Paraguayan Senate impeaches leftist president, causing international uproar

RussiaToday



Thousands have been protesting the impeachment of leftist Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo, many clashing with police. A number of Latin American countries called the impeachment illegitimate.

The the Senate of Paraguay voted to impeach President Fernando Lugo with 39 legislators in favor and four against. Lugo was immediately succeeded by his vice president, Federico Franco, who was sworn in in Congress.

News of Lugo’s impeachment sparked anger amongst thousands of his supporters who had gathered outside the Congress building in the country’s capital, Asuncion. Some of them reacted by tearing down fences, while police tried to disperse the crowd with tear gas and water cannons.
Lugo said he was submitting to Congress' decision, but added that the history of Paraguay and its democracy had been “wounded.”

“Today I retire as president, but not as Paraguayan citizen,” he stated.
Latin America's resounding reaction

Paraguay's neighbors responded by calling the motion illegitimate.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez responded by saying his country does not recognize Paraguay's new, “illegitimate government.” He told reporters that his ally Fernando Lugo "preferred the sacrifice" of stepping aside, and said the trial was a setup.

Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa also said his country would not recognize any government in Paraguay other than Lugo's.

"This goes beyond This goes beyond Fernando Lugo. It goes beyond Paraguay. It's about true democracy for all of our America," Correa said on television," Correa said on television.

Bolivian president says NGOs spy on his country for US

PressTV

Bolivian President Evo Morales speaks during a press
conference at the governmental Palacio Quemado

Bolivian President Evo Morales has said that a number of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are spying on his country for the United States.

Some of the NGOs that work with local philanthropic groups "are the fifth column of espionage in Bolivia. I'm convinced of that, they are systems of espionage," Moales said in Oruro, 370 kilometers (230 miles) south of the capital La Paz.

"Some countries, especially the United States through USAID (US Agency for International Development), give money to some NGOs. Why? So these NGOs will be accountable" to the foreign governments, he added.

Morales, who became the first indigenous leader of Bolivia in nearly 500 years after his inauguration in January 2006, has many times accused NGOs of clandestinely working for Bolivia's enemies and conspiring against the country.

He has especially blamed three NGOs -- the Center for Legal Studies and Social Research (CEJIS), the Bolivian Forum on Environment and Development (FOBOBMADE) and the League of Defense of the Environment (LIDEMA) -- for plotting to undermine the Bolivian state.

The indigenous people of Bolivia and the rest of South America have suffered through five centuries of oppression, which began with the European invasion and conquest of the Americas. 

Iran, Bolivia blast foreign meddling

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Bolivian President Evo Morales have criticized interference by hegemonic powers in other countries' affairs. 

 

Ahmadinejad met his Bolivian counterpart at the United Nations headquarters in New York on Tuesday on the eve of the 66th annual session of the world body's General Assembly, IRNA reported.

He voiced solidarity with all the independent countries around the globe, which stand against the colonial powers, noting that the recent developments the Latin America would be beneficial to all the freedom-seeking states.

The Iranian chief executive praised the Islamic Republic's relations with Bolivia and stated that Tehran-La Paz relations were immune to harm.

The two also discussed the latest international developments and called for the strengthening of bilateral ties.

Morales, for his part, described the relations as friendly and said that La Paz supported Iran's stances on international issues.

Ahmadinejad also held separate meetings with Comoros' President Ikililou Dhoinine and St. Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves.

The Iranian president, who arrived in New York on Monday at the head of a high-ranking delegation, is slated to deliver a speech at the UN session about the Islamic Republic's stance on the latest international developments.  

Voices of Opposition • Spin Doctors in American Politics

What is James Carville doing in Bolivia?  Chasing the money by supporting a dictator opposing Evo Morales.  This is an eye-opening documentary about the manipulation of voters by money, media, and campaign consultants. It will raise questions about all mainstream candidates.  Includes key excerpts of film followed by a talk and QnA session with Jody Gibbs.

Bolivia to Fight Food Shortage with Non-GMO Seeds

Organic Authority
Jill Ettinger

State-owned farms and companies will provide non-genetically modified seeds and fertilizers to the people of Bolivia, says a new law signed into effect by Bolivian president, Evo Morales.

In what Morales is calling a “food revolution,” over the course of the next decade, the government will invest $5 billion, mostly in supporting small-scale farmers and growers to help establish an inclusive, holistic food system, eliminating the country’s need to purchase GMO seeds from companies like Monsanto that are eager to expand their presence in South America.

Protests in Bolivia have erupted recently out of concern over the excessive exportation of the highly nutritious regional grain, quinoa, which has become a natural-foodie darling in the U.S., and popular among those who follow a wheat and gluten free diet. While exporting the sought-after grain brings revenue to the country, locals are forced to eat lower quality foods instead of regional staples. Biotech companies sell their GMO seeds cheap, making it hard for some farmers to resist in light of the limited access to indigenous grains that are being shipped to the U.S.

