fbpx

Blog

This is where we share our experience
Latin America
 by Liam Timmons

The Threat of Drone-Based Terror

Drone - The Threat of Drone-Based Terror

On August 4, 2018, President Nicolás Maduro of Venezuela was attacked with explosive-laden drones during a political rally. Although the drones were not successful in assassinating the Venezuelan leader, they managed to injure seven national guardsmen who were at the rally.

A few weeks earlier in July, the Public Safety Secretary of Mexico’s Baja California was also targeted by an armed drone, although the attached IED did not detonate. Attacks such as these are indicative of the burgeoning threat that drone-related terror can play in today’s world.

No longer is drone technology limited to the militaries of countries like the United States, Nigeria, or Pakistan. Instead, groups such as Hezbollah, the Houthi rebels, and the Islamic State are getting in on the action. In fact, ISIS recently threatened Paris with a drone attack. As drones become easier to obtain and use, attacks using this technology will become more frequent, more sophisticated, and more deadly.

The barriers to carrying out a drone-based terror attack are lower than ever. Lightweight hobby drones are cheap, easy to purchase and allow terrorist groups to carry out attacks from a distance. While military drones are less accessible and harder to operate, they do provide a higher operational capacity and have a number of avenues by which terrorist groups can obtain them. In this way, drone-based terror is comparable to nuclear terror.

Hobby drones, like a dirty bomb, can easily be weaponized, but have a relatively small impact, while military drones, like a weapon of mass destruction, can be stolen, bought from a rogue state or corrupt official, and has a high potential impact. Additionally, improvements in battery and camera technology will only increase the negative impact of drone-based terror as groups learn to harness these ever-increasing capabilities. In recent testimony to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, FBI Director Christopher Wray stated that drones, “will be used to facilitate an attack in the United States against a vulnerable target, such as a mass gathering.”

The Security Challenges of Drone-Based Terror

Drone-based terror presents unique security threats and challenges. The particular tactical flexibility inherent to drones forces a rethinking of current security strategies. Traditional notions of perimeter defense and target hardening no longer apply when the threat is as maneuverable and flexible as a drone.

Small drones can be used in swarms to destroy commercial airliners, disrupt military operations through hyper-local targeting, or inflict asymmetric damage on civilian targets. Additionally, drones can and have been used in conjunction with more traditional methods of terror.

During the Islamic State’s defense of Mosul, drones were used to guide suicide bombers and improve the accuracy of rocket and mortar fire. The coalition’s anti-drone no-fly zone was quickly counteracted by a do-it-yourself solution implemented by fighters on the ground. Further, drones can conduct both intelligence and counterintelligence operations: terrorist groups could use drones to jam military communications, survey battlefields, and download sensitive data.

In addition to conventional attacks and military-based operations, drones could be engineered to disperse chemical weapons, biological agents such as viruses or Anthrax, or even radioactive material. A September 2018 National Terrorism Advisory System Bulletin warned that, “some terrorist groups overseas are [pursuing] new technologies and tactics, such as unmanned aerial systems and chemical agents,” while Hezbollah may have the ability to carry out biological warfare using drones.

Finally, aerial drones are not the only technology terrorist groups can exploit. In January 2017, Houthi rebels killed two Saudi soldiers with a sea-based drone. As aquatic drone technology continues to proliferate, terrorist capabilities may widen to include attacks on coastal cities. Aquatic drones maintain the security challenges of aerial drones but can dramatically widen the target range of drone-based terror. Land-based drones may pose a threat as well, since “fighters in Syria and Iraq have been […] experimenting with remotely controlled vehicles and small robots for nearly a decade.”

Countering Drone-Based Terror

US doctrine focuses on active and passive defense, as well as a proactive intelligence-based approach, to countering air threats. Because of the small size, speed, and maneuverability of drones, they may not be detectable to forms of active defense reliant on radar. However, communication jamming may be a particularly effective form of defense against drones, reducing targeting accuracy and thus the potential threat.

Additionally, acoustic and radio detection methods can make up for radar’s shortcomings in countering drone incursion. On the passive side of defense, simple behavioral changes like hosting high-profile events indoors, varying arrival and departure agendas of potential target personnel, and changing transport routes can make all types of terror, not just drone-based attacks, more difficult. Finally, greater control and oversight of the supply chain, through the monitoring of suspicious purchases and cooperation with manufacturers, would decrease the likelihood of terrorist groups acquiring drones in the first place.

Drone-Based Terror Takeaways

Drone-based terror can be seen as an emerging threat to the global security environment which demands immediate and creative solutions. Terrorist groups are already making use of drones in the air, at sea, and on land in a variety of situations and capacities. The barriers to acquiring, arming, and using drones are lower than ever, and drone-based attacks come with their own unique security challenges. As drone technology improves, becomes cheaper, and proliferates, militaries will have to reckon with new security paradigms to combat this rapidly-evolving threat.

in Africa / Asia / EUROPE & CENTRAL ASIA / Latin America / MENA / Rise to Peace blog / United States 0 comments
 by Kate Kleinle

Lone Wolf Bio-Terror: Are We Prepared?

