<html>
<body>
<font size=4><b>Ecuador: Left Turn?<br><br>
</b></font><font size=3>Written by Marc Becker <br>
<a href="http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/2150/1/" eudora="autourl">
http://upsidedownworld.org/main/content/view/2150/1/<br>
</a> <br>
Thursday, 08 October 2009 <br><br>
On April 26, 2009, Rafael Correa won re-election to the Ecuadorian
presidency with an absolute majority of the vote. He gained broad popular
appeal through a combination of nationalist rhetoric and increased social
spending on education and health care. The victory cemented Correa’s
control over the country as the old political establishment appeared to
be in complete collapse. <br><br>
Mainstream news outlets reported Correa’s triumph as another socialist
win in Latin America. Barely a month earlier, Maurcio Funes of the former
guerrilla Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN) won El
Salvador’s presidential elections, bringing the left to power for the
first time in that country’s history. <br><br>
Motivated by what is perhaps an unjustified optimism by the left, undue
fear on the right, and the opportunism of eager politicians, socialism is
increasingly seen as the dominant discourse in Latin America. Is
Ecuador’s Correa justly included as part of a leftward tilt in Latin
America, or is his inclusion in this trend a result of hopeful thinking?
<br><br>
On one hand, analysts now talk of Latin America’s “many lefts,” ranging
through Chile’s neoliberal socialist president Michelle Bachelet,
Bolivia’s Indigenous socialist Evo Morales, and Venezuela’s
state-centered socialism of Hugo Chávez. On the other hand, this is not
the first time that a new president in the small South American country
of Ecuador has been warmly greeted as part of a leftward movement.
<br><br>
In 2003, in a seeming repeat of Chávez’s rise to power, Lucio Gutiérrez
was elected president after a failed 2001 military-Indigenous coup. He
quickly moved in a significantly neoliberal direction, alienating his
social movement base and finally falling in an April 2005 popular
uprising known the “rebellion of the forajidos” or outlaws. Gutiérrez
continues to enjoy a significant amount of support from some sectors of
the Ecuadorian population, particularly from evangelical Indigenous
communities, but most of those on the left would now denounce him as a
center-right populist. <br><br>
While many outside observers either celebrated or bemoaned Correa’s
consolidation of power as part of Latin America’s broader turn to the
left, social movements in Ecuador have become increasingly critical of
his populist positioning. Despite Correa’s claims that under his
administration the long dark night of neoliberalism is finally over,
Indigenous movements have condemned him for continuing basically these
same policies through large-scale mineral extractive enterprises,
particularly of petroleum in the ecologically delicate eastern Amazonian
basin. <br><br>
Rafael Correa and a New Constitution <br><br>
Correa is a young economist and university professor who wrote his
dissertation at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign attacking
neoliberal economic policies known as the “Washington Consensus.” He does
not emerge out of social movement organizing, but rather out of a
Catholic left motivated by concerns for social justice. <br><br>
Correa first came onto the public scene as the Minister of Finance in
Alfredo Palacios’ government after Gutiérrez’s removal. Correa leveraged
his popularity in that position to a win in the 2006 presidential
elections. <br><br>
In power, Correa appeared to attempt to follow Venezuelan president Hugo
Chávez’s strategy to consolidate power through rewriting the
constitution. He could then call for new elections that would reaffirm
himself in office and provide for a more sympathetic legislature.
<br><br>
Like Chávez, Correa had run as an independent without the support of a
traditional political party. The existing “party-ocracy” was severely
discredited in both countries. Since 1996, not a single president in
Ecuador had been able to complete a four-year term in office. Three
presidents (Abdalá Bucaram in 1997, Jamil Mahuad in 2000, and Lucio
Gutiérrez in 2005) were removed through massive street protests.
<br><br>
On April 15, 2007, three months after Correa took office, 80% of the
Ecuadorian electorate approved a referendum to convoke a constituent
assembly. Correa created a new political movement called Acuerdo País
(AP) that on September 30, 2007 won a majority of seats in the assembly.
