Latin American Publications!

122 readers
19 users here now

A community for Latin American publications.

NOTE: All the publications in this feed are Latin American in origin; that does not mean they only report on Latin American news.

founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
501
 
 

This article by Arturo Sánchez Jiménez originally appeared in the February 28, 2026 edition of La Jornada, Mexico’s premier left wing daily newspaper.

Recalling Mexico’s tradition of respect for international law, multilateralism, and the defense of the self-determination of peoples, the ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Iran to Mexico, Abolfazl Pasandideh, stated this Saturday that his government expects Mexico to condemn the bombings launched against his country by the United States and Israel.

In a press conference held at his official residence, the diplomat maintained that the attack constitutes “an act of aggression” that, he said, must be condemned in accordance with the principles of the Mexican Constitution and international law. “Mexico’s foreign policy is based on multilateralism, the defense of international law, and respect for the independence of nations. Under these principles, this aggressive attack must be condemned,” he stated.

Pasandideh recalled that Iran and Mexico have maintained friendly relations since 1902 and emphasized that his country “loves Mexico and the Mexican nation very much.” He noted that, in his eight months in Mexico, he has witnessed the Mexican people’s appreciation for sovereignty. “We hope that, given this historical perspective, the Mexican government will condemn this situation,” he insisted.

The ambassador confirmed that the Iranian Supreme Leader is alive and refuted US President Donald Trump’s claims of his death. “An official announcement was made half an hour ago: the Supreme Leader is well, safe, and managing the response to these attacks,” he stated. He added that statements to the contrary “are unsubstantiated claims.”

Regarding the victims, he indicated that so far 106 female students have been confirmed dead after the bomb struck a girls’ school with nearly 200 students. He added that preliminary information indicates around 200 deaths in 24 regions of Iran and 747 injuries. “They are civilians, ordinary people,” he maintained, rejecting the notion that the bombings were directed exclusively at military targets.

Pasandideh maintained that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful and has been monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency, which, he said, has issued 15 reports to that effect. He asserted that the accusations against him are “an excuse” and that his country has provided “numerous guarantees” and even offered to limit uranium enrichment.

“Iran has over 5,000 years of history and independence. It is a nation that has endured and knows how to defend itself,” he emphasized. He maintained that his country does not seek war, but will not accept aggression.

He added that the embassy will continue to disseminate updates on the situation through its social media channels.

  • Iranian Ambassador Asks Mexico to Condemn US & Israeli’s Illegal Attacks

    News Briefs

    Iranian Ambassador Asks Mexico to Condemn US & Israeli’s Illegal Attacks

    February 28, 2026February 28, 2026

    The Ambassador confirmed 106 young children were confirmed murdered after the US & Israel regimes bombed a girl’s school.

  • Clicks February 28

    News Briefs

    Clicks February 28

    February 28, 2026February 28, 2026

    Our weekly roundup of stories in the English and Spanish language press including El Mencho and US imperialism, World Cup of Gentrification, field workers fight for justice, migrant farmworkers lawsuit, and Mexico misses out on Chinese EVs.

  • Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    Analysis

    Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    February 27, 2026February 27, 2026

    The yet-to-be-disclosed 200 mining concessions voluntarily returned to the Mexican state represent less than 1% of the 22,000 currently active, while questions remain about the government’s new strategy.

The post Iranian Ambassador Asks Mexico to Condemn US & Israeli’s Illegal Attacks appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.


From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.

502
 
 

By Manolo De Los Santos  –  Feb 26, 2026

Since the triumph of the Revolution, Cuban authorities have documented approximately 5,780 separate terrorist acts directed against their country.

On the morning of February 25, 2026, Cuban authorities thwarted yet another terrorist attack one mile off the country’s northern coast. When it was over, four men lay dead, six more were wounded and in Cuban custody, and a high-speed boat registered in Florida (FL7726SH) sat disabled, its deck littered with assault rifles, handguns, Molotov cocktails, and bulletproof vests.

The attack has brought to the fore a discussion of the long and often forgotten history of terrorist attacks that Cuba has faced in the 66 years since its revolution and what actors, state and otherwise, have been behind them.

The attackEarly on February 25, an unidentified and unannounced speed boat entered Cuban waters. When the Cuban Coast Guard approached it to identify the vessel, the boat’s crew opened fire without warning. The assailants, armed with assault rifles and Molotov cocktails, wounded the Cuban patrol commander before the guards returned fire in self-defense.

Reports from Miami-based journalists have confirmed that this was not a journey to rescue Cuban migrants as some are attempting to say but, in fact, an organized, armed expedition to engage in violent actions on Cuban soil.

On shore, Cuban authorities arrested Duniel Hernández Santos, an operative who had recently arrived from the United States to welcome the infiltration team.

The US government has not yet made an official comment condemning the attack on Cuba’s sovereignty and Secretary of State Marco Rubio has stated that the US will conduct its own independent investigation.

The events of February 25, 2026, however, represent far more than an isolated incident of maritime violence. Terrorist attacks against Cuba, in many historic cases directly sponsored by the United States, have been a central component of the sustained campaign waged by Washington against the Cuban people for more than six decades. Such attacks and others like it are the logical outcome and intended consequences of the Trump administration’s escalation of a state of war and a fuel blockade deliberately crafted to make the Cuban people suffer, destabilize a sovereign nation, and undermine its government.

The geography of this ongoing conflict is particularly telling, as the state of Florida has for decades functioned as a launching pad for paramilitary groups that have operated with varying degrees of official tolerance from US authorities. According to the preliminary investigation by Cuba’s Ministry of the Interior, many of the individuals involved in the attack, such as Amijail Sánchez González and Leordan Enrique Cruz Gómez, were already known to authorities for their involvement in illegal and terrorist activities. This suggests another troubling reality: the United States continues to allow its territory to be used as a staging ground for planning and executing armed attacks against a neighboring country.

This violence at sea represents the paramilitary manifestation of a broader campaign of economic warfare and terror waged through more sophisticated means by the US naval armada in the Caribbean, yet both approaches share the identical objective of bringing about the collapse of the Cuban state through sustained pressure and destabilization.

CARICOM Urges Collective Action To Support Cuba Amid US Pressure

The war on CubaSince the triumph of the Cuban Revolution in 1959, Cuban authorities have documented approximately 5,780 separate terrorist acts directed against their country. These statistics represent far more than mere numbers on a page. These attacks cut short the lives of 3,478 and left thousands more with permanent disabilities. The methods employed throughout this long history have certainly varied according to the circumstances and capabilities available at different periods, but the underlying cruelty has remained remarkably consistent across the decades.

Among the most devastating tactics employed was biological warfare, exemplified by the 1981 dengue fever epidemic that claimed the lives of 101 children, primarily infants and young children. The sabotage campaigns orchestrated against the island were equally destructive, with declassified documents revealing that during a single six-month period in the 1960s, the CIA successfully smuggled approximately 75 tons of explosives onto the island with the specific purpose of destroying factories, plantations, transportation infrastructure, and other facilities essential to the nation’s economic survival and development.

Perhaps most horrific of all was the 1976 bombing of Cubana Flight 455, which resulted in the deaths of all 73 people aboard, including the teenage members of Cuba’s fencing team, and stands as one of the earliest acts of aviation terrorism ever perpetrated in the Western Hemisphere. The masterminds behind this atrocity, Luis Posada Carriles and Orlando Bosch, subsequently lived out their remaining years freely in Miami, with their unbothered existence sending a clear and unmistakable message from the US government that individuals who direct terrorist violence against Cuba will find safe haven and protection within Florida’s borders.

The armed incursions conducted by groups such as Alpha 66 and others based in the United States constitute the overt and violent edge of a US government policy whose foundations were explicitly laid out in the infamous 1960 Mallory memorandum. That document candidly called for bringing about hunger, desperation, violence, and ultimately the overthrow of the Cuban government through systematically denying the nation access to money and essential supplies. The US economic blockade, maintained for decades with increasing severity and through financial strangulation, has resulted in scarcity of food, essential medicines, and fuel necessary for basic functioning. The designation of Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism, most recently reaffirmed in 2025 by Trump, has prevented the country from engaging in normal financial transactions and international trade that are essential for any nation’s survival and development. The support, whether direct or through implicit tolerance, of paramilitary groups contributes to physical destabilization that results in continued loss of life and destruction of infrastructure vital to the Cuban people’s ability to survive.

There exists a profound and bitter irony in the US government’s 2025 decision to once again designate Cuba as a state sponsor of terrorism. Throughout the entire sixty-six-year period during which Washington has applied this and other labels to Cuba, it has actually been Cuba that has consistently been the victim of a sustained terror campaign organized, funded, and systematically ignored by successive American administrations.

The violent confrontation off the coast of Cuba on February 25, 2026 was not an accident or a coincidence, but the direct and foreseeable consequence of the refusal of US officials to accept the reality of Cuban sovereignty and the right of the Cuban people to determine their own destiny without external interference or manipulation. In responding to this terrorist attack, Cuba acts in full accordance with international law, specifically Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, which guarantees “the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a member state.”

Ultimately, Marco Rubio and the US government must answer ​​why a group of terrorists residing in the United States conspired to orchestrate acts of terror against the Cuban people, utilizing weapons purchased in the United States and operating a boat departing from a Florida port. As long as Washington continues to treat Florida as a permissible base for operations aimed at regime change in Havana, and as long as it continues to weaponize its financial system to economically strangle the island, this cycle of violence will inevitably continue, claiming lives and perpetuating the suffering of the Cuban people.

As the Trump administration presses forward with the sixty-six-year war against Cuba, inducing famine through a cruel fuel blockade and permitting terrorist attacks from its soil, the Cuban people refuse to break. They continue to weather the storm, standing tall against an empire that has failed, for over six decades, to bend them to its will.

(Peoples Dispatch)


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

503
 
 

By Caitlin Johnstone  –  Feb 24, 2026

In a post-Iraq invasion world, these sorts of reports deserve nothing but a scoff and a dismissal.

Reading by Tim Foley:

They’re not even trying anymore.

US middle east envoy Steve Witkoff told Fox News on Saturday that Iran is “probably a week away” from having the materials necessary to make a nuclear bomb — a line that Iran hawks have been falsely repeating for over three decades.

It’s such a transparently bogus claim that even The Jerusalem Post dunked on Witkoff for making it, quipping that “The US envoy left out that Iran currently has no access to its material, no machines to enrich it, and no weapons program to use it for any operational purpose.”

This is the guy supposedly assigned by the White House to the task of establishing peace in the middle east, churning out the most fuzzbrained justifications for war with Iran you could possibly imagine.

The New York Post has an article going viral right now with the flamboyantly propagandistic headline “Iranian forces hack out wombs of female protesters to hide horrific sexual abuse,” which would sound absurd at a glance even you didn’t know anything about atrocity propaganda. Like they said “Let’s mutilate these women’s reproductive organs so that nobody thinks we horrifically abused them!” How does that even make sense?

The article is of course based on no evidence whatsoever, citing nothing but a NewsNation report full of anonymously sourced assertions. The central claim of the New York Post headline is attributed solely to “An Iranian refugee who spoke to NewsNation under a condition of anonymity.”

Can the US Use This Ethnic Conflict To Break Iran From Within?

In a post-Iraq invasion world, these sorts of reports deserve nothing but a scoff and a dismissal. After all the lies we’ve been told about every US war of aggression over the years, any claims made about a government that Washington wants to topple need to be flatly rejected unless they are backed by rock-solid, independently verifiable proof. That proof never arrives. US wars are always justified by lies, psyops, and misinformation.

But these aren’t the usual caliber of lies. We normally get better-quality war propaganda than this. This slop is designed to appeal to the dumbest people in the dumbest parts of the United States, and to people who already want to go to war with Iran.

Consent for the Iraq invasion was manufactured by many months of high-energy media saturation designed to harness the power of post-9/11 hysteria about the possibility of foreign attacks on American soil. This is just a few propaganda rags and government officials farting into a microphone and calling us idiots.

And yet the war machinery is rolling out anyway. They’re preparing to unleash a horrific war of immense consequence which Americans overwhelmingly oppose, and they don’t even have the decency to tell believable lies about it.

It can’t say good things about the future that they’re not even pretending to care what the American people want anymore. The US empire is getting more and more bold about exposing its true tyrannical nature, feeling less and less need to manufacture consent before engaging in mass military slaughter.

I guess we can still have hope that this will help open some eyes to the dire need for revolution in the heart of the empire.

