, one of the issues of gravest importance to Europe is the question of the crackdown against political adversaries and minorities, especially the Kurds. In October, clashes between the Turkish army and Kurdish separatists killed more than forty Turkish military and a great number of Kurdish civilians.

The EU says that Turkey has the right to protect its people against what it considers “terrorism”, yet should guide such actions by the preservation of peace in the region, a reference to potential operations against the Kurds of the PKK in Iraq.

Still, Turkey seems intent about taking measures authorized by its parliament even if they might harm the country’s accession, such as refusing to recognize Cyprus’s sovereignty and opening its ports to that EU member country. The invasion of Iraq would be a second obstacle to the country’s long-term interests.

On November 30, the Turkish government authorized the army to start military operations against the PKK’s Kurdish separatists in northern Iraq. The decision, according to Prime Minister Recep Erdogan, was taken at a ministerial meeting on November 28, and had the approval of President Abdullah Gull.

The commanders of the American and Turkish armies have exchanged intelligence about the Iraqi territory and the PKK’s movements. US troops and Kurdish Iraqis, who control the northern part of the country, are in favor of the Turkish action in the region and agreed to cooperate.

After meetings between Erdogan and George W. Bush, the American president affirmed the PKK was both countries’ common enemy and pledged to offer Turkey all the necessary help in terms of intelligence, legitimizing thus any Turkish attack against the PKK in Iraqi territory. For more, read the European Union’s progress report on Turkey’s adoption of reforms suggested for accession to the bloc.

Stalemate in Lebanon proceeds, but there is light at the end of the tunnel

As Lebanon’s President Émile Lahoud’s term of office ended on November 23, he transmitted the presidency of the country to Army Commander General Michel Suleiman, for as long as it takes for the political forces that compose Parliament to reach a consensus and elect a new president to form a new cabinet.

The coalitions (Sunnis and part of the Christians, on one side, and Shias, Hezbollah and the other part of the Christians) lack the power singly to impose a solution, yet are capable of obstructing the functioning of parliament and forestall the election of a presidential candidacy.

The solution being pursued at the moment is to elect General Suleiman himself as president, an alternative that obtained consensus among the country’s main political forces. This, however, will require amending the Constitution, for, by the present rules, government officials seeking to run for president should first observe a two-year ban.

Moreover, there are other ministries to negotiate and fill. Let us wait. For more, read Government nominates army chief as Lebanon’s president, Lebanon presidential vote delayed a week to Dec 7 and Diplomatic Pleasantries Have Been Discarded – Lebanon is Hanging by a Thread.

The Annapolis Peace Conference

Although it was attended by representatives of practically every country in the Middle East, plus other guests among which was Brazil, the meeting between Palestinians and Israelis held on November 27 to discuss the peace process between Israel and the National Palestinian Authority was far from producing any concrete results.

The most that was achieved was a calendar stipulating monthly meetings between the two parties for the period of one year and the release of a group of approximately 400 Palestinian prisoners detained by Israel. Brazil offered to host some of these meetings.

The problem is that neither Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (since several parties in the ruling coalition refuse to make any concessions) nor Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas (politically weakened after Hamas took control of the Gaza Strip) has the necessary political backing to sign an accord. The US government in turn will have its own agenda for 2008, an electoral one, which will have a decisive impact on the peace process.

The new element was the invitation made by the US for Syria to take part in the process, an invitation that is likely to be accepted because Syria sees in this participation an opportunity to discuss the devolution of Golan Heights.

On the other hand, the absence of Iran, which criticizes the process, might yield political dividends to Teheran from the poorer Arab masses given the likelihood that these negotiations will fail. For more, read Why Annapolis Is About Iran, Israelis and Palestinians Try to Set Pace for Peace Talks as Bush Plans Speech, When the Roadmap is a One Way Street – Israel’s Strategy for Permanent Occupation and UN resolutions on the Palestine question.

Contest for the presidency of the ANC toughens in South Africa

South Africa’s Constitution only allows two consecutive presidential terms. In light of the rejection by public opinion of the possibility of modifying the Constitution to allow a third term for incumbent president Thabo Mbeki, he launched his candidacy for reelection as president of the African National Congress (ANC), since party rules do not disallow that.

In that country, as in many others with laws based on the English tradition, party presidents, in case of an electoral victory, become prime ministers or presidents.

In a normal situation, the natural candidate to the presidency of the ANC and the 2008 presidential elections would be Jacob Zuma, Mbeki’s deputy. However, Zuma was accused of having received kickbacks from an arms’ government procurement deal, and was fired from his post by the president. Earlier he had been accused of rape, something that was not proved. Today, the two are political and personal enemies.

Despite the charge of improbity, which has not been dealt with by justice yet, Zuma is the strongest candidate internally and has the support, mainly, of important unions that judge that Mbeki made too many concessions to the private sector, including promoting privatizations.

