Close

Donate today to keep Global Voices strong!

Our global community of volunteers work hard every day to bring you the world's underreported stories -- but we can't do it without your help. Support our editors, technology, and advocacy campaigns with a donation to Global Voices!

Donate now

See all those languages up there? We translate Global Voices stories to make the world's citizen media available to everyone.

Learn more about Lingua Translation  »

Peru: Wikileaks and the Presidential Campaign

This post is part of our special coverage WikiLeaks and the World.

One of the unexpected consequences of the cables released by Wikileaks has been its impact on the Peruvian presidential campaign. Shortly after the release of the first leaks, a congressman declared [es] that “We must look carefully at this issue, it could be an intentional leak or the actions of a hacker.” Subsequent statements given by people such as author Mario Vargas Llosa: “Wikileaks is frivolous gossip” [es] and President Alan Garcia: “Wikileaks reports are not relevant,” [es] did not show very favorable views on the subject.

The first cables made public in Peru were themed around corruption and terrorism. Although they had some impact on the press, the current political situation did not seem shaken by them. But earlier this month, in the middle of the presidential campaign, a cable emerged [es] alluding directly to one of the candidates (Pedro Pablo Kuczynski) and his ties to big business and mining lobbies. As a result, the wires are now seen differently and have begun to have some impact on the campaign.

On February 13, the daily El Comercio [es] announced that it would begin releasing cables related to Peru since 2006 [es] thanks to negotiations with Wikileaks. That same day, the newspaper published two cables, both related to key players in Peruvian politics. The first was about Ollanta Humala coordinating with Venezuela [es] to create the anti-Summit (ALC-UE) of 2008. The second was about Jorge Del Castillo asking for support from the United States so that Lourdes Flores would accept the results of the 2006 elections. Both cables are closely related to the elections, especially the one referencing Humala, who is currently a presidential candidate.

But on Saturday 19, the situation reached new levels with the release of a cable from 2005 via the Spanish newspaper El Pais stating that “Fernando Rospigliosi, former Minister of Interior in the government of Alejandro Toledo, asked for assistance from the United States Embassy to carry out a campaign against Ollanta Humala.” Furthermore, the day after, El Comercio published information on cables related to candidates Luis Castañeda [es], Keiko Fujimori [es], Ollanta Humala [es] and Alejandro Toledo [es]. However, despite how revealing some of the latter cables were, they did not generate as many reactions [es] as the one released on Saturday, February 19.

Former president and now candidate Alejandro Toledo declared [es] not long ago that “Wikileaks [cables] are a ‘kind (of) noise’ that disrupt the electoral process and thereby avoid proper debate among candidates.” While Luis Castañeda, another candidate, has preferred to refrain [es] from giving his opinion on the cables again, adding [es] that “national problems must be solved by Peruvians” in reference to the Rospigliosi case. Moreover, Congressman Mauricio Mulder said [es] that the cables had become “an object” that “a local newspaper will be able to handle as they want.”

Print media analysts have also given their very diverse opinions on the subject, like Juan Paredes Castro from El Comercio [es], Mirko Lauer [es] and Javier Diez Canseco [es] in La República, and Aldo Mariátegui in Correo [es]. The issue has also been discussed on television: here is a compilation video [es] of several interviews on the matter.

Opinions on blogs have been a little more raw and unbarred. For example, John Ochoa in the blog Mariategui: The magazine of ideas says [es] that these revelations should not surprise anyone:

Aquí todos saben que los buitres del norte toda la vida han sido amos y señores de estas tierras. Aquí, sino somos todos, al menos los que hemos logrado cierto grado de instrucción elemental siempre entendimos que los hijos del Tío Sam, siempre han sido los mandamases de nuestra política, los justiprecieros de nuestra economía. Los inoculadores de una “cultura” a la medida de sus intereses. ¿Dónde diablos está la novedad sobre este hallazgo más antiguo que la momia juanita?

Here everyone knows that the vultures from the north have always been masters and lords of this land. Here, if not all of us, at least those of us who have achieved some degree of elementary education, have always understood that the sons of Uncle Sam have always been the bosses of our politics, the vigilantes of our economy. The ones that inculcate a “culture” to the extent of their interests. What the hell is new about this finding?

In his blog Gran Combo Club Silvio Rendón analyses [es] the U.S embassy and its ambassador participation:

La embajadora estadounidense en el Perú, Rose Likins, es todo un personaje mediático más de la política peruana. Se reúne con candidatos en plenas elecciones. Hace declaraciones semanales. Nomás falta que la imiten en la tele […] A ver que en EEUU una embajada apoye o perjudique a algún candidato estadounidense […]

The U.S ambassador in Peru, Rose Links, is just another media character in Peruvian politics. She meets with Peruvian candidates during elections and talks in the media every week. The only one thing that has not been done is imitating her in T.V […] Just imagine if an embassy in The U.S supported an American candidate or if it harmed this candidate during elections […]

He also talks about interventionism:

De 2006 a 2011 los términos de la política se han volteado. Entonces era Humala quien aparecía como parte de una intervención externa, de Venezuela. En la actualidad, es Toledo quien aparece como parte de la intervención de los Estados Unidos en el Perú. Mientras Humala ha marcado distancias con Chávez, Toledo ha evidenciado ser el protegido oficial (al menos uno de ellos) del gobierno de los Estados Unidos

From 2006 to 2011 Peruvian political conditions have taken a turn. In the past, it was Humala who appears as a part of the Venezuelan intervention. Nowadays, Toledo participates in the U.S intervention in Peru. While Humala has separated from Chavez, Toledo has been widely recognized as the officially protected person, at least one, of the U.S government.

