The Washington Post is wringing its hands over the trial of Jeanine Áñez, who seized power in a coup in in Bolivia, for genocide.
The thing is that as soon as she became interim President, she explicitly called for the a program of aggressive violence against the indigenous communities in Bolivia and called for the use of the state security apparatus of Bolivia to suppress indigenous religion and culture.
As a minor player in a minor party (less than 4% of the vote), she's just a nut, but when she became interim President, and openly called for the eradication of aboriginal culture in the mountain nation, you have probably cause to try her.
What the hand wringing from the US foreign policy establishment is really about is that they want to make sure that the next time the US foments a coup, their stooges won't have to worry about this happening to them:
On the day before Bolivian former interim president Jeanine Áñez was arrested and detained this year, accused of gaining power by fomenting a coup in 2019, she left her supporters with a message: “The political persecution has begun.”
And in the five months since, as Áñez’s mental and physical health has deteriorated in jail, the conservative former leader has become a symbol of the deepening polarization in Bolivia.
To some, she’s the victim of a vengeful, politically motivated justice system under her socialist successor, President Luis Arce. To others, she’s a usurper who staged a coup that dislodged longtime president Evo Morales, and then presided over systematic human rights abuses by police.
On Saturday, a day after prosecutors announced new charges of “genocide” against her, Áñez cut her own wrist, in what her lawyer described as “a cry for help.” The news prompted her supporters, the European Union and the U.S. Embassy in Bolivia to call on the Arce government to safeguard her well-being.
As I noted above, these charges are justified by her public words and deeds.
“She’s not asking for impunity,” her lawyer, Norka Cuellar, told reporters. “She’s asking to defend herself in her own home.”
The State Department is asking for impunity though, because it serves the purposes of the US State Security apparatus.
………
The Organization of American States’ human rights watchdog last week reported evidence of “massacres,” “systematic torture,” and “summary executions” by security forces under Áñez’s interim government. Incidents of excessive police force against Morales supporters occurred after Áñez signed a decree guaranteeing amnesty for security forces restoring order in the country, according to the Group of Independent Experts commissioned by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.
To some of Áñez’s critics, the report provided clear-cut evidence of the charges against the former interim leader. But even as international human rights groups and the State Department demanded an investigation into the OAS watchdog’s allegations, many doubted that the country’s justice system was capable of pursuing an impartial case against the former president.
Yes, it will be difficult, and that is a problem, but allowing her impunity for her actions is worse for society and governance in Bolivia, and across Latin America.
Just look at the corrosive effects of Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon in 1974.
It created the expectation of impunity among America's ruling elites, frequently cast as, "Looking forward, not back," (God, I hate that phrase) by shallow evil people.
………
“They were brutal, outrageous massacres,” [HRW researcher] Muñoz said. “But two massacres don’t make genocide. These disproportionate charges are not helpful to the victims.”
Gee, ONLY two massacres? Well, that's an endorsement for the hiring policies of Human Rights Watch.
I do think that her trial should be held to high standards, both inside and outside of Bolivia, but the concerns stated by foreign powers are driven by a cynical, and bigoted, desire to keep coups, and lawfare as coups on the table throughout Latin America.
0 comments :
Post a Comment