The Central American Free Trade Agreement, the treaty to bring our good and faithful friends from Central America into free trade with the U.S. has won - won! - a bruising battle in the Senate. We were terrified all was lost and it was not! This is the greatest victory of the year! Victory!

The last step is to get CAFTA passed in the House. If it passes in the House, it will be a strike for freedom and a deadly blow to Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. Communism won’t be the way out, but standing on one own two feet and selling to the biggest market on the face of the earth will be in. Our prosperity will be their prosperity, oh and it will help the U.S. too! Give me a delightful Salvadoran tamarindo drink, will you?

CAFTA is a vote for real and sustainable prosperity, not Chavez charity. Central America’s future, and America’s is now assured. There are no words for this, this is a great night to be American whether you are North American or Central American.

We are all Americans now!!!!!!

Now for the individual votes here - it’s praise time for the winners and revenge time for the losers and we must never forget who stood up for freedom when it counted and who crawled under a rock, which slimey maggots, and tried to shut America’s door on our neighbors from Central America.

Pride:

The great John McCain - eloquently stated for CNN - link above: “The stakes could hardly be higher,” said Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a supporter. “It’s important because at stake is the future of Central America in its economic and political dimensions and hence its security dimensions.”

Elizabeth Dole - brave lady from a textile state and she voted yes. Some things are just more important than textiles. Like national security. Presidential material. Thanks Liz!

The intelligent Dianne Feinstein who has always had a good head on her shoulders, even though she is a San Francisco Democrat. Makes me proud that I was once her neighbor on Stanyan Street. Glorious!

The unexpected Lincoln Chafee - I expected nothing, NOTHING, from a Hugo-Chavez-visiting liberal of your stripe. You turned out to be a man after all. I salute you.

Sam Brownback - I expected everything from you. And got it. Compassionate. Intelligent. And knows the way the world works. And is pro-America. Great man!

Human rights champion Richard Lugar who cares about all of us in the region, he held fast like a ship in a storm. We love you Richard Lugar!

The decent Pete Domenici - a man who can always be trusted to do the right thing, thanks Pete!

Florida Senator Bill Nelson, a man who intends to keep his Senate seat as Republicans buck to take it. He wants to keep it. He listens to his Latino and Cuban constituents, to his great credit. He’s gonna make it to the finish line.

Virginia’s George Allen - a man said to want to be president who’s acting presidential. Thanks, George!

James Jeffords - the nutty independent from Vermont got a lick of sense. Thanks Jeff, you came through when it counted.

Shame:

Bianca’s Boyfriend Chris Dodd. Still pining after Danny Ortega, are ya, Chris? You sandalista garbage. Always the sandalista, ain’t that right Chris? Barf.

The-Senate-Turned-Me-Stupid Jon Corzine. What’s got into you, Jon? You can’t be paid off, you can’t have constituents who want this, you can’t be so ignorant you don’t know the deal - all I can say is: The Senate has turned you stupid. Get out.

Mary Landrieu, oh sugah honey bun, you nevah did have a lil’ ol’ brain in yo’ haid, did ya’ll? You just wanted dat good ol’ sugah money, dincha? Bless yo’ heart! Sugar-drenched, stupid wench.

Evan Bayh - who’s so carefully cultivated an image as an intelligent Democrat. Sorry creep, you’ve blown it. Word’s out about your extremism, jerk.

Plagiary Joe Biden: Still plagiarizing after all these years, eh Joe? You’ve moved from plagiarizing Neill McKinnock to Hugo Chavez, though. F U

Grand Kloogle Robert Byrd - well what better way to keep our brown-skinned brothers out of the U.S. than to shut them out to free trade? Your Klansmen buddies are so proud of you, Bob!

Hillary Clinton: The icy calculating communist shows her red card. Evil incarnate, you can see it in her gelid eyes. Well Hil, enjoy all that Dominican support you’re gonna get on your next Senate run, beach! I despise you.

Barbara Boxer: Good luck scrapping up the Salvadoran vote outta Los Angeles, freak. You’re targetted for defeat and it’s going to be miserable.

Mister Sugar Beet Max Baucus, who normally votes free trade decided he needed to get paid. The Sugar Beet subsidy lobby was calling.

John Kerry - still stupid after all these months.

Interesting choice, too. It was a foregone conclusion that Saad Hariri probably wouldn’t try for it, as he and Lahoud would constantly clash — and that’s not good for a newcomer into politics (Lebanese politics, no less). But I thought that they may have stuck with Mikati, who replaced Karami. Here’s the article.