(Caitlin Johnstone)


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

504
 
 

By William Serafino  –  Feb 25, 2026

Far from the image of total control, coherent, linear, and practically seamless action that an intense, visibly coordinated propaganda effort is trying to portray for Donald Trump’s management of the relationship with the Venezuelan government led by Delcy Rodríguez, the post-military intervention bilateral scenario is proving to be much more complex and intricate for the US president than is often stated.

In this context, the ocean of difference with which the pronouncements of Trump and Rodríguez are usually evaluated serves as empirical evidence of an attempt to delineate the approach to a critical and unprecedented juncture in favor of US interests, with the aim of imposing narratives instead of analyzing realities.

Thus, while whatever the US president says is taken as an undeniable fact, the explanations offered by the acting president of Venezuela regarding this atypical moment are relativized and minimized. The aim is to extend the White House’s narrative control over the situation as much as possible two months after the fateful military aggression.

The instrumental logic of praise
Although Trump’s continuous praise of Rodríguez has prompted various interpretations, almost no one doubts its use as an openly instrumental resource with multiple objectives. Among these, to portray the Venezuelan government as a docile and subordinate entity, introducing tension and fabricated suspicions within the country’s political high command.

However, this declarative calculation does not end there, as Trump is also strongly conditioned by significant perturbance in the US political scenario after January 3. A few days after the bombs of Operation Absolute Resolve fell on Caracas and other cities, 70 Democratic Congressmembers questioned the US president for dismissing “the pro-democratic leadership of the legitimate elected president, Edmundo González, and the opposition leader, Nobel Peace Prize winner María Corina Machado.”

The Democratic Party’s selective alignment with Machado has forced Trump to trench himself in. In a context where he is on the defensive, losing consecutive battles in the tariff and immigration fields, with the Supreme Court ruling against his global trade war agenda and ICE withdrawing from Minnesota, all while Republican voting intentions continue to fall worryingly ahead of this year’s midterms, Trump cannot afford to give in and show weakness to the Democratic Party.

In this situation, Trump’s praise for Rodríguez is his way of domestically defending his risky military adventure and the projected economic-energy benefits that are yet to materialize.

In Trump’s own party, the situation is not optimal. Although many legislators are careful not to challenge him publicly, Republican representatives and senators are concerned that this praise will strengthen Venezuela’s acting president politically and economically. Due to this, they are questioning the lack of clarity regarding how oil sales are conducted.

Particularly, the “Crazy Cubans” of Florida sense the electoral cost of Trump’s praise of Rodríguez. If this behavioral trend continues, the Latino vote could continue to drift away from the Republican Party in a context where the relationship between that sector and the party suffers extreme tension due to ICE’s punitive approach and the worsening economic situation.

This fear is grounded in reality. In November 2025, in Miami-Dade, a microcosm of Florida’s complex demographic diversity, Democratic candidate Eileen Higgins won the mayoralty after nearly three decades of exclusive Republican dominance. She achieved it with a 20-point margin in the same county where Trump won the 2024 presidential elections with 55% of the votes.

These internal dynamics not only shed light on the underlying, internal reasons for Trump’s instrumentally friendly tone but also underscore the strategic dilemma he faces: not yielding to the Democrats fosters nervousness and distrust within his own camp, with potential electoral dangers in a place like Florida. Due to its district configuration and objective weight within the Republican universe, Florida will be crucial for absorbing and stabilizing losses in blue states during the midterms. The peninsula is the last frontier that could protect Trumpism from a predicted historic defeat.

Oil and gasoline
According to a recent article by the Venezuelan outlet Banca y Negocios, which reported current data from the US Energy Information Administration (EIA), “Venezuelan oil exports to the United States experienced a sharp decline during the second week of February, totaling 49,000 barrels per day, a 68% drop compared to the previous period.”

The report highlights that, “with this level of exports by Venezuela, it falls to ninth place among the crude oil suppliers to the United States in the second week of February.” In the first six weeks of 2026, it had exported “107,300 bpd, a figure that is 60% below what was recorded in the same period of 2025, when a license granted to Chevron was in effect. The characteristics of the license were changed in July of last year.”

Amid the growing threats of a new US attack on Iran, international oil prices have settled at $66 for WTI and above $70 for Brent, rates that are well above the $50 threshold that Trump projected as a strategic interest following the aggression against Venezuela.

According to Bloomberg energy analyst Javier Blas, Washington is irresponsibly underestimating a probable Iranian response to a broad-scale US military campaign in the crucial Strait of Hormuz. Cutting this key trade artery for the global crude market would precipitously raise prices, with destructive consequences for the overheated US economy.

Venezuela: ‘For Now’ (Por Ahora)

In the US, the price of gasoline has begun to rise by several cents. This rise undermines what, until a few weeks ago, was a highly publicized achievement by Trump: keeping the price below $3.

A comprehensive reading of this data expands the passages of Trump’s labyrinth into the energy sphere. Not only is the promise of a colossal investment boom by US companies not materializing, but the coercive architecture of commercial arbitration established through specific OFAC licenses has not increased Venezuelan crude oil imports to the US, thus not providing a tailwind to keep US domestic fuel prices in check.

It is becoming evident that the oligopolistic and bureaucratic strategy of US commercial control over Venezuelan oil sales has made it impossible for Venezuelan oil to be properly integrated into global supply chains. This is hindering contractual dynamics, generating regulatory costs, and increasing volatility in terms of prices and profitability.

The big problem for Trump is that he seems to be moving further away from the triple objective that justified his violent military aggression (low global prices, greater supply, cheap gasoline), translating into growing pressure to begin lifting the punitive sanctions against Venezuela. This action, while helping to resolve current operational hurdles, would have detractors on both the Democratic and Republican sides, leaving him between a rock and a hard place. The defeat would not only be institutional (dismantling of sanctions) but also political (recognition of the Venezuelan government).

Andrés Oppenheimer, a perennial aspirant guru of the global right, added a new layer of complexity to the Trump scenario in a recent article. He explained: “The concern that the post-Maduro dictatorship will cling to power has grown in recent days when it was revealed that the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, the largest in the United States Navy, left the shores of Venezuela for Iran. The aircraft carrier was the trump card of the naval blockade on Venezuelan oil, which forced the regime to concede to some of Washington’s demands. Without such a massive military presence off the coast of Venezuela, will Trump’s threats of military action remain credible? They will probably be much less so.”

What Oppenheimer detected is not an individual’s concern but a cry where confusion, skepticism, and fear converge in sectors fully committed to regime change. They are beginning to see that Caracas might be managing the moment more intelligently than the White House, which is now facing the labyrinth of a country that has made adapting to complex situations a style of political exercise.

(Diario Red)

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/SC/SF


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

505
 
 

Venezuelan Foreign Minister Yván Gil met Chinese Ambassador Lan Hu to review the progress of bilateral relations and high-level cooperation between the two countries.

At the meeting on Friday, February 27, at the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry headquarters, the two diplomats reaffirmed the strength of the All-Weather Strategic Partnership that governs political and economic exchanges between Caracas and Beijing.

The conversation also addressed the diplomacy and friendship that characterizes the two countries and their willingness to continue working on mutually beneficial projects.

Venezuela’s Automotive Market Surges as New Car Sales Grow 120% in 2025, China Leads the Trend

Venezuela and China have maintained diplomatic relations since 1974. With the arrival of the Bolivarian Revolution, the ties between the two nations solidified as bonds of brotherhood and solidarity.

In 2023, the two countries signed 31 comprehensive cooperation agreements to strengthen their strategic alliance and facilitate joint development in economic, technological, and social areas, highlighting the solidity of bilateral relations.

(Últimas Noticias)

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/SC/SF


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

506
 
 

The integration bloc warns prolonged crisis could affect regional migration and security.

On Tuesday, leaders of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) called for collective action to support Cuba amid the crisis it faces due to the U.S. oil blockade.

“We must address the situation in Cuba with clarity and courage. Cuba is our Caribbean neighbor. Its doctors and teachers have served throughout our region. We must be clear that a prolonged crisis in Cuba will affect migration, security, and economic stability across the Caribbean region,” said Jamaican Prime Minister Andrew Holness stated.

His remarks came during CARICOM’s annual conference in Saint Kitts and Nevis, which will be attended by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday. During the opening ceremony of the meeting, the Jamaican leader stressed that “it is important to consider this matter carefully and take collective action” regarding Cuba.

“Jamaica firmly supports democracy, human rights, political accountability, and an economy based on an open market. We do not believe that long-term stability can exist where economic freedom is restricted and political participation limited,” said Holness, who served as CARICOM president in 2025.

U.S. pressure, after Washington threatened tariffs on countries that supply oil to Havana, is progressively paralyzing the Cuban economy, which was already in a very precarious situation as a result of an economic blockade that has lasted 64 years.

“Jamaica supports constructive dialogue between Cuba and the U.S. aimed at de-escalation, reform and stability… The geopolitical environment is changing and CARICOM can play a constructive role, not as an ideological bloc, but as a community of democratic states offering cooperation, economic reform and social development,” Holness stated.

Venezuela Condemns Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister for Anti-Integrationist Rhetoric and Praise of US Aggression

CARICOM Chairman Terrance Drew called on states to join forces in “designing the necessary mechanisms to help the people of Cuba at this particular time,” saying the Caribbean community can provide assistance “directly and become a forum for conversation.”

“I studied in Cuba. I lived in Cuba for seven years. I have friends there. I have people who are like family to me. They reach out to me and tell me of their difficulties. Food has become terribly scarce for some. Access to water has been challenging. Garbage fills the streets. Houses are without electricity,” he said, as reported by The Guardian.

Currently, CARICOM members are Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, the Bahamas, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago.

(Telesur)


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

507
 
 

Israeli warplanes launched an act of aggression against Iran, with reports confirming multiple explosions across the country.

Israeli warplanes carried out an attack against Iran early Saturday morning in a significant act of aggression, with Israeli Security Minister Israel Katz framing the aggression as a so-called “pre-emptive strike.”

The strikes targeted areas in central Tehran and other areas.

According to Fars News Agency, new explosions were heard in northern and eastern parts of the capital, signaling a widening scope of the assault.

Can the US Use This Ethnic Conflict To Break Iran From Within?

Iranian media reported that missiles fell on Daneshgah Street and the Jomhouri area, raising concerns over civilian infrastructure in densely populated districts. According to Mehr News Agency, explosions were heard in Isfahan, Qom, Lorestan, Karaj, and Kermanshah.

Additionally, an Iranian official told Reuters that several ministries in southern Tehran were targeted.

Yedioth Ahronoth reported that so far, about 30 sites across Iran have been targeted, including the Iranian leader’s residence and the Revolutionary Guard’s intelligence headquarters.

Meanwhile, Israeli media announced the closure of Israeli airspace, suggesting anticipation of potential regional repercussions following the attack.

An Israeli security official said the aggression was coordinated with the United States, adding that the operation had been planned for months and that the date of the attack was decided weeks in advance.

(Al Mayadeen – English)


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

508
 
 

Our weekly roundup of stories in the English and Spanish language press on Mexico and Mexican politics.

Benjamin Fogel, Another Kingpin Falls, Nothing Changes Jacobin. The killing of El Mencho, Mexico’s most wanted drug lord, won’t slow the cartels, reduce violence, or stop the flow of drugs.

Carlos Acuña, Airbnb se acelera en CDMX rumbo al Mundial de Futbol Fábrica de Periodismo. Cada dos días, tres viviendas desaparecen del alquiler tradicional.

David Bacon, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and the San Quintín Justice Plan The Nation. Field workers’ highway blockades send a warning to Mexico’s president.

Rafael Ramírez, Campesinos y transportistas piden a FIFA no hacer el Mundial en México El Sol de México. Organizaciones agro y de transporte alertaron que las condiciones de violencia y la falta de mercado para granos básicos generan un escenario de incertidumbre que podría coincidir con el torneo.

Nicholas Keung, Migrant farm workers’ class-action suit against Canadian government certified Toronto Star. Canada’s SAWP allows agricultural employers to hire temporary foreign workers from Mexico and participating Caribbean countries for up to eight months a year. Between 30,000 and 40,000 seasonal migrants come to work in Canada via the program each year.

Fallo de la Corte de EU anularía bloqueo petrolero contra Cuba; Sheinbaum revisa retomar envío de crudo Educa Oaxaca. “La amenaza de los aranceles a México por el envío de petróleo fue basada en la Ieepa. Pero la Suprema Corte fue contundente al declarar que esa ley de poderes no autoriza al mandatario a imponer aranceles. Eso correspondería al Congreso” de Estados Unidos, explicó el abogado José Pertierra, quien durante más de cuatro décadas ha litigado asuntos de política hacia Cuba en tribunales estadunidenses.