2018 02 11 Maya Norman BioTerror 300x225 - Lone Wolf Bio-Terror: Are We Prepared?

It’s no secret that the lone-wolf threat to Europe is bad, and worsening. However, it’s not just an increasing number of lone wolves, but the variety of tactics they’ll employ in terror’s service that makes prevention a challenge. 

[pullquote]It’s no secret that the lone-wolf threat to Europe is bad, and worsening.[/pullquote]

According to Britain’s Security Minister and top counter-terrorism officer, Ben Wallace, it is likely that a biological or chemical terror attack is on the horizon. At a security conference in London, last Tuesday Wallace warned, “The only limit to the ambition of our adversaries is their imagination.

Chemical and biological weapons are getting closer.

Chemical and biological weapons are getting closer. They have developed and worked on a better arsenal. We have to be prepared for the day when that comes to our streets.” Implicit in his remarks was the notion that counter-terror specialists, as well as governments, must be equally imaginative in their pro-activity.

One major challenge governments face in trying to thwart chemical and biological attacks is the scale. If one person releases tiny amounts of a chemical agent like Anthrax, it could have implications for hundreds, or, millions of people. Traffic flow disruptions, water supply tainting, exposure areas untouchable, these are just some of the possibilities. 

Governments and private contractors have little experience with bio-terrorism. If terrorists were to release biotoxins in civilian areas, the damage could be enormous.

A terrorist need only infect one person, who could then infect her (sic) social circles. Epidemic exposure rates could be a reality faster than you can say Cipro, bringing repercussions on a global scale. The terrorists would need to do very little. The disease would naturally spread at a velocity that grows exponentially.

The probability of these attacks is increasing, and it’s time that governments took note. Currently, there is no international system in place specifically to combat chemical and bio-terror.

If a terrorist infected someone with a biological agent in New York, and then that person flew to Germany infecting people in Berlin, German and American authorities would have no pre-existing framework within which they could cooperate, info-share about how to stop the disease’s transmission, and help those infected. 

[pullquote]The international community will have to work together with maximum efficiency. Unfortunately, it seems governments, unlike terrorists themselves, have a fixed view of terrorism.[/pullquote]

It is critical that such a framework is in place before the scenario unfolds. In the event of a biological or chemical terror attack, time will be of the essence. The international community will have to work together with maximum efficiency. Unfortunately, it seems governments, unlike terrorists themselves, have a fixed view of terrorism.

Governments use major resources to plan for shooters, suicide bombers, and other common acts of terror. Diversifying those resources and intensifying the focus on biological and chemical terrorism could, in the future, save countless lives.

in Africa / Asia / EUROPE & CENTRAL ASIA / Latin America / MENA / Rise to Peace blog / United States 0 comments
 by Roberto Malta

Colombia After FARC

1231santosfarc01 - Colombia After FARC

Leftist rebels of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia patrol a roadway near to San Vicente de Caguan in January 1999. The conflict with the FARC has killed nearly a quarter million people.
JOSE GOMEZ/REUTERS

The 21st-century has been one of the more peaceful epochs in human history. People are bombarded with violent images and tragic news, but this century has borne witness to dramatic peace. Rampant violence defined epochs from Pax Romana to the Middle Ages through the Napoleonic Era.

World Wars and the Cold War marred the 20th-century. In this century, international wars have diminished. And in the shadows, violence has oriented to non-state actors and civil conflicts. The young 21st-century saw the end of two conflicts which had lasted for decades: the Korean War and the Colombian Civil War between FARC, Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, and the government. This piece, in keeping with themes regarding Latin America, will discuss outcomes of the Colombian peace deal.

The Peace Accord in Colombia was signed on November 24th, 2016 and it won incumbent Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos a Nobel Peace Prize. Talks had developed over four years, beginning in Oslo, Norway and Havana, Cuba in 2012. In the short-term, the peace-talks resulted in disarming many FARC members, a decrease in violence, and a more coordinated political system wherein FARC has legitimate representation. More than 12,000 former combatants have pledged to return to society. Businesses such as Coca-Cola and Cemex have agree to hire former insurgents and run re-integation programs. The internal displacement rate has been reduced by a multiple of 30, and casualties have dropped from 3,000 at the beginning of the peace accords, to 10 at the end.

The death toll has climbed to more 120 human rights defenders in 2017 alone.

We can rightfully call this a success. But Colombia’s situation remains touch-and-go at best. When FARC agreed to the deal, other insurgent groups increased their presence, particularly in the countryside. Small groups such as the National Liberation Army (FNL), refused to negotiate with the government and remain active in such areas. Said groups have filled the power vacuum left when the government failed to extend its presence to areas where FARC controlled territory.