Morales’ sustainable vision for the nation is attracting both praise and criticism for being idealistic as the nation joins their neighbors, Peru, in a move away from GMOs; they’re also committing efforts to an heirloom seed-saving program and a long-term redevelopment plan that is expected to reduce Bolivia’s dependence on fossil fuels.

Bolivia is just one of many nations around the world facing potentially disastrous food shortages beyond their imminent vulnerabilities, and this program is anticipated to support a strong infrastructure of development and sustainability measures that will lead them into economic prosperity and a return to a healthy embrace of indigenous food and culture.

Bolivia renounces UN anti-drug convention over coca leaf controversy

The Telegraph

Robin Yapp

Bolivia's government has decided to renounce the United Nations' anti-drug convention because it classifies coca leaf as an illegal drug, the Foreign Ministry said.

The decision comes after a proposal by President Evo Morales to remove language obliging countries that have signed the convention to ban the chewing of coca leaves was rejected following US objections.

Bolivian officials contend that coca leaf in its natural form is not a narcotic and forms an age-old part of Andean culture. Morales is a former coca growers' union leader who has campaigned for the leaf's traditional uses.

Coca is a mild stimulant with high religious and social value in the Andean region. But while it fights hunger and alleviates altitude sickness, it is also the raw material of cocaine.

The Bolivian Foreign Ministry confirmed that its decision was presented to Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary-General, in New York.

The Andean nation plans to rejoin the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, but noting its objection to the penalisation of coca chewing.

US officials have said they are concerned that Bolivia's proposal would weaken the integrity of the UN convention.

Bolivia Set To Withdraw From U.N. Treaty Banning Drugs

Toke of the Town
Steve Elliot

First Indigenous Bolivian President Evo Morales

The South American nation of Bolivia is set to withdraw from the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, adopted in 1961 to outlaw "illicit substances" across the planet. It plans the move in protest of the U.N.'s classification of coca leaves as an illegal drug.

President Evo Morales -- who, not coincidentally, is also leader of one of the country's biggest coca producers' unions -- has asked the Bolivian Congress to pass a law that would take the nation out of the Single Convention, reports the Sydney Morning Herald.

Morales, an Aymara Indian who came to power as the leader of coca growers in the Chapare region, has moved away from the forced eradication of coca plantations while at the same time stepping up efforts against cocaine traffickers, with record seizures.

Photo: Cannabis Culture

Bolivian kids in the coca field

Like neighboring Peru, Bolivia permits the limited cultivation of coca for legal use in cooking, folk medicine and Andean religious rites. Unadulterated coca is a mild stimulant that counteracts the effects of altitude sickness and helps to suppress hunger pangs, reports Fox News Latino.

According to the Bolivian government, the Single Convention contradicts the Bolivian constitution, which says the country is "obliged to preserve and protect" the chewing of coca leaves as a cultural heritage and ancestral practice.

For years now, Bolivian officials have argued that coca in its natural plant form is not an illicit drug. The plant is legally grown in Bolivia for medicinal and traditional purposes. A considerable portion of the supply is also diverted and processed into cocaine for the U.S., Brazilian and European markets.

An international attempt to remove coca chewing from the U.N.'s illegal drugs list failed in January, so the government, based in La Paz, is now ready to withdraw from the convention.

Photo: Cannabis Culture

Bolivians harvesting coca leaf in the fields

No signatory nation to the Single Convention has ever formally withdrawn from it in the 50 years that the treaty has existed.

Under the draft law, which has already passed the lower chamber of the Bolivian Congress and is expected to pass in the Senate -- where leftist President Morales's party has a two-thirds majority -- Bolivia would keep its international obligations in the fight against drug trafficking.

Foreign minister David Choquehuanca said the country would rejoin the Single Convention next year, but with an important exception: That Bolivians be allowed to consume coca legally. The legislation states that Bolivia may rejoin the Convention only if the articles that outlaw the chewing of coca leaf -- in contravention of Bolivia's 2009 constitution -- are removed.

Lakotah: The Next Chapter

Republic of Lakotah

Russel Means

Two weeks ago, I went to New York with a delegation from the Republic of Lakotah, to utilize the annual meeting of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues (UNPFII, May 16-27). The primary purpose of the trip was to utilize past and present allies in the indigenous struggle to aid us in visiting a small, select group of other Nation’s Missions and their Ambassadors to the United Nation to discuss the international character of treaties between my people, the Lakota, and the United States of America.
In 1851 and 1868, the Lakotah, Dakota, Nakota, Cheyenne and Arapaho nations had militarily defeated the United States, and the United States had requested peace. Our nations agreed to peace at a treaty negotiation at Fort Laramie. The treaties were international instruments between two independent nations, unambiguous and unequivocal in defining the territories of the indigenous nations involved—it covered an area the size of the contemporary country of Guatemala.

Since the time of the signing of the treaty, the Lakotah have insisted that the United States respect its obligations under the treaties. Our insistence has even taken us to the United States Supreme Court. Now, how ridiculous is that, for us to go to the violator of the treaties, expecting that same violator to force itself to live up to its own laws. How can we allow an international contract dispute to be decided by the Violator?