Ieva Jusionyte, How the United States Arms the Mexican Cartels Rolling Stone. ATF agents who shared their experiences during interviews conducted by a congressional committee admitted they knew that the only way they would learn the whereabouts of the guns they let go would be when Mexican law enforcement recovered them at crime scenes.

Acerca de la violencia de la guerra contra el narco El Machete. El narcotráfico en México nació, creció y se desarrolló bajo el auspicio de los EEUU. Durante décadas las agencias de inteligencia estadounidenses, principalmente la CIA y la DEA, convivieron, negociaron, armaron y apoyaron a diferentes carteles de la droga en Colombia y México.

Ximena González, Whose stories matter? I Would Prefer Not To. A brief analysis of Canadian media’s coverage of Mexico’s cartel violence.

Pablo Monroy, México duda en aceptar fábricas de autos chinos Motorpasión México. Mientras tanto, otro país de Latinoamérica le está ganando la carrera: ya tiene 6 plantas y va por la 7.

  • Clicks February 28

    News Briefs

    Clicks February 28

    February 28, 2026February 28, 2026

    Our weekly roundup of stories in the English and Spanish language press including El Mencho and US imperialism, World Cup of Gentrification, field workers fight for justice, migrant farmworkers lawsuit, and Mexico misses out on Chinese EVs.

  • Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    Analysis

    Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    February 27, 2026February 27, 2026

    The yet-to-be-disclosed 200 mining concessions voluntarily returned to the Mexican state represent less than 1% of the 22,000 currently active, while questions remain about the government’s new strategy.

  • People’s Mañanera February 27

    Mañanera

    People’s Mañanera February 27

    February 27, 2026

    President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on electoral reform, labour poverty, 80% of weapons seized originate in US, Sinaloa homicide reduction, and addressing root causes of crime.

The post Clicks February 28 appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.


From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.

509
 
 

Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—Through his attorney Barry Pollack, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro has denounced the United States for violating his right to a legal defense by attempting to prevent the Venezuelan government from paying his law firm’s fees.

In a sworn statement dated February 18 and filed with a federal court in Manhattan, President Maduro clarified that, in accordance with the laws and practices of Venezuela, he has the right to have the government cover his legal costs. The document, signed by President Maduro, reaffirms that the Venezuelan government is prepared to fulfill this commitment.

“I have relied on this expectation and cannot afford my own legal defense,” the president stated, adding that he is willing to provide a sworn financial statement to demonstrate his inability to cover the fees of Pollack and his team.

Maybe it is the time for a crowdfunding! https://t.co/iSZEtSw3xd

— Orinoco Tribune (@OrinocoTribune) February 26, 2026

The president also reaffirmed his intention for the lawyer, who has represented him since January 4, to continue leading his defense on US soil. According to Pollack, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) denied a license this week to use Venezuelan government funds to cover the legal costs for the defense of the Venezuelan president. President Maduro was kidnapped on January 3 in Caracas following a US military bombing resulting in the killing of over 100 people.

The lawyer informed Judge Alvin Hellerstein that OFAC is interfering with President Maduro’s right to a defense, established in the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution, and his right to due process under the Fifth Amendment. “Mr. Maduro, as Venezuela’s head of state, has both a right and an expectation to have legal fees associated with these charges funded by the government of Venezuela,” Pollack said.

Evidence of legal obligations
The defense team for President Maduro presented several pieces of evidence to the court:

• Evidence A: A statement from Henry Rodríguez Facchinetti, head of litigation at the Attorney General’s Office of Venezuela. He confirmed the state’s legal obligation to cover the president’s defense expenses and noted that the proposed funds are unrelated to any alleged illegal activities.
• Evidence B: A sworn statement signed by President Nicolás Maduro himself, claiming he trusted the Venezuelan government to cover his legal fees.
• Evidence C: A sworn statement from Pollack explaining that on January 7, he requested an OFAC license to receive government funds. While OFAC initially issued a license on January 9, it was amended three hours later to permit payments only from the personal funds of the defendant or joint funds with his wife, Deputy Cilia Flores, who was also kidnapped by the US government.
• Evidence D: A statement from Timothy O’Toole, a Treasury Department sanctions expert, noting that OFAC normally allows third parties to pay for the legal defense of sanctioned individuals.

Chavismo demands the release of Cilia Flores and Nicolás Maduro
On Friday, during a demonstration commemorating the 37th anniversary of the Caracazo on February 27, 1989, Venezuelans demanded the release of Deputy Cilia Flores and President Nicolás Maduro.

United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) Deputy Pedro Infante used his speech to send greetings to the president, asserting that “Nicolás Maduro is a son of February 27” and was kidnapped by the empire.

US Empire Obstructs Venezuela’s Payments for President Nicolás Maduro’s Legal Defense

“We must also use this platform to send greetings to President Nicolás Maduro and, from here, demand the release of the first lady, Cilia Flores, and the president. Nicolás Maduro is also a child of February 27th,” he said.

Infante reaffirmed the people’s support for Acting President Delcy Rodríguez, who has led Venezuela with bravery, courage, and intelligence during “these difficult times.”

Special for Orinoco Tribune by staff

OT/JRE/SF


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

510
 
 

Caracas (OrinocoTribune.com)—On Thursday, Venezuelan Acting President Delcy Rodríguez urged her US counterpart, Donald Trump, to end the sanctions and blockade imposed by Washington on Venezuela. The day before, the US president described Caracas as “a friend and partner” of Washington.

“Yesterday, he said he was a friend and partner of Venezuela, and I celebrate and welcome that concept for Venezuela… I hope, and it is the feeling of Venezuelans, that as friends, the blockade and sanctions against Venezuela cease. Our young people have the right to reclaim their aspirations. Our workers have the right to fair wages and incomes for themselves and for their families,” the Chavista leader said at a meeting with young people at the Teresa Carreño Theater in Caracas.

(VIDEO) Delcy Rodríguez envía mensaje a Donald Trump: "Ayer dijo que era amigo y socio de Venezuela, y yo celebro y saludo ese concepto que se tenga de Venezuela (…) yo espero y es el sentir de los venezolanos, que como amigos que somos, cese el bloqueo y las sanciones contra… pic.twitter.com/GhNahY12yy

— Luigino Bracci Roa (@lubrio) February 26, 2026

Rodríguez commented on the US ruler’s comments the previous day regarding the current state of bilateral relations, in which he labeled Venezuela as “friend and partner.” Despite these comments, on January 3, he ordered the bombing of Venezuela and the kidnapping of Deputy Cilia Flores and President Nicolás Maduro. Over 100 people were murdered in the atrocious US military operation.

“I welcome and applaud this perception of Venezuela, because Venezuela has never been an enemy of the US. Venezuela has never been a country that threatens the US or any other country in the world. Venezuela has always had a policy and a geopolitical vision of friendship and cooperation,” she added.

She recalled that the two countries got off to a very bad beginning of the year on January 3, blaming the attack on the massive campaign of lies by transnational media corporations and demands for US aggression by far-right sectors of Venezuelan politics based on falsehoods.

“President Trump: as friends and partners, as we are opening a new agenda of cooperation with the US. [We ask] for an end to the sanctions and the blockade against our homeland, because that blockade is also against Venezuelan youth, and Venezuelan youth are now demanding an end to the sanctions and the blockade against Venezuela,” she added.

University education for Venezuelans abroad
Alongside Education Minister Héctor Rodríguez during the event, Delcy Rodríguez announced that all young Venezuelans outside of Venezuela can pursue university degrees remotely.

Venezuela: ‘For Now’ (Por Ahora)

Online university access will be widely recognized and valued by young Venezuelans living abroad. “Those who live abroad can and do have access to educational programs via teleconferencing, so they do not lose touch with their country,” she emphasized.

Minister Rodríguez reported that all students who wish to return to the country are guaranteed places in the national education system so that they can reintegrate without problems. She reiterated that education in Venezuela is free of charge and includes support networks to provide financial support for productive projects.

Special for Orinoco Tribune by staff

OT/JRE/SF


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

511
 
 

The National Assembly of Venezuela appointed human rights lawyer Larry Devoe as acting attorney general and former Attorney General Tarek William Saab as acting ombudsperson.

Following the resignations of Tarek William Saab as attorney general and Alfredo Ruiz as ombudsperson, National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez stated that according to constitutional procedure, the parliament must form a nominations committee and, in the meantime, interim officials would be appointed for the two positions.

After the conclusion of the regular session on Wednesday, February 25, the National Assembly swore in Devoe and Saab.

First, the president of the National Assembly, Jorge Rodríguez, swore in lawyer Larry Devoe as acting attorney general, who stated: “I swear to uphold the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Organic Law of the Public Ministry, and other laws related to the exercise of the function of the Public Ministry. I swear to work tirelessly to help consolidate a high-quality justice system for our people, a justice system that would leaves behind the discrimination that it historically inherited. For a justice system that would recognize and make evident the principle acknowledged in Article 26 of our Constitution, I swear accordingly.”

Subsequently, Tarek William Saab was sworn in, stating:

I swear, in the name of a Constitution that in its title 3 speaks of human rights, duties, and constitutional guarantees, that we coordinated as president of that commission in the Constituent Assembly, to draft together with the Popular Movement of this country and the National Movement of Human Rights, to once again rise to an important responsibility, which we assumed during an extremely difficult time in the years 2015, 2016, and a few months of the year 2017.

I swear that the role that we had to fulfill with dignity and honor while I was Attorney General of the Republic to maintain democratic coexistence and peace, confronting aggressions never before seen in the recent history of our country, where we could see how during the period that we took charge of the Public Ministry, we had to face foreign aggressions, assassination attempts, maritime incursions, mercenary-style operations like Operation Gideon, coup attempts like the one in April 2019, drone attack attempts on August 4, 2018, and so many other violent actions, and we were able to maintain and safeguard the peace of the republic.

Furthermore, I would like, citizen president, Jorge Rodríguez, to commend the work of the officials who have accompanied us during this time to create unprecedented programs in the history of the Public Ministry, programs for the care of children, women, the elderly, and the defense of animals, which I swear I will continue to carry out through the mandate of the Ombudsperson. I swear.

Attorney General and Ombudsperson of Venezuela Resign

Appointment of preliminary evaluation committee
During the regular session on Wednesday, the National Assembly (AN) approved the appointment of the Preliminary Evaluation Committee which will be responsible for initiating the process for the selection of the new attorney general and ombudsperson.

The committee will be chaired by Deputy Giuseppe Alessandrello, who will coordinate the work of this multidisciplinary team composed of parliamentarians from various political factions, to ensure compliance with legal deadlines.

The committee comprises of the following deputies: Rodbexa Poleo, Gloria Castillo, Willys Medina, Carlos Mogollón, Carolina García, Roy Daza, José Villarroel, Pablo Pérez, Bernabé Gutiérrez, Julio Hernández, Antonio Ecarri, and Luis Romero.

The immediate mission of this preliminary committee is to work for the formation of the Nominations Committee, which will be responsible for receiving, evaluating, and selecting the profiles of citizens aspiring to become the new attorney general and the new ombudsperson.

(Alba Ciudad)

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/SC/JRE


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

512
 
 

The US government declared on Wednesday, February 25, that it does not completely prohibit the resale of Venezuelan oil to Cuba, marking a shift in its stance toward the island, which is suffering from the tightening of the oil blockade imposed by the United States.

The US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), the agency responsible for the US unilateral coercive measures, published a statement on its website expressing its willingness to favorably consider license applications from entities wishing to resell Venezuelan oil to Cuba.

It stated that this is a measure of “support and solidarity with the Cuban people.”

The OFAC added that transactions must not under any circumstances benefit “individuals or companies linked to the military, intelligence services, or other Cuban government institutions.”

Venezuela had been the main supplier of crude oil and fuel to its political ally Cuba for more than 25 years through a bilateral agreement. However, since December 3, 2025, the US has imposed an oil blockade on Venezuela and since then has stolen all tankers carrying oil from Venezuela to Cuba. Mexico, which had become an alternative supplier, recently suspended shipments to Cuba under US threats. The last Mexican fuel shipment arrived in Havana in January, according to shipping data.

What Is the US Really Seeking in Cuba? Analyst José Ramón Cabañas Responds (Interview)

US President Donald Trump has threatened that Venezuela’s allies who received its oil as part of swaps, debt payments, and other agreements must now pay fair market prices for the shipments. These allies include China and Cuba.

The authorization comes after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio started his Caribbean tour on Wednesday to begin talks with leaders who have decried that the growing humanitarian crisis in Cuba could destabilize the region.