The struggle for control has led to conflicts between the smaller groups and the local population. Unfortunately, native, afro-Colombians, and human rights defenders have suffered disproportionately. Consequently, such populations are protesting peace accord details and urging the Colombian government to step in. The death toll has climbed to more 120 human rights defenders in 2017 alone.

The Santos government earned criticism when it failed to bring the peace deal before a plebiscite, and instead presented it to the Colombian Congress.

Another challenge lies in understanding the proposed agrarian reforms. Land rights have been at the heart of the Colombian conflict since the 1950s. FARC often loomed in the jungles so companies could not grab land belonging to indigenous communities. Newly elected president, Ivan Duque Marquez, sees the land restitution part of the Peace Accord as an attempt to bring socialism to Colombia. However, Marquez and his party have opposed the Peace Accord since the start.

2018 10 15 Roberto FARC Pic - Colombia After FARC

Former FARC guerrillas Nasly Rodriguez and Gregory Villarraga – shown at a Bogota art gallery with their baby daughter — are among the many families who have had to adapt to new jobs and lives after the rebel group’s demobilization last year. CARLOS VILLALON/THE GLOBE AND MAIL

Given Venezuela’s turmoil, many rightfully fear that socialism will take Colombia down the same path. Finally, the Santos government earned criticism when it failed to bring the peace deal before a plebiscite, and instead presented it to the Colombian Congress.

The situation in Colombia reminds us that peace is not achieved by signing papers. Rather, it’s earned through sustained hard work, dialogue, and mutual trust. Making peace is a delicate process that requires more than stopping armed conflicts. Creating a sustainable peace requires political will and follow-through, working within existing institutional structures, and coordinating with civil society organizations.

Santos failed to exercise the requisite will and follow-through. He did not promptly increase the State’s presence in conflict zones. Additionally, the government failed to act in the interests of marginalized and vulnerable populations. It failed to provide indigenous and poor, rural farmers with necessary aid. Finally, there was a failure of proper public consultation, which is vital for democracy. Other nations should learn from Colombia’s mistakes, and the next peace process, wherever it occurs, should be a model of inclusivity, transparency, and be approved of by its population. Political will should carry the day from conflict zone to reconstruction.  

Roberto Malta is a Brazilian born, George Mason University student pursuing a B.A. in Global Affairs, with minors in History and Economics.

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
 by Roberto Malta

Lingering Consequences of the Paraguayan War

paraguay2 0 - Lingering Consequences of the Paraguayan War

One of Latin America’s darkest periods began in 1865 — around the time that the American Civil War was drawing to a close — but its wounds still have not healed. The mid-19th century Paraguayan War saw its namesake on one side and a triple alliance of Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay on the other. Latin America looked quite different then. It has long been a place in flux politically, economically, and geographically speaking. But, this conflict altered rudimental perceptions of the continent. Its scars in South America run deep.

In 1862, just three years before the start of the war, Solano Lopez became the country’s second president.

In 1865 Argentina was a newly independent nation. It won its independence in an 1810 war with Spain led by Jose de San Martin. Uruguay was part of Argentina, as part of the United Provinces of the Rio de la Plata, which was then conquered by Brazil and became independent in 1824. This, at the conclusion of Brazil and Argentina’s war for it. Brazil gained its independence from Portugal in 1822 but kept its royal family as it became an Empire. It often intervened in the domestic affairs of its South American neighbors.

Paraguay of today versus Paraguay of 150 years ago is a study in contrasts. It became independent from Spain in 1811. It instituted a military junta to control the country. Paraguay developed an economy, arguably becoming the most advanced South America country at the time. It used British support and know-how to develop industry and improve infrastructure. In 1862, just three years before the start of the war, Solano Lopez became the country’s second president.

2018 10 19 Roberto Pic 1 300x248 - Lingering Consequences of the Paraguayan War

Wikipedia: Brazilian Soldiers at the end of the war, including Corporal Chico Diabo (sitting down, third from left), who killed Paraguayan dictator Solano Lopez.

Paraguay like its 19th-century industrialized society peers needed access to production inputs, labor, and ports from which it could ship products. As a landlocked country, Paraguay’s only choice to gain access to the sea was to expand. Thus, Lopez started his expansionist plan and in 1865 attacked Brazil and Argentina with great success. The two attacked nations organized a joint war effort, and with Uruguay, created the Triple Alliance. Initially, the commander of their armies was Argentinian President Bartolome Mitre.

Brazil and Argentina annexed considerable portions of Paraguayan territory in the peace treaty following the end of the war.

2018 10 19 Roberto Pic 2 300x168 - Lingering Consequences of the Paraguayan War

Wikipedia: Battle of Riachuelo by Victor Meirelles, the turning point of the Paraguayan War

During the war’s first phase Paraguay was on the offensive. In February 1867 Mitre stepped down as the allied commander. He was replaced by Brazilian Army commander Luis Alves de Lima e Silva, aka the Duke of Caxias. Caxias was nominated Brazilian commander in October of the previous year. His first command halted the Brazilian army’s advance. Thereafter, he completely reorganized and restructured the allied military. Consequently, when he restarted the offensive in July 1867, the allied forces won one victory after another. This momentum allowed them to take Asunción, Paraguay’s capital, in January of 1869, defeating the Paraguayan forces. With the war seemingly won, Caxias — who was old and tired — relinquished his command of the allied war effort.