<br><br>
A year later, on September 28, 2008, almost two-thirds of the voters
approved the new constitution that had been drafted largely under
Correa’s control. As was the case with Venezuela’s 1999 constitution,
Ecuador’s new Magna Carta so fundamentally remapped the country’s
political structures that it required new local, congressional and
presidential elections. <br><br>
Lengthy and contentious debates in the constituent assembly resulted in a
constitution that provided a basis for a more inclusionary and
participatory political system. The new document rejected neoliberalism,
and embraced increased resource allocation to education, social services
and health care. Similar to Venezuela, it also employed gender inclusive
language. It also expanded democratic participation, including extending
the vote to those between 16 and 18 years of age, foreigners living in
the country for more than five years, and Ecuadorans living outside the
country. <br><br>
The constitution also defended the rights of nature, Indigenous
languages, and in a highly symbolic gesture, pluri-nationalism designed
to incorporate Indigenous cosmologies into the governing of the country.
The constitution also borrowed from Bolivia’s Foreign Minister David
Choquehuanca the Quechua concept of sumak kawsay, of living well not just
better. Sumak kawsay includes an explicit critique of traditional
development strategies that increased the use of resources rather than
seeking to live in harmony with others and with nature. <br><br>
Following Venezuela’s lead, Ecuador also created five branches of
government. In addition to the executive, legislative, and judicial, the
constitution added an electoral branch and a Consejo de Participación
Ciudadana y Control Social or Council of Citizenship Participation and
Social Control. The last branch is in charge of nominating officials
including the attorney general and comptroller general. <br><br>
The purpose for the new branch is to increase citizen participation and
improve political transparency, although the opposition complained that
it would concentrate more power in Correa’s hands. While advocates argued
that a stronger executive was necessary to bring stability to this
chronically politically unstable country, social movements feared that it
would come at a cost to their ability to influence policy decisions.
<br><br>
2009 Elections <br><br>
Correa won the April 26, 2009 presidential elections with 52% of the
vote. The significance of this victory cannot be overstated the first
time since Ecuador’s return to civilian rule in 1979 that a candidate won
a high enough percentage of the vote to avoid a runoff election.
<br><br>
Most Latin American presidential campaigns are multi-party races that
require either a runoff election between the top two vote getters or a
congressional decision to select the victor. Salvador Allende, for
example, won the 1970 presidential race in Chile with only 36% of the
vote. Evo Morales’ 2005 victory in Bolivia with 54% of the vote was the
first time in that country’s history that a candidate had won the
election with an absolute majority. <br><br>
Under Ecuador’s current constitution, in order to avoid a second round a
candidate must either win more than 50% of the vote, or gain at least 40%
of the vote and outpace the nearest rival by at least 10%. In Ecuador’s
fragmented and contentious political landscape, it is unusual for any
candidate to poll more than 25% of the vote in the initial
multi-candidate round. <br><br>
Correa’s closest competitor in this election was the former president
Lucio Gutiérrez of the centrist Partido Sociedad Patriótica (PSP), who
won 28% of the vote. Gutiérrez drew most of his support from his native
Amazonian region, wining those provinces by a wide margin, and in
evangelical Indigenous communities in the central highland provinces of
Bolívar, Chimborazo and Tungurahua. His support rose as the election
approached when the conservative opposition, including the most
traditional sectors of the Catholic Church grouped into Opus Dei,
recognized him as the best opportunity to defeat Correa. <br><br>
Gutiérrez claimed he had evidence of a monstrous fraud that denied him
victory, although the electoral commission rejected the charge.
International observers, however, criticized Correa’s overwhelmingly
dominant media presence as compromising the fairness of the poll.
<br><br>
The third-place candidate was billionaire banana magnate Alvaro Noboa of
the right-wing Partido Renovador Institucional Acción Nacional (PRIAN),
who almost won the 2006 elections. In 2009, with the right completely
discredited but still running on the same neoliberal agenda of
privatization, opening up the country to foreign capital, and lowering
taxes on the most wealthy, he only polled 11%. This was his worst showing
in four attempts to win the presidency. <br><br>
The left did not fare any better than the right. Martha Roldós, daughter
of the progressive president who returned Ecuador to civilian rule in
1979 but was killed two years later in a mysterious plane crash, only won
four percent of the vote. She ran as a candidate of the Red Ética y
Democracia (RED), which grouped labor leaders and other leftist
militants. Her campaign was based largely on attacking Correa, without
successfully presenting an alternative to his “citizen’s revolution”
project. <br><br>
Another leftist candidate Diego Delgado, who strongly questioned Correa’s
commitment to socialism, only gained one percent. Many on the left
preferred to opt for Correa instead of risking a conservative victory.
Eight candidates in total competed for the country’s highest office.