Even with the new policy, it is unclear if Cuba can afford to buy oil without favorable conditions. Given that Cuba has had difficulties paying for fuel imports on the spot market in recent years, any possible purchase from traders is expected to require regular commercial conditions, such as bank guarantees and cash payments.

(Diario VEA)

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/SC/JRE


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

513
 
 

The acting president of Venezuela, Delcy Rodríguez, held a high-level meeting with executives from the British oil company Shell, with the aim of strengthening projects in the national energy sector.

The meeting, held on Thursday, February 26, was attended by Adam Lowmass, regional vice president of Shell; the president of Global Gas, Cederic Cremers; Elias Nucette, vice president of Shell; and Alfredo Urdaneta, representative of Shell in Venezuela. Rodríguez was accompanied by the president of Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA), Héctor Obregón, along with the deputy ministers of oil, Paula Henao, and Gas, Luis González.

US Energy Secretary’s Venezuela Visit and OFAC Licenses: the Scenario Clears

The aim of Venezuela is to boost the reactivation of oil wells and the exploration of gas fields, attracting new international investments. Currently, the country possesses the largest proven crude oil reserves on the planet and is advancing in the process to certify itself as the fourth largest gas reserve in the world.

The incorporation of Shell into these projects is considered key to the economic agenda, given that the company operates in more than 70 countries in the oil and gas sector.

(Últimas Noticias)

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/SC/JRE


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

514
 
 

By Black Alliance for Peace Africa Team -Feb 26, 2026

The Black Alliance for Peace Africa Team and the U.S. Out of Africa Network stand in revolutionary solidarity with our Comrade Booker Ngesa Omole, Secretary General of the Communist Party Marxist Kenya (CPM-K), and we demand his immediate release, access to emergency medical care, and the immediate withdrawal of all fabricated charges against him.

As of this writing, we have learned that Comrade Booker Ngesa Omole was violently abducted and tortured on the evening of February 23rd and is being held at Mlolongo Police Station. He was scheduled to appear in court on February 26th, where the state intends to charge him with assault, a grotesque and cynical inversion of reality in which the victim of state torture is accused of being the aggressor. We are monitoring the outcome of that hearing and await further reporting from our comrades on the ground in Kenya.

Comrade Omole was beaten severely. He was tortured throughout the night. His tooth was broken. His finger was cut with a pen knife. He was brutalized to near death by officers of the Kenya Police Service. To charge him with assault is a continuation of the torture by other means. It is the state attempting to give its criminal violence the veneer of legality.

“We Will Fight in the Streets of Nairobi for Our Brothers and Sisters in Haiti”

The physical assaults and denial of medical care are crimes. The Kenyan state is known for its willingness to commit acts of brutality and we have no doubt that it is willing to let Comrade Omale die in custody from his injuries. The international community must act now to prevent another state murder disguised as “detention.”

Comrade Omole is being targeted because he is a leader of the organized working class. He was abducted, tortured, and now framed because he represents a threat to a neocolonial system that cannot tolerate revolutionary ideas. Because the Kenyan state, with the backing of its U.S. and European imperial masters, has decided that the price of resisting exploitation is state terror.

This is the same Kenyan state that has volunteered its police forces to serve as the Black face of white supremacy in the U.S.-led occupation of Haiti. This is the same state that receives millions in military and police aid from the U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) and the U.S. Department of State. The guns, the training, the ideology of repression, all of it flows from the empire to its local enforcers.

Free Booker Ngesa Omole Now!
Medical Care Now!
Drop the Bogus Charges!
U.S. Out of Africa! Shut Down AFRICOM!
No Compromise, No Retreat!

(The Black Alliance for Peace)


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

515
 
 

By María Páez Victor  –  Feb 25, 2026

“Nobody here gives up” (Hugo Chávez)

Venezuela defeated the Spanish Empire in the Americas. That is an essential part of its national identity. History is not a series of dates in this country but serves as an ideal and a consolation for present dangers.

On April 2, 1819, on the plains of Venezuela, 1,500 fully equipped and fed Imperial Spanish soldiers, led by notable generals, faced a patriotic “rag-tag” army of 153 Venezuelan llaneros led by General José Antonio Páez. Venezuela’s independence was on the line. When the llaneros saw they were outnumbered, they turned in a hasty retreat. Páez raced to face his troops and ordered (with a few impolite words included) “About Face!” They turned, the Spaniards panicked, and the Venezuelan forces won the battle spectacularly. They lost only 2 men, but the enemy lost 400, and the Independence of Venezuela was further advanced.

Venezuelans have had to relive this scenario again in recent years many times against another vile empire.

On Feb. 4, 1992, Lieutenant Hugo Chávez led a rebellion against the thoroughly corrupt and violent presidency of Carlos Andrés Pérez. The rebellion failed, and when Chávez surrendered before the TV cameras, he lamented that they had not achieved their objectives “for now,” (por ahora). These now famous words catapulted Chávez into Venezuelan political history. He was jailed, but all was not lost. After two years in prison, he went on to win the presidential election of December 1999 by a landslide, obliterating the ruling parties.

In 2002, the USA led, financed, and sheltered Venezuela’s anti-democratic, fascist opposition, which toppled and kidnapped President Hugo Chávez. As he and his ministers were surrounded in the Presidential Palace being threatened by bombs, Chávez managed to speak directly to Fidel, to whom he said they were ready to die. But Fidel urged quite forcefully: “Chávez, do not martyr yourselves! Do not die! To retreat is no shame. Live, live to fight another day!” Chávez then surrendered to avoid the bombing. All was not lost, however: in two days, the people and army rescued him just before he was to be executed, in a spectacular, never-before-seen popular reversal of a coup d’état, and the Bolivarian forces strengthened and thrived.  

In 2013, when President Hugo Chávez died of a strange cancer, the USA and its lackeys thought that would be the end of Chavismo. By law, elections had to be called within 30 days. The nation became flooded with US money and political lackeys steering the opposition’s campaign and voter intimidation. They thought the fall of the governing party was imminent without its leader. They were wrong. The Bolivarian Revolution did not depend on one man, not even its charismatic leader. Nicolás Maduro went on to win despite never having run a presidential campaign. Misjudged and underestimated, he went on to consolidate the governing party, the communal councils and communes, and the grassroots and worker organizations.

Since 2014, the USA launched the fiercest attack of any nation the Hemisphere has known. It imposed 1020 illegal economic sanctions, launched mercenary raids, cyber-attacks, sabotage, used criminal gangs, and all sorts of blackmail and corruption to try to weaken and topple President Maduro. Oil production and sales were impeded. To no avail. Bolivarianism became stronger with every attempt to weaken it. President Maduro was recognized by his people as their defender against the foreign enemies and traitors who were the ones causing such terrible economic and political woes. The economy suffered, people’s daily lives were severely affected, and some 100,000 citizens died because of the illegal sanctions that prevented access to food or medicines.

The West demonized President Maduro and his government and warned of Venezuela’s “imminent collapse.” But again, it did not happen because the Bolivarian Revolution meant that the people were ORGANIZED. They were not a mass of lone individuals. There were regular food package distributions; rural communes produced so much food that importing it was not necessary; it was the communes, government, and army working together, helping people. The economy was diversified and produced for the domestic market. The housing program built 5 million houses; schools and universities continued; and public health services never closed. Venezuela’s diplomacy reached out to the world outside the USA and its lackeys and there found genuine international solidarity and new markets. Venezuelans, despite the odds and the attacks, lived to fight another day, and its economy—even though heavily sanctioned—attained the highest GDP growth in the region (7.7% in 2025).

January 3, 2026, is “a day that will live in infamy” like the attack on Pearl Harbor, except that it is the USA that has perpetrated such barbarity: a most vicious attack on Venezuela, without a cause, without a declaration of war, without any justification legal or otherwise. A powerful army with nuclear capacity, with the most technologically advanced weapons in the world, bombed a nation at peace, which had never gone to war and did not have even a tenth of its military capacity. US forces massacred the presidential guard with unknown cyber weaponry, and in total killed 120 people. And violating all international laws and protocols, they kidnapped the head of state, the legitimate, elected president of Venezuela, and his wife, Congresswoman Cilia Flores.

This unprecedented, unwarranted violation of the sovereignty of a democratic country, of the human rights and political immunity of a head of state, the bombing of innocent people, is a heinous act, worthy only of the most criminally led governments. The US Navy can add piracy to the list of crimes, as its enormous and numerous warships prior to the bombing, assassinated 142 innocent people in small boats in the Caribbean and the Pacific without arrests, charges, evidence, or trial.

The USA will be held accountable for these war crimes, if not by law, certainly by history and in the collective memory of the region. There is no reason, no cause, no justification in any law that allows a foreign power to attack another sovereign country and remove its legitimate president—whether they liked or agreed with that president or not. In other words, the USA is an outlaw nation, a nation that exercises its military power through piracy, bombing, massacring, and trashing the sovereignty of a peaceful nation that poses absolutely no threat whatsoever to its security, so that it can steal its resources.

This is the political situation, which Trump and his factotum Marco Rubio, have enshrined in the most imperialistic, colonialist, dictatorial document in modern political history, comparable to Mein Kampf: an extended Monroe Doctrine. It asserts, gangster-like, that the USA actually owns the Western Hemisphere and all its resources, and its nations have to obey the wishes and interests of the USA – or else.

President Maduro showed his mettle when brought before a court in New York and asked to identify himself. He calmly and clearly stated his name and that he was the president of Venezuela and was a prisoner of war, kidnapped from his home by the US military. That court has no authority whatsoever to judge a prisoner of war, let alone a legitimate head of state of a foreign country. The initial charges had to be withdrawn as the Department of Justice had to admit, finally, that the drug cartel that President Maduro was supposed to be the leader of, in fact, has never existed. The trial has been postponed while the prosecutors scramble to invent other false accusations to make against him.

US Empire Obstructs Venezuela’s Payments for President Nicolás Maduro’s Legal Defense

However, the bombing and kidnapping in the end failed to achieve its main goal: to topple the Bolivarian government. Again, the USA thought that if the leader was eliminated, the Bolivarian government would collapse. It did not. There was no “regime change.” The Constitution was complied with in detail: Vice-president Delcy Rodríguez was immediately sworn in as interim president by both the National Assembly and the Supreme Court. The entire government cadre stayed in place. The Bolivarian Revolution proved it was not a façade but is deeply embedded in Venezuelan political life and culture.

Granted, Venezuelans have had to negotiate with a gun pointed at their heads and at the heads of their president and first lady. Moments after the president was kidnapped, the Executive Vice-President Delcy Rodríguez; Jorge Rodríguez, head of the National Assembly and her brother; and Diosdado Cabello, top director of the ruling party PSUV, were given 15 minutes to decide whether to cooperate or be killed and the country further bombed. They decided to live to fight another day.

To add insult to injury, Rubio boasted that he was a Catholic, and in a speech in Munich on February 13, 2026, he had the audacity to preach that the USA is a champion of the values of Christianity. Rubio was the architect of the bombing of the overwhelmingly Christian country that is Venezuela. This is truly tempting God.

Is the USA a pillar of Christian values, as Rubio states? It has been at war 232 out of 250 years since its beginning. In this century alone, it has invaded Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and continues to support the devastation of Gaza. It is estimated that 20 million people have lost their lives in US-led wars post-WWII. It has invaded and/or overthrown Latin American nations and their governments at least 90 times, has blockaded Cuba for more than 60 years, and without casus belli bombed Caracas without provocation, a capital city in our region with which it was not formally at war.

As to its own people, the USA has the highest prison population in the world; the highest inequality of all G7 nations by race, age, and class; 47.9 million people have no food security; there were 425 mass shootings last year alone; and during the Covid-19 pandemic 1.2 million died—by far the highest of any country in the world. According to The New York Times, a third of the workforce earns less than $12 an hour, and each night 200,000 sleep on the streets. Four million are evicted from their homes each year. Black and Latino families fare the worst of these dystopian social statistics. And Trump’s immigration goons, ICE, has recently forcefully detained up to 70,000 immigrants, 73% of whom have no criminal record. This is Rubio and Trump’s “diabolical theology.” If they were truly Christian, they would know that Jesus said clearly that we will be judged by how we treat “the least of these”: the poor, hungry, sick, and marginalized.

Government of the USA: read the sign on the wall: you will be found wanting.

“During the hardest hours of dawn on January 3rd, the first thing that I said as Executive Vice-President was that I was not going to betray President Nicolás Maduro, and secondly, I said that I will not betray the people of Venezuela.” (Delcy Rodríguez, 24 Feb. 2026)

For now, and for as long as necessary, Venezuela will live to fight another day.