The Triple Alliance governments were unsatisfied and continued the war. They nominated the Count D’Eu, Brazilian Emperor Peter II’s son-in-law, to command their military forces. While Lopez refused to surrender, his resistance didn’t amount to much. With the army depleted, women, children and the wounded were left to fight on. What followed is one of the darkest moments in Brazilian history. Argentina and Uruguay decimated the Paraguayan population and destroyed the country. Brazil and Argentina annexed considerable portions of Paraguayan territory in the peace treaty following the end of the war.

This conflict altered rudimental perceptions of the continent.

The effect on Paraguay cannot be overstated. The most harrowing statistics indicate that 60% of Paraguay’s population, and 90% of its men, fell victim to combat, disease, or starvation. Paraguay was set back decades in its development and industrialization. This lag remains responsible for current economic and social problems.

The war is infrequently discussed outside of South America, but it’s a terrible chapter which reshaped its power balance ever after. Paraguay struggles with criminality, bootleggers, and drug traffickers to this day. It is poorer and less developed than its neighbors. It’s a lesson in the comprehension of a nation’s struggle. Often undermining characteristics result from occurrences decades or even centuries in the past. It is a vital reminder to keep human rights in the fore, and not forget its victims, lest they reoccur. Meanwhile, the wounds are far from healed, Paraguay may never recover fully, and it resurfaces often in relations between the four countries.

Roberto Malta, is a Brazilian born, George Mason University student pursuing a B.A. in Global Affairs, with minors in History and Economics.

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
 by Roberto Malta

Brazilian Elections

212c3f89f0d44615a090303a638ffea7 18 1 - Brazilian Elections

There is a growing uneasiness among Brazilians against Bolsonaro, who has expressed nostalgia for Brazil’s military dictatorship [Amanda Perobelli/Reuters]

Last Monday, October 8th, 2018, saw the first round of Brazilian general elections. Paraphrasing one of the presidential candidates, Joao Amoedo, what was supposed to be an election of hope, quickly became an election of fear.

The country is enduring the worst economic crisis of the 21st century, as well as a political crisis, with many leaders being jailed for corruption.

The astonishing rise of far-right candidate Jair Bolsonaro completely changed the political landscape of Brazil. Since 1994 the only parties to win a presidential election had been the Brazilian Social-Democracy party (PSDB), with former president Fernando Henrique Cardoso winning two terms, and the worker’s party (PT), with Luis Inacio Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff winning two terms each.

The current president, Michel Temer, took office following Roussef’s impeachment. With his approval in the single digits, it was too low for him to even consider running for president.

Brazil nearly escaped the 2007 recession without a scratch because its economy is based mostly on the export of commodities like soy. However, as prices dropped, the Brazilian economy felt shock-waves. An economy that had been thriving suddenly was no longer. And its people were horrified by the succession of corruption scandals publicized by the media and federal police.

Brazil is hardly immune to processes affecting the rest of the world. This is especially regarding the rise of extremist, right-wing candidates. This has played out in Europe, Asia, and even the United States. Jair Bolsonaro represents the Brazilian iteration of this phenomenon. Bolsonaro, a former Army captain and longtime representative who defends easier access to guns and a tougher stand on criminality, has been known to proclaim that the only good criminal is a dead criminal.

Opposing him in the run-off is Fernando Haddad, former Education Minister and former Sao Paulo mayor who was decisively voted out two years ago. Haddad is a member of PT, which has been involved in corruption scandals. Much of its old guard is jailed, including Lula, or gone turncoat on their colleagues in exchange for reduced sentences. Politically, his proposals are left-leaning and he would continue the social programs started under Cardoso’s government and amplified by Lula, albeit in a worse economic context.

On one side, there is a career politician who pines to return to brutal military dictatorship and makes claims that are dangerous to minorities. On the other side is a young politician intending to apply the same social reforms that worked when the country was economically prosperous.

Parallels can be traced to the American presidential election two years ago. Donald Trump was elected even though he was opposed by the media and never held political office. Bolsonaro is also seen as an outsider. But he has been in politics since he left the Army, and he has little to no accomplishments to show it. Haddad is closer to the figure of Hillary Clinton. He is relatively new to the executive field, but he represents the succession of Lula’s ideals. Lula has been in politics since before the re-democratization of Brazil in 1985.

Most alarmingly, Bolsonaro frequently defends the Brazilian military dictatorship of 1964-1985. He often praises torturers, and he favors minority repression. Brazil is a relatively young and fragile democracy. A shock like this could prove a mortal wound. Poland and Hungary show the effects of extreme-right governments on democracies. In the former, the image of Lech Walesa, one of the leaders of the democratic process in the 1980’s, is constantly attacked. Civil and political rights are suppressed.

