O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida.

Mostrando postagens com marcador regime esquizofrênico. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador regime esquizofrênico. Mostrar todas as postagens

quarta-feira, 2 de abril de 2014

Venezuela: seria a Igreja fascista tambem?

Venezuela protestas

Iglesia venezolana tilda de “totalitario” al Gobierno, pero ofrece mediación

CARACAS (VENEZUELA), 01/04/2014.-EFE/SANTI DONAIRE
Infolatam/Efe
Caracas, 2 de abril de 2014

Las claves
  • Representantes de la CEV explicaron que el Gobierno venezolano debe presentar al Vaticano una solicitud formal para que medie en el conflicto, después de que Maduro aceptara que secretario de Estado del Vaticano, Pietro Parolin, sea testigo del diálogo.
  • El arzobispo de Caracas, el cardenal Jorge Urosa Savino, dijo a Efe que aunque la CEV no ha tenido una contacto directo con Parolín, exnuncio apostólico en Venezuela, sabe que tiene "muy buena voluntad de colaborar en la solución del actual conflicto del país".

Los idus de marzo en América Latina

El análisis
Daniel Zovatto
(Infolatam).- “La gravedad de la crisis, el creciente malestar social (exacerbado por la carestía, el desabastecimiento, la criminalidad y la reciente devaluación del bolívar del 88%) y el alto nivel de represión y de polarización evidencian la necesidad de encontrar un mediador creíble e imparcial que ayude a poner en marcha, con urgencia, un diálogo honesto e inclusivo”.
La Conferencia Episcopal de Venezuela (CEV) calificó al Gobierno de Nicolás Maduro de “totalitario”, pero dijo estar dispuesta a mediar en el diálogo entre el oficialismo y la oposición para “apaciguar” la ola de protestas que vive el país.
Representantes de la CEV explicaron que el Gobierno venezolano debe presentar al Vaticano una solicitud formal para que medie en el conflicto, después de que Maduro aceptara que secretario de Estado del Vaticano, Pietro Parolin, sea testigo del diálogo.
En un comunicado leído por el arzobispo Diego Padrón, el episcopado arremete contra el Gobierno por la “brutal represión de la disidencia política”, las restricciones al derecho a la información y “la falta de políticas adecuadas para enfrentar la inseguridad jurídica y ciudadana”.
Lamenta, asimismo, las muertes de civiles y de guardias nacionales, que suman ya 39 desde el 12 de febrero pasado, y rechaza la “criminalización de la protesta ciudadana y la negación práctica de los derechos humanos en el trato a los manifestantes”.
“El Gobierno se equivoca al querer resolver la crisis por la fuerza”, apunta la CEV e invita a los ciudadanos “a no permanecer indiferentes” y promover el diálogo y la reconciliación.
En su opinión, la “causa fundamental de la actual crisis es la pretensión del partido oficial y las autoridades (…) de implantar el llamado ‘Plan de la Patria’, detrás del cual se esconde la promoción de un sistema de Gobierno de corte totalitario”.
Sobre el papel de la Iglesia católica, el arzobispo dijo que no le corresponde “decir cuándo, cómo y en qué medida” pueden ser mediadores. “A nosotros nos corresponde ofrecer nuestro humilde servicio como facilitadores de un diálogo”, apuntó.
Negó haber tenido algún acercamiento de parte del Gobierno para mediar en el diálogo y aseguró que la Iglesia venezolana puede emitir su opinión “con toda la libertad del mundo”, aunque “puede ser interpretado por unos y otros de diversas maneras”.
El arzobispo de Caracas, el cardenal Jorge Urosa Savino, dijo a Efe que aunque la CEV no ha tenido una contacto directo con Parolín, exnuncio apostólico en Venezuela, sabe que tiene “muy buena voluntad de colaborar en la solución del actual conflicto del país”.
Sobre las partes en conflicto, dijo que el Gobierno tiene una “muy seria responsabilidad en la conducción de la vida del país”, mientras que la oposición “se siente acorralada con la persecución política”.
Por ello, agregó, es necesario que el Gobierno atienda las “inquietudes” de sus adversarios para que exista una vida democrática y “fluida” en Venezuela.
“Que dialoguen dos personas depende de ellos dos, no depende de lo que un tercero diga”, sostuvo Urosa, quien descartó una visita del papa Francisco a Venezuela mientras continúe “este ambiente de turbulencia”.
Desde el 12 de febrero pasado Venezuela vive sumida en una ola de protestas contra las políticas del Gobierno de Maduro, que en algunos casos se han tornado violentas. El balance oficial hasta ahora es de 39 muertos y centenares de heridos y detenidos.