MPV/OT


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

516
 
 

This article by Aleida Azamar Alonso originally appeared in the February 27, 2026 edition of Rebelión.

Over the past year, the mining sector in Mexico has shown growth in revenue and activity that contrasts sharply with the periods prior to 2024. This rebound can be largely explained by speculation surrounding precious and strategic metals in an international context marked by economic uncertainty, geopolitical tensions, and disputes over supply chains. However, it is also important to mention the approach of the new government, which seems to be seeking to maintain formal control over the mining concession regime while simultaneously maintaining channels of active dialogue with the industry. This strategy of regulatory discipline on the one hand and openness to economic dialogue on the other represents a different approach from that of former President Obrador, who opted for structural containment.

President Claudia Sheinbaum has insisted that mining legislation will not be modified, no new concessions will be granted, and no agreements will be sought that break with this approach. Meanwhile, Economy Secretary Marcelo Ebrard has led dialogues with both international actors and representatives of the national mining sector, particularly within the framework of the action plan on strategic minerals with the United States, as well as in talks aimed at streamlining procedures and strengthening Mexico’s position in value chains considered critical. This suggests a calculated shift toward regulatory firmness in rhetoric and strategic openness in practice, with all that this implies in terms of reconfiguring the state-business relationship, exposure to geopolitical pressures, and potential socio-environmental tensions in territories where strategic projects are concentrated. It appears that this is not a policy of confrontation with mining, but rather an attempt at “balance” between regulatory sovereignty and participation in a global market increasingly strained by speculative and political interests.

In this context, two events emerge that are far more significant than they appear: a) the voluntary return of over 200 mining concessions by private companies; b) the administrative recovery or cancellation of over 1,100 concessions for non-compliance with legal obligations. More important than the numbers themselves is that these developments reveal the balance of power and the state’s room for maneuver in relation to a historically influential sector.

Mexico’s government has not released any information on the names and locations of 200 returned mining concessions, meaning the government could simply be assuming the cost of environmental clean-up for mines that have had already had their wealth stripped.

The recovery and return of these concessions is significant, but it’s worth analyzing it in more detail to avoid exaggerating its true scope. Currently, there are around 22,000 active mining concessions in the country, so the 1,100 recovered represent approximately 5% of the total, while the 200 voluntarily returned amount to slightly less than 1%. Structurally speaking, this is a limited intervention within a still extensive concession market.

But the government’s interest in this case could stem from another source, as it is likely attempting to flex its muscles in the face of its foreign neighbour’s recent interest in the joint strategic minerals plan. Perhaps what is being done, in collaboration with the national mining sector, is to set an example that the State will act and enforce the law within its territory, regardless of who owns the project. This improves public opinion, projects the image of a government that will not relinquish territorial control, but also demonstrates a government that still seeks dialogue with the industry.

The question is whether Mexico’s mining reorganization will strengthen environmental and social oversight, or whether it will merely rearrange the extractive map under new geopolitical coordinates.

However, it remains to be seen whether these measures will establish a dynamic that truly ensures compliance with the rules governing this sector, greater transparency, and effective enforcement. This could signal a shift towards a more institutionalized relationship between the state and businesses. But if the return and recovery of concessions is limited to idle or low-impact projects, while strategic projects are consolidated under schemes similar to those of the past, then this will only serve to appease public opinion.

In this regard, the lack of detailed information is the main obstacle to assessing the full extent of the situation, as no disaggregated lists have been published that would allow for determining the exact location, the mineral involved, the holding company, or the compliance history of each affected concession. Nor is there an accessible system that allows for continuous monitoring of royalty payments, technical reports, or penalties.

The foregoing is very important because the relationship between the State and the mining sector is not merely an economic matter, but rather a power dynamic. It involves access to strategic resources, territorial control, foreign investment, employment, potential litigation, and, in the current context, geopolitical positioning. Given the imminent review of the USMCA and US pressure to secure supply chains for critical minerals, a regulatory decision of this magnitude can be seen as a reaffirmation of sovereignty, but also as a message of order and predictability to avoid uncertainty and ensure investment.

My interpretation is that a delicate balance is being struck between demonstrating regulatory firmness without causing a rupture, and at the same time maintaining the discourse of sovereignty without closing the door to strategic integration in North America; in other words, exercising authority without scaring away investment. It’s a fine game, which, if played well, could generate a flood of investment and projects, with the inherent risks and socio-environmental damage.

But we must not lose sight of the fact that what is truly relevant is not the number of concessions returned or canceled, but what these decisions foreshadow about the course the country will take in the coming years. We are facing a profound global geopolitical reconfiguration, where strategic resources will define new economic and political hierarchies. If the government does not exercise its authority consistently and transparently (not only in rhetoric, but in the effective application of the law), we will be at the mercy of the whims of third parties, whether corporations or other countries. The real debate is not how many concessions are canceled, but who decides the fate of the territory. Therefore, the question is whether this reorganization will strengthen environmental and social oversight, or whether it will merely rearrange the extractive map under new geopolitical coordinates.

Aleida Azamar Alonso is research Professor at the Autonomous Metropolitan University, Mexico and a member of the group Our Future, Our Energy.

  • Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    Analysis

    Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    February 27, 2026February 27, 2026

    The yet-to-be-disclosed 200 mining concessions voluntarily returned to the Mexican state represent less than 1% of the 22,000 currently active, while questions remain about the government’s new strategy.

  • A Raw Deal

    News Briefs

    A Raw Deal

    February 26, 2026

    Mining in Mexico has not led to economic development. Despite record wealth extraction, mining communities remain poor, and often poverty rates are far higher than the national average.

  • The Mining Minefield – Soberanía 95

    Soberanía

    The Mining Minefield – Soberanía 95

    February 11, 2026February 11, 2026

    The controversy surrounding the U.S.-Mexico critical minerals agreement, examining what it actually says, what it doesn’t, and why it has sparked widespread concern over national sovereignty and resource control.

The post Concessions, Concessions, Concessions appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.


From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.

517
 
 

Every day, President Claudia Sheinbaum gives a morning presidential press conference and Mexico Solidarity Media posts English language summaries, translated by Mexico Solidarity’s Pedro Gellert Frank. Previous press conference summaries are available here.

Electoral Reform: More Democracy and Faster Results

President Claudia Sheinbaum made it clear that proportional representation will not be eliminated with the new Electoral Reform. It remains in the Chamber of Deputies and in the Senate it will involve three seats per state including the largest minority party. The change democratizes the lists. The party leaderships will no longer decide the candidate lists; citizens will vote directly for the candidates.

Sheinbaum defended replacing the Preliminary Electoral Results Program (PREP) with digital counting from the start for faster official results with certainty.

Labour Poverty at Lowest Level

The National Statistical Institute (INEGI reported labour poverty at 33.9%, the lowest in many years. This indicator measures those unable to afford the basic basket with their income. The trend confirms that wage and well-being policies are delivering results.

Security with Intelligence and the Fight Against Arms Trafficking

The Mexican government reiterated that 80% of weapons seized in the country come from the United States. Ongoing investigations and permanent coordination with U.S. authorities seek to halt these illegal flows. Following the death of leading drug kingpin Nemesio Rubén Oseguera Cervantes, federal intelligence identified four potential candidates who might try to take control of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel.

Sinaloa Reduces Homicides and Advances Voluntary Weapons Exchange

The average number of daily homicides dropped from 6.9 in June 2025 to 3.42 in January 2026, a 50% reduction and 28% less than January last year. Following the surge from internal disputes in September 2024, the trend is now downward thanks to federal reinforcement coordinated with state governments.

From October 1, 2024, to February 26, 2026, some 1,219 weapons were exchanged in 20 municipalities; in El Fuerte alone, 208 weapons that were for the exclusive use by the army were turned in. Security with territorial presence and citizen participation.

Addressing Root Causes to Recover Youth Opportunities

The President said that in Michoacán and Sinaloa, the strategy is not only operational but social. It involves more higher secondary schools, education, and programs to pull youth away from crime. Sheinbaum acknowledged the coordination with Governor Rubén Rocha Moya to reduce insecurity.


  • Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    Analysis

    Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    February 27, 2026February 27, 2026

    The yet-to-be-disclosed 200 mining concessions voluntarily returned to the Mexican state represent less than 1% of the 22,000 currently active, while questions remain about the government’s new strategy.

  • People’s Mañanera February 27

    Mañanera

    People’s Mañanera February 27

    February 27, 2026

    President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on electoral reform, labour poverty, 80% of weapons seized originate in US, Sinaloa homicide reduction, and addressing root causes of crime.

  • Mexico’s Filthy Rich

    Analysis

    Mexico’s Filthy Rich

    February 27, 2026February 27, 2026

    Less than 8 pesos out of every 100 that the rich earn thanks to our collective effort returns to the economy in the form of investment. They are rentiers, clinging to their inherited fortunes, their connections to political & academic power & they extort the State when it threatens even the crumbs they refuse to give us.

The post People’s Mañanera February 27 appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.


From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.

518
 
 

This editorial by Fabrizio Mejía Madrid originally appeared in the February 27, 2026 edition of Sin Embargo. The views expressed in this article are the authors’* own and do not necessarily reflect those ofMexico Solidarity Mediaor theMexico Solidarity Project.*

When I was a child in the 1970s, it was said that Mexico was a country of “contrasts.” The PRI assumed that inequality in the country was almost a folkloric image, worthy of being sold to the National Fund for the Promotion of Arts (FONART) or for a photojournalism prize. Then, when neoliberalism began under Miguel de la Madrid, the idea took hold that the wealth of the rich would, sooner or later, trickle down to those at the bottom because, if there are millionaires, they’re bound to invest, right? Later, during the PRIAN era, with Vicente Fox, Calderón, and Peña Nieto, the idea they tried to sell us was that there were two Mexicos: one developed and globalized, and the other backward and struggling to survive. None of this is true. In reality, there aren’t parallel Mexicos, but rather one—the Mexico of all of us—that feeds, sustains, and even flatters the other, the Mexico of the billionaires, like Slim, Larrea, and Aramburuzabala.

An Oxfam report released just a few days ago provides terrifying data about Mexico’s disgustingly rich. One of the most shocking findings is that the private sector invests less than 8 pesos out of every 100 it owns back into the Mexican economy. The idea that having many billionaires is good because they reinvest is a complete lie. They invest nothing. They hoard, spend abroad, and sail yachts flying the Cayman Islands flag. I repeat: less than eight pesos out of every 100 that the rich earn thanks to our collective effort returns to the economy in the form of investment. They are rentiers, clinging to their inherited fortunes, their connections to political and academic power, and they extort the State when it threatens even the crumbs they refuse to give us.

Carlos Slim and Germán Larrea’s wealth is supported by 18.8 million working Mexicans who lack access to nutritious, quality food, 38.5 million with social deprivations or incomes below the poverty line, two million people who work without pay, and 21 million women who dedicate at least eight hours a day to unpaid care work.

The Oxfam report states: “The wealth of Mexican billionaires stems primarily from business activities in poorly regulated or under-regulated sectors, poor working conditions for most workers, women’s double or triple shifts due to unpaid care work, environmental degradation caused by their large corporations, and the fiscal irresponsibility of the wealthiest.” It points to a global phenomenon of wealth concentration, but in the Mexican case, this is largely explained by the cronyism and nepotism practiced by Salinas de Gortari, Zedillo, Fox, Calderón, and Peña Nieto.

“Mexican fortunes are closely tied to the privatizations of the 1980s and 1990s, as well as to concessions, licenses, and permits to exploit public assets in strategic, often poorly regulated, sectors. As concession holders, contractors, or owners, they control key infrastructure, granting them veto power over the national development model.” Another falsehood is that they are billionaires because they are more adept at exploiting the market. That’s a lie. The wealthiest people in Mexico have grown faster than the economy. While the country grows at one percent, their fortunes grow at almost nine percent annually. This means they are responsible for the country’s one percent annual growth rate, while their wealth grows at seven percent each year. They are the ones hindering the country’s growth. Inequality is what prevents our development, and if you invest less than eight pesos out of every 100 you earn, things aren’t going to improve. That’s why it’s outrageous that the PRIAN (PRI and PAN parties) criticize the one percent growth rate, attributing it, as it suits them, to the cancellation of the airport at Lake Texcoco or to the failure of the economic strategy, and never to the appalling inequality the country experiences with voracious billionaires, more concerned with amassing fortunes than with innovating, taking risks, or transforming, as they claim to do from their business chambers and their Communication Councils, the Voice of Business.

