Felipe Calderón inventó en la campaña presidencial de 2006 una de las varias mentiras que hasta la fecha siguen repitiendo los panistas-salinistas: que AMLO es como Luis Echeverría y como José López Portillo.
Según esta patraña, tanto LEA como JLP eran “de izquierda.” Eso es falso.
Echeverría no sólo no era de izquierda sino que fue a Washington a reunirse con Richard Nixon para decirle que Fidel Castro y Salvador Allende eran un peligro para América Latina, y que le pedía por lo tanto que las empresas americanas invirtieran en México.
Esto ocurrió el 15 de junio de 1972 en la Casa Blanca. La conversación fue grabada por el gobierno de Estados Unidos y desclasificada muchos años después. La transcripción y el audio, disponibles en el sitio de la Universidad George Washington, incluye las siguientes declaraciones de Echeverría a Nixon vía traductor:
“Dígale usted al señor Presidente que en el discurso que voy a tener dentro de una hora en el Congreso, yo ratifico mis tesis del tercer mundo frente a las potencias, porque si en América Latina yo no tomo la bandera nos la quita Castro Ruz. Estoy perfectamente consciente de eso.
“Y que a todos los países del tercer mundo donde hay subempleo y hay pobreza, observamos soluciones capitalistas de tipo mixto preservando nuestras libertades o el otro va a avanzar.
“Dígale que México tiene que contribuir más que ningún país latinoamericano a quitarle una bandera de progreso a Castro Ruz, que no es cosa de rivalidad personal, sino es que tenemos que, que preservar valores y provocar fuentes de trabajo con tesis distintas de lo que Castro Ruz significa como un incentivo en América Latina.”
Echeverría no sólo no era de izquierda sino que buscaba complacer a Nixon, quien era republicano, es decir: de extrema derecha.
(((((Echeverría: Tell Mr. President that in the speech that I will deliver to the joint session of Congress within the hour, I will reiterate my principals of the Third World vis-á-vis the great powers of the world. Because-
Nixon: [Interrupting] The Echeverría Doctrine.
Echeverría: Yes - because if I don't take this flag in Latin America, Castro will. I am very conscious of this.
[Translator]
Echeverría: We in Mexico feel - and I sensed this also when I was in Chile and it can be felt in Central America, and among young people, among intellectuals - that Cuba is a Soviet base in every sense of the word, both militarily and ideologically, and that this is going on right under our noses.
[Translator]
Echeverría: [. . .] We are also aware of the fact that Dr. Castro and Cuba are instruments of penetration into the United States itself, not to mention Mexico and the other countries of Latin America. They are unceasing in their efforts, using one path or another.
[Translator]
Echeverría: And I believe, Mr. President, that it's obvious that with the large subsidies he receives [from the Soviets] and his very deep complicity, he seeks to project his influence into groups within the United States and Latin America. And if we in Mexico do not adopt a progressive attitude within a framework of freedom and of friendship with the United States, this trend will grow. I have sensed this not only in Latin America, but in certain groups within the United States as well.
[Translator]
Echeverría: He has had no scruples whatsoever about sacrificing his own country and eliminating all freedoms there just to be a tool of Soviets; at this very moment he is making a grand tour of many of the smaller socialist countries in Eastern Europe.
[Translator]
Echeverría: And this poses a huge problem for all of Latin America, in this time of population growth, unemployment and social tensions aggravated by international communism. That's why I believe that it is extremely important - and this is something of great personal concern to me - that we take their flags away from them by making real efforts to cooperate at the highest levels of government, as well as with private initiatives and technology.
Not only did the thrust of Cuba and the Soviet Union into Latin America threaten the stability of the region - Echeverría warned Nixon that it was already having an effect among leftist organizations inside the United States. Echeverría disclosed to Nixon that his aides had gathered intelligence on U.S. groups planning to protest the Mexican government in the American cities he would be traveling to.
Echeverría: This problem in Latin America is reflected within American society itself in the Mexican-Americans and Puerto Ricans and other racial minority groups. Therefore either we find balanced economic solutions to these issues or [the communists] will gain ground in Latin America and that will have repercussions inside your own borders.
[Translator]
Echeverría: There is no doubt whatsoever that President Nixon's meetings in China and Russia were great successes, but at the same time anything that China and Russia can do to cause problems, they will do - and in Latin America we feel that directly. I have observed this in Mexico, I saw it in Chile directly and in every Latin American country in one form or another.
[Translator]
Nixon: Well I think that, ah - first, the President's analysis is very perceptive about the problems of the hemisphere. And second, I appreciate the fact that he is taking the lead - speaking up not only for his own country, which of course is his first responsibility […] - but he's taking the lead in speaking up for the whole hemisphere. Because Mexico, as he said earlier, provides not only the U.S. border with Mexico but the U.S. border with all of Latin America. And Mexico also, you could say, is the bridge - the bridge between the United States and the rest of Latin America. I think for the President of Mexico to take a leading role in speaking about the problems of the hemisphere is very constructive. [. . .]
[Translator]
Echeverría: When I was about to leave from Mexico for this trip, Mr. President, I was informed by my various people that groups of Mexicans had been in touch with friends of Angela Davis [a well-known Black activist at the University of California in Berkeley] in this country. And that we were aware of the plans of the organization that Angela Davis heads to mount a key demonstration in San Antonio protesting the existence of political prisoners in Mexico. All of this is connected to people in Chile, with people in Cuba, with the so-called "Chicano" groups in the United States, with certain groups in Berkeley, California - they're all working closely together.