Democracy is under attack the world over more than any time since the Cold War. Brazilians can stop it from reaching their country again.

In summary, democracy and its institutions in Brazil are at stake. On one side, there is a career politician who pines to return to brutal military dictatorship. This is someone who makes claims that are dangerous to minorities. On the other side is a young politician intending to apply the same social reforms that worked when the country was economically prosperous. This, while his party is involved in numerous corruption scandals. Paraphrasing Mario Vargas-Llosa, this is like choosing between Cancer and AIDS. However, as humans living in a western society, democracy and human rights should come before all else.

October 28th will see the run-off that pits Bolsonaro against Haddad. The hope is in the next 20 days Haddad will change his plans and appeal to moderate Brazilians. And these Brazilians will accept a worker’s party under a coalition government plan to oppose Bolsonaro’s authoritarianism and populism.

Democracy is under attack the world over more than any time since the Cold War. Brazilians can stop it from reaching their country again. They can opt to preserve its institutions and respect for all of its people. All we can do is hope that they do so.
-Roberto Malta is a Brazilian born George Mason University student pursuing a B.A. in Global Affairs, with minors in History and Economics.

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
 by Liam Timmons

Nuclear Terrorism: Threat Profile and Potential Impact

2018 10 04 Liam Pic 300x169 - Nuclear Terrorism: Threat Profile and Potential Impact

The typical profile of a terrorist attack may include gunmen storming a government building or a suicide bomber detonating his explosive vest in a crowd of festival attendees. However, arms wonks, policy makers, and scientists have long been attuned to a more sinister threat: a radiological dispersal device, or dirty bomb. A dirty bomb is a conventional explosive outfitted with a radiological contaminant such as strontium or cesium, which kills not only through explosive force but radioactive contamination as well.

Terrorist groups can create dirty bombs without much scientific expertise–the difficulty is not in designing the weapon but acquiring the radioactive material. However, according to the Nuclear Threat Initiative, radiological sources are common in commercial or medical devices and are often poorly secured and vulnerable to theft. In fact, as early as 1998, nineteen tubes of radioactive cesium were stolen from a hospital in North Carolina and were never recovered. Poorly secured nuclear facilities in Russia and former Soviet states are also at threat for theft of nuclear materials, with facilities in a number of Russian provinces and Georgia reporting theft.

A Center for Nonproliferation Studies outlined four possible threats of nuclear terrorism. These include the theft and detonation of an intact nuclear weapon, the theft or purchase of radioactive material and subsequent construction of an improvised nuclear device, attack against nuclear power plants, and the construction and detonation of a dirty bomb. Some sources have stated that nuclear terrorism may already be a reality: documents found in Herat, Afghanistan have indicated Al-Qaeda has been in possession of a dirty bomb since 2003, and radioactive contaminants before then.

In 2017, Indonesian militants acquired low-grade radioactive Thorium-232, which they hoped to transform into more potent Uranium-233. This uranium would then be combined with a homemade explosive to produce a dirty bomb. When ISIS conquered Mosul in 2014, radioactive Cobalt-60 was housed on a university campus in the city, ripe for the taking.

While the terrorist group proclaimed they had seized radioactive material and took over laboratories at the same university, Iraqi government officials later discovered they had not touched the Cobalt-60. Terrorist groups have long been aware of the deadly capabilities of a nuclear attack and have sought to plunder, purchase, or create dirty bombs with which to carry out nuclear attacks. At the same time, governments and nuclear scientists are aware of the threat posed by terrorists to nuclear facilities and actively work to upgrade security systems to combat it.

Despite efforts by a number of terrorist groups to obtain radioactive material and build a nuclear bomb, some experts believe the threat of nuclear terrorism is overblown. A number of explanations for terrorist nuclear abstinence have been proposed. These include the difficulty of carrying out such an attack, the disruptive impact of counter-terrorism efforts, and the potential for a nuclear attack to undermine the terrorist cause rather than advance it. Since the overwhelming majority of terrorist attacks to date have been simplistic strikes such as those utilizing knives, conventional explosives, or vehicles, a RAND Corporation analysis concluded, “Governments would be better off focusing their efforts on combating the spread and use of conventional weapons,” as opposed to countering nuclear terrorism.

Even assuming a terrorist group was able to carry out a dirty bomb attack, its impact may be limited. While the public may imagine dirty bombs as capable of killing hundreds or thousands of people, the death toll would more likely be limited to fewer than 100 people. If impacted civilians leave the area quickly, remove contaminated clothing, and shower to wash off radioactive debris, a dirty bomb does not pose much of a threat. However, the economic, psychological, and social costs of a dirty bomb would be much larger. As such, governments must be prepared for the long-term impact of a nuclear terrorist threat more than an initial attack. Costly, long-lasting decontamination efforts may be necessary depending on the level of radioactive contamination, and the public may be afraid of returning to the attack location, causing economic and social disruption.