Let’s talk about our billionaires. In the last three decades, their number has increased from 15 to 22 individuals between 1996 and 2025. During that same period, their combined fortunes grew from $52.3 billion to $219 billion. This means that, in three decades—those of neoliberalism and the PRIAN (PRI and PAN alliance)—their fortunes grew by almost nine percent each year, quadrupling their wealth simply because they hardly invest, because their taxes were forgiven, and because they were given incentives to establish companies that don’t regulate labor or environmental conditions, like Larrea in Sonora. I repeat the chilling statistic: the wealth in the hands of Mexican billionaires multiplied 4.2 times in just three decades, with an average real annual growth rate of 8.8 percent. Meanwhile, the country only grew at one percent when things were going well.

Mexico’s wealthy pay no taxes on their inheritances or estates. Mexico’s wealthy pay no taxes on stock market transactions.

Thus, Oxfam explains, between 1996 and 2025, Carlos Slim’s wealth increased more than eightfold, and that of billionaires multiplied 4.2 times, while the Mexican economy didn’t even double in size during those same years. Therein lies the double harmful effect of neoliberalism: it doesn’t serve to create growth, only to concentrate wealth. It extracts wealth, it doesn’t generate it. The wealthiest one percent of the Mexican population—a mere 1.3 million people, not counting your PAN-supporting aunts on WhatsApp—receives 35 percent of the total income of the economy, owns 40 percent of the nation’s private wealth, and is responsible for 23 percent of the country’s polluting emissions. Slim and Larrea’s wealth is supported by 18.8 million working Mexicans who lack access to nutritious, quality food, 38.5 million with social deprivations or incomes below the poverty line, two million people who work without pay, and 21 million women who dedicate at least eight hours a day to unpaid care work. And speaking of pollution, the wealthiest one percent of Mexico pollutes as much as the poorest 74 percent of the population.

Let’s talk about our billionaires. In the last three decades, their number has increased from 15 to 22 individuals between 1996 and 2025. During that same period, their combined fortunes grew from $52.3 billion to $219 billion. This means that, in three decades—those of neoliberalism and the PRIAN (PRI and PAN alliance)—their fortunes grew by almost nine percent each year, quadrupling their wealth simply because they hardly invest, because their taxes were forgiven, and because they were given incentives to establish companies that don’t regulate labor or environmental conditions, like Larrea in Sonora. I repeat the chilling statistic: the wealth in the hands of Mexican billionaires multiplied 4.2 times in just three decades, with an average real annual growth rate of 8.8 percent. Meanwhile, the country only grew at one percent when things were going well.

Carlos Slim with President Claudia Sheinbaum

Carlos Slim, the richest man in Mexico and Latin America and the Caribbean, has never been wealthier than he is today. Slim’s fortune totaled $107.1 billion as of November 2025, the largest amount in his history of political connections. Since 2020, with the pandemic, his wealth has increased by an average of $23.65 million per day, equivalent to $273 per second. A person with an average salary, like you or me, would need to work a week to earn what he earns in one second. Someone earning minimum wage would need 20 days to earn what he earns in one second. We know Slim as the one who was able to buy Telmex because he contributed money to Carlos Salinas de Gortari’s campaign. But lately, Slim has been a key partner of Petróleos Mexicanos (PEMEX) with large investments in oil and gas projects.

The pandemic was a boon for these disgustingly rich individuals. Their wealth grew by 101 percent in real terms, that is, after adjusting for inflation. During the pandemic, Carlos Slim increased his fortune by 66 percent, while Germán Larrea’s multiplied 2.4 times. To try and avoid getting lost in this nauseating array of numbers, Oxfam offers an example. Let’s say these Mexican billionaires are told they can keep their fortunes as they were before the pandemic, but that they have to invest the rest in hiring workers at the 2025 minimum wage. How many jobs do you think they could have created? 21 million for an entire year—that’s almost two out of every three people in the informal labor market in Mexico. That’s the magnitude of the obstacle preventing Mexico from achieving greater growth.

Germán Larrea

Now let’s look at this. Between 1981 and now, the country’s annual growth rate has averaged two percent. That is, during the neoliberal era and despite the adjustments made by the current administration. In 35 years, per capita income has only increased by 16 percent compared to 1981, even without adjusting for inflation. In Brazil, it grew by 58 percent, in Spain by 98 percent, and in China by 2,796 percent.

The Oxfam report states: “For every peso the Mexican economy as a whole had in 1996, it had 1.76 pesos in 2025, adjusted for inflation. Meanwhile, the richest 10 percent had 2.14 pesos; the richest one percent, 2.38 pesos; and the wealthiest 0.0001 percent—that is, the 22 billionaires—4.20 pesos. 4.20 pesos in an economy of a mere 1.76 pesos. For every peso they had in 1996, they now have 4.20 pesos. Their wealth grew twice as fast as the Mexican economy. That wealth, produced by all of us who work, was siphoned off by the yachts and mansions of our beloved magnates.”

In 35 years, Mexico’s per capita income has only increased by 16 percent compared to 1981, even without adjusting for inflation. In Brazil, it grew by 58 percent, in Spain by 98 percent, and in China by 2,796 percent.

But the picture one can draw from the Oxfam report is equally devastating, beyond the numbers. It turns out that we have an elite that originates when the State transfers public assets—the wealth generated by everyone—to a few elderly men (there’s only one woman) who have close ties to the neoliberal PRI and the PAN. Then, they are granted concessions for national resources, such as mines, oil, electricity, water, and natural gas. They also control education, healthcare, and even prisons. Already flush with money, they begin to exert a dominant influence on political decisions because they wield the power of extortion. They own telecommunications, investments in banks, mining, healthcare, and infrastructure such as highways, ports, airports, and water concessions. I’ll focus on just one point: the healthcare data is terrifying. In 2024, the majority of patients, 58 percent, received care in private medical services, not public ones. In other words, those who fall ill have to resort to private healthcare because the public system is insufficient or provides inadequate care. This amounts to extortion in a country with chronic diseases, a reality brought to the forefront by the pandemic: obesity, diabetes, and hypertension.

The wealthy pay no taxes on their inheritances or estates, and increasingly powerful hereditary dynasties have been established. Oxfam proposes that inheritances, gifts, and estates exceeding one million dollars be taxed. Furthermore, they propose a two percent tax on those with more than one billion dollars; a minimum tax of two percent on fortunes exceeding one billion dollars. The wealthy pay no taxes on their stock market transactions. Last year, the stock market gained 30 percent, yet no taxes are paid on this, which is not productive but rather vile speculation.

Although AMLO and the President have made them pay what they owe by law, the truth is that the wealthy don’t pay their fair share. In 2025, people with annual incomes exceeding 500 million pesos contributed only 21 cents out of every 100 pesos collected in federal taxes, that is, 0.21 percent. There is an abysmal disparity between them and us when it comes to paying taxes. They pay 10 percent on dividends, while we pay 35 percent in Income Tax. This injustice must be addressed. Another point: Of all the properties that are not primary residences—that is, apartments held solely for renting to tenants or tourists, vacation homes, and resorts—half are registered in the names of the wealthiest five percent. So they should pay more property taxes than those of us who live where we contribute, because they are nothing more than land speculators. And they should pay more for polluting more. It would take an average Mexican two centuries to pollute what a billionaire pollutes with his private planes, helicopters, and yachts.

What I’m saying is that, up to now, the 4T (Fourth Transformation) has acted to try to mitigate the effects of neoliberalism, but it should emphasize a project that prevents them. Reclaiming the State’s role in the economy means that the decision about how money is invested rests with the State, which should ensure that this investment benefits people, provides good working conditions, doesn’t pollute, and creates more wealth where it’s located. We’ve celebrated the fact that taxes are being collected, that more foreign direct investment is arriving, and that more jobs are being created, but it’s not enough. The inequality is that of a country that, to this day, supports 21 men and one woman who contribute almost nothing to improving the country. It’s time to reclaim the power that was lost when Miguel de la Madrid came to power in 1982 and began to transfer away everything that many generations of Mexicans had helped to build.

  • Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    Analysis

    Concessions, Concessions, Concessions

    February 27, 2026February 27, 2026

    The yet-to-be-disclosed 200 mining concessions voluntarily returned to the Mexican state represent less than 1% of the 22,000 currently active, while questions remain about the government’s new strategy.

  • People’s Mañanera February 27

    Mañanera

    People’s Mañanera February 27

    February 27, 2026

    President Sheinbaum’s daily press conference, with comments on electoral reform, labour poverty, 80% of weapons seized originate in US, Sinaloa homicide reduction, and addressing root causes of crime.

  • Mexico’s Filthy Rich

    Analysis

    Mexico’s Filthy Rich

    February 27, 2026February 27, 2026

    Less than 8 pesos out of every 100 that the rich earn thanks to our collective effort returns to the economy in the form of investment. They are rentiers, clinging to their inherited fortunes, their connections to political & academic power & they extort the State when it threatens even the crumbs they refuse to give us.

The post Mexico’s Filthy Rich appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.


From Mexico Solidarity Media via This RSS Feed.

519
 
 

By Misión Verdad — Feb 26, 2026

During the last few weeks, a clear narrative shift has been observed among the spokespeople for economic opinion in Venezuela.

The consensus among economists has shifted from “debacle” to “optimism.” This change in discourse came after the US government announced oil agreements with Acting President Delcy Rodríguez.

Since then, the fervor for the new impetus of the Venezuelan economy has been increasing since the publication of the licenses recently issued by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), such as GL 49, GL 50, and GL 48, which authorize the operations of Western oil companies in the country.

In the heart of the truth
Several economists with opposition leanings in Venezuela have minimized and, in many cases, dismissed the objective reality of the economic sanctions and their harmful effects on the Venezuelan economy.

There are exceptions, such as the case of economist Francisco Rodríguez, who has published various investigations on the impact of sanctions in Venezuela, standing out recently for his analysis in the report “The Human Consequences of Economic Sanctions” (2023), published by the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR).

Other works by Rodríguez include “Sanctioning Venezuela” (2022) and “Sanctions, Economic Policy, and the Venezuelan Crisis” (2022), published through the Sanctions and Security Research Project. In these works, Rodríguez has criticized the Venezuelan government’s economic management but has emphasized, with supporting data, the destructive nature of foreign sanctions.

Another exception is the case of Luis Vicente León, an economist best known for his role at the firm Datanálisis. León, in a less academic and more reflective setting, has consistently criticized the sanctions against Venezuela’s oil activities, outlining their impact on the national economic base.

Luis Oliveros, an economist and professor at the Metropolitan University (UNIMET), has questioned the role of sanctions in the deterioration of living conditions for the population. Consequently, he has also criticized fellow economists and opposition politicians for defending these measures and for being “out of touch with the reality people are experiencing.”

On the other hand, there is a second group of economists, including Asdrúbal Oliveros, José Guerra, Ángel Alvarado, Ronald Balza Guanipa, Rafael Quiroz, Ricardo Hausmann, and even the chemical engineer and tireless economic commentator Henkel García, among others, who have chosen to emphasize their criticisms from two fundamental angles of opinion.

First, by referring almost exclusively to internal economic management (before and during the sanctions). This line of argument suggests that “macrostructural imbalances”—exchange controls, expropriations, and hyperinflation—had already destroyed a large part of the economy before the imposition of far-reaching sanctions.

That line of discourse focused primarily on the economic policy of Chavismo, instead of highlighting, for example, the loss of more than 90% of the country’s foreign exchange income, and the impact of that fact on an economy in which all sectors are directly or indirectly linked to oil revenue, as happened in 2020, at the expense of the sanctions.

Second, they took positions on the “shared responsibility” or limited impact of the sanctions; some experts acknowledge the harm caused by the measures, but claim that they “complicate” pre-existing problems.

This supposedly “more objective” angle of analysis was based on the premise of recognizing the sanctions as a precise and undeniable reality. However, the political undertones and style of the statements made by some of these spokespeople almost always pointed toward economic fatalism, pessimism, a refusal to acknowledge achievements, a minimization of successful reforms, and a politically biased treatment of the overall situation.

For all Venezuelan economists in the opposition, the arena of economic discussion is also a terrain of political debate. This is a logical reality, since, regardless of one’s political leanings, all economic debate must necessarily be political. The problem in this case is bias, and how it works in the face of changing concrete situations.

The sanctions
During the last few weeks, several economists who downplayed or dismissed mentioning economic sanctions as a central point for their estimates have changed their narratives to a more optimistic ground.

Recently, Asdrúbal Oliveros considered that the positive behavior in oil production will generate an “expansionary effect” on the entire economy, admitting that it has been marked by a deep contraction in recent years. Oliveros also estimated economic growth of around 12% this year. According to the analyst, the main driver of this improvement will be the hydrocarbons sector, which could experience an expansion of 30%.