By Lucy Fielder

BEIRUT (Reuters) - The Lebanese parliament on Thursday chose Fouad Siniora, the anti-Syrian former finance minister, to head the first government in three decades to take office without Syrian troops in the country.

President Emile Lahoud, a long-time Syrian ally, is obliged to respect the choice, though relations between the two are said to be frosty, and is expected to nominate Siniora as prime minister-designate later in the day.

Siniora’s name was put forward by the Future Bloc led by Saad al-Hariri, son of the assassinated ex-premier Rafik, and a majority of party leaders and independent MPs consulted by Lahoud have also backed him, making his appointment certain.

Elections earlier this month returned an anti-Syrian majority to parliament for the first time since Lebanon’s 1975-1990 civil war.

Syria pulled out its troops in April under Lebanese and international pressure after Rafik al-Hariri’s death.

Lahoud continued to meet bloc representatives and independent lawmakers, each of whom names a candidate for prime minister, a post reserved for a Sunni Muslim under Lebanon’s sectarian political system.

Agreeing on a government will be harder because pro-Syrian Lahoud can oppose the prime minister’s chosen line-up, expected to include many anti-Syrians and few of Lahoud’s allies.
…
Siniora was finance minister for most of Lebanon’s post-civil war period under the late Hariri, and remains an adviser to the Hariri family. He is credited with tightly controlling spending and introducing post-war taxes.

Seems sound to me. Beirut Spring thinks likewise.

It????????s also great that Seniora is becoming Prime Minister. A veteran Haririst Number-cruncher is exactly what we need for the role of Prime minister. Some challenges like reforming Social security and finishing privatization are going to be tough, but he has political backing.

Maybe when he’s done over there, he can come fix our social security system!

Will Franklin has this week’s carnival of revolutions up at his blog, which takes on all of this week’s democratic developments.

By the way, I’ve been in Boston this whole week and have been totally cut off from the internet during that time (my posts were pre-timed to publish, how cool is that?). I’ll be back in Arizona by this afternoon. Huge thanks to Daniel, Kirk, and A.M. Mora y Leon for their work to keep everything going so well!

Those interested in development issues in the Arab world might find it worth while to read a back and forth discussion of the future of the Arab world taking place between my blog and that of an Egyptian architect-turned-political activist, Karim Elsahy (pronounced es-sahhi, with a hard “h”).

Elsahy’s blog, One Arab World, contains a few posts explaining his political project followed by a series of comments by various (mostly) Arab bloggers (but in English).

My post deals with two different things: the first part is a response to a request for comment by Elsahy regarding a statement in President Bush’s speech last night regarding the “totalitarian ideology” against which the U.S. is fighting. I then give a brief historical explanation of my theory of how the religious and political philosophies of modern Islamic terrorist groups evolved. The second part of the post shifts gears and addresses a variety of political and economic development issues raised by Elsahy and his readers. Essetially, it is a response to several posts on his blog.

For convenience, my post has links back to my original posts on the issue plus links to the most relevant posts on Elsahy’s blog. This is the link to my response on both issues: Response to Comments - Fort Bragg Speech & Arab World Development

Yesterday, I posted “More squawking of a Russia-Belarus union,” though significantly most of that squawking comes from Belarus’ side. Here’s a piece in RFE/RL that adds further to yesterday’s post.

KREMLIN ADVISERS SCOLD BELARUS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD…
In an open letter to Belarusian President Alyaksandr Lukashenka published on 23 June at sovetpanfilova.ru, the Council for Promoting Civil Society and Human Rights (SSRIGOPCh) under Russian President Vladimir Putin expressed its concern about “the unfavorable situation with civic rights and freedoms” in Belarus. The council, which is an advisory body whose head is appointed by Putin, said that Belarus has virtually no independent “sociopolitical media,” nongovernmental and human rights organizations are being gradually liquidated by the administration, and electoral legislation does not ensure ” legitimate results of the expression of the people’s will.” The council also pointed to “overtly unfriendly steps” that are being taken by the Belarusian government against Russia, including squeezing Russian electronic media from Belarus’s information sphere and censuring their programs, confiscating Russian commodities at Belarusian border checkpoints, and infringing on the rights of Russians who are in conflict with the Belarusian legal system. “The council is very influential but it does not reflect the state policy ÄstanceÅ,” SSRIGOPCh member Sergei Markov told RFE/RL’s Belarus Service. JM

…AS EUROPEAN LAWMAKER PREDICTS END OF RUSSIAN SUPPORT FOR BELARUSIAN PRESIDENT
Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly (PACE) deputy Christos Pourgourides said on 23 June that the Russian government is “bound to abandon Alyaksandr Lukashenka pretty soon,” Belapan reported. He added that Lukashenka will “have no legs to stand on” without Russia’s support. The previous day, the PACE subcommittee on Belarus adopted a resolution urging Russia to “make any political or financial assistance to the government of Belarus conditional on respect for the human rights and civil liberties of the people of Belarus.” It also approved a draft memorandum criticizing the Belarusian authorities over the ongoing crackdown on political opponents and independent media outlets and calling for specific steps to unseat the Lukashenka regime. The Belarusian Foreign Ministry said in response that PACE does not have an impartial view of the situation in Belarus and lacks any tools to influence it.