The election to the ANC presidency will occur in a congress due in mid December, but the choice of delegates and, therefore, the definition of who is to be the winner is happening at the moment.

Zuma took the lead in the election of the first delegates and Mbeki’s reaction was to ask members of the ANC not to vote in “rapists and thieves”. The aim of Mbeki’s candidacy, if victorious, is to prevent Zuma from contesting or, at least to limit his powers through the party if he is elected president of South Africa.

The other two candidates in the party’s internal elections, Tokyo Sexwale and Cyril Ramaphosa, have no chance of victory, yet the former is expected to quit the contest in favor of Zuma.

Pakistan – Musharraf reinstated, legislative elections confirmed, but outlook still uncertain

To impede that his election were considered unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the country, the president of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf, opted for guaranteeing the continuity of his term by declaring a state of emergency on November 3.

A few hours after declaring the state of emergency, the general dismissed and arrested Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice, whose clumsy suspension in March this year had triggered a pro-democracy movement that led to his reinstatement, only to be once again discharged.

Chaudhry’s home arrest was just one in a bigger wave of detentions of lawyers, civil rights activists and journalists. Aitzaz Ahsan, the lawyer representing the Supreme Court’s Chief Justice and two former chief justices, Muneer Malik and Tariq Mahmood, were arrested for a month in compliance with the law on preventive detentions.

On November 22, the Supreme Court spent less than an hour to rule Pervez Musharraf’s election legitimate after analyzing the sixth and last argument brought by the opposition to question the constitutionality of the general’s accumulating the role of head of state and military commander. The new members of the Court are all jurists connected with the general.

At his inauguration, Musharraf – who had already resigned the post of army commander– announced that the current state of emergency will be over by December 16 and that the elections scheduled for January 8 will be free, transparent and will take place in accordance with the Constitution.

The general’s justification for the state of emergency was the growing opposition from the Judiciary, the media and political groups which, according to him, were hampering the combat against terrorism Pakistan was undertaking with the support of the United States. Since September 11, 2001, Pakistan has received US$ 10 billion in aid to step up its defense and strategic role in the region.

The US, however, fears that the political turmoil may compromise the efforts of the Pakistani forces deployed along the border with Afghanistan, where it is believed Osama bin Laden has his hideout.

Before the state of emergency, Benazir Bhutto, the opposition parties’ greatest leadership recently returned from exile, was negotiating with the general a deal to share power, with the blessings of the United States. With the announcement of the state of emergency negotiations were suspended, and the former president ordered to remain in home arrest to keep her from organizing protests.

Bhutto affirmed that her party, the lay Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), will boycott the general elections and began to negotiate an alliance against Musharraf with Nawaz Sharif, another former Pakistani premier who is still in exile.

Still, with or without a boycott, Musharraf’s resignation from his post as army commander and the holding of elections to choose a prime minister offer a new scenario for Pakistan. The president will have to negotiate with the opposition parties and will depend on his own PML-Q party in the coming elections. For more, read Independence of Judiciary – The Main Issue and Bhutto at the Barricades.

The rapprochement of the two Koreas and the elections in South Korea

The prime ministers of the two Koreas met for the first time in fifteen years on November 14 to discuss a peace agreement for the Korean peninsula and an aid package for the Pyongyang.

The meeting took place six weeks after the second presidential meeting involving South Korea’s Roh Moo-hyun and North Korea’s Kim Jong-il, with the countries technically at war and amid the dismantling of North Korea’s nuclear plants as part of a wide international negotiation.

During the three-day meeting in Seoul, the prime ministers detailed the aid package directed to develop North Korea’s ports, shipyards, roads and railroads. Besides discussing economic issues, the two countries’ prime ministers, South Korean Han Duck-soo and North Korean Kim Yong-il discussed a plan to develop a joint fishery of the peninsula’s western coast, which is to be established as of 2008.

The two governments also agreed to reestablish the railway service connecting the two countries and to facilitate international communications for companies located in the industrial complex of Kaesong, on the northern border and near the demilitarized zone. This industrial zone was fully conceived and financed by South Korea, and is seen today as a symbol of the two nations’ rapprochement. Today, 23 South Korean companies occupy the area, but it has been designed to allow for more than 2,000 companies to set up plants there. Read more.

Though neither of the prime ministers has enough political power, their meeting translates the political will of the two presidents to move toward accomplishing the agreements made in early October in Pyongyang.

To scale up the process another meeting was held by the ministers of defense of both countries aiming at reducing tensions along one of the world’s most heavily armed borders. North Korea does not recognize the border established by the UN at the end of the 1950-1953 Korean War. According to the South Korean delegation, discussions regarding this dispute kept the talks from deepening security issues.

