With extraordinary speed, the highland organization that advocates the creation of a “plurinational America” is preparing to turn Cusco into an emblematic and geopolitical center of that dangerous ambition.
Indeed, with the express silence of the Foreign Ministry, that “anti-imperialist, anti-capitalist and anti-colonial” act to be held just before Christmas (December 20 and 21) at the initiative of Evo Morales and with the support of the governments of Bolivia and Argentina, it intends to be the headquarters that consolidates the “Runasur” during its second conference.
This entity “from the peoples to the peoples” aims to convene the “indigenous, Afro-descendant movements and popular political, social and union organizations” in the area to achieve the “(American) reconstitution of our ancestors.”
If your vocation is nativist and retrograde (in the Spanish sense that involves invoking institutions from past times), it is based on the challenge of history (as in the case of the Preamble to the Bolivian Constitution), on the confrontation with the United States and its policies (from the outdated Monroe Doctrine to extractive activities) and proposes the coordination of regional strategies as a “generational response” to a “life crisis”.
Although it is true that this bellicose, Marxist and existential platform corresponds to the “ideology” and experience of the MAS that today governs Bolivia, its configuration was quickly achieved during Morales’s exile in Argentina. Indeed, under the protection of President Fernández (and after a transit through Mexico), Morales searched for a return strategy and found it in an idea: the “plurinational America”.
Its instrumental purpose, rather than philosophical, is to achieve a great space of influence whose center is Cochabamba (the coca-growing headquarters of the MAS) that does not respect borders and facilitates indigenous contacts and their “forms of expression” (such as the defense of coca from the one that drug trafficking is its most strident activity).
Given the known folkloric characteristics and royal ambitions of the MAS, the proposal is not entirely surprising. What is new is its opportunism (the return from self-exile in less than a year) and its geopolitical purpose: beyond the construction of an external base of personal support for “el Evo”, the MAS is interested in taking over, instantly, with the south of Peru and the north of Chile and Argentina as a Bolivian “nucleus of cohesion”.
In this regard, it is striking that the Peronist Fernández, belonging to a hyperstatist political tradition, has found value in this transnational idea that will lead him to collide with his neighbors.
But it is even more surprising that Torre Tagle has not ruled on the convenience of the next Cusco meeting that will bring to Peru politicians, instruments and a program of activities that violate our foreign policy (in the interstate sense) and our foreign relations (which deals with the external interests of society that concern or affect the State).
And it is also surprising that the Foreign Ministry has ignored the declaration of Evo Morales as persona non grata made by the Foreign Relations Commission of Congress. Although that was a decision that has the jurisdictional limits of that Commission, its political dimension should have been considered by Torre Tagle. And it has not been.
At a time when President Castillo’s vacancy is being discussed in Congress, that pronouncement deserved even more consideration.
By not doing so, it seems that the Chancellery responds more to the wishes of the governing party (or parties), to the personal commitments of Messrs. Castillo and Cerrón, to the influence of a “plurinationalist” leadership in Torre Tagle (the one that has the great merit of ignoring the essentially mestizo composition of Peru) and the insistence on bad initiatives (such as holding a bilateral meeting of presidents and cabinets with Bolivia when the Peruvian cabinet had not yet deserved the trust of Congress and its progressive disarticulation is intolerable daily news).
The effects that may derive from such a lack of reaction are not marginal and, therefore, the responsibilities of the case must be assumed.
Especially if Runasur pretends to be the manager of the “revitalization” of UNASUR (from which Peru withdrew along with several countries in the area) and tries to form the third leg of amorphous and populist regional socialism. That “leg” would be the social ingredient that the Puebla Group (made up of Latin American and Spanish politicians linked to the Chavista tradition) and the Sao Paulo Forum (essentially made up of parties of similar ideology) are missing.
The consequences of a regional configuration of this type will have a very high strategic cost for Peru and South America. A president who is also ignorant in these matters and the group of diplomats who accompany him or, with their silence, endorse him, will be responsible for him.
.
Ricardo is a renowned author and journalist, known for his exceptional writing on top-news stories. He currently works as a writer at the 247 News Agency, where he is known for his ability to deliver breaking news and insightful analysis on the most pressing issues of the day.