The PACE resolution also makes many jabs at unfulfilled obligations on the Russian side, something they aren’t too happy about. But right now Putin is in a position where he must decide between a degenerate vassal state and a friendly, prosperous democratic Belarus. His main concern would be that the latter would turn toward Europe and shun Russia. That’s why, at the end of the first article, despite the resolution of deterioting human rights, Sergei Markov notes that it does not reflect the state policy.

To make a case study, however, this only happened in Ukraine due to enormous help by the Russian government in support of Yanukovich. Yet, in eastern Ukraine, there is still large support for Russia due to ethnic and economic ties. A liberal Belarus would have the benefits of a free society and still retain Russia as an important partner in development. At this point, it’s really Putin’s choice to make, as Russia is the only country in the area still supporting Lukashenko’s dictatorship.

I feel like I’m just giving advice, though, to an ear that won’t hear it. As anyone can imagine, that’s just not how Russia does things, even after seeing how the policy of retaining post-Soviet vassal states has failed. Putin is actually trying to actively re-energize the CIS in the face of a re-vitalized GUAM alliance. It just so happens that the former is made up of the lingering dictatorships of Central Asia while the latter are those closer to Europe and are looking to move toward more democratic societies. With regards to these alliances, the main problem for Russia strategically is that Belarus is located in the midst of the GUAM, EU, and potential EU countries. When Lukashenko’s dictatorship collapses in on itself, whenever that may be, most of the political leadership is going to be completely western leaning unless Putin moves now to assure his place alongside those who want to move Belarus forward.

Remember back several months ago when Putin declared that regional governors would be appointed rather than elected. It didn’t really matter in the first place, because those elected were already vetted for approval by Moscow. The reason Putin gave is that he would be able to install more popular and competent leaders should they be needed. But elections hold both a practical and symbolic importance, especially when the corrupt and incompetent leadership is not being replaced.

Russia????????s abolition of regional elections ????????- a reflex reaction to the Beslan tragedy ????????- has backfired. Instead of bringing order to the North Caucasus, it may swell the ranks of those fighting the Kremlin.

Officials said the reform would allow them to remove corrupt regional leaders, strengthening the state enough to finally crush the Chechen rebels behind last September????????s Beslan hostage-taking, in which 330 people died.

But six months after the law????????s adoption, the same elites have had their mandates confirmed in two of the most volatile provinces: North Ossetia, which includes Beslan, and Ingushetia.

???????From the start, we said that our local president was to blame (for Beslan), and now his right-hand man has been put in power,??????? said Susanna Dudiyeva, chairwoman of the ????????Beslan Mothers???????? support group.

???????Are these the morals of the Kremlin? These useless presidents should be held to account, not rewarded … Moscow is doing nothing. We are living through a war but it is their war and they should know how to end it,??????? said Dudiyeva, who lost her son in the school siege.

Even President Vladimir Putin????????s top man in southern Russia, which includes the North Caucasus, has warned that the abolition of elections was losing Moscow support and boosting corruption.

???????The arbitrary nature of the authorities has created social apathy … In many regions, authorities do not have any public support,??????? Dmitry Kozak wrote in a memo to Putin and which was leaked to a Moscow daily.

Officials in the Caucasus, like Ingush President Murat Zyazikov, insist the situation is improving.

Observers say it is not.

???????Ordinary people are starting to think they are not important. Whoever is representing the Kremlin is not doing his job,??????? Vladimir Semyonov, ex-president of the increasingly unstable region of Karachayevo-Cherkessiya, told Reuters.

???????If the Kremlin … follows the opinion of one clan rather than popular opinion, then the whole federal army won????????t be enough to control the Caucasus,??????? said Semyonov, who commanded the Russian ground forces in Chechnya between 1994 and 1996.

The Caucasus is home to a war centred on Chechnya, where 100,000 Russian soldiers have fought for 10 years but failed to stop the separatists. The war is infecting other Caucasus regions like Dagestan and Karachayevo-Cherkessiya.

