Similar to various other Latin American countries, Brazil suffered through a right-wing military dictatorship from 1964 to 1985.1 The aim of this dictatorship was to eliminate any and all threats of communist uprising within the country. This is similar to Chile, Argentina, and Uruguay, but, unlike such countries, Brazil has only now acknowledged the torture and other atrocities committed during the 21-year dictatorship.
News and Politics
On September 3, 2015, the president of Guatemala resigned after being charged with fraud, illicit association and corruption.1 Less than a week later, in Mexico, the government account of what happened to 43 missing students was discredited, calling into question the integrity of everyone from Mexico’s military to the president himself.2 Neither of these things could have happened without a key element of the investigations: two external investigatory commissions, organized by the UN and the OAS respectively, which turned out reports negating the validity of
The race for the president of the United States is nearing the finish line and Republican candidate Donald J. Trump and Democrat opponent Hillary Clinton have been pushing harder than ever to win the votes of the American people. Most recently, this week CNN aired what was the most-watched presidential debate in the history of the United States. While both candidates muddled through their respective weaknesses, one story that was exposed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has since dealt a serious blow to entrepreneur Donald Trump’s campaign.
This past Monday, Colombian president Juan Manuel Santos and FARC rebel leader Timochenko signed a historic peace agreement six years in the works.1
En estas líneas me detengo en la pregunta que mañana la ciudadanía de Colombia deberá responder en las urnas. Esta pregunta constituye un eslabón fundamental de todo un ciclo político cuya potencialidad es inconmensurable para el país (y, consecuentemente, para toda América Latina). Mi afán aquí no es ni criticar al gobierno, ni debilitar el proceso plebiscitario, sino que, muy por el contrario, mi punto es simplemente contextualizar y señalar algunos errores de procedimiento que se podrían haber evitado.
In the rhetoric heavy topic of trade negotiations there is always talk of how expanding trade deals between countries will do both of them a great amount of good. Deals such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (or NAFTA) tout their ability to expand the economies of all countries involved, somehow giving them an upper hand over nations that aren't able to participate in the deal. But does this rhetoric live up to the reality of the situation?