Nuclear terrorism is a threat that has been underappreciated by the general public, but it has been recognized by counter-terrorism experts, governments, and scientists for some time. While the likelihood of a nuclear terror attack may be slim and the initial deadly effects small, the long-term threat of a dirty bomb attack means governments must upgrade nuclear security efforts at hospitals, power plants, and other facilities containing nuclear materials. Although prior thefts of radioactive material have not yet resulted in nuclear terrorism, it is only a matter of time before a dirty bomb or other nuclear threat becomes a reality.

in Africa / Asia / EUROPE & CENTRAL ASIA / Latin America / MENA / Rise to Peace blog / United States 0 comments
 by Roberto Malta

Profile: Brazilian Journalist Tim Lopes

noti 1 us 672 - Profile: Brazilian Journalist Tim Lopes

O filho de Tim Lopes, Bruno Quintela, com a avó e mãe do jornalista, dona Maria do Carmo Leia mais<\/a>

The media alerts us to human rights violations and wars between the oppressed and their oppressors. An under-reported story, however, is how journalists, photographers, and radiographers put their lives on the line to tell us the stories that must be told.

Many of them die in the process of doing so: Robert Capa, a Hungarian war photographer, took some of the best-known photographs of World War II. Capa shot the D-Day landing at Normandy. He died when he stepped on a landmine in the Vietnam War. Paraguayan journalist Candido Figueredo has covered his country’s criminal organizations for years. Figueredo has received numerous, credible death threats and has lived under government protection for 13 years.

Tim Lopes was a Brazilian journalist who was killed while covering drug traffickers. Arcanjo Antonino Lopes do Nascimento, aka Tim Lopes, was born in November 1950 in Pelotas, in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul. When he was eight years old, his family moved to the Mangueira favela in Rio de Janeiro.

Lopes had a humble upbringing. However, that did not stop him from studying journalism at the Faculdade Helio Alonso (FACHA). He won the coveted Premio Abril de Journalismo award twice early in his career in 1985 and 1986.

Lopes was an investigative journalist who preferred to do fieldwork on the street over sitting in an air-conditioned office. In pieces like the newspaper O Dia’s Funk: Sound, Joy, and Terror, Lopes openly criticized the drug traffickers in Rio’s Favela. However, he also went after those he saw in the municipal government ceding control to the criminals.

In 1995, Lopes joined Rede Globo, Brazil’s largest broadcaster, and began a career in broadcast journalism. Lopes kept his focus on fieldwork, specifically on the impact of those who grew up in the favelas as he did. He excelled at the network and within a year Lopes was a producer. Lopes and his team were awarded the Premio Esso, which is the Brazilian equivalent to a Pulitzer Prize. This was for a 2001 piece on drug traffickers. Lopes exposed traffickers openly selling cocaine in Rio de Janeiro’s streets. His work often included hidden cameras and disguises.

In June of 2002, Lopes left his middle-class apartment in Copacabana and stopped at the Rede Globo office. He continued to the Vila Cruzeiro favela to work on a piece about prostitution amongst minors. The local population had pleaded for Lopes to write such an expose. Lopes was filming when traffickers who had spotted his hidden camera approached and beat him. They kidnapped him, taking him to the Morro do Alemao, another favela where he had made enemies throughout his career.

There, he was tortured and condemned by a trafficker’s court. After being dismembered alive, Lopes was executed by being put inside car tires that were then set on fire, a method known as the microwave. The police listed the 51-year-old journalist as disappeared until an anonymous tip led police to a secret grave. There, a piece of Lopes’ rib was found, along with his wristwatch, crucifix, and camera.

Lopes left behind his wife Alessandra and their sons Diogo and Bruno. He also left behind many grieving coworkers and friends. Lopes received a proper send-off during Rede Globo’s Jornal Nacional, Brazil’s most popular news broadcast. Ending the show in silence was the habit when covering gristly developments. But anchor and chief-editor William Bonner led the newsroom in a standing ovation for Lopes and his work. To the last, they prevented the drug traffickers’ violence from having the last word. They proclaimed that journalists’ work would continue.

Tim Lopes’ life and legacy reflect his work. In life and in death he brought attention to the crimes and brutality of drug traffickers and government inaction. In the arduous work of improving the security of a city like Rio de Janeiro, his journalism led to action against drug traffickers. Lopes became nationally known after his death and a national conversation ensued. Lopes’ name is alive in the Newseum, in Washington D.C. There, he is commemorated among too many other journalists like him who were murdered in pursuit of career and moral commitment. In 2012 President Rousseff posthumously awarded Lopes the Premio Direitos Humanos, Brazil’s highest human rights prize. His death was an indictment of the favelas’ brutal realities – a testament to the terror that reigned there.