<br><br>
Many on the left had urged Alberto Acosta, the popular former president
of the constituent assembly, to run. When it appeared unlikely that he
could rally the left against Correa in the face of the president’s
overwhelming popularity he declined to enter the race. <br><br>
The Indigenous party Pachakutik did not run a presidential candidate, and
refused to endorse any of the candidates. In the 2006 elections when a
possible alliance with Correa fell apart, Pachakutik ran their standard
bearer Luis Macas but only polled two percent of the vote. <br><br>
While Correa enjoys majority support from the voters, the same is not
true for his AP, which lost its control over congress. In 2006, Correa
campaigned without the support of a political party or alliances with
congressional delegates. Three years later, Correa is still having
difficulty pulling his new party together even though he personally
remains quite popular. <br><br>
The January 25, 2009 primaries for legislative and local races was
fraught with difficulties and disorganization. The AP is by no means an
ideologically homogenous or coherent party, which may be its greatest
strength as well as its greatest weakness. While it incorporates a broad
range of people, that diversity also threatens to pull the party apart
into left and right wings. <br><br>
In the runup to the April vote, Correa implemented several populist
economic measures, such as restructuring the foreign debt, which appeared
to be largely designed to strengthen the electoral fortunes of his
congressional allies. The AP’s failure to win an overwhelming majority in
the congressional contests complicates issues, particularly since
Gutiérrez’s PSP is the second largest, and very antagonistic, power.
<br><br>
Even though the AP fell far short of the two-thirds majority it enjoyed
in the constituent assembly, it still remains the largest party in the
assembly. If it can build alliances with smaller leftist parties it might
still be able to control the decisions. Such alliances are sure to be
fragile. Nevertheless, the new constitution significantly strengthens
executive power at a cost to the assembly, so losing congressional
control may not prove so much a liability to Correa who could still rule
through decrees and referendums. <br><br>
Traditional parties such as the Partido Social Cristiano (PSC) continue
to lose support. In fact, all the parties that largely defined the return
to civilian rule in 1979 and actively contested power over the last 30
years the PSC, the Izquierda Democrática (ID), the Democracia
Popular-Democracia Cristiana (DP), Partido Roldosista Ecuatoriano (PRE)
-– have now largely disappeared. <br><br>
The PSC did not run a presidential candidate, instead focusing its
energies on congressional and municipal elections. In the coastal
commercial port city of Guayaquil which has long been a bastion of
opposition to Correa’s left-populist government, the conservative PSC
mayor Jaime Nebot easily won re-election. <br><br>
Even in Guayaquil, however, political allegiances fall out along class
lines, with poor people strongly supporting Correa, including many of
those who voted for Nebot as mayor. Reflecting deep-seated regional
divisions, the AP’s Augusto Barrera easily won election as mayor of
Quito. <br><br>
Indigenous Movements in Opposition <br><br>
Much of Correa’s support comes from urban professionals. Despite his
seemingly leftist credentials, Ecuador’s leftist Indigenous movement has
moved deeply into the anti-Correa camp. Because of his support for a new
mining law that advocates resource extraction, Indigenous activists have
criticized Correa for ruling with a neoliberal agenda. Furthermore, under
Correa’s governance Indigenous movements have become increasingly
fragmented, with militants accusing the president of attempting to
destroy their organizational capacity. <br><br>
The largest and best known Indigenous organization is the Confederation
of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (CONAIE), founded in 1986 as an
umbrella group of regional Indigenous organizations intended to represent
all Indigenous peoples in Ecuador. CONAIE emerged on the national scene
through a 1990 uprising for land and Indigenous rights that shook the
country’s white elite to its core. <br><br>
Perhaps the most militant Indigenous organization in Ecuador is CONAIE’s
highland regional affiliate Ecuarunari, the Confederation of the Peoples
of the Kichwa Nationality of Ecuador. Ecuarunari has consistently run to
the left of Correa, challenging him for his failure to make a clean break
with Ecuador’s neoliberal past. These organizations continue to press
their agenda in a variety of ways, including with a proposed water law to
conserve and protect water resources. <br><br>
At an April 2 assembly, CONAIE made its position crystal clear in a
resolution which stated that “Correa’s government was born from the
right, governs with the right, and will continue to do so until the end
of his time in office.” They condemned the government for creating
organizations parallel to CONAIE, and stated that they would evict anyone
from their organization who occupied positions in the government or
worked with Correa’s electoral campaign due to “their lack of respect for
our organizational process.” <br><br>
In particular, CONAIE targeted Correa’s extractive policies, and
especially large-scale mining and petroleum exploration efforts “because
they go against nature, Indigenous peoples, it violates the constitution,
and threatens the governance of the sumak kawsay.” They were eager to use
Correa’s constitution as a tool to combat what they saw as his abusive
policies. (“Resoluciones de la asamblea ampliada CONAIE 2 de abril del
2009,”
<a href="http://www.conaie.org/es/ge_comunicados/2009/0402.html">
www.conaie.org/es/ge_comunicados/2009/0402.html</a>) <br><br>
CONAIE stated that as an organization they would not support any
presidential candidate, despite earlier conversations the leftist Martha
Roldós. Refusing to support a presidential candidate is an explicit
reversal of a policy in previous elections to support a candidate because
otherwise campaigns would prey on rural communities to gain the
Indigenous vote. <br><br>
In 1995, CONAIE helped found Pachakutik as a political movement for
Indigenous peoples and their allies to contest for electoral office. A
short-lived alliance with Gutiérrez in 2003, however, was such a horrific
experience that CONAIE and Pachakutik remained very shy of entering into
another such similar alliance. Nevertheless, they did urge support for
local and congressional candidates running under the Pachakutik banner.
