Latin America’s response to the massacre of more than 100 civilians, including 49 children and 34 women, in the Syrian town of Houla has been, with a few exceptions, shockingly tame for a region that has suffered gross human rights violations in the past.
Last week, the United States, Canada, Germany, France, Spain and at least five other major nations expelled their Syrian ambassadors following the slaughter in Houla, which United Nations observers say was carried out to a large extent by pro-government militias who entered homes and executed entire families at close range.
The paramilitary forces have been behind many of the estimated 12,000 deaths in Syria since the beginning of the uprising against dictator Bashar Assad thirteen months ago. United Nations High Commissioner of Human Rights officials have said that nearly 20 of the dead in Houla were killed by government artillery.
But in Latin America, at the time of this writing, no country has physically expelled a Syrian diplomat to send a strong message of outrage against the Syrian regime.
Only one country, Panama, has announced that it has “temporarily suspended” diplomatic relations with Syria, although the measure is largely symbolic, because Syria has no embassy in Panama. Among the other official reactions:
• Cuba and Venezuela are openly supporting the Syrian dictatorship. On Friday, when the 47-member U.N. Human Rights Council, which rarely condemns human rights abusers, passed a resolution condemning the “outrageous use of force against the civilian population” by mostly “pro-regime elements” in Houla and called for an independent investigation, Cuba was one of the few council members that voted against it, and Ecuador abstained.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who in 2010 decorated Assad with Venezuela’s “Order of the Liberator” and proclaimed him “one of the liberators of the new world,” has sent more than 600,000 barrels of diesel oil to Syria over the past year, according to Venezuelan government reports.
• Colombia and Guatemala, which currently hold seats on the U.N. Security Council, have condemned the Houla massacre and supported a May 27 Security Council resolution that condemns the events, but doesn’t directly blame the Assad regime. U.N. diplomats tell me Colombia was much more outspoken than Guatemala in condemning the Assad forces during the debate.
• Mexico, Chile and other countries issued strong statements condemning the slaughter in Houla and supporting the U.N. Security Council resolution, but have not taken any diplomatic actions regarding Syrian diplomats, or their own diplomats in Syria.
• Brazil has supported the U.N. Security Council resolution but stressed that it will not expel Syrian diplomats because that would shut down dialogue avenues with the Syrian regime. Argentina has remained silent.
Jose Miguel Vivanco, of the Human Rights Watch advocacy group, says that “Brazil and other Latin American countries that have suffered dictatorships, like Argentina, should be in the forefront of international demands for concrete measures to take those responsible for this atrocity to the International Criminal Court. But they are not doing it.”
Sanjeev Bery, a specialist on Middle Eastern affairs with Amnesty International, says that “Latin American countries have been increasingly flexing their geopolitical muscle, and with that comes a responsibility to advance human rights. Now is the time for them to explicitly demand action from those who are standing in the way on human rights in Syria.”
Latin American diplomats argue that an escalation of sanctions against Syria would lead to a possible foreign military intervention in Syria, similar to what happened in Libya. Some also say that the U.S. and European countries are hypocritical, because they do not expel the ambassadors of China, Saudi Arabia or other major human rights violators with whom they have strong business ties.
My opinion: Not sending a strong signal to Syria and allowing the Syrian dictatorship to kill even more civilians will only help further spread Syria’s sectarian conflict into neighboring countries, and increase the chances of an international military intervention.
And the argument about the alleged U.S. and European hypocrisy is a copout. If Latin American countries are as serious about human rights as some of them claim, they should act against all human rights abusers, including those condoned by the United States and Europe.
Acting against human rights abuses globally should be Latin America’s best line of defense against possible rights abuses in their own countries. But most governments seem to have forgotten the lessons of their own past.
• Oppenheimer is a Latin America correspondent for the Miami Herald.
Comments (8)
Add commentPast?
"But most governments seem to have forgotten the lessons of their own past."
Latin American countries cannot afford to raise a stink about human rights violations in other countries. Any given Central or South American country is just one beheading away from sparking a "Latin Spring". Any place touched by Spain's conquistadores and inquisition has suffered hundreds of years of abuse in the name of gold and God. Conquered and enslaved, these countries have not only suffered human rights violations, but also, a perverted culture ruled largely by dictators and highly susceptible to socialist regimes. A Latin American revolution epidemic could be avoided or postponed by keeping world news on the down-low and away from the populace. The hypocrytical denunciation of atrocities on the other side of the world would only bring these historical offenders' own abuses to the forefront. Chavez's and Castro's and Morales' lack of condemnation of Syria are cases in point. Though not mentioned here, you can bet Ortega is right on board with these other three buddies of Ahmajenidad.
Or maybe they just prefer to
Or maybe they just prefer to mind their own business. Most of them held their own revolutions and sorted out their own affairs without the need of world intervention. Maybe we should be following their lead...
Mind their own business, kp?
Pay a little more attention to your neighbors. They might be moving Russian missiles on to an island 90 miles off your coast. Never happen? Already has. Think offering heating fuel to Alaskan villages was an anonymous humanitarian donation? Yeah, the leaders I named above are SO loved by their subjects. Don't think this fab four are not taking notes.