His life, however, proved no matter how humble one’s origins, no one has to join the criminals. In fact, one’s living could be made fighting them. Tim Lopes’ was a vital contribution to Brazilian society. His fight against drug traffickers led to better living conditions. Though our eyes may tear up, let’s not linger in the sadness following deaths like his. Let us, too, follow Bonner’s lead and give a standing ovation. We thank them for their vitally necessary work, their positive impact on society, and their inspiration for others to follow their path. That is how we make better and more peaceful societies and as a result, Lopes and his colleagues smile in Heaven for the survival of their work and legacy. 

700px O Complexo - Profile: Brazilian Journalist Tim Lopes

The Complexo do Alemão. For many years these hilltops were used by leaders of drug trafficking gangs as sanctuary from law enforcement; they now feature the stations of a gondola transport system connecting the Complexo (operational since July 2011).

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
 by Roberto Malta

Latin American Military Dictatorships

2018 09 14 Roberto Pic 300x185 - Latin American Military Dictatorships

http://freethoughtmanifesto.blogspot.com/2013/03/operation-condor.html

The period from 1964 – 1990 is a dark chapter in Latin American history.

The period from 1964 – 1990 is a dark chapter in Latin American history. Nearly all of the countries in the region were engulfed by the Cold War, and with American support, many overturned their democratically elected leaders. They turned to military dictatorships in what was an extension of the Red Scare, i.e. a paranoia regarding communist politicians and parties. Of these countries, three are of particular relevance due to their size and the violence of their regimes: Brazil, Argentina, and Chile.

The military took power in Brazil in 1964. This coup d’état deposed the elected government of Joao Goulart, who was perceived as having been a communist. Gradually, the general-presidents restricted civil and political rights. This culminated in the issuance of Institutional Act Number Five. AI-5 was a major decree that allowed the military to interfere as it wished in any level of Brazilian city or state government. It could even gerrymander its localities. AI-5 suspended constitutional guarantees, including those protecting Human Rights. Institutionalized torture became part of the state’s modus operandi. The regime was responsible for 191 deaths, 243 disappearances, and more than 50,000 arrests in a brutal season of oppression.

Security forces, right-wing death squads, along with military elements all went after socialists, left-wing guerrillas, and populist Peronists.

Argentina endured a similar convulsion. 10 years after Brazil’s lurch toward dictatorship, an Argentinian military junta took power. Unlike Brazil, in Argentina, the focus was on killing not on torture. The military junta launched what became known as The Dirty War on its opponents. Security forces, right-wing death squads, along with military elements all went after the opposition. Opponents included socialists, left-wing guerrillas — known as Montoneros — and the populist Peronists. As many as 22,000 Argentines were either killed, dumped into the river Mar del Plata, or disappeared into clandestine detention camps.

Estimates hold Pinochet responsible for the deaths of 10,000 – 30,000 Chileans.

A year before Argentina’s coup d’état, Chile had its own. It was 1973, and with American support, the Chilean military bombed the Chilean presidential palace. The incumbent, the leftist president Salvador Allende, reportedly committed suicide — albeit under circumstances so suspicious they remain under investigation today. What followed until 1990 was an end of civilian rule and the rise of Augusto Pinochet. During this time, repression of the population was rampant. Estimates hold Pinochet responsible for the deaths of 10,000 – 30,000 Chileans.

With extreme-right wing movements resurgent the world over, including in Latin America, it behooves us to reflect on the past’s pain and suffering. This is to say nothing of the economic woes that the appearance of right-wing military dictatorships augurs. When we forget history we doom ourselves to repeating it. Today, tools such as social media, international law, and prosecution of human rights violators act as a bulwark against abuses. However, populations must remain vigilant. The international community must rebuff any prospect of a brutal regime take-over to avoid irreparable losses. May Latin American military dictatorships remain a dark part of history and not a resurgent part of our present, or worse, our future.

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/03/violent-crime-in-sao-paulo-has-dropped-dramatically-this-may-be-why
 by Roberto Malta

Latin America: Transcending the Crime Epidemic

2018 09 10 Roberto Pic 300x129 - Latin America: Transcending the Crime Epidemic

Police reform has contributed to an improvement in public safety in São Paulo.

Despite milestones like 2012’s peace agreement between the Colombian government and FARC rebels, Latin America remains a region fraught with unconventional conflict. We are not talking about guerrilla war. As institutionalized state oppression largely becomes a memory – most of the region’s military dictatorships crumbled in the wake of the Cold War – homicides have become the most common form of violence. High murder rates, driven by daily criminal activity, plague Latin American streets.

43 of the globe’s 50 most murderous cities are concentrated in Latin America.

Civil violence in Latin America is a sad reality. The region includes 43 of the globe’s 50 most murderous cities. El Salvador has the highest murder rate per capita, earning it the dubious distinction Murder Capital of the World. Furthermore, Mexico’s President Felipe Calderon and his War on Drugs have let loose state security and police forces on organized criminals. This has led to unprecedented levels of violence. For the first time in its history, Mexico will be among the world’s top 20 most murderous countries.