quinta-feira, 14 de fevereiro de 2013

ISIS: sobre o teste nuclear da Coreia do Norte

Sempre me pareceu muito claro que, a despeito de suas tendências autonomistas muito pronunciadas, o país que sempre deteve, e detém cada vez mais, controle sobre o que pode, ou não pode, fazer a Coreia do Norte, é a China. Se a China desejasse, por exemplo, poderia "estrangular" economicamente a hiperditadura stalinista da península, e ela só não o faz, o que seria de seu interesse nacional (pelo menos desde Deng Xiao-ping), para causar "incômodos" nos EUA, que poderiam passar a dispor de certa vantagem estratégica na região, se a Coreia do Norte simplesmente desaparecesse nos braços da República capitalista do sul. Apenas a cegueira geopolítica dos generais chineses impede a China de "estrangular" o regime surrealista imperante na Coreia do Norte. A China talvez venha a se arrepender dessa postura um dia, pois uma Coreia do Norte miserável, nuclearmente armada e tendo megalomaníacos na sua direção pode ser um desastre para ela e para toda a região.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

ISIS Reports

ISIS Statement on North Korean Nuclear Test

by David Albright and Andrea Stricker
February 12, 2013
Download PDF
On Tuesday, February 12 at 2:57 GMT/UTC, North Korea claims that it tested its third nuclear device.  The official KCNA news agency stated: “It was confirmed that the nuclear test, that was carried out at a high level in a safe and perfect manner using a miniaturized and lighter nuclear device with greater explosive force than previously, did not pose any negative impact on the surrounding ecological environment.”  The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization recorded a seismic event 5.0 in magnitude and the U.S. Geological Survey recorded a shallow earthquake of 5.1 in magnitude.  The test occurred at Punggye-ri, site of its 2006 and 2009 tests, which recorded magnitudes of 4.1 and 4.52, respectively.  ISIS assessed on February 3 that North Korea was likely preparing for a third nuclear test based on preparations at the site visible in overhead satellite imagery. 
While much information is still unknown about the nature of North Korea’s nuclear test, several key points should be made:
North Korea’s stated miniaturization capability, if true, should not be a surprise.  It should not come as a surprise to the international community that North Korea may now have the capability to explode a miniaturized nuclear device.  ISIS (and key members of the U.S. intelligence community) have assessed for some time that North Korea likely has the capability to miniaturize a nuclear weapon for its 800 mile range Nodong missile.  Although more information is needed to make a sound assessment, this test could, as North Korea has stated, demonstrate this capability. ISIS has also assessed that North Korea still lacks the ability to deploy a warhead on an ICBM, although it shows progress at this effort. North Korea would need to conduct missile flight tests with a re-entry vehicle and mock warhead, increase the explosive yield of the warhead, possibly requiring its further miniaturization, and improve the operational reliability of the warhead and missile.
North Korea does not appear to have detonated a more sophisticated nuclear device, such as a thermonuclear device. Before the test, concern was expressed by some analysts that North Korea could test a more advanced nuclear weapon. The data from this test so far indicate that this is not the case. One important question is whether the nuclear test used only plutonium or involved highly enriched uranium either alone or in combination with plutonium.
It is time to accelerate efforts to stop North Korea’s foreign procurements for its nuclear programs and increase efforts to halt its proliferation financing efforts.  North Korea’s efforts to procure nuclear and dual-use goods and raw materials for its nuclear programs must be addressed by targeted countries through improved United Nations sanctions resolutions and domestic trade control laws and the enforcement of those measures.  North Korea continues to improve its nuclear programs through its access to such goods and materials, particularly through trading companies and citizens located in neighboring China.
The United Nations Security Council should incrementally increase proliferation financing sanctions on North Korea as a result of this test. 
The international response to the test should be measured and should circle back to engagement.  Despite the likely demonstration of an improved North Korean nuclear capability, the international response to the test should be carefully constructed.  Ironically, North Korea’s previous nuclear tests, despite being followed by sanctions and international condemnation, eventually paved the way for engagement.  North Korea’s historical use of brinkmanship to gain concessions is well documented.  A new formulation is necessary to break this cycle of provocation/engagement that has too often ended with a more advanced North Korean nuclear weapons program.  A strategy of engagement that does not reward the test but seeks to moderate the regime’s behavior through sustained dialogue may be most productive going forward.  A key element is for the United States to deepen cooperation with China and resist seeking renewed bilateral U.S./North Korean dialogue.  There are signs that China is listening more to U.S. concerns about North Korea’s nuclear provocations.  A goal must be the United States developing common positions with China, along with South Korea and Japan, making it harder for North Korea to play China against the United States.
A response must not provoke even worse behavior.  Faced with a draconian response to this third nuclear test, it is possible that North Korea could retaliate by causing minor military skirmishes with its neighbors, conducting another test, or even deploying nuclear-tipped Nodong missiles.  Remaining cognizant of the need to prevent and mitigate worse behavior by North Korea should be the goal of any international or regional response. This again argues for seeking solidarity among China, Japan, South Korea, and the United States.
http://isis-online.org/isis-reports/detail/isis-statement-on-north-korean-nuclear-test/10
Institute for Science and International Security
236 Massachusetts Avenue, NE - Suite 305
Washington, DC 20002