Paraguay history is characterized by continuous periods of political instability, devastating wars, and exhaustive fights for freedom. In this regard, Paraguay’s challenging conditions of severe political regimes are now about to change. The Paraguayan War, also known as the Triple Alliance War – the war between Paraguay and the alliance between Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay– brought devastating consequences for Paraguay due to the treacherous policy of Argentina and Brazil (Meade 91). Uruguay’s betrayal also contributed to the defeat of Paraguay in the war; where its population was reduced by half. Despite the devastating police of Paraguay President Solano Lopez, who led thousands of people to death, he still managed to develop a strong political and military system and to consolidate the spirit and desire to fight in his people (Meade 92). Since the end of this war, Paraguay has become a country with an oligarchic political system. As a result, Paraguay also witnessed a fierce contradiction and rivalry between two political powers: the Liberal Party and the Colorado Party. Lugo’s government in Paraguay is an outright calling for the Colorado party, and Stroessner regime whose political regime have caused many sufferings to Paraguay people. The downfall of the Colorado party can be attributed to three main factors: the defeat of bourgeois opposition to the oligarchy, the recession of the political system and dictatorship.
Another obstacle to a prosperity and freedom was the Chaco War (1932-1935) – the struggle between Bolivia and Paraguay for the Chaco Boreal region. This event also led to protests of the population and veterans in particular who fight experienced difficult times in the country. Being in the constant need of a reliable and strong leader, the Liberal Party nominated General Estigarribia as the president who has been taking the office for four years who later was awarded by the title of “Mariscal” for his role during the Chaco War. His aggressive reforms of 1940 led to the expansion of the authority of the executive branch, which legitimized the dictatorship and gave rise to totalitarian regime in future (Franks 5). A special consideration requires his land reform, monetary and municipal reform (Warren 3).
After the presidency of Mariscal Estigarribia, the Administracion Nacional Republicana (ANR) or, better known as the Colorado Party, took over governmentand its leader who tried to suppress the constitutionalist freedoms of the population of the country. Once Alfredo Stroessner took over power, he resorted to anticommunist spirits to launch the policy of the Cold War (Mora and Hey 312). Continuous restrictions imposed on social, cultural, and political life led to the rise of an opposition that opposed the regime. During this repressive period, Paraguayan people had to overcome abhorrent sufferings and cruel treatments from the government, as portrayed in the documentary “One’s Man War” (1991).
Furthermore, the fall of the Colorado party in 2008 after over 60 years, and the election of President Lugo represent the beginning of a new era in Paraguay. The advent of the leftist political powers has led to considerable changes in the political and social structure of the country.
Despite the above, the shortcoming of the regime lied in aggravating relations with Cuba after the appearance of Castro on the world arena (DeRouen and Heo). Continuous repressions and limitations of human rights made people to fight against this totalitarian regime where the absolute power of the leader did not give opportunities for the cultural development of the country and its further improvement in economical terms. Stroessner, hence, “…. skillfully penetrated and seized control of the two most powerful institutions in Paraguay at the time: the Colorado Party and the armed forces” (Hey 15). Therefore, the Colorado party became the main tool of political and legal control.
The example of Colorado party is a explicit illustration of how corruption can influence the reliability of traditional parties. Nonetheless, a more important question is how the Colorado Party managed to retain a six-decade dictatorship. The explanation consists in the fact that this political regime governed in the time of completely noncompetitive two-party regime. This contradiction was further involved into military political mode of Alfredo Stroessner. As a whole, civilian and military governing made its contribution to a long-term rule of the Colorado Party. Hence, during this time, Paraguay had the lowest percent of social security in all of Latin America (Abente-Brun 143). Their stress on the economic potential of the country and their considerable role in the promotion of the labor force was the leading need of the Paraguayan people and, therefore, this was the main reason of why the Colorado Party had failed. More importantly, the political regime where executive power belonged to one person was no longer welcomed by the nation. The end of the regiment of the Colorado party was the end of fears of people who had been living in the state where the power had ruled (Fox n.p.). With the emergence of Fernando Lugo, the Paraguayan people were willing to put an end to the era of dictatorship and political repressions.