<br><br>
Historically, Pachakutik has fared much better in local races. In this
election, however, they suffered significant losses to the AP, and barely
survived with only one seat in the national assembly. <br><br>
In addition to CONAIE and its regional affiliate Ecuarunari, two
competing Indigenous organizations are the National Confederation of
Peasant, Indigenous and Negro Organizations (FENOCIN) and the Council of
Evangelical Indigenous Peoples and Organizations of Ecuador (FEINE).
FENOCIN has its roots in the Catholic Church’s attempts in the 1960s to
draw support away from the communist-affiliated Ecuadorian Federation of
Indians (FEI). <br><br>
FENOCIN broke with the church and became much more radical in the 1970s,
assuming a socialist position. Today it is allied with Correa, and some
of its principle leaders including president Pedro de la Cruz serve as AP
deputies. FEINE tends to be much more conservative, and recently has
allied with Lucio Gutiérrez. <br><br>
In the past, the three organizations (CONAIE, FENOCIN, FEINE) have
sometimes collaborated to advance Indigenous interests, and at other
times bitterly competed with each other for allegiance of their
Indigenous base. Currently they are perhaps as fractured as they ever
have been. <br><br>
Twenty-first Century Socialism <br><br>
Correa has been very eager to speak of socialism of the 21st century, but
has never been very clear what he means by this term. During a January
2009 trip to Cuba, Correa rejected the “dogmas history has defeated”
including “the class struggle, dialectical materialism, the
nationalization of all property, the refusal to recognize the market.”
(“Correa attempts to define modern socialism,” Latin American Weekly
Report, WR-09-02, January 15, 2009: 3) <br><br>
Discarding key elements traditionally associated with socialism while
failing to identify alternative visions raises questions as to what
exactly Correa means by 21st-century socialism. <br><br>
Hugo Chávez in Venezuela has faced similar criticisms. At the 2005 World
Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil where Chávez first spoke of the
Venezuelan revolution as socialist, he said that new solutions must be
more humanistic, more pluralistic, and less dependent on the state.
Nevertheless, both Chávez and Correa have relied on strong governmental
control in order to advance their political agendas. <br><br>
Indigenous intellectuals and their close allies such as economist Pablo
Dávalos argue that once one looks beyond the rhetoric of socialism of the
21st century, regional integration, and the Bolivarian dream of a united
Latin America, the reality on the ground often looks quite different.