The economist associates the growth of Venezuela’s oil activities with the current state of relations between Venezuela and the US entity, which has resulted in oil licenses and the lifting of restrictions on the Venezuelan economy. Oliveros has also called for the need to close the exchange rate gap, which requires a new exchange system and the necessary flow of petrodollars.

On the other hand, Ricardo Hausmann has suggested that there will be economic growth in Venezuela this year, but he has focused his assertion on political conditions. He states that any growth figure for 2026 will be fragile if it is not accompanied by a reinstitutionalization that allows for a return on investment.

Rafael Quiroz has advocated for national stability and political stability as key factors in attracting investment. He has supported oil reform, and expressed positive views on the reform to the Organic Hydrocarbons Law. In recent statements, he mentioned that a complete institutional transition in state agencies, including PDVSA, could take up to three years. Therefore, he does not see the current growth phase as contingent on political change. Quiroz also made assessments about oil licenses, acknowledging their favorable impact on Venezuelan activities.

Ronald Balza, dean of the Faculty of Economic and Social Sciences at the Andrés Bello Catholic University (UCAB), is part of the moderate opposition economist sector. He recently projected a possible growth of 10.4% of Venezuelan GDP for this year. He also questioned the initiatives to dollarize the Venezuelan economy, and alluded to the new oil revenues as a component element of “exchange rate stability.”

Henkel García has repeatedly stated the obvious fact that oil remains the “key” to the economy. He has emphasized that appropriate public policy in this sector will generate benefits for the rest of the national industry. Echoing Hausmann and other commentators across the political spectrum, including María Corina Machado, he has spoken about the Hydrocarbons Law and licensing, arguing that with institutional reforms, production could reach between 1.3 and 1.4 million barrels per day within two years, “after a political transition.”

José Guerra, a former anti-Chavista congressman and founder of the Venezuelan Finance Observatory (OVF), stated that the definitive stabilization of prices in the country depends largely “on the maintenance of oil agreements with the US.”

“There is no doubt that the economy will grow,” he said, adding that the new revenues should be used to address the social debt. Guerra admitted that the new Hydrocarbons Law seeks to attract foreign companies, allowing the private sector and foreign companies to “obtain licenses” from the US regime and “market oil independently to revive the Venezuelan industry.”

The general trend in claims among this group of opposition opinion leaders shares common criteria:

• Starting in January, there will be more revenue from oil sales from Venezuela.
• Foreign exchange earnings are a catalyst for multisectoral economic growth and clearly impact the country’s Gross Domestic Product.
• Foreign currency income is a stabilizing factor for the exchange rate, reducing the gap, and mitigating devaluation and inflation.
• Licenses are a central factor in the development of Venezuela’s energy activities.
• For growth to be sustainable, institutional changes and a transition are necessary, implicitly acknowledging that sanctions hinder foreign investment.

The use of coercive sanctions appears as a transversal axis that connects these criteria. In fact, these spokespeople seem to frame their comments as if the government in Miraflores were a different government than that of President Nicolás Maduro, ignoring the fact that Delcy Rodríguez has recently held the positions of the Executive Vice Presidency, Economic Vice Presidency, and the Ministry of Hydrocarbons.

In very concrete terms, there has been no regime change in Venezuela, and the strategic line of economic management is preserved. The only things that are changing in the Venezuelan economy are the easing of the coercive framework, the revitalization of oil trade, and the flow of foreign currency.

Rejecting Defeatism: Why Negotiation is Not Betrayal in the Face of US Imperialist Aggression Against Venezuela

The shift in rhetoric exposes the omissions, silences, and distortions that have dominated economic opinion for years. It was never “the regime;” it has always been the sanctions.

Perhaps an enlightening element regarding the reality of economic sanctions in Venezuela does not come from any Venezuelan economist, but from Donald Trump himself. Trump reiterated that his administration is working “closely with Venezuela’s new president, Delcy Rodríguez,” to “drive extraordinary economic progress for both countries.”

The only thing the US administration has done is to relatively and partially loosen some of the constraints that were unjustly imposed on the national economy, all in exchange for oil that could have flowed freely for years if it had not been for the measures Trump himself implemented.

(Misión Verdad)

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/JRE/AU


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

520
 
 

In a statement, the organization of Cubans reported that a vessel that violated Cuban maritime space with the aim of destabilization was neutralized “by our authorities” and border guard troops.

The statement also denounced the “criminal” energy blockade imposed by the United States against the Caribbean nation, which prevents the arrival of fuel and which it described as “an act of direct war to suffocate the Cuban people.” “Cuba is not alone! Down with the blockade!” it emphasized.

The Accreven stressed “No infiltrations, no blockades! Cuba must be respected!” The Cuban Ministry of the Interior reported on February 25 that it detected an illegal speedboat within Cuban territorial waters.

The vessel, registered in Florida, USA, with the registration number FL7726SH, was located one nautical mile northeast of the El Pino channel, near Falcones Cay, in the municipality of Corralillo, Villa Clara province.

The Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through its Deputy Minister Carlos Fernandez de Cossio, expressed the previous day its willingness to collaborate with the United States in clarifying the facts.

The official statement confirmed the activation of diplomatic channels with the U.S. State Department and Coast Guard, both of which expressed their readiness to cooperate in the investigation.

jdt/ro/jcd

The post Cubans residing in Venezuela denounce armed aggression from the US first appeared on Prensa Latina.


From Prensa Latina via This RSS Feed.

521
 
 

The US empire has continued to block Venezuela’s payments of the legal fees for President Nicolás Maduro, who was kidnapped by the US entity on January 3 and has been held in a federal US prison in New York since then, according to his lawyer and various international reports.

President Maduro’s legal defense faces serious difficulties because the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), belonging to the US Treasury Department, revoked—without explanation—authorization for the Venezuelan government to pay the fees of its lead lawyer, Barry Pollack, even though it had initially issued a license on January 9.

Less than three hours after granting it, OFAC amended it, no longer allowing Caracas to finance President Maduro’s defense.

Pollack argued before a federal judge in Manhattan that this decision prevents President Maduro from hiring and paying his lawyers with Venezuelan funds, which could constitute a direct interference with his right under the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution to have a lawyer of his choosing.

The lawyer explained that, under the law and practice of his country, “the government of Venezuela has the obligation to pay Maduro’s fees,” and that the Venezuelan leader cannot finance this representation himself.

The situation arises in the context of a federal case in which Deputy Cilia Flores and President Maduro have pleaded not guilty before a New York court to drug trafficking and other charges that analysts explain were used as an excuse for their kidnapping by the forces of US imperialism.

The revocation of the license to fund the defense has generated a legal and constitutional debate, because OFAC maintains a separate license that does authorize the payment of fees for Cilia Flores’ lawyers.

From Caracas Arrest to DC Spotlight: The Traces of Enrique Márquez’s Conspiracy

The blocking of state funding for President Maduro’s defense is part of a broader pattern of illegal economic sanctions and financial restrictions imposed by the White House against Venezuelan officials and the Chavista government, including measures on assets and international transactions.

Both Cilia Flores and President Maduro are scheduled for a new court hearing on March 26. The defense has asked the court to intervene to reinstate the payment authorization or to judicially recognize the Venezuelan state’s obligation to cover the costs of its leader’s defense, amidst a controversy involving foreign policy, illegal sanctions, and fundamental procedural rights.

(Telesur)

Translation: Orinoco Tribune

OT/JRE/AU


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

522
 
 

By Farhad Ibragimov – Feb 26, 2026

As Kurdish groups consolidate abroad, Washington’s pressure campaign may increasingly rely on domestic fractures

Amid escalating tensions surrounding Iran and the ongoing discussions about potential military strikes by the US, the internal political situation in the Islamic Republic is becoming increasingly turbulent. Tehran’s adversaries are considering not only direct military pressure but also a mixed strategy of destabilization involving limited strikes combined with the activation of internal protest movements and ethnic-political factors.

This strategy implies minimizing the duration and scale of military operations and instead relying on internal pressure. In other words, external actions could serve as a trigger for internal processes. In this situation, opposition forces – not just ‘political’ ones (in Iran, and even beyond its borders, no political force has emerged that could position itself as a unified center of non-systemic opposition), but particularly ethnoregional groups – might seize the opportunity to organize large-scale protests reminiscent of a ‘color revolution’. In this scenario, the focus shifts from a military defeat to undermining Iran’s internal resilience.

In such a configuration, the ethnic factor could play a significant role. Iran is a multi-ethnic state, and the Kurdish issue has traditionally been one of the most sensitive issues for the authorities. Tehran’s adversaries in the Middle East (Israel) and in the West (the US) have never concealed the fact that they view the ethnic-political factor as one of the most promising means of pressuring Tehran. The focus is primarily on national minorities that have historically been a sensitive issue for the central government, and whose social discontent may grow into more radical forms of resistance, including guerrilla activities. The Kurds, along with the Arabs, Azerbaijanis, and the Baloch people, are frequently mentioned in this context.

Such reasoning is quite pragmatic: large-scale military operations come with political, financial, and reputational costs, whereas destabilization by means of existing internal divisions can achieve comparable strategic effects with much lower expenses. Within this framework, external pressure – such as sanctions, information campaigns, or limited military actions – functions as a trigger, while the main ‘strike’ occurs from within the country.

During the January protests in Iran, both Israeli and US officials were closely monitoring the behavior of key ethnic groups to assess their mobilization potential. However, the actual situation turned out to be less straightforward than what many Israeli and Western experts had described for decades. This time, the Baloch people and the Arabs, who have traditionally expressed discontent with Tehran’s policies (mainly on socio-economic issues), did not widely engage in protests. Their demonstrations remained limited and did not escalate into a systemic anti-government movement.

The country’s Azerbaijani population (which amounts to around 30 million people, out of Iran’s total population of 90 million) has largely adopted a loyalist stance. Iranian Azerbaijanis took part in public demonstrations supporting Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. These meetings were often accompanied by criticism of Reza Pahlavi, who presents himself as the “crown prince.” The memory of his father Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi’s repressive policies – such as restrictions on minority languages and harsh suppression of dissent – still shapes historical perception and political identity.

In contrast, a different dynamic is emerging in the country’s Kurdish regions. Some of the largest protests in late December occurred within the Kurdish-speaking provinces of Lorestan and Kurdistan. This means that the Kurdish factor can act as a trigger for deeper destabilization. In this context, Iran’s opponents could use the Kurds as a means of destabilization, similar to Syria and Iraq, where Kurdish groups significantly expanded their autonomy and institutional presence amid weakened central authority. In other words, the Kurdish issue is viewed as a particularly sensitive topic for the central authorities, one that may be used as a tool for long-term destabilization, especially when combined with internal protests and external military force or sanctions.

On February 22, five Kurdish organizations operating in the US announced the formation of an alliance called the Coalition of Political Forces of Iranian Kurdistan. They expressed their intention to intensify armed resistance against Tehran and their political support for Washington’s actions.

Members of this alliance include the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (KDPI), the Kurdistan Free Life Party (PJAK), which is the Iranian wing of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, the Kurdistan Freedom Party (PAK), the Komala Party of Iranian Kurdistan, and the Xebat Organization of Iranian Kurdistan. This coalition reflects the Kurds’ desire to consolidate resources and coordinate political actions amid the potential transformation of the region’s security architecture.

In a joint statement, the alliance emphasized that its strategic goal is to establish a governance system in Iran based on the “political will of the Kurdish people.” The document referenced the long-standing struggle of the Kurdish movement against centralized governance, stressing the need to revise existing power distribution mechanisms and recognize the national-political rights of the Kurdish population.

The joint statement is not one of protest; rather, it projects the coalition’s stance. It underscores that the role of the Kurds in opposing the current regime will increase, and the “future of Tehran” must be reevaluated in light of possible systemic changes. It also highlights that in the event of a regime change, the Kurdish populace should have the opportunity to determine its own political and legal status within the Iranian state.

Iran to Consider Even ‘Limited Strike’ by US as Act of Aggression – Foreign Ministry

From a regional security perspective, the consolidation of Kurdish structures in Iran poses additional risks not only to the country’s internal stability but also to the already fragile security architecture of the Middle East. This is particularly true in border areas, where the ethnic issue is intertwined with other factors: cross-border ties, armed groups, and the accompanying external influences. This may very well be used by the White House for destabilization purposes.