Thus, the new government was hoping that it would obtain a financial help for the changes due to the large bi-national construction of hydroelectric power plants– Itaipu and Yacyreta. The Program for Social Action considerably lacked money for different social needs and, therefore, it was withdrawn from legal transactions being supported by the former president Nicanor Duarte Frutos who governed the country from 2003-2008. As a whole, the government faced great challenges, as it inherited the country with a weak infrastructure, oligarchic society being reluctant to reject the power they had during the one-party regime, and plundered funds. It was impossible for the government to control the situation and to resotre power (Sonderegger n.p.). Lugo’s plan to promote the technical and industrial development of the country in order to reduce poverty could be, thus, carried out by means of increasing the revenues on all boundaries. Hence, Itaipu and Yacyreta hydroelectric dams could bring huge benefits for the economy of Paraguay; the monetary gains obtained could be used to finance the least developed sectors of the country – education, healthcare, and agriculture. This would also augment the employment level (Sonderegger n. p.).
In terms of health care, there have been launched programs focused on the proliferation of social equality and involvement of community organizations. The plan is to establish the teams working at the most vulnerable segments of population; thus, introducing a deeper meaning for the importance of health and paying deeper attention to a healthy lifestyle of population and environmental protection. The program would also encourage a free access to healthcare services for all layers of society. The main problem was that the ubiquitous democracy considerably hampered the budgeting of those healthcare reforms (Sonderegger n. p).
The education sector was, perhaps in the most deplorable condition, as the money destined for funding was squandered by the former totalitarian government. This is why the main purpose of the newly appeared government was to restore the welfare of the educational establishments and to improve the educational curriculum and supply schools with books and documentary films, as thousands of folders has not reached the educational institutions yet. (Sonderegger n.p.). More importantly, the president wanted the training staff to provide students with a sufficient level of knowledge (Sonderegger n.p.).
It should be stressed that the president’s goal was to make lands available for peasants (Bhavnani and Foran 151). Lugo was against the agricultural-export model where the agricultural products were genetically modified (Bhavnani and Foran 151). The redistribution of the lands, which were earlier possessed influential political and military leaders (Nickson n.p.). Fernando Lugo is also known as the founder of the Patriotic Alliance for Change, a coalition consisted of eight parties that have been trying to achieve the same goals(Nickson n.p.). However, due to the large and loose size of the alliance, it is rather hard to reach a consensus. Therefore, the established goals are under the threat of failure owing to the different perspectives of each member. The Patriotic Alliance for Change (APC) emerged as the result of uniting two appositions –the Popular and Social Blog with left-wing orientations and the National Coalition with right-wing views— and both orientations served as a political platform of Lugo. The parties concluded the document that was primarily focused on the economic development, the restoration of the agricultural sector, and the advancement of the educational sphere (Gimene n.p.). However, to achieve the purpose, it was necessary to install an independent legal system, which was deeply corrupted (Gimene n.p.). Of all the parties participating in the APC recovery program, the entire leftist and LRAP (Liberal Radical Authentic Party), the rightist representative accepted Lugo’s campaign. However, the left wing activities in the APC took place but various ideological policies. The focus, then, was made on the proliferation of democracy. The ideological unity during the electoral campaign was not transferred into a firm cooperation at the parliamentary level. Therefore, the parliamentary results were rather deplorable for the APC, as they obtained a small number of seats and the right parties in apposition gained the majority (Gimene n.p.).When examining Lugo’s political programs and ideologies, it is hard to ascribe them purely to one ideological tendency but to a combination of neoliberal and neo-populist views. (Petras and Veltmeyer 237).