<br><br>
Yes, there has been state intervention in the economy, most notably in
important areas such as health and education. But the basic economic
model remains capitalist in its orientation. Not only does Correa
continue to rely on extractive enterprises to advance Ecuador, but he
uses the repressive power of the state to attack anyone who dares to
challenge his policies, including presenting dissidents with charges of
terrorism. <br><br>
In one of the most high profile cases, Correa sent the military into
Dayuma in the eastern Amazon in search of “terrorists” who had opposed
his extractive policies. The environmental NGO Acción Ecológica also
faced a threat of removal of legal status, seemingly because of their
opposition to Correa’s petroleum policies. When faced with a massive
outcry, Correa quickly backpedaled, claiming that the government was
simply moving its registration to a different ministry where it more
logically belonged. <br><br>
Although AP managed to liquidate the previous political system and
emerged with a leftist discourse, Dávalos argued that “in reality it
represented a continuation of neoliberalism under other forms.” This is
clear in its themes of decentralization, autonomy, competition, and
privatization.” Correa continued to follow traditional clientalistic and
populist policies far removed from what could be reasonably seen as
radical or as a socialist reconstruction of society. <br><br>
Dávalos concludes that in no sense is Correa a leftist, nor could his
government be identified as a progressive. Rather, he “represents a
reinvention of the right allied with extractive and transnational
enterprises.” (Pablo Dávalos, “Alianza Pais o la reinvencion de la
derecha,”
<a href="http://alainet.org/active/29776">
http://alainet.org/active/29776</a>). <br><br>
After Correa’s victory, Luis Fernando Sarango, rector of the Amawtay Wasi
Indigenous University, criticized the president’s talk of radicalizing
his programs. “What socialism of the twenty-first century?” Sarango
asked. “What about a true socialism, because we have seen almost nothing
of this of the twenty-first century.” Instead, Sarango proposed “a
profound change in structures that permits the construction of a
plurinational state with equality, whether it is called socialism or
not.” (Boletin Digital Universidad Intercultural Amawtay Wasi 12, May
2009: 2) <br><br>
CONAIE leader and 2006 Pachakutik presidential candidate Luis Macas
criticized Correa for pursuing a “citizen’s revolution” as part of a
fundamentally liberal, individualistic model that did not provide a
fundamental ideological break with the neoliberal past. In contrast,
Indigenous movements pressed in the 2006 electoral campaign for a
“constituent revolution” to rewrite the structures of government to be
more inclusive. <br><br>
Correa stole the thunder from Indigenous militants in also pressing for a
new constitution, and even going one step farther in granting CONAIE
their long-standing demand to have Ecuador declared a pluri-national
country. It is not without reason that CONAIE resents Correa for taking
over issues and occupying spaces that they previously held. <br><br>
At the same time, Correa holds those to his left hostage because
criticizing him plays into the hands of the oligarchy who are equally
anxious to attack him from the right.<br>
<br>
At the World Social Forum <br><br>
In January 2009, Correa joined his fellow leftist Latin American
presidents Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil, Hugo Chávez of Venezuela,
Evo Morales of Bolivia, and Fernando Lugo of Paraguay in a meeting with
representatives of Vía Campesina, an international network of rural
movements, at the World Social Forum (WSF) in the Brazilian Amazonian
city of Belém. <br><br>
Of the five, Correa was the president with the weakest links to civil
society. Lula and Morales, of course, were labor leaders before becoming
president. Lugo was a priest, influenced by liberation theology, who
worked in rural communities. Chávez rose through the military ranks and
used that experience to cultivate his popular support. <br><br>
Correa, in contrast, comes out of the academic world, but of the five
presidents at the forum he presented the deepest and most serious
analysis of the current economic crisis. He began with a challenge to
neoliberalism and the Washington Consensus. “We’re living a magic moment,
one of new leaders and governments.” <br><br>
Correa noted that capitalism is commonly associated with efficiency,
whereas socialism emphasizes justice. Nevertheless, Correa argued,
socialism is both more just and efficient than capitalism. Latin American
countries need national development plans in order to advance, and
Ecuador’s new constitution was part of that process. <br><br>
He appealed to support for Indigenous cultural projects, the Pachamama
(mother earth), and repeated the now common call for the sumak kawsay, to
live well, not better. We need to be responsible for the environment,
Correa said, and conserve resources for the next generation. <br><br>
Capitalism is in crisis, Correa argued, and Latin America is in search of
new models, one that would bring dignity to Latin American peoples. Even
though Ecuador has resisted joining Venezuela’s Bolivarian Alternative
for the Americas (ALBA), for which Chávez publicly chided Correa at the
forum, Correa still called for Latin American integration, for a United
States of Latin America. <br><br>
“We are in times of change,” Correa concluded. “An alternative model
already exists, and it is the socialism of the twenty-first century.”
Much of his rhetoric echoed that of the dominant discourse at the forum
that has fundamentally shifted sentiments away from neoliberal policies.
<br><br>
Correa also seemed to be the most eager of the five to employ populist
discourse in order to identify himself as with “the people.” Correa spoke
favorably of Indigenous movements and the history of exclusion that
Afro-Ecuadorians have faced. All this came in the face of his
increasingly tense relations with social movements, particularly over his
determination to build Ecuador’s economy on resource extraction.