The last point about Chechnya and the rest of the North Caucasus is very significant. Popular protests have been spreading from Bashkortostan to Ingushetia. Right now, the discontent seems to be mostly at the regional leadership, but federal Russian interference and inaction has put Moscow in the crosshairs. This could mean that, eventually, separatism will become the path of the regional republics, just as Chechnya has done. In fact, news reports show that captured rebels in Chechnya are sometimes from neighboring provinces like Ingushetia. Russia as an influential, whole country is not in a good place right now.

Viktor Yushchenko seems at time to be more interested in completing assession to NATO than to tackling the problems of his fragile presidency. This is interesting seeing that NATO officials and member heads of state have not exactly thrown their arms around the Ukrainian president as he moves from constituent to constituent trying to rustle up an invitation. One can see that Yuschenko’s tactic of assuming membership and imploring the alliance to hurry up already with the papers is starting to grate on the (admittedly) thin patience of the slow-witted NATO administration.

Curious, then, that headlines trumpet a breakthrough in Ukraine-Atlantic Alliance relations and quote, sort of, the latest bureaucrat to give Viktor a hands up:

NATO is ready to help Ukraine in its bid to become a member, alliance Secretary-general Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said Monday after meeting Foreign Minister Borys Tarasiuk in Kiev.

De Hoop Scheffer, on a one-day visit, also met with President Viktor Yushchenko, Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko, and other top officials, Associated Press reported.

Yushchenko, who was brought to power by last fall????????s ???????Orange revolution???????, has sought to bring this former Soviet republic of 48 million people into the European Union and NATO, putting these goals into Ukraine????????s defense doctrine. He has set 2008 as the target date for joining NATO.

Sounds pretty promising, no? The 2008 target is a little ambitious, but if NATO wants this to happen, anything is possible.

But what to make of what De Hoop Scheffer (the best-named stiff in the whole damn treaty) actually said?

???????I know that the Ukrainian government is on the reform path. NATO and myself as the secretary-general will assist Ukraine,??????? de Hoop Scheffer said. He did not elaborate.

Oh. Hmmm. What exactly does the secretary-general mean by assist? He pointedly did not say, “…assist in Ukraine’s application for membership in the Atlantic Treaty.” Would that have been too much to ask? Apparently. Even though Poland has been a strong supporter of Ukraine’s bid, many other member nations have legitmate concerns over the slow pace of reform and the current state of governance. Yushchenko has squandered a huge amount of political capital and goodwill left over from the Orange Revolution. Another concern, less articulated though widely thought, is Ukraine’s still significant ties to Russia. The relationship between Ukarinian Security Service (SBU) and CIS Intelligence would make the sharing of intelligence between NATO and Ukraine problematic.

The basis for relations between Ukraine and the Alliance in the 1997 NATO-Ukraine Charter on a Distinctive Partnership. Ukraine is also a member (since 1994, the first former CIS member to do so) of NATO’s Partnership for Peace, which despite its touchy-feely name serves as a platform for NATO assession. Ukraine has soldiers on the ground in Kosovo under NATO command and is active in many Alliance Working Groups. So there are significant strides being made for Ukraine to become a the Eastern-most member of the Atlantic Alliance. But for now, NATO officials are content to praise Yushchenko and Ukraine and offer vague “assistance” without fully committing either to a timetable or formal talks to assession.

One of the two key problems facing the new Lebanese government is what to do about pro-Syrian President Lahoud and who to elect to the position of Parliament Speaker. The new parliament, which has not yet convened, has called on Lahoud to resign, a call he is obviously ignoring.

WASHINGTON (AFX) - Lebanese President Emile Lahoud, who most of his parliament wants to resign, said he will remain in his post despite accusations he covered up assassinations.

‘I’m not resigning,’ he told CNN. ‘I’m staying until the end of my term.’

On Thursday, Lebanon’s new parliamentary majority called for Lahoud to resign, accusing him of covering up for a series of political assassinations targeting anti-Syrian figures.

How the new parliament will oust Lahoud remains to be seen. If it can be proven that he was involved in some way with the bombing that killed Rafik Hariri, he could be tried and removed by the Constitutional Court for treason. Otherwise, the situation may not be so easy.

Quite a few of the people in this new parliament are from the old, pro-Syria parliament, who themselves voted to constitutionally extend Lahoud’s term by three years (with Syrian strong-arming, of course). As far as I know, it will be very difficult for the parliament to cut off the extended term or force him to resign. If they fail to do so, and they may, their best bet is to form a government cabinet devoid of his influence so as to effectively neutralize the problem.

The parliamentary majority has also decided upon keeping Nabih Berri, an ally of Syria who has served every term since the end of the civil war.