Lugo’s political platform is based on proliferation of democracy through the elimination of bourgeois pressure over the pleasance and the declaration of national sovereignty presupposing social and economic equality and independence. Still, there are many dispute concerning the character and origins of Lugo’s regimes: it is neo-liberal or neo-populist? According to Maxwell, a well-known professor of the University of British Columbia who studies comparative politics (331) there are two types of leftist supporters – populists, who fight for the equality and neo-liberalist, who advocate the principles of social democratic. He also emphasizes the recent tendency of egalitarianism and equal market in Latin America. This tendency is explained by the fact that Latin Americans are considerably disappointed with the liberalist politics. As a whole, “…the disenchantment with neo-liberalism, the poor performance of democratic governments, and the waning of United States’ influence in the Western Hemisphere, have created opportunities for the left throughout the region” (Maxwell 332). Lugo, thus, is keen to return the social and political equality to this country.
If proving from the contrary, Hetherington, a political and environmental anthropologist, PhD of University of California, who specializes in studying political history of Latin America, states that the main paradox of liberal theory applied to the Paraguayan peasants is revealed through the biases of land distribution (224). This bias is embedded in the corrupted legal system who ‘titles’ the lands but not provides them to peasants in fact. This phenomenon, which Hetherington called “privatizing the private”, is the main contradiction faced by Lugo’s government (225).
Neoliberal policies have emerged after the Washington consensus in 1989, when Washington financial institutions were striving to decrease the role of the state and to eliminate the tariffs and other barriers in trade (Bouzas and Kiefman 157). This consensus triggered the development of a middle classes in developing countries of Latin America. Still, it has also provoked the rise of income inequality and the elite took over of power. However, there also observes the tendency of liberalization of the Latin American economy and its global integration to the international market after the debt crisis in 1982 (Kurtz and Brooks 236). Referring to our particular case, Lugo’s reforms are also focused on social protection and national security, which is widely spread in the developed countries. After over a year of governing, the incumbent president of Paraguay, Fernando Lugo has faced numerous challengers and obstacles to accomplish the programs that had been defined in the beginning (Kurtz and Brooks 236). As a whole the Washington consensus has launched the process of democratization resulted in changes in Latin America (Bouzas and Kiefman 158).
Referring to changes occurred in Paraguay, the Latinobarometro (2008) shows that, according to the public opinion, the democratic level provided by public opinion pollsin Paraguay is 10 percent, in comparison with Chile’s 44 and Uruguay’s 43 percent. Apparently, this was one of the lowest levels in Latin America (Latinobarometro n. p.). However, Lugo’s short term governing is not enough to make unpredictable assumptions concerning the democratic integration, as centuries of dictatorship and repression cannot be removed within two years.
It is worth saying that Fernando Lugo made tangible achievement in the struggle against corruption and crime level in state institutions, such as in the Ports’ Administration, the telephone company COPACO—which had earlier provided telephone and satellite bills for airing ANR advertisements— and in Itaipu (Abente-Brun 151). More importantly, some improvements were observed in the case of poverty reduction and legal issues where Lugo’s government made an accent on the removal of the corrupted Supreme Court. The President also signed several important agreements with Colombia on the security cooperation and settled good relations with the presidents of Uruguay, Chile, and Brazil. The Itaipu hydroelectric power plan has stopped external long-term disputes and, therefore, this deal is Lugo’s victory.
Addressing the achievements of Lugo’s government, which are not substantial compared with goals settled by the President, almost two years are nothing for these long-term and complicated changes (Gonzalez n.p.). Still, the democratic prospective allows to introduce some changes to the existed programs. First, it is necessary to place a considerable emphasis on the legal system, as the stumble block for other reforms introduction. Second, it is necessary to clarify the privatization issues, as they are hardly determined in the program.
After a thorough consideration of Lugo’s government, it is possible to admit that Paraguay is its way to democracy and social equality, as the President has managed to establish a fertile ground for the proliferation of neoliberal views. “The bishop of the poor”, as it is called in public has also firmly settled the strategy of poverty elimination. Therefore, in future, the marginalized layers of Paraguayan society will be gradually expelled and assimilated among the newly appeared middle class. This scenario is more valid, as return to conservatism is not a prosperous perspective.
In conclusion, Fernando Lugo will be remembered in the history of Paraguay as one of the few leaders who fought for the respect of human rights and for the welfare of the country. The integrating democracy has given rise globalization processes in the countries of the third world and their international cooperation and has provided brilliant opportunity for economic growth and political recognition (Arnson et al. 24). Lugo has proved that the country that heroically fought the Triple Alliance War, won the Chaco War, and overthrew the dictator Alfredo Stroessner, is able to fight again for democratic freedom and human rights, since these had been neglected for a long time. The current regime’s policy can be therefore considered the result of the failed Colorado party’s policies and vigorous need for changes. Further alteration occurred in Paraguay were predetermined by important internal factors like Washington consensus financial treaties that greatly contributed to the development and improvement of countries in Latin America and contributed to liberation trade and international cooperation. More importantly, those agreements gave rise to great alterations in other countries, like Bolivia, and Brazil. Finally, Washington consensus negotiations have led to the decrease of the ratio of poor people and improve the problems of social inequality (Bouzas and Kiefman 161).
References
Abente-Brun, Diego. The Unravelling of One Party Rule. Journal of Democracy. 20.1 (2009): 143-156
Arnson, Cynthia J., Robert Kenneth, Mayogra Rene Antonio, Kaufman Robert, Augero Felipe, Armony Ariel, Hershberg, Russel, Roberto. The ‘New Left’ and Democratic Government in Latin America. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. 2007.
Bhavnani, Kum-Kum, and Foran, John. On the Edges of Development: Cultural Interventions. US: Francis & Taylor, 2009.
Bouzas, Roberto, and Kiefman, Saul. Making Trade Liberation Work. After the Washington Consensus: Restarting growth and reform in Latin America. US: Peterson Institute, 2003.
DeRouen, Karl R. and Heo Uk. Defense and security: a compendium of national armed forces. US: ABC-CLIO, 2005.
Fox, Michael. Report from Paraguay on the Eve of Historic Elections. Upside Down World. 2010. Web.
Frank, Jefrey R., and International Monetary Fund. Paraguay: corruption, reform, and the financial system. Washington: International Monetary Fund, 2005.
Gimene, Aldolfo. Paraguay: Change is still to come; The first year of Fernando Lugo’s government. International Journal of socialist renewal. Web.
Gonzalez, Diego. Lugo’s Dilemmas. Americas Program Report. 2009. Web.
Hettherington, Kreqq. Privatizing the Private in Rural Paraguay: Precarious Lots and the Materiality of Rights. American Ethologist, 36.2. (2009): 224-241.
Hey, Jeanne A. Small States in world politics: explaining foreign policy behavior. US: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2003.
Kurts, Marcus J., and Brookes, Sarah M. Embedding Liberal Reform in Latin America. World Politics, 60.2, (2008): 231-280.
Latinobarometro. Democracy in Latin America. Web 2008.
Maxwell, Cameron A. Latin America’s Left Turns: Beyond Good and Bad. Third Word Quarterly. 30.2 (2009):331-348.
Meade, Teresa A. A History of Latin America: 1800 to the Present. US: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
Mora, Frank O., and Hey, Jeanne A. K. Latin American and Caribbean foreign policy. US: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003.
Nickson, Andrew. Paraguay: A Shift to the Left under Lugo? Real Instituto Elcano. Web.
One’s Man War. Dir. Sergio Toledo. Anthony Hopkins, Norma Aleandro. Channel 4. Television Corporation. 1991. Film.
Petras, James F., and Veltmeyer, Henry. What is Left Latin America?: Regime Change in New Times. US: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2009.
Richer, Hugo. Paraguay: Fernando Lugo’s Victory and the New Space for left struggle. International Journal of Socialist Renewal. Web.
Sonderegger, Reto. Political and Social Crisis in Paraguay. Upside Down World. Web.
Warren, Harris Gaylord. Political Aspects of the Paraguayan Revolution, 1936-1940. The Hispanic American Historical Review. 30.1. (1950): 2-25.