Despite staggering murder rates and the heavy hand of organized crime, some parts of Latin America are showing promise. Previous comments notwithstanding, the murder rate in El Salvador dropped an impressive 26% between 2016 and 2017. Yet despite being significantly below even 2015 levels, it is still high enough to stay in the global top spot. Honduras saw a 28% drop in its homicide rate during the same period. Guatemala and Belize reported similar reductions, lighting a beacon of hope that the continent can overcome the violence that plagues it.

Sao Paulo’s conspicuous reduction in criminal activity is intriguing. Usually it is the largest cities that have the most crime.

Brazil, on the one hand, reported an uptick in murder per capita. And on the other hand, Brazil and Latin America’s largest city, Sao Paulo with its 12 million inhabitants, followed the declining pattern reported in El Salvador and Honduras. There, the murder rate declined from 52.5 per 100,000 inhabitants in 1999, to 6.1 in 2017 – 5 times lower than the Brazilian national average. Nearly every type of crime has declined there during this period. Sao Paulo’s conspicuous reduction in criminal activity is intriguing. Usually it is the largest cities that have the most crime. Thus, it is important to understand how Sao Paulo achieved this drop. Hopefully other areas can replicate its strategy and its results.

So, how did they do it? Well, where Mexico reportedly increased state-supported violence and suppression, Sao Paulo improved accountability around policing (one in four murders there is perpetrated by police), limited the sale of alcohol after 11 pm, and created economic opportunities for unemployed youth. El Salvador has instituted strong criminal justice reforms.

No doubt there remains much to be done. However, these examples illustrate that political will, sound policy, and transparency can help Latin America turn its problems around. Other localities therein would do well to take note: structural, and social reforms reduce conflict better than meeting brutality with more brutality.

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
 by Roberto Malta

Latin America: How Safe From Terror?

2018 Roberto Pic 300x187 - Latin America: How Safe From Terror?

Hall de Las Americas

Latin America has avoided the terrorist wave that has brutalized other parts of the world. That’s not to say that 7.5 million square mile swath of territories stretching from the northern border of Mexico to the southern tip of South America, including the Caribbean is immune to violence or that life there is a utopian paradise.

The region is rife with gun violence, murders, gang fights, drug traffickers, and civil wars. But, it has mostly avoided terror attacks and their brutal consequences.

This region has marginalized populations. It has poverty, and there are few opportunities to escape inequalities common in other regions such as the Middle East. But no corollary incidence of terror. The aforementioned characteristics – violence, marginalized populations, poverty, and injustice are the principal criteria that drive recruits to terror organizations.  However, the datasets diverge when you consider what the hostiles are fighting for. Usually, they are fighting what they perceive as the oppression of a foreign group invading their lands.

In the last century, terror groups have executed attacks against oppressive powers the world over. The Black Hand, which assassinated Archduke Franz Ferdinand, initiating World War I, intended theirs to be a blow against the oppressive Austro-Hungarian Empire, and an advancement in the cause of a free Serbia.

Several Middle East groups arose from French and English occupation following the Treaty of Versailles. Across the Mediterranean, nationalist groups such as IRA and ETA were formed with the intent to gain statehood for their people, the Irish and Basques. Famously, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in the 1980s saw terror groups spring up – in the context of the Cold War – sometimes with military support from a superpower like the United States. With the US invasion two decades later, this infrastructure was turned against what in some cases were those very groups.

Latin America has not gone through similar processes. Since its colonization in the 16th and 17th centuries, there have not been similar invasions or occupations. There was the Falklands War in 1982, but the island considered itself British and not Latin American. Most of the wars since have been between their European colonizers or didn’t lead to comparable military occupations. 

Latin America is more ethnically homogenous than the Middle East, or even the U.K., Spain, and the Balkans. This too keeps it away from the sectarian nature of terrorism. Foreign influence is indirect, unintrusive, it focuses on politicians. Civil wars in this region were contained to settling internal politics. Notable exceptions such as the FARC shifting from revolutionaries to narco-terrorists, and 1994’s AMIA bombing in Argentina, notwithstanding.

On the flip side, there are vulnerabilities that come from Latin America’s relative freedom from terror: it is in no way prepared to deal with an attack should one happen. The Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean calls attention to how such extreme events are incredibly expensive, citing 9/11 as a case in point. More than $50 billion in damages occurred, necessitating, “…some degree of state intervention to secure the solvency of insurance market institutions in the wake of large contingencies.”

The countries comprising Latin America, coupled with the Organization of American States (OEA) must take steps to vouchsafe markets and continuity of day-to-day life should an attack occur on Latin American soil. Hezbollah has unmistakably established a foothold in the border region between Brazil, Argentina, and Paraguay.

Besides, with globalization, terrorist organizations can plan attacks in one region while executing it in another. Latin America may be more exposed to harm than it realizes. If it doesn’t take steps to protect itself the consequences could be devastating.

in Latin America / Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
Rise to Peace