Ecuador Under Lenin Moreno: an Interview With Andres Arauz — Joe Emersberger interview Andres Arauz

Backgrounder. Not looking good.

Detailed and nuanced report. Maybe more than you want to know. Cutting to the chase, a lot of backroom deals.

Looking at it structurally, our political project, the historic coalition that led to the Constitution of Montecristi [ratified by Ecuadorean voters in 2008] was gradually weakened over time by internal attrition. Contradictions were generated that made it difficult to keep the whole coalition together. During Rafael Correa’s last term in office the contradictions were visible, but Correa was the synthesis of that historic coalition that included the political movement [Alianza Pais], social organizations and other forces. The moment Correa left the scene a kind of vacuum of power was created. It has happened in many historic periods when strong leadership disappears through death or by succession. Disputes arise – some ideological and some not ideological – as we have seen. In my opinion, it was a huge mistake not to continue with Correa’s leadership. It was a mistake to believe the institutions would hold up; unfortunately our democracies are still too immature. In fact, throughout Latin America, the conditions under which progressive projects have developed have made it very difficult to sustain revolutionary changes. So that is the structural reading.…

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
Counterpunch
Ecuador Under Lenin Moreno: an Interview With Andres Arauz

Joe Emersberger interview Andres Arauz, formerly Deputy Secretary for Planning and Development and the Coordinating Minister of Knowledge and Human Talent in the Correa government

See also

Peru has in place the full set of democratic mechanisms: a constitution, opposition parties, regular elections, a presidential term limit, safeguards for the independence of the judiciary, and a free press. In the 1990s, Peru was run, in the name of President Alberto Fujimori, by its secret-police chief, Vladimiro Montesinos Torres. In the course of exercising power, Montesinos methodically bribed judges, politicians, and the news media. Montesinos kept meticulous records of his transactions. He required those he bribed to sign con- tracts detailing their obligations to him. He demanded written receipts for the bribes. Strikingly, he had his illicit negotiations videotaped.

In what follows, we use Montesinos’s bribe receipts and videotapes to study the breakdown of checks and balances. Montesinos and Fujimori maintained the facade of democracy—the citizens voted, judges decided, the media reported— but they drained its substance. We discuss how they went about undermining democ- racy: the negotiation and enforcement of the secret deals, the workings of covert authoritarianism....

Journal of Economic Perspectives
How to Subvert Democracy: Montesinos in Peru
John McMillan and Pablo Zoido