Historical experience indicates that the Kurdish factor is a longstanding element in US foreign policy in the region. Since 2003, Iraqi Kurds have been Washington’s key allies in the Middle East; their support was crucial in launching the campaign against Saddam Hussein’s regime. Moreover, Kurdish forces played a significant role in the Syrian conflict, receiving backing and weapons in their fight against radical groups. Over time, Kurdish structures in Syria and Iraq have strengthened their economy, particularly through oil exports from territories under their control.

Today, Iraqi Kurdistan stands as the largest political and territorial entity of the Kurdish people and holds substantial oil reserves (about 45 billion barrels). This not only provides economic stability but also enhances the region’s political influence. The existence of such a quasi-state next to Iran’s Kurdish regions strengthens cross-border ties and creates an alternative center of gravity.

In this context, the Kurdish regions of Iran have emerged as one of the most active areas during protests. There is also speculation that some protest initiatives may receive infrastructure and organizational support from abroad, including from neighboring Iraqi Kurdistan. The recent escalation in Iran’s Kurdish provinces could be seen as another attempt to push through a broader project for autonomy or even statehood, especially with the backing of external partners. The Kurds reside not only in Iraq and Iran but also in Türkiye and Syria, though in each country there is a unique Kurdish identity. However, what unites them is their shared history.

Historical memory is important in this context. The Kurdish uprising in Iran following the 1979 Islamic Revolution was brutally suppressed, and hopes for autonomy within the new ‘Islamic system’ were dashed. In the decades that followed, there have been occasional tensions in the Kurdish regions of Iran; however, the current protests appear more extensive and organized. We must note that Iran has a special region for its Kurdish population called Kurdistan Province, where the Kurdish language is taught, children can attend Kurdish schools, and Kurdish-language media operate. All of this was unimaginable during the monarchy. However, as the saying goes, “Eating whets the appetite.” Over time, the Kurds sought more privileges; this contradicted the logic of the Iranian authorities – they feared that the more compromises they made, the greater the demands of the Kurds would become. Moreover, this could trigger a ‘domino effect’ that could resonate with other ethnic groups.

Tensions between Kurdish movements and the central government could serve as another tool for Western powers in their multifaceted pressure strategy. In this context, the ethnic-political conflict, in which Kurds play a significant role, may become part of a “divide and conquer” policy – one of the West’s traditional and most successful tools.

The Kurdish factor undoubtedly carries additional symbolic and political weight. The autonomous institutions in Iraqi Kurdistan and the successful ‘institutionalization’ of Kurdish identity in neighboring Iraq set a precedent that many Iranian Kurds view as a potential blueprint for their future. This fuels separatist sentiments in border regions, and, if the central authority weakens, there is a good chance that these sentiments could become more organized.

A potential scenario involving limited strikes aimed at triggering internal turbulence in Iran implies synchronization between external pressure and internal tensions. In this context, the Kurdish factor emerges as a crucial element in the West’s multilayered strategy of exerting pressure on Tehran. While external military action may serve as a trigger, the main escalation will likely occur within Iran’s domestic political landscape.

(RT)


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

523
 
 

In statements to Prensa Latina, Santiago, spokesperson for the United Left (IU) in the Congress of Deputies, stressed that this is the first resolution approved by Spanish institutions to reject the executive order of the US president, Donald Trump, to sharpen the suffocation of the Cuban people.

With the impetus of the Sumar movement, led by Izquierda Unida, and the support of EH Bildu, ERC, Podemos and Coalición Canaria, a proposal was adopted without law, amended by the socialists of the PSOE (majority force in the government).

It was Enrique Santiago who pushed the idea, arguing that these restrictions could lead in a few weeks to the “collapse” of critical infrastructure on the island, including hospitals, electricity system and transportation.

We hope that this will encourage other institutions, starting with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to make a clear statement in defense of Cuba against the brutal aggression it is suffering from the US, noted the legislator.

He also emphasized the need for the initiative to serve as an incentive for cooperation and solidarity, both in the official spheres of Spain and throughout society, “to help send to Cuba all the materials, goods and energy products that the island currently requires.”

Also general secretary of the Communist Party of Spain (PCE), Santiago was thinking about the importance of collaborating with the Caribbean Island to get ahead in front of “the brutal blockade that aims to turn Cuba into a US colony or an associated state, as has already happened with Puerto Rico”.

He told Prensa Latina that this initiative to reject the executive order of Trump has been made possible thanks to a great agreement between left-wing and democratic forces that support international law and especially the sovereignty of peoples, the principle of non-interference and non-use of force in international relations.

The adopted text, which was rejected by the conservative People’s Party (PP), Junts for Catalonia (right) and the far-right Vox, calls on the government to demand in all forums the end of Trump’s “coercive measures” against Cuba.

abo/ro/ft

The post Spanish MP highlights strong support for Cuba in Parliament first appeared on Prensa Latina.


From Prensa Latina via This RSS Feed.

524
 
 

An official statement noted that the head of the Executive talked about restoring security, strengthening institutions, and organizing elections in his dialogue with Anthony, one of the driving forces behind the regional body, gathered in Saint Kitts and Nevis until February 27.

The Prime Minister’s office added that Fils-Aime detailed the efforts already undertaken in Haiti to hold democratic elections in his meeting with Anthony, which took place alongside the summit that began on Tuesday and focuses on cooperation, sustainable development, security, and regional integration.

The head of government, accompanied by his special aides, Guerly Leriche and Raina Forbin, assured that seven of the country’s ten departments, along with several western municipalities such as Artibonite and the Central Plateau, already have sufficient security conditions for holding elections.

He underscored that security forces are also mobilized for the gradual recovery of areas still under gang control, whose violations are keeping the country on edge.

Other objectives of government forces include consolidating the territories already recovered, supporting the return of displaced families, and the rapid reopening of strategic highways connecting the North and South, the statement added.

The issues addressed during Fils-Aime’s talks with Anthony included the preservation of the Toussaint Louverture International Airport, a strategic infrastructure essential for air transport, economic recovery, and the gradual normalization of national activities.

abo/iff/mem/apb

The post Haiti leader exchanges views with former Saint Lucia’s PM first appeared on Prensa Latina.


From Prensa Latina via This RSS Feed.

525
 
 

By Becca Renk – Feb 23, 2026

Following decades of war, entrenched poverty and gang violence, Nicaraguans are now “breathing peace” in their barriosand around the country.

‘The bullets were flying’
‘I thought they were going to kill us. The bullets were flying past our house, and I was so afraid a stray one would hit us,’ Socorro tells me. She’s recounting a gang fight that took place more than a decade ago right outside the walls of mismatched metal sheeting that surround her garden near Managua.

‘My granddaughter was small at the time, I ran with her and hid behind a barrel, thinking it was full and that the water would help protect us. But the joke was on me, the barrel was empty!’ Socorro laughs. We’re sitting on her stoop and she’s telling that her neighbourhood in Ciudad Sandino, once infamous for violent gang reprisals, has settled into a calm that has now lasted for years.

Rodolfo, who lives in the same neighbourhood, says the barriowas violent from its beginnings. It emerged after thousands of people who had lost their homes in Managua during Hurricane Mitch in 1998 were moved out to a cow pasture by the neoliberal government of the time.

‘The problems followed people when they were moved here,’ he says. ‘Those who came from one place always had problems with those who came from another.’

For decades there were active gangs in the community. During a time most families’ budgets couldn’t even stretch to cover three meals a day, even a primary school education was out of reach for many, and there were no opportunities for young people. Children were limited to begging in the streets, young women to becoming street vendors, young men day labourers. Faced with these bleak prospects, it is no wonder that some turned to glue sniffing, petty theft and gangs.

‘****Thebarriohad to change****‘
This situation left young men in poor communities like Socorro and Rodolfo’s stuck in a cycle of retaliation killings that held the people of the neighbourhood hostage at night. I remember one woman showing me bullet holes in her front gate, others describing to me how they locked themselves in their homes for days when the fighting got bad.

‘The barriohad to change,’ Rodolfo says, recalling that it has been more than two years since there the last gang activity in the community. I ask him what has happened to the gang members.

‘They’re in jail,’ he says. ‘Some died, and others are in jail.’

Socorro says that her neighbours who were gang members have reformed. ‘Many are still here, but they’ve shaped up,’ she says.

Opportunities for change
Theirs isn’t the only neighbourhood to have been transformed in recent years: these changes are echoed throughout Managua and around the country. What can these changes be attributed to? Over the past 19 years of Nicaragua’s Sandinista government, the state has applied a range of targeted approaches, providing a host of opportunities for Nicaragua’s youth which have been institutionalised to create gradual and lasting societal change.

These opportunities include free education, preschool through university, including technical degrees; free lunch in schools; tidy, well-maintained parks in each neighbourhood; free sports, dance, art and entrepreneurial business programs; streetlights, community policing, regular home visits from social workers and police; and free family-friendly activities organised every weekend.

This feeling of safety at a barriolevel is now widespread around the country. In a recent poll, 82.5% of Nicaraguans report feeling safer today than they did five years ago, with only 3.6% reporting gangs or delinquency as major problems, and only 3.3% reporting being recent victims of robbery or aggression.

Remarkably, 98.6% of Nicaraguans say they “breathe peace” in their country.

This peace has not come easily. In Nicaragua during the 1970s, there was a popular uprising to overthrow the cruel Somoza dictatorship. By the time the Sandinista Popular Revolution finally won, 50,000 Nicaraguans had been killed.

In the 1980s, the US organised, armed, trained and funded Nicaraguan Contras to attack the “soft targets” of the Sandinista Revolution, including teachers, health care workers and farm families. That conflict left another 50,000 Nicaraguans dead. More recently, in 2018, the US led and funded a violent coup attempt which ultimately failed, but left 270 people dead and dealt a huge blow to the economy of the country.

Following each conflict, Nicaraguans have granted amnesty to the aggressors, a more difficult decision than choosing punitive measures. But Nicaragua believes in rehabilitation, and values peace. Here, it is understood that peace is not granted, but must be built through continual hard work.

Nicaragua Continues ICJ Case Against Germany for Gaza Genocide

Honouring Peace and Reconciliation
That work is ongoing: on 2 February, Nicaragua celebrated its newest national holiday, the Day of Peace and Reconciliation in honour of Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo.

Over several decades, Cardinal Obando y Bravo served as an intermediary to help resolve conflicts. In the 1970s, he negotiated between the Sandinista National Liberation Front and the Somoza government. And in the 1980s, he helped broker peace to end the Contra war. Following the Sandinistas return to power in 2007, the Cardinal accepted President Daniel Ortega’s request to preside over the national Peace and Reconciliation Commission.

On 9 February, the 100th anniversary of Obando y Bravo’s birth, Nicaragua conferred the honour of the Medal of Reconciliation and Peace “Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo” on Jaime Morales and his wife Amparo. In the 1980s, Morales was a Contra leader, one of the intellectual “faces” of the Contra in the US, ‘not firing bullets, but thinking,’ as Co-President Ortega said in his speech.

Morales represented the Contra during the peace talks, and in 2006, when he was running for President, Daniel Ortega invited Morales to be the Vice-Presidential candidate on the Sandinista Alliance ticket. Morales accepted, and two Contra political parties joined the Alliance. Following their electoral win, Ortega and Morales worked together to form the Government of National Unity and Reconciliation, a government led by the Alliance which, 19 years later, continues to focus on national reconciliation.

‘So today is a good day for our Nicaragua,’ said Co-President Rosario Murillo during the ceremony.  ‘We have made a conscious choice to reconcile. We have chosen unity, peace, brother and sisterhood. Peace is love, and love is stronger than hate.’

Youth with a conscience
With a national leadership that exemplifies the values of peace and reconciliation, perhaps it should not be surprising that the gangs in Socorro and Rodolfo’s neighbourhood have been able to overcome years of violent conflicts.

‘Things have changed,’ Socorro says as one of the new Chinese buses drives past the park in front of her house and turns down the paved road. ‘I was a street vendor like my mom, I never learned to read or write. I tell my grandkids that they need to take advantage of school and all the opportunities they have today.’

Co-President Ortega has recognised the values of the youth of Nicaragua, who are no longer growing up in gangs.

‘You are not a Youth of empty words. No! You are Youth with a Conscience, with a Heart and who work for the benefit of the People,’ he told the young people gathered for the ceremony to confer the Medal of Reconciliation and Peace.

‘You are an example, an example of Conscience, you are an example of Solidarity, you are an example of Love for the People, you are an example of selflessness,’ he said. ‘You are worthy children of the Heroes and Martyrs.’

(Sovereign)


From Orinoco Tribune – News and opinion pieces about Venezuela and beyond via This RSS Feed.

view more: ‹ prev next ›