Staunch Syrian ally Nabih Berri will keep his position as parliament speaker after the biggest bloc in the newly elected legislature supported his candidacy for the powerful post.

Saad al-Hariri, son of slain former premier Rafiq al-Hariri, on Sunday led a meeting late of his anti-Syrian coalition, the Future Movement, which agreed to back Berri for a new four-year term.

“After consultations with allied and friendly blocs, the Future parliamentary bloc announces that it members have decided to elect Nabih Berri as parliament speaker after he has promised to forge ahead with a reform programme …. and enable the new government to confront security, political, economic and social challenges in Lebanon,” the coalition said in a statement issued after the meeting held at Saad’s residence.

The 128-member parliament is to hold its first session on Tuesday to elect a speaker and get down to the business of nominating a premier who will form a Cabinet.

Constitutionally, the speaker of parliament must be a Shiite, which Berri is. Retaining him is obviously not the most welcomed outcome, especially in the view of the United States. However, due to the alliances formed between Amal-Hizb’allah and Hariri, he got the backing that he needed. Besides that, should Berri not be elected, the only other major Shiite group besides Amal is Hizb’allah. A candidate from them would be disastrous, as the speaker can halt legislation in its tracks (as Berri did with the rewriting of the electoral law). All in all, with Berri, he was the best of all the bad choices.

There has been some talk about this for awhile now, though it usually amounts to nothing. Lukashenko is basically looking for a way to preserve his power and status through oppression. With so much pressure from the west, he must be counting down the days until the end of his reign. Because of that, he has to look eastward; specifically, Russia (though greater ties with countries such as Zimbabwe are revealing as well). This has largely resulted in military cooperation and aid, though talks over a joint currency and even possible union are being talked about, albeit haltingly without much progress. This would be Lukashenko’s last resort, as it would subjugate him to Russia completely, but it’s still on the table.

Here’s the latest. Read this transcript:

Excerpt from report by Russian external TV service NTV Mir on 22 June

ÄPresenterÅ New unions were being built in Moscow today, and existing ones were being shored up: leaders of the member countries of the Eurasian Economic Community ÄEAECÅ met in the Grand Kremlin Palace. The EAEC includes Russia, Belorussia ÄBelarusÅ, Kazakhstan, Kirgizia ÄKyrgyzstanÅ, Tajikistan and also Armenia - as an observer. No major political decisions are expected from this meeting. Experts say it is a response of sorts to alternative meetings of ÄotherÅ former Soviet republics within the framework of GUAM ÄGeorgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and MoldovaÅ. Vladimir Kondratyev reports.

ÄCorrespondentÅ ÄPassage omitted: EAEC, and not CIS or Single Economic Space, appears to be the most viable integration platform in the region. Known details about the meeting.Å Belarusian President ÄAlyaksandrÅ Lukashenka will be at the helm of the EAEC for the next year: ÄKazakh President NursultanÅ Nazarbayev has passed on this heavy burden. Lukashenka, however, is facing a more important task: to make sure he achieves union with Russia on his own terms.

ÄPavel Borodin, state secretary of the Union of Russia and BelarusÅ We are a bit short of political will.

ÄCorrespondentÅ What should it consist of?

ÄBorodinÅ It should be like it was before; convene the Politburo and say: we are holding a referendum in November; in January-February, elections to the parliamentary assembly of the Union State; and in the autumn of next year, elect president and vice-president.

ÄCorrespondentÅ Who will be president then?

ÄBorodinÅ Well, you know-

ÄCorrespondentÅ I mean, what does the constitution say?

ÄBorodinÅ Don’t prompt me with the answer! Of course it will be Putin because- Of course Putin, and Lukashenka Äwill beÅ vice-president.

ÄCorrespondentÅ Does Lukashenka agree to this?

ÄBorodinÅ You know, even if he is loath to, he will still agree.

ÄCorrespondentÅ The Belarusian delegation reacted sceptically to this statement. The Belarusian blueprint is presumably different.

As much press is given to this possibility, I honestly just don’t see it happening. This “possibility” has been on the table for years and the two seem to simply despise each other. It certainly wouldn’t happen in time before external and internal pressures force a different political route for the country.

Pro-Syria, pro-Hizbollah Speaker Nabih Berri has been re-elected by the anti-Syrian parliament:

The 128-seat assembly, dominated by opponents of Syria for the first time since the 1975-1990 civil war, voted by an overwhelming majority of 90 for Berri, despite international and local reservations over retaining one of the main enforcers of Syria’s grip over its tiny neighbor.

Though the May 29-June 19 elections were won by groups that opposed Syria’s role, they had little choice but to back Berri for a fourth straight term after his alliance with the Hizbollah guerrilla group won over 80 percent of the Shi’ite Muslim vote.