Over the past century, one thing has become clear—the United States wanted to take its benefit from the treaties, and it never intended to abide by the other essential treaty provisions. OK, we get it. The US certainly is not going to begin to respect the treaties today.

There are some who say, “Well, if we don’t have our treaty, we have nothing.” To them, I say, “Look around you. You already have nothing! You experience the worst poverty, the worst health, the worst environmental problems, the worst of everything, plus they have stolen your territory, your freedom, and your self-respect. Wake up! What you wave around in the name of ‘sovereignty’ is no longer a treaty, it is a broken contract!”

Let’s be clear, if the US decides that it is not going to abide by the treaties (and it has done so repeatedly), then there must be consequences for that decision—just like if you sell me your car, but I do not pay you the money for your car. I don’t get to keep the car just because I have grown accustomed to driving it. Neither does the US get to keep our territory just because it allowed its citizens to invade and occupy our homeland, build homes and businesses, and steal wealth and resources from our homeland.

Article 37 of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (PDF document) directly addresses this point:

Indigenous peoples have the right to the recognition, observance and enforcement of treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements concluded with States or their successors and to have States honor and respect such treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements. Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as diminishing or eliminating the rights of indigenous peoples contained in treaties, agreements and other constructive arrangements.

Our treaties are international instruments, and require enforcement. If the US is not going to honor its obligations then international law is clear about an equitable remedy for that breach. Under the established international legal principle of inadimplanti non est adimplendum (“one has no need to respect his obligation if the counter-party has not respected his own”), if one party to a treaty consistently refuses to abide by the treaty, then the parties have to return to their original positions before the treaty was signed.

When I first came to New York in 1975 to help establish the UN office of the International Indian Treaty Council, we were in the midst of an indigenous revolution. (Two years before, we had liberated our community of Wounded Knee, indigenous peoples were on the move.) By 1977, we had kicked open the doors of the UN, and demanded our seat at the table of nations. In my recent visit to the UN, I was dismayed and saddened by what has happened since that time.

In the years since 1977, that revolution that we began has become bogged down in bureaucracy and procedure that divert and sidetrack our right to be free. Countries like the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand trot out their sell-out “Natives” like puppets to mouth the ongoing genocidal policy of those countries. The original indigenous revolutionaries have been replaced by “technicians” who accept crumbs from the invaders who continue to seek to destroy us.

People in the throes of genocide are given five minutes to tell their story, with no recourse—it’s just on to the next speaker. It is time to renew the teachings of our ancestors.

We need a renewal of the international indigenous revolution, one that does not ask permission from the invaders of our homelands, one that recalls the original message of our ancestors never to surrender, one that advances our natural right to be free and independent peoples, with international personality and dignity and respect. The Republic of Lakotah is not waiting. We have renewed our strategies with other freedom-loving indigenous peoples, with countries like Bolivia who understand and support our aspirations, and with international civil society. We now encourage a new generation of indigenous young people to shake off their cynicism, put their talents to work, and take their place in history by writing the next chapter with us in the international indigenous revolution.

Russell Means, Oglala/Iynktowan, is Chief Facilitator, Republic of Lakotah (republicoflakotah.com), and author of the autobiography Where White Men Fear to Tread.

Nobel Committee asked to strip Obama of Peace Prize

Digital Journal

The Bolivian President and a Russian political leader have launched a campaign to revoke Obama's honour after the US attacked Libya.

Liberal Democratic Party of Russia leader and Vice-Chairman of the State Duma Vladimir Zhirinovsky released a statement today calling for the Nobel Prize Committee to take back the honour bestowed on US President Barack Obama in 2009.

Zhirinovsky said the attacks were "another outrageous act of aggression by NATO forces and, in particular, the United States," and that the attacks demonstrated a "colonial policy" with "one goal: to establish control over Libyan oil and the Libyan regime." He said the prize was now hypocritical as a result.

Bolivian President Evo Morales echoed the call: "How is it possible that a Nobel Peace Prize winner leads a gang to attack and invade? This is not a defence of human rights or self-determination."

Morales won the Gaddafi International Prize for Human Rights in 2006.

He is amongst a number of left-leaning Latin American leaders who have denounced the attacks against Libya. Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Rafael Correa of Ecuador, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua and Cristina Fernandez of Argentina have all criticised western media coverage of the Libyan crisis.

Hugo Chávez, President of Venezuela, holds a miniature copy of the 1999
Venezuelan Constitution at the 2005 World Social Forum held in Brazil.

Read more: http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/304909#ixzz1HR858O3Z

Morales and Chavez repeated calls for peace talks with Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi.

Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2009 for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples." The Committee praised the "change in the international climate" affected by Obama's presidency.

In his Nobel Lecture, he discussed the "hard truth" of the inevitability of war, saying: "There will be times when nations — acting individually or in concert — will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified."

A message has been widely retweeted on Twitter today: "Obama has now fired more cruise missiles than all other Nobel Peace prize winners combined."