He also talks about the people seeking interventionism:

Extraña concepción de democracia. Rospigliosi va a una embajada a pedir una contracampaña contra un candidato que goza del apoyo popular. Si la gente vota contra las privatizaciones, ahí está Rospigliosi para imponerlas. Sin embargo, la reunión fue a pedido de los funcionarios de la Embajada. El legado de Eudocio Ravines, ex-comunista, que se convirtió en agente de la CIA, sigue vivo en el Perú.

There is a strange idea of what democracy is. Rospigliosi goes to an embassy and asks for a campaign against a widely supported candidate. If Peruvian people vote against privatizations, then Rospigliosi will impose them. Nevertheless, the meeting was carried out because the embassy employees wanted to. Eudocio Ravines’ legacy, a former communist who became a CIA agent, is still alive.

In addition to that, in other posts Rendón analyses the history of U.S political interventions in Peru and in some other Latin American countries. In those posts there is also an analysis of the consequences of political intervention both in Peru's current politics and in some other organizations. Those posts are mainly: “IDEPHPUCP and USAID” [es], “Sandino in Peru” [es], “The great USAID payroll in Peru” [es], “The CNDDHH in the embassy” [es] and “Round-up without surveyors” [es]. By reading all of them, not only is it inferred that there are people who provide information to the U.S government in a web, but it is also deduced how some authorities of Peruvian politics are used to providing information about either opposition or any other topic required. The proof of this is the post “Aveleaks 8” [es] in the Ave Crítica blog.

In his blog Lex Digitalis, Erik Iriarte, a candidate for the congress, gives his opinion [es] regarding changes in the balance of political power due to the information unveiled by some organizations such as Wikileaks:

Que representan los wikileaks para la democracia peruana?, esta representando un reconocimiento de relaciones y temas ya conocidos, pero se les esta entregando rostros, se esta estableciendo responsabilidades y sobre todo los mecanismos como el poder ha esta ocurriendo en los pasados años. […] En esta época ya no es mas posible entender la participación política, el actuar en democracia, sin un acceso real y efectivo a la información, que se ve potenciado por los instrumentos digitales como redes sociales, webs, wikileaks, en fin internet.

What does Wikileaks represent for Peruvian democracy? It represents the recognition of relations and topics which were already known by the vast majority. But now, it has been revealed the people involved in this, the responsibility of all them and, most importantly, how government has evolved during the past years […] Nowadays, it is not possible to understand political participation any more, how to work in a democracy without real and effective access to information that is evident in Internet tools such as social networks, websites and Wikileaks.

But maybe the main topic behind all this is not the modern age with internet or Wikileaks, but it is something basic like values. Like the journalist Cesar Hildebrant accurately asserts in a republished article [es] in the Ave Crítica blog: “this crisis regarding lack of values transform us in active third world people, serious underdeveloped people, barbarians that cannot be helped. Development is not just about exporting and selling, it also consists on establishing a new system that approaches as much as it can to principles of honesty.”

Finally, Aldo Cisneros Jirón in a post in his blog Grupo Perú Futuro asserts: “Wikileaks has started to embrace new theories regarding political power relations.” Nonetheless, the influence of those disclosures in the results of the April 10th elections remains unclear. In a survey in the newsaper La República, “do you think that what Wikileaks revealed affects the result of the elections?” [es], 48% answered yes, whereas 52% answered no. In any case, as the Uruguayan journalist Danilo Arbilla said in “The Wikileaks factor” [es]: “candidates will have to be aware, they cannot leave aside internet sites because even though they do not want to, they do not deserve it or if it is unfair, they can wake up in the morning with the surprise of a new Wikileaks cable that might include them.”

Post originally published in Globalizado [es] by Juan Arellano on February 26, 2011.

This post is part of our special coverage WikiLeaks and the World.

  • http://omaymen.wordpress.com rothena aymen

    1-

    “this crisis regarding lack of values transform us in active third world people, serious underdeveloped people, barbarians that cannot be helped. Development is not just about exporting and selling, it also consists on establishing a new system that approaches as much as it can to principles of honesty.”

    2-

    What does Wikileaks represent for Peruvian democracy? It represents the recognition of relations and topics which were already known by the vast majority. But now, it has been revealed the people involved in this, the responsibility of all them and, most importantly, how government has evolved during the past years […] Nowadays, it is not possible to understand political participation any more, how to work in a democracy without real and effective access to information that is evident in Internet tools such as social networks, websites and Wikileaks.

    The above lines comes in conformity with the political reality in the world today and particularly in the countries of the developing world.

    There is no real democracy in the developing countries. They need tens of years to become more democratic.

    They need more time to understand the difference between globalization and democracy.

    To be open to the other world does not mean u are democratic.

    I would like to give u this Democracy quotes that reflect the real meaning of democracy nowdays.

    “People often say that, in a democracy, decisions are made by a majority of the people. Of course, that is not true. Decisions are made by a majority of those who make themselves heard and who vote – a very different thing.”
    Walter H. Judd quotes

  • Pingback: Ecos de los wikileaks – Perú | (a) político

  • Pingback: This week in the press: 3 March – 9 March, 2011

Receive great stories from around the world directly in your inbox.

Sign up to receive the best of Global Voices
* = required field
Email Frequency



No thanks, show me the site