Liberal President Roh Moo-hyun cannot run for a second term because the Korean legislation only allows a single five-year term. His party’s candidate is ex minister of unification Chung dong-young and the candidate of the opposition is Lee Myung-bak of the Grand National Party (GNP), who is a Hyundai former CEO and the ex mayor of Seoul.

It is in the interest of the North that the liberals remain in power so that negotiations can continue and the proceeds from the aid packages may increase, while it is in the interest of the South to get closer and unify with the neighbor country, for until the end of the Second World War they were a single country, and also to boost their economic competitiveness, particularly in face of China.

The first train to cross the borders between the two Koreas is scheduled to do so one week before the December 19 South-Korean elections. For more information, log on to the official web page of the government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea) and the official web page of the government of South Korea.

Protests in Myanmar continue

Though less intense, the protests by the population of Myanmar against the military regime continue. The crackdown of these past months succeeded in discouraging the Buddhist monks and the population from risking themselves in big rallies. Several monks are still under arrest and the army forced the rest to remain inside the monasteries where they live.

Meanwhile, the UN sent a special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari, to talk to the military junta to try to persuade them to start dialoguing with the political opposition led by Aung San Suu Kyi. The minister of labour, General Aung Kyi, was charged with that task.

Also allowed to visit the country was Paulo César Pinheiro, the UN special rapporteur for human rights, whose report is to be made public soon. Pressure from the international community for these initiatives to make progress is mounting, but the situation is still uncertain. For more information read Myanmar Arrests, Harassment of Monks Is `Troubling,’ U.S. Says and Amnesty International: Myanmar’s junta still arresting activists.

Labour wins parliamentary elections in Australia

After 11 years of Prime Minister John Howard’s Conservative Party government, Labour is back to power. In the elections held on November 24, Labour won 81 seats of a total 150 in Parliament. The new prime minister will be Kevin Rudd.

This outcome stemmed from the weakening of the extreme neoliberalism introduced by the conservatives and Howard’s unconditional alliance with the US’s George Bush. Australia, as the United States, has not signed the Kyoto Protocol. The country also cooperated with the US by sending troops to Iraq from the very outset of the invasion of that country.

Domestically Australia reached high economic growth rates which, however, only benefited businesses. The workers and the unions in particular suffered strong attacks from the government against their rights over this period, and a series of measures was adopted against the migration of citizens from Asian and Pacific neighboring countries.

The conservative government represented a grave detour in the history of Australia, which was the first country in the world to adopt the 8-hour working day back in 1888, one of the first countries in the world to introduce women’s right to vote and noted for electing a mostly social democratic government as early as 1910.

The country’s traditional values have always been its multiculturalism and the existence of a strong Welfare State, as well as an active presence of trade unions and of the Labour Party, which shelter influential leftist fractions.
Despite Rudd’s rhetoric in line with the Third Way inaugurated as a form of government by Tony Blair, he is expected to propose, in the foreign policy sphere, the ratification by Australia of the Kyoto Protocol and to withdraw the Australian troops from Iraq.

The recent appointment of Peter Garret, a known musician engaged in the environmental cause, seems to signal that expectations will be met. For more, read Australia wants Iraq troops home by mid 2008, Ex-rocker is Australia’s new Environment Minister and Rudd Wins Australian Election on Climate, Troops Vows (Update2).

UN – Holding of the Bali Conference on Climate Change

The UN Conference on Climate Change was held in Bali, Indonesia, on December 3-14. Government officials of 180 countries participated, in addition to observers from inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon – who has defined the environmental question as one of his agenda’s top priorities – has been pointing out the need for breakthroughs in the agreements regarding this topic, since the Kyoto Protocol is valid only until 2012.

In order to avoid a gap between 2012 and the coming into force of a new agreement, the UN hopes to step up negotiations for a protocol by 2009, so that it may be ratified in due time by the signatory countries.

The Bali Conference aims to establish a roadmap for the working process regarding future climate change, including adaptation, mitigation, technological and financial cooperation in environment-related issues, as well as generating the methodology and timetable for this process.

The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was adopted in 1994 as a great step toward dealing with global warming and, since the emission of greenhouse effect gases (GHGs) kept on rising, a protocol was negotiated to regulate such matter (Kyoto Protocol).

After two and a half years of intense negotiations, the protocol was adopted by the Third Conference of the Parties (COP) on December 11, 1997, which came into force on February 16, 2005. The protocol has the same objectives and institutions of the United Nations Convention, its most significant difference being the fact that, while the UNFCCC encourages governments to stabilize GHG emissions, the protocol seeks to commit the signatories to that end.

The Bali Conference includes in its program a Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC and its subsidiary bodies, a meeting of the Parties of the Kyoto Protocol and a ministerial summit. For more, read the Conference Program and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).