As part of the launch of his new book Democracies in danger: democratic regression in Latin America and proposals for the futureformer Foreign Minister Heraldo Muñoz addresses the complexities and risks that characterize democracies in the region, such as the influence of authoritarian populism and the governance crisis following the advance of organized crime.
The text is also supported by reports and surveys from international organizations, information crossed by a political and academic reflection based on Muñoz’s experience, not only as former chancellor but also as former undersecretary general of the United Nations and former regional director of the UNDP for America. Latin and the Caribbean.
“The concern for democracy is with its gradual and persistent decline; no longer through coups d’état, but stealthily, even through authoritarian governments initially elected in a more or less democratic manner that end up hijacking democracy. “Political and social polarization in contexts of pandemic and economic crisis, irregular migrations, domestic and transnational crime, among others, have allowed the emergence of extremist voices that question democracy,” he points out in the introduction.
In conversation with The counter, Muñoz also analyzes the diplomatic tensions with Venezuela, stating that it is “necessary to exhaust all bilateral resources and channels,” which is why he is in favor of not breaking relations with the “regime” of Nicolás Maduro. Along these lines, he also refers to the importance of regional cooperation to confront irregular immigration and transnational crime.
-What were the main factors that influenced the current democratic degradation in Latin America that you argue in the book?
-Democracy is under attack in Latin America and in several other places in the world. In my opinion, the great global debate, more than between left and right, will be between those who support democracy and those who wish to subvert it in different ways.
Behind the decline of democracies there are factors such as corruption, delinquency and organized crime, persistent social inequalities, the Trump effect of ignoring the rule of law – just remember Brazil under Bolsonaro – and that governability has become more difficult because new challenges, new identities and greater social diversity have emerged.
Traditional coups d’état have given rise to what I call the “hijacking of democracies” from within, gradually and furtively, by autocrats who manipulate anxieties and citizen unrest to seize all power, weakening or destroying them. the separation of powers.
-What does the evidence tell us about the main manifestations of this democratic regression?
The evidence is clear. Various studies show that Latin America continues to fall in rankings of democracy. We have gone back more than a decade as democracies. Recent reports from Reporters Without Borders reveal records in the number of journalists harassed or imprisoned in various countries, and the murders of journalists have spread, with Mexico being a critical case in this regard.
Democratic degradation is perceived in violent and moralizing speeches, generally against politicians, and this is accompanied by the spectacularization of complaints about corruption and abuses of power, the construction of enmities, and the cultivation of contempt for what is divergent. Civic friendship is fading, as is already happening in different countries. The radicalization of conservatives polarizes politics, narrows centrist options and puts extreme “cultural war” issues on the agenda. And the moralizing and identity-based left also reduces the space of the center-left.
-The democratic exercise of power seems to be the great absence of populist governments. What reflections do you develop regarding the alternatives that politics offers today, in times where the matrices of right and left have become blurred, and where citizens demand immediate solutions?
-Today almost all democracies are more fragile than a decade ago. Presidential power fades quickly and the honeymoons of newly assumed governments are increasingly shorter, because citizens distrust politics and demand immediate solutions to problems. That is why the “saviors of the country” emerge who offer to solve complex problems in a short time, without coherent ideas, in exchange for accumulating power and making people give up freedoms. Since they fail, they blame politics and people end up fed up with everyone and vote punishment for the most anti-system candidates. Milei in Argentina is an example.
-In that sense, what is your reading of the different situations that we are seeing in the region and that represent this democratic regression? For example, what is happening in Venezuela with the questioning of this year’s presidential elections, where even Lula and Petro criticized the impediments to the registration of opposition candidates; the entry of the Ecuadorian police into the Mexican embassy; Bukele’s re-election; the penetration of organized crime, etc.
-Democratic deterioration interacts with problems such as criminal violence. Ecuador was a relatively safe country a decade ago, and in the last presidential election a candidate whose program was fighting corruption was assassinated, and the remaining candidates closed their campaigns wearing bulletproof vests.
Venezuela shows that it is not enough to access power in a more or less democratic way, but that the democratic exercise of power is crucial. Hugo Chávez initially won more or less democratic elections, and then swept away the Legislative and Judicial powers, and Venezuela gradually transformed into a dictatorship. Autocrats today use the institutions of the democratic system, elections, the media, freedom of expression, etc., and then undemocratically capitalize on the unrest of societies.
Bukele offered citizens to reduce homicides and insecurity in El Salvador in exchange for the population giving up basic freedoms, the separation of powers, respect for the Constitution, and the rule of law. And he calls himself the “most dictator.” cool in the world”, since he significantly reduced gang crime, the people rewarded him with enormous support. The lesson is that every democracy must guarantee the human right to security; citizens want to live in peace, tranquility, with social progress.
Returning to Venezuela, Maduro promised, in the Barbados Agreement, democratic guarantees for the presidential elections, and, on the contrary, he banned the opposition candidacy of María Corina Machado, has imprisoned people around Machado and other dissidents, and has failed to comply his promise to organize free and fair elections. For this reason, Presidents Lula and Petro have publicly criticized the repressive wave of the Maduro regime. The only hope is that the pressures of the Brasilia Consensus, led by Lula, take effect on Maduro. It looks difficult.
-In relation to what is happening in our country, what are the main risks that you identify and what actions should the political system take in a context of unresolved social demands and the advance of organized crime?
-The most important thing in Chile is that we have been unable to agree on a great social pact for the future on the main national challenges, which looks to the coming decades and not to the next elections. Likewise, reforms of the political system are required to avoid the enormous fragmentation and dispersion of political parties that makes personal interest or that of parties and micro-parties predominate. The right has already forgotten the social outbreak, when the social democratic model became widely supported, even by important businessmen, and now the right refuses to legislate a tax pact to sustainably collect and finance social reforms, agree on a pension reform for a social security system, etc. We haven’t learned anything, it seems.
-What would you highlight from the last chapter on recommendations to improve the state of democracies in Latin America, taking into account the characteristics of 21st century democracies?
-As for recommendations to improve the democracies we have, the first thing is to note that no one will do it for us. In the book I propose to increase citizen participation, strengthen regional mechanisms for the promotion and defense of democracy, improve capacities for good government, cooperate regionally against irregular immigration and transnational crime, and regulate large technology companies. big data. I would add that we have not been able to make profound reforms to reduce social inequalities and provide justice, or attack corruption and crime more decisively.
-In that sense, what role does the digital revolution play, in your opinion, in terms of solutions and threats to democracy?
-One of the most disturbing phenomena that threatens democracies is social networks and Artificial Intelligence (AI). The digital revolution and AI pose great advances, but they also carry great dangers such as cyberespionage – we already live under surveillance capitalism, maintains a Harvard academic – the spread of fake news to intervene in elections, the attacks ransomware and even the falsified appearance of personalities making political advertisements or promoting products thanks to the deepfakes of generative AI, all of which pose emerging risks to democracy.
-Regarding the contingency and diplomatic tensions with Venezuela, what is your reading regarding the expectations of collaboration and the calls to break relations that persist in the political world?
-In my opinion, despite the differences between the Government of Chile and the dictatorial regime of Venezuela, diplomatic relations should not be broken. It is necessary to exhaust all bilateral resources and channels to obtain the arrest for extradition purposes of the two individuals identified in the kidnapping and murder of former lieutenant Ojeda. Diplomacy is about trying to solve difficult problems. You have to act calmly and firmly. It seems naive to me to think that results will be achieved by breaking relationships and closing all dialogue. Since the Venezuelan Government reversed his speech and has promised collaboration, we must charge him for his word. Of course, actions and not words are expected.