Together or at odds

If you look at Venezuela and Colombia on a map, reaching from the Atlantic to the Pacific, you see that in the end it will be impossible to avoid the many opportunities that integration would offer. It is clear that either the two countries will join, or one will take hold of the other, or someone else will stick them together… by force and according to their own geopolitical interests. Which would you prefer?

Consider the countries of Europe today: with all their differences - linguistic ones being the least - less than sixty years after the war, they have submitted to a political-economic community and are drawing up a common constitution for the humble purpose of trying to maintain their level of development. Their example contrasts with the pettiness of our political leadership in Colombia and Venezuela, yesterday’s and today’s.

There is no doubt that both our countries are in very bad shape, but instead of trying to capitalize on the possibilities of a true union of markets, which could help us at last find that lost course never found, our leaders – if they can be called that – spend their time feeding and fanning tensions, hiding their own ineptitude.

In today’s world it is not easy to come up with a plan that can simultaneously satisfy the urgent needs of our people of dreams, while providing the credibility that the markets demand. A strong commitment to total integration, beginning with establishing a harmonized monetary, exchange and trade policy, must be one of the main components of any such plan capable of offering us a better future.

How do we accomplish this? I wish I knew, but I confess I have no idea… except that it requires leadership capable of subordinating today’s pettiness to tomorrow’s grandeur, though this appears very difficult in a world in which the increasing demand of our people for instant gratification is surpassed by that of most of our politicians.

Nevertheless, since it is true that every crisis brings opportunity… if we consider the magnitude of the crisis in our countries, who knows if suddenly, when so many material needs meet up with so many spiritual needs, conditions will finally be there for us to awake from our lethargy and fulfill the historical mandate for a Great Union.

El Universal, Caracas November 6, 2003

Of course, there is always a fourth alternative – the worst between brothers: a new bipolar world with a great Colombo-Venezuelan wall as a border.

Together or mixed up

Together or mixed up

If you look at Venezuela and Colombia on a map, you will know that in the long run, it will be impossible to avoid the multiple opportunities that their integration would offer, so it is clear that either the two countries unite, or one of the two grabs the other, or Someone will bring them together... in a macho way, under the umbrella of their own geopolitical interests. What do you prefer?

Contemplate how European countries, with all their differences, linguistic ones being the least, today, less than sixty years after the war, subordinate themselves to a political-economic community and are drafting a common constitution, with the humble purpose of trying to maintain its level of development, serves to highlight the smallness of our political leaders in Colombia and Venezuela, yesterday and today

Both countries are doing badly, very badly indeed, but instead of seeking to capitalize on the possibilities of a true union of markets, which would allow us to recover that lost direction that has never been found, our leaders, if they can be classified as such, are rather dedicated to feed and fuel tensions, hiding their own inadequacies.

It is not easy to design a plan in today's world that simultaneously feeds a people hungry for dreams and inspires the credibility that the markets demand. Committing ourselves fully to integration and beginning it by establishing a consistent monetary, exchange and trade policy must be one of the main components of any plan capable of offering us a better future.

How do we do it? I wish I knew, but I confess that I have no idea... except to know that it requires leadership capable of subordinating the little things of today to the greatness of tomorrow, which would seem very difficult to achieve in a world where the growing demands of our peoples for immediate gratification, are surpassed by those of the majority of our politicians.

However, and because every crisis means an opportunity...if we think about the size of the crisis that our countries are experiencing, who knows if suddenly, when so many material needs have been combined with so many spiritual needs, the conditions will finally be met. so that we can wake up from our lethargy and fulfill that historic mandate of achieving a Great Union.

Of course, there is always the fourth alternative, the worst between brothers, that a new bipolar world emerges with a great Colombian-Venezuelan wall as a border.

https://perkurowski.blogspot.com/2001/01/my-colombia-plan.html

Translated by Google.

My Plan Colombia

My Plan Colombia

In times of disagreement, it is important to draw the conveniences, which is why I firmly believe that with the people and land of Venezuela and Colombia we could build a Nation capable of competing, face to face, with the other superpowers of the world. However, given the many mental and real barriers that exist, you will probably ask me: what lumpia [eggroll) did I smoke?

Paraphrasing Carlos Zubillaga, I consider that one of the obstacles to the integration of interests of the two countries is due to the fact that Colombia seems to have developed under the influence of a ruling class, which only sought to dominate, while in Venezuela, our course was marked by a ruling class that refused to dominate.