That made it difficult for parliament to replace him without appearing to defy the will of a large segment of the Lebanese.

This is as was expected as Berri garnered support from Saad al-Hariri and Druze leader Walid Jumblatt after Berri promised to institute reforms. As a Shiite, this is the highest office open to the man who has been Speaker since 1992. Also as expected, Berri lead off his new term by quashing any hopes that Hizbollah would be part the proposed reform:

In his first speech to parliament after winning the vote, Berri indicated he would oppose efforts to disarm Hizbollah’s guerrillas, who helped end Israel’s 22-year occupation of south Lebanon in 2000, and who now control the volatile border.

“Last time we neglected the south and left it exposed, we found the enemy (Israel) knocking on the door of our capital with a fireball,” Berri told the house.

Berri campaigned under the slogan, “No to disarming the anti-Israel resistance.” Maybe it’s catchier in Arabic.

Christopher Hitchens has another must-read article in this month’s Vanity Fair. This time, Hitch visits Iran (now becoming possibly the only “scribbler” to have visited all three Axis of Evil members since 2000). I have a post and link on the article here. Hitchens once again reveals what is at the base of another rancid government that keeps an ancient and great civilization under its heal. The value here is that the author has no agenda to push from either the right or left. He’s perfectly willing to credit the Bush Administration when credit is due and continues to refuse to descend to the level of hackery.

This is an article that swings between mild hope and casual despair. Kind of like Iran itself.

Fraudster to fraudster, who could be more pleased with Iran’s stolen election than Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez himself? I guess this means he’s not the only guy at the election fraud party. Read the whole thing here.

There is no issue, none, more critical today than whether the U.S. Congress passes CAFTA. So much is at stake in the treaty that will show whether the U.S. includes Latin America in to its hopes and opportunity or coldly shuts it out. And don’t think Osama Bin Laden, Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe aren’t watching - they are. If CAFTA loses, every single one of them will be emboldened.

This prospect is unbelievably horrible, and Bush must pay any price, battle any battle, to get this treaty passed. It is that important. If there is a political cost to him, so be it. It must pass! Whatever it takes! And the same goes for every member of Congress. CAFTA must pass. If it doesn’t, the U.S. will have neither friends nor credibility left in the world.

I spent the day on the phone talking to members of Congress on this vote. They all say it will not only be close, it will be bruising and how it comes out is anyone’s guess. Many of the Congressmen who are currently saying ‘no’ are believed to be bluffing. Others, like Chris Dodd, were for it and now are on the fence, waiting for a cue about which way the wind is blowing, wanting to be on the winning side. So there are complications that may affect the outcome. We just don’t know. All we know is that it absolutely must pass.

Are the Democrats and Republicans who oppose this critical bill so deeply buried in the pockets of Big Sugar and Dinosaur Labor that they can’t see a thing? Have they stuck their heads in the sand of socialism? Or are they willing to listen to reason and extend America’s hand of friendship, prosperity and trade to its faithful friends in this hemisphere? For America, this is the equivalent of France’s referendum test. It is terrifying. It is critical. Tomorrow, the U.S. Senate is expected to approve the treaty for a full vote in the Senate. After that, the House will follow. If this bill doesn’t pass, we will face dire consequences.

Here is a news roundup:

News:

INVESTOR’S BUSINESS DAILY warns Congress to vote for CAFTA or prepare for war, because Central America is a region engulfed in potential trouble. And because these are tiny states, anything could be tinder. The only way to kill it all dead is CAFTA.

CHICAGO TRIBUNE has an essay by William Daley of JP Morgan warning that U.S. national security is at stake if CAFTA does not pass and that the region cannot become prosperous without it. Trade is the only way out of poverty. This is a powerful essay.

THE WASHINGTON TIMES: Pro-CAFTA, warns that the U.S. will lose influence in world trade bodies like Doha Round if it does not pass. Warns about the insidiousness of Big Sugar.

Revolutionary Blogs:

CLUB FOR GROWTH: It reports that 8 out of 10 major newspapers who’ve looked at the CAFTA treaty endorse it.

SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTERPRISE COUNCIL warns that CAFTA is more about politics than economics and that politics is old line protectionism.

CLUB FOR GROWTH also reports that National Taxpayer’s Union will be offering a CAFTA fact a day for this Big Week in the CAFTA showdown.

I was just about to post a translation of an article from Al-Hayat on the Libyan opposition’s conference which closed yesterday, and then I noticed that one of my collaborateurs beat me to it with this article a few hours ago (linking to ABC’s website). But the Al-Hayat article takes a different angle on the issue from the ABC article, and so may be worth reading as well. I’ll just provide the link: Window on the Arab World, and More!