<br><br>
Correa has not responded well to criticism, condemning what he terms as
“infantile” Indigenous activists and environmentalists. At the closing of
the Indigenous tent three days after the presidential presentations,
longtime leader Blanca Chancoso denounced the “nightmare” that they were
living with Correa who was undertaking resource extraction “at all
costs.” <br><br>
Perhaps the only current Latin American president broadly identified with
the left who would have received more vigorous denunciations at the forum
is Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega, who in particular has engaged in
pitched battles with women’s movements. <br><br>
Many Lefts <br><br>
Following Chávez’s lead in Venezuela, Correa has sought to build his
popularity on the basis of “petro populism,” which uses income from oil
exports to fund social programs. But the fall of the price of oil
threatens to put those programs at risk. At the same time, a growing
inflation rate threatens to undermine some of his government’s
accomplishments. <br><br>
Although Correa talks openly of embracing a socialism for the 21st
century, he has made no move to nationalize industries. Building his
government on economic development without proper concern for the
environment and people’s rights has cost him support, while gaining him
the label of “pragmatic” from the business class. <br><br>
On the other hand, Correa does follow through with enough of his policy
proposals to assure his continued popular support. He promised not to
renew the U.S. Forward Operating Location (FOL) lease on the Manta
airbase when it comes due this fall, and it appears that Washington is
proceeding ahead with his wishes to withdraw. <br><br>
Last December, Correa defaulted on more than $3 billion in foreign bonds,
calling the foreign debt illegal and illegitimate because they had been
contracted by military regimes. Many people rallied to his defense,
saying that he is defending the country’s sovereignty. In addition to
tripling spending on education and health care, Correa has increased
subsidizes for single mothers and small farmers. These steps played very
well with his base. <br><br>
Despite Correa’s attempts to mimic Chávez’s strategies, his policies are
not nearly as radical as those of his counterpart. Of the many lefts that
now rule over Latin America, Correa represents a moderate and ambiguous
position closer to that of Lula in Brazil or the Concertación in Chile
rather than Chávez’s radical populism in Venezuela or Morales’ Indigenous
socialism in Bolivia. <br><br>
The danger for popular movements is a populist threat with Correa
exploiting the language of the left but fundamentally ruling from the
right. It is in this context that a mobilized and engaged social
movement, which historically in the Ecuadorian case means an Indigenous
movement, remains important as a check on a personalistic and populist
government. If Correa follows through on any of the hopeful promises of
his government, it will be due to this pressure from below and to the
left. <br><br>
Correa continues to enjoy an unusually large amount of popular support in
a region which recently has greeted its presidents with a high degree of
good will only to have the populace quickly turn on its leaders who
inevitably rule against their class interests. Chávez (and, to a certain
extent, Evo Morales in Bolivia) have bucked this trend by retaining
strong popular support despite oligarchical attempts to undermine their
governments. <br><br>
Correa is a charismatic leader, but in the Ecuadorian setting charisma
does not secure longevity. José María Velasco Ibarra, Ecuador’s classic
caudillo and populist, was president five times, but was removed from
four of those when he failed to follow through on his promises to the
poor. In recent history, Abdalá Bucaram was perhaps the most charismatic
leader, but he lasted only seven months in power after winning the 1996
elections. Charisma alone does not assure political stability. <br><br>
In the wake of Ecuador quickly running through ten chief executives in 10
years, Correa appears positioned to remain in power for 10 years if he
can maintain his current coalition to win reelection in 2013. Correa has
also said that it will take 80 years for his “citizens’ revolution” to
change the country. <br><br>
In quickly moving Ecuador from being one of Latin America’s most unstable
countries to maintaining a strong hold over executive power, Correa
appears to have been able to mimic Chávez’s governing style. Whose
interests this power serves, and particularly whether it will be used to
improve the lives of historically marginalized subalterns, remains an
open question.<br><br>
<br><br>
</font><x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
<font size=3 color="#FF0000">Freedom Archives<br>
522 Valencia Street<br>
San Francisco, CA 94110<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#008000">415 863-9977<br><br>
</font><font size=3 color="#0000FF">
<a href="http://www.freedomarchives.org/" eudora="autourl">
www.Freedomarchives.org</a></font><font size=3> </font></body>
</html>