Another impediment is the loss of self-confidence, caused first and foremost by the gospel of globalization. Normally, our geographical conditions, between north and south, east and west, would represent for a glass-half-full philosopher a cluster of fortresses, but unfortunately, for our glass-half-empty philosophers, they only constitute weak flanks to protect.

To make matters worse, even Bolívar's life cycle, his birth and death, which could unite us so much, instead of constituting a platform to launch us into a greater future, only seems to anchor us in the past.

Given these difficulties, it is understandable that prudence suggests deferring an integration effort until when more favorable conditions exist. However, the reality is that our Colombia, said with the same right and respect with which I hope they can refer to their Venezuela, faces something very close to a civil war, which we simply cannot ignore.

Of course, if we want to preserve the ambitions of achieving a future and twinned greatness, we cannot participate directly in this conflict, but I believe that this should not mean that our only alternative for action is to equip our border and avoid the splash of a Colombia Plan.

On the contrary, the moment is historically opportune to relaunch an aggressive economic integration plan that helps us, both them and us, to understand that the true obstacles to a better future are very, very far from the causes of a fratricidal conflict.

In this sense, I propose that we immediately seek to reaffirm the Andean Pact, at least as it relates to Colombia and Venezuela. To begin, we must seek to align our currencies in order to maximize Colombian-Venezuelan commercial exchange and impose significant external and common trade barriers, which will allow us to create an important internal market.

The above, like a successful angioplasty, could unblock the commercial arteries and oxygenate the economies to such an extent that both Colombia and Venezuela can observe new and better horizons and perhaps even a bonanza that allows generating new and peaceful solutions.

In so many places in the world we observe the presence of wars caused by passions that are absolutely inexplicable to a normal being. For God's sake, whatever happens, I beg you not to leave as an inheritance to our children that absolute, eternal and corrosive hatred between brother peoples, which eats away at a newborn life.

(Translated by Google from an Op-Ed published in El Universal January 4, 2001)

 

A New English Language Empire

I have often harbored reservations about the possibility of success of the European Union. In particular my worry is about its new currency, the euro, the bases of which I believe are rather weak. I recently heard that there is still much debate going on which, even when new to me, leads me to rethink many of today’s geopolitical aspects.

I refer to the thesis that the United Kingdom is finding it extremely difficult to get used to the idea that it must forgo much of its autonomy in favor of an entity formed by other nations which are geographically close, but still very mystifying, and therefore could possibly abandon the idea altogether, forging instead an alliance with the English speaking world. Among the sponsors of this line of thought, I find the Canadian newspaper owner Conrad Black and the well renowned historian Paul Johnson.

Having observed how much time and effort the UK and the United States spend coordinating their foreign policy and considering how tempting it must be to unite cultures of the same origin that speak the same language and share the same legal system into one global superpower, it should not really be surprising if we were all of a sudden presented with the creation of an English Language Union, or ELU. Considering the recent impact of Shakespeare in Hollywood it might be a lot closer than we think.

The possible implications of a NAFTA expanded to include the UK plus perhaps even other nations such as Australia and New Zealand (both disillusioned by the Asian crisis) lead me to reflect on other issues in addition to the importance of the English language. 

The first issue that occurs to me is that any pact of this sort would effectively wipe out any aspiration Europe may nurture of going head to head with the United States unless it undertakes internal expansion (Russia or its former satellites, maybe?).

Another important thought is the fact that in a globalized and computerized world, geographical proximity seems to be losing its importance. The truth is that once you have incurred the cost of loading merchandise on an airplane or ship, the marginal cost of transporting it a few thousand miles further is not really that great. This could be of importance to Venezuela, especially when it owns so much oil.

The Andean Pact, is basically a commercial agreement with Colombia. This makes a lot of sense if we are trying to create bigger markets with their corresponding economies of scale for our respective industrialists. 

It does not make much sense as far as real complementary economics are concerned.

It is possible that Venezuela, while not abandoning its policy of creating larger markets, should be intensifying its efforts of negotiating commercial agreements with countries very different from itself, in which we can maintain our competitive advantages.

While oil prices remain low, our currency will be sufficiently weak so as to allow industries heavily dependent on labor, such as the textile confection sector to compete with Colombia. Evidently, if oil prices were to spike upwards, the bolívar would become stronger and would make survival of industries such as these difficult, obligating the country to impose protective duties.

