It is no longer a secret that TIME magazine chose Bill Gates, Melinda Gates and Bono as their people of the year, 2005. But probably relatively few will be aware that a magazine published in Colombia, SEMANA, has named Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, as their man of the year. In Ecuador, the daily EL COMERCIO put Chávez at the top of their list of international leaders that they consider to have been the "winners" of 2005. (They also placed President George W. Bush at the top of their list of "losers.") Time (not TIME) will tell which publications had the better judgment and whether we are looking at fads or at trends.
It should be noted that this is the first time in its history that SEMANA, a very conservative publication, has chosen someone outside of Colombia for this designation. On the other hand, TIME's list of other significant people indicates to me their obsession with the importance of U.S. personalities and events. How many people in the world give a hoot about the teen golfer, Michelle Wie, for example?
The SEMANA article is currently available online in Spanish. I don't plan to translate it here, but a few sentences from the opening paragraph should give an idea of the contents of the article and the reasons for SEMANA's choice.
"... In the last 12 months he has altered the political map of this continent, distributed Venezuela's petroleum wealth to the four corners of the earth, challenged the United States, and from being perceived as a tropical clown he has positioned himself as the most influential Latin American leader on the global level. In a world that is more and more interdependent, what the president of a country indelibly linked to Colombia has done has a historic appearance."
The article gives four principal reasons for their choice: Chávez has led the integration of Latin America; he has bettered relationships with Colombia (South America's closest ally to the U.S.); he has gained international respect; and, he is the only world leader that has openly challenged President George W. Bush of the United States.
Comparing the Gates and Bono with Chávez, I sense that the choices of both magazines were heavily influenced by the way all of them secured funds and how they distributed them for the benefit of others. But there are some differences involved.
In the case of the Gates, we are talking about sharing some of their personal wealth, a matter of philanthropy. In regard to Bono, his efforts have been in motivating governments and others in an effort to eliminate poverty. The efforts of Chávez, however, have not been as a private citizen, but as an elected leader of a government.
What the Gates and Bono have done is good, but no one elected them to do what they are doing. At least theoretically, what Chávez is doing is what those who have elected him to be their world representative want him to do. By a quirk of nature, Venezuela has oil. But what is done with the wealth it produces is another question. Do the natural resources of the world belong only to the nation where they are found, or are they to be shared for the benefit of all? This sharing is not a charitable act; it is a matter of justice.
Charitable foundations and private initiatives can do a lot; but a new world order demands social justice more than charity. This, I feel, is the thrust of Chávez's efforts.
I may be wrong in thinking of the efforts of the Gates and Bono as a fad, but I have seen so many attempts (most on smaller scales) come and go. Let's face it, lots of major corporations have had foundations distributing some of their surplus funds for years--and have received tax benefits as a result and the executives of the foundations have gained good salaries for these "philanthropical" efforts.
Maybe the efforts of Chávez will also end up being classified as a fad. But deep down, as I watch what is happening in Latin America, I hope we are beginning to witness a trend.
Finally, speaking of trends, the first country that the new president of Bolivia, Evo Morales, visited was Cuba. Not even Chávez merited the honor that Fidel Castro gained. And the country chosen by Colombia to hold their negotiations with the ELN was Cuba. And, when Colombian president Uribe needed help mending his disastrous handling of the kidnapping of Rodrigo Granda, a former militant of the FARC (