I will note that whereas our own A.M. Mora y Leon makes the point that the Libyan opposition seemed to be rather anti-American based on her reading of her ABC source, that element was emphasized much less in the Al-Hayat article, which just references the Libyans’ desire to effect change through people power rather than “American tanks,” with the emphasis on change within Libya, not attacking the U.S. It seems that ABC News was more eager to promote the anti-American side of the conference than the Arab world’s most prominent Arab nationalist newspaper.

Alek Boyd’s piece on Colombia published here yesterday has drawn a rabid reaction from a tiny shrivelled pro-Chavez news organ, which devoted scads of bandwidth to name-hurling invective. They seem to have a personal problem with Mr. Boyd. This is starting to sound like an embarassing sort of envy. By their headline, they seem to actually believe Mr. Boyd has President Bush in his pocket. They really do see him as a giant threat. Amazing!

Read it here, or if you don’t want their chavista cookies and spyware, here.

Can you stand a story on the Venezuelan national budget? I promise you, it’s got gamy details of swindling, pocket-lining, waste, graft and lying. And given that it’s the main vehicle for the spread of the chavista ‘revolution’ it has relevance to the mission of this blog. It’s what Venezuela’s real revolution is up against. Venezuelan writer Francisco Toro has a short, nicely written essay here or if you prefer, here.

To give him the boot. A London newspaper is reporting just that. Read it here.

One can only hope the same is going on for Hugo Chavez. If only!

It sure looks like it:

LONDON Jun 25, 2005 ???????? Mohammed al-Senousi calls himself a prince, although he has had no throne since his grandfather was ousted in a 1969 coup by Moammar Gadhafi.

Al-Senousi, 42, joined hundreds of Libyan opposition members in London on Saturday to push for Gadhafi’s ouster their first conference in exile to tell the world, they said, there is an alternative to Gadhafi that is not Islamic extremism.

This group, though seems pretty negative and thinks it more important to condemn the U.S. for recognizing Khaddafi for his improved record than just getting on with the business of revolution. This whining won’t make them many friends. Why don’t they show us what they can do instead? I don’t recall hearing from them all these years prior to U.S. recognition. Read the whole thing for yourself here.

Ever wondered why George Bush was seen meeting with Phan Van Khai, the communist premier of Vietnam? Same as the real revolutionaries like Maria Corina Machado?

This editorial has some background here.

Hat tip: Real Clear Politics

Daniel has an important post about the growing erraticness of dictator Hugo Chavez’s relationship with the Venezuelan military. Apparently, they can’t stand him.

Hugo Chavez is too into Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, for the Venezuelan military’s liking, and ignores the history that Venezuela’s military for years fought off this Monster at Our Door, and at Venezuela’s door, too. Castro has been nothing but trouble over the decades for Venezuela and Venezuela’s military professionals, who have expended blood and treasure to beat Castro off, and they have no intention of forgetting. This could be quite explosive. Could Venezuela’s revolution begin in the military over this? It could. Chavez is on thin ice.

Read Daniel’s analysis here. My Babalu commentary on the same subject here.

Not many revolutionaries make the transition from old 1960s leftwing Castro worshippers into New Style revolutionary in the Age of Orange, Cedar, Rose, Daffodil, and Velvet Revolutions, which we live in today.

Daniel Duquenal has a fascinating portrait of Teodoro Petkoff, a Bulgarian-Venezuelan leftist who did a stretch as a guerrilla in the mountains long ago, came down, and then went on to much better things.

He’s now a leading news editor in Venezuela that pointedly opposes thugs and tyrants. Petkoff launched a new book called ‘Dos Izquieridas’ about the democratic and the non-democratic left. He is a formidable opponent of dictator Hugo Chavez. And he is quirky and interesting as it is possible to be.

How is this for interesting? Daniel writes:

That he thinks the left is the best way to address Latin American glaring disparities does not stop him from being convinced to use capital to develop a country instead of the dead certainties that rule us today. Some of (Petkoff’s) words, from memory: “Capitalism has demonstrated to be unique in its ability to generate plenty”.

All of Petkoff’s work is worth reading, even if one does not agree with all of it. Thinking people everywhere will agree with most of it.

Daniel has a portrait of this unusual revolutionary here.