If, however, our agreements would be based more on real complementary issues and economics, then it would be possible to create sustainable results. A simple theoretical example would be a negotiation of an commercial agreement with one of the Nordic states, with a wintry climate, allowing them preferential access to our market, with the establishment of the beaches of Margarita as the preferred winter tourist attraction for its citizens. Chile, for one, has made a lot of this, in for instance promoting fruit exports, taking advantage of the fact that their seasons are opposite to those of the Northern Hemisphere.

There is no doubt that we are in a fluid and rapidly changing environment in which it is of extreme importance to be alert to the possibilities that are presented to us. Personally, I feel that Venezuela should not hurry into commercial agreements, simply because it is the thing to do, the flavor of the month. What’s more, with the sole exception of Colombia, with which we share a permeable border which in turn makes the negotiation of agreements a must, I believe Venezuela has not signed one single agreement in which it comes out ahead in practical terms as a country.

Published in The Daily Journal, Caracas, April 1999

PS. Oops! Does Brexit now reignite this alternative? How much should the English language proprietors now charge the remainder EU for the use of it… so as to avoid a war between Germans, French and Spaniards on which should now de facto be its official language? Or will EU go for Esperanto?

Venezuela and Colombia today

Two weeks ago I attended a conference identified as Venezuela and Colombia in the new millennium. This event was sponsored by the Pensamiento y Acción Foundation, the Rómulo Betancourt Foundation and the IESA. It was also supported by the Andean Development Corporation (CAF) and the Banco Mercantil.

The event was excellent, having managed to impose a strictly academic ambiance in spite of an extremely delicate subject. There was absolute respect for different and contradicting ideas and sentiment. Since the event allowed for moments of reflection and thought, I would like to share a personal concern.

Over the last few years, trade between the two countries has grown dramatically in nominal terms. As a result of this, it seems that the idea that an irreversible process of integration led by markets, business and consumers now exists has become popular. On top of this, this process seems to be occurring behind the political sector’s back.

This idea is somewhat dangerous. Specially when you consider that a substantial part of the trade we have observed over the last few years is based on false premises and on factors that are not sustainable in the long run. Among these we can observe the following:

The explosion in the volumes exchanged between the two countries originated during the early eighties at a time when Venezuela was entering into its “impoverishment” phase. Before this, with the exception of certain strictly unilateral commercial activity of basically local and borderline character, Venezuela negotiated at its will, need or extravagance with the most sophisticated commercial centers in the world. Colombia had virtually no chance to participate in the Venezuelan market.

At the same time, Venezuela’s oil income caused the country to sustain an extraordinarily strong currency which made it virtually impossible to achieve levels of competitivity that would have allowed the country’s business community to make inroads into the Colombian market. Evidently, there was no incentive to export when the country was required to maintain a policy of high tariffs and import quotas in order to protect local markets.

In recent years, the introduction of artificial economic measures helped to feed this mirage of increased trade. Among these measures, one of the more important ones was the appearance of currency exchange subsidies offered Venezuelan industry in order to facilitated imports of raw material and even finished goods. This obviously generated an “export of subsidies” both in the formal as well as in the informal markets. It is also important to note that in the face of barriers such as exchange controls of various types, commerce naturally gravitated towards countries that belonged to the ALADI compensation agreement, including of course, Colombia. This also artificially stimulated Venezuelan imports from these countries.

I also harbor a suspicion that commercial flows, even when expressed in hard currency and apparently favorable to Venezuela, hide problems that should be looked at more closely. Among these problems, looked at (perhaps subjectively) from the Venezuelan perspective, we can find the following: Is the generation of jobs produced by this trade equitable? Is Venezuela exporting commodities to Colombia for which the country has always had available markets? Is Colombia being favored by this exchange, gaining access to an export market for products that are really not competitive elsewhere?

I am certainly not criticizing the increase of trade between Venezuela and Colombia. I am totally for it. However, I am convinced that the commercial trade between Colombia and Venezuela by itself does not constitute a sufficiently strong foundation to support the integration. Most specially when, as all Venezuelans desire, the country manages to emerge from its current impoverished state and as a consequence totally alters its management of trade flows.

We should definitely not paralyze this integration, but we must promote new and solid foundations that can support it. For example, it is of utmost importance for any beneficial integration between the two countries to reach agreements on the management of hydrological basins and catchment areas which will guarantee the supply of potable water to future Colombo Venezuelan generations.