1. Who cares
1. who cares what Latin AM thinks about Syria? It's not like they are going to DO anything because
2. strongly worded letters of condemnation mean nothing to Assad and
3. the US has already ceded any leadership role to the UN and the Islamic World Forum, and the Arab League.
4. Though I do think that if the heads of state in Latin AM got together and formed their own league or forum, Obama would put them on the list of folks to consult before gettin' his jingo-mojo going.
We often ask more of others
We often ask more of others than we do of ourselves. This author is absolutely correct that all nations that value human rights must oppose abuses wherever and whenever they are present; however, I disagree with his assertion that it's a copout for those countries to point their fingers back at the U.S. and say "what about you?"
The US and Europe are hypocrites when it comes to this. We take bold action when it doesn't impact our economy and are timid when it does - across party lines. As Americans, we often support that timidity because we want to keep our standard of living which often means maintaining relationships with dictators that are supreme human rights violators. See picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein as an example. And pointing out our complex relationship with China, another huge violator of human rights, is fair game in my opinion.
Latin America is understandably leery of supporting US policies. After all, our CIA has had their hands in helping to overthrow democratically-elected leaders in an effort to help American corporations for decades. For instance: "Chile 1964-1973: After the CIA unsucessfully prevented Salvador Allende from winning the Chilean presidency by spreading propaganda and funding the opposition, it concentrated its efforts on getting Allende overthrown. The campaign, which involved bribing officers and spreading misinformation, was eventually successful and brutal dictator General Augusto Pinochet overthrew Allende in 1973. Allende died during the overthrow and seventeen years of repressive military rule followed.
The recently elected Chilean president, Michelle Bachelet, was herself imprisoned and tortured by Pinochet’s regime, as was her father, who died while in captivity. In her acceptance speech, Bachelet promised that to lead with tolerance, saying "because I was the victim of hatred, I have dedicated my life to reverse that hatred and turn it into understanding, tolerance and -- why not say it -- into love." " http://www.geopoliticalmonitor.com/us-interventions-in-latin-american-021/
The rest of us, including other Latin AM countries, could learn something from President Bachelet's approach. Let's all speak out against atrocities wherever and whenever they exist, even at the risk of our own cushy lives.
Gee Skirz, we should be so
Gee Skirz, we should be so afraid. Russian missiles were moved to a country right off our shores, 50 years ago-ish. Now all that cuba can muster is a little saber rattling with an old rusty saber and they have to stop and have a coughing fit, then rest up for a week or two. Venezuela and their oil donating? Really? Thats the best you've got? These countries are barely even bark anymore, let alone bite. They can try to influence other countries through oil money, or appeal to humanitarian needs on Cuba's part, but they are no threat. Besides, why should they even bother to worry about it? If the UN says Syria should be annexed, Obama and the war profiteers will jump up, salute, and start pouring money at it. The US will do whatever the UN says, regardless of what Latin America says. They cant lend arms or money to it, so why bother. None of their business, really.
I doubt it's the UN
that's controlling things - they don't seem to have much power to do anything. I'm guessing it's the neo-con chickenhawks that are pushing the agenda. Of course, it's to their benefit to remain in the dark and to have the focus on the UN.
Another example of the hypocrisy this author pooh-poohs:
"The State Department is once again giving China a hard time about its human rights record, a worthy cause to be sure, though the United States makes for an odd champion. What’s the saying? Those who torture should not throw stones, maybe.
Specifically, deputy spokesman Mark Toner says of prisoners still held more than 20 years after the violence in Tiananmen Square, “We renew our call for China to protect the universal human rights of all its citizens; release those who have been wrongfully detained, prosecuted, incarcerated, forcibly disappeared, or placed under house arrest; and end the ongoing harassment of human rights activists and their families.”
There are several reasons why that statement could be read as hypocritical. For one thing, the United States reserves for itself the right to forcibly disappear and indefinitely detain anyone in the world. What’s more, we just learned that the president, himself, personally has suspected terrorists, their associates and their families remotely executed by drone strike without so much as a show trial. And that’s not to mention the wars and their associated human rights complications.
The State Department’s critique is specifically aimed at China’s treatment of its dissenters, so let’s turn the mirror. With the benefit of homeland security funding, police forces across the country have militarized and turned their beanbag guns and other nonlethal weapons on the protesters squatting in parks and corralled into free speech zones.
And what about throwing people in prison for having the gall to oppose corruption in the state? Ask Tim DeChristopher, the environmental activist who was sentenced to two years in prison for participating in a public land auction, or the thousands of Occupy protesters who have been jailed and bailed in an effort to hush their voices and keep public parks clean.
You don’t even have to be an activist to go to prison in America. The U.S. contains almost one-quarter of all the world’s prisoners.
China’s human rights record is terrible (it has the second most prisoners, after the U.S., according to the International Centre for Prison Studies). Its leaders should absolutely “respect the universal rights of all its citizens.” So should ours."
Clean your own house first, before looking for dirt elsewhere.
Missed point.
Point being, these historical oppressors aren't about to condemn Syria. They are just like them. Heavy handed dictators.