Colombia’s president Alvaro Uribe faces mounting opposition from what it seems to be a united front of the liberal party and other more preoccupying factors. A coalition of former presidents -Cesar Gaviria, Ernesto Samper and Andres Pastrana- seems to have found common ground, leaving behing past rivalries, to attack the policies and performance of former party member Alvaro Uribe. Recent appointments aside, that of Cesar Gaviria as party leader, it remains to be seen whether or not they will be able to agglutinate enough votes against the current president, whose prospects of getting re-elected look promising -should the Constitutional Court rules in favour of approving the necessary constitutional amendment- given the high level of support and popularity he enjoys. There are however other elements that must be considered.

Due to procedural methods the decision of the Constitutional Court, even if favourable to Uribe’s aspirations, will take some time to materialise, which could impede the timely inscription for the presidential race of Uribe. There are other constitutional reforms, such as prohibition to public office holders to participate in politics; modification to the campaign financing mechanisms, that need be passed. To make the amendment workable Colombian jurists believe that both the Penal and the Disciplinary Codes and the Regime of Incompatibilities must also be reformed. Ergo, due to time constraints, Uribe’s chances are slim.

Then one has to observe the swelling movement building around Bogota’s leftist Mayor Lucho Garz????n, who, gossip has it, it’s the favourite in Caracas and Havana, and without a doubt has signed already in ‘Mision la Nueva Gran Colombia’ and -as Evo Morales, the Ortegas, the Humalas, Lopez Obrador and the duet Gutierrez/Bucaram- is likely to benefit from Venezuelan petrodollars and expert chavista advice on how to bring about ‘democratic revolutions’ successfully.

The FARC, ensconced for a while, have reemerged of late to make Uribe’s Patriot Plan look like a failure. Reinvigorated, after much needed rest and pampering in Venezuelan soil, the narcoterrorists have recently engaged in fierce battles with Colombia’s army which has added yet more casualties to the very long list of victims in their war against the state. Raul Reyes, spokesman of the narcoterrorist group, should have been very upset when he wrote recently that FARC’s archenemy Alvaro Uribe “…pretends to perpetuate himself in power…” Similar perpetuating wishes of camarada Hugo Chavez and the 46 years that the Cuban tyrant and idelogical guru of the FARC has in power, are, of course, no matter for concern.

The US hegemony and clout in the region are on an increasingly weak footing. The fact that the big South American players -Brazil and Mexico- are either governed, or to be governed, by friends of Castro/Chavez poses a huge challenge to the US administration, which needs be said, does not seem to count with the brightest of diplomats and strategists in its foreign service. The question of throwing its weight behind Alvaro Uribe can and will make the difference between a region gearing towards prosperity, democracy and the reestablishment of the rule of law or a continent plagued with revolutions a la Bolivarian. The consequences of having upwards of 500 million people ruled by deranged leaders will be dire for the US, whether it wants to realize the gravity of the situation or continues with the policy of appeasement and leniency. For the vast majority of Latinos willing to emigrate will find their way north. Thus the US administration should act now or prepare for an ever growing invasion.

From South Africa to Nigeria, leaders from all around Africa are saying “no” to pressure on Zimbabwe’s Mugabe for his eviction of hundreds of thousands. The African Union itself has said, “If it is in the interests of the Zimbabwean government to prevent crime or improve sanitation or ensure the health of the people or ensure Harare is not turning into another slum, I do not see how the AU should take over the internal legislation of the government.” You may be thinking, “Slum? You mean the one Mugabe created himself? Are these people ignorant?” But obviously, they are not. The BBC nails it dead on:

Foreign ministers from the G8 grouping of the world’s richest and most powerful countries have called on other African leaders to denounce the forced evictions which are causing so much suffering in Zimbabwe.

Yet many of those other African governments have overseen similar brutal evictions in their own countries, and yet have suffered very little outside criticism.

The sad truth is that what is going on in Zimbabwe at the moment is not at all unusual.

From one end of Africa to the other, governments have set about slum clearance schemes without any consideration for the people who live there, or any sense of responsibility for what happens to them afterwards.

Read the whole article. It’s sad, but true.

The world could be coming to an end as we know it, but I’m enjoying a family BBQ. More blogging tomorrow, and I’m putting together a bunch of posts so that I’ll have something on the site while I’m in Boston on Monday.

Meanwhile, definitely keep tabs on Regime Change Iran.

It’s jackass season in Washington and with it comes threats from Congress to harass China over its trade gap. Larry Kudlow outlines the incredible progress China has made since 1978 - 1978! - and warns that the U.S. has got to stop hectoring China for doing all the right things. China’s stable currency, its trade of goods with us, its lifting of its poor into the middle class are all things that need to be encouraged, not screamed at in U.S. Congress. Because trust me, China is capable of much worse than the ‘crime’ of trade. Larry Kudlow makes a fine argument about the need to encourage, not growl at, China’s growing economic revolution here.