[Translator]
Echeverría: As soon as the plan existed that she would go to San Antonio to a demonstration in protest of internal affairs of Mexico with this idea of saying that "all political prisoners in every country should be released," we were immediately informed.
[Translator]
Echeverría: They are working very actively - and again, these events that take place in Latin America have repercussions within the borders of the United States.
Nixon told Echeverría that he agreed in principle that increased investment was crucial, but said that before U.S. business would commit to Latin America, they needed to be confident that countries could protect private enterprise and ensure stability: "stability without the fear of violent takeover or expropriation." He asked Echeverría to carry that message to the leaders in the region, and to warn the rest them of the perils of going down the path of socialist Chile. By spreading the word about the dangers of communism and the importance of private capital, Nixon said, Echeverría would become the hemisphere's most important leader.
Nixon: [. . .] I think one thing that would be very helpful for the President to emphasize in his statements in Latin America would be the fact that there is a responsibility to provide stability in government, and some guarantee for the protection of the right kind of private enterprise, such as is the case in his country. Now this is a very delicate matter. I do know this: nobody in the United States can say that because then it looks as if we are interfering in Latin America and trying to tell them what kind of government they should have. On the other hand, I think if the President of Mexico speaks out on this subject, […] he could simply say that [. . .] he finds a readiness, a willingness of American private enterprise to come in on a partnership basis to Latin America. But there must be on the other side responsibility in governments in the Latin American countries to provide stability for that kind of investment.
[Translation into Spanish]
Nixon: For example, the President has been to Santiago. I do not know President Allende, and I do not judge him, I don't know what his plans for Chile may be in the future. But on the other hand, as the President well knows, at the present time all foreign capital is fleeing Chile, trying to get out. And no new capital is coming in. Now that's their choice. But if the Chilean experiment is repeated in varying degrees in other Latin American countries, there's no chance that the big corporations […] will put their money there. Because there are other parts of the world - for example, countries like Indonesia, Thailand, in Asia and countries in Africa, even, where they think there's a better chance for their investments to survive. What I am saying to the President is not directed to his country. I'm using his country as an example - if more countries in Latin America could follow the example of Mexico, I think you'd see a tremendous boom in investment from the United States and from Europe and Japan. […]
[Translation into Spanish]
Nixon: But I want to tell the President that […] he can count on me to urge the American business community to invest in Latin America. I think it's vitally important for the United States that we not allow the Cuban tragedy to infect the rest of the Caribbean and eventually the rest of Latin America. And frankly, to be quite candid, I think it would be very detrimental to all of us to have the Chilean experiment spread through the rest of the continent. It will be a very unhealthy hemisphere if that will be an element - the wave of the future.
[Translation into Spanish]
Nixon: I would also like to say one other thing to the President, without treading on any of Mexico's traditional attitude toward maintaining an independent policy. I think it's very helpful that Mexico take a greater leadership role in the OAS in matters like this. I am not thinking now that Mexico should take this role as any agent of the United States. But I think that Mexico is in an ideal position to do so. And otherwise the leadership role will be taken by other leaders in the continent who cannot speak as effectively as can the President of Mexico.
[Translation into Spanish]
Echeverría: Tell him that I agree with his analysis.
[Translator]
Nixon: In other words, let the voice of Echeverría rather than the voice of Castro be the voice of Latin America.
But if Nixon liked the man, he was indifferent to the country the man represented. The American President saw himself as a protagonist in the great geopolitical questions of his day - and Mexico was not one of them, as he told his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, after his first meeting with Echeverría.
Nixon: After you've dealt in two summit meetings - one in Peking and the other in Moscow - with major subjects, it is really terribly difficult to deal with even a country as important as Mexico. And frankly, for that matter, you could say the same for the British, the French, the Italians and the Germans. You know what I mean? There are certain countries that matter in the world and certain countries that don't matter in the world at the present time.
Despite Echeverría's plea for a "new American partnership" with Latin America, U.S. policy toward Mexico did not change perceptibly during the Nixon administration. Indeed, the rhetoric of a new partnership has continued throughout the present day, with few new results. Personalismo did not translate into policy then, nor does it today.
Whatever Nixon may have thought of Mexico and its President, Luis Echeverría - who completed his term in office in December 1976 - outlasted his American counterpart. On June 17, 1972, the day after the two leaders met for a second time in the White House, five burglars were arrested breaking into the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate apartment complex in downtown Washington.
It was the beginning of the end; Nixon's White House tapes would later prove his downfall. .))))
López Portillo también se hizo pasar por político de izquierda mientras, al mismo tiempo, continuaba la guerra sucia contra la izquierda mexicana. La mejor prueba de que JLP era de derecha es el hecho de que designó como su sucesor a un neoliberal: Miguel De La Madrid Hurtado.
Los gobiernos de LEA y JLP no fracasaron por ser de izquierda (no lo eran), sino por ser sumamente corruptos. Por esa misma razón fracasaron los gobiernos neoliberales de De La Madrid, Salinas, Zedillo, Fox y Calderón.
—
PD: Al PAN le agradaba López Portillo. No sólo prominentes panistas defendieron la nacionalización de la banca, sino que el PAN no postuló candidato presidencial en 1976 para que JLP no tuviera oposición y ganara sin broncas las elecciones. Los panistas alegan que era porque no tenía caso participar en elecciones en donde siempre ganaba el gobierno, pero ese alegato no se sostiene ya que sí postularon candidatos a diputados federales y senadores.
PD2: Si no lo han hecho, lean por favor la columna de ayer: http://sdpnoticias.com/sdp/columna/victor-hernandez/2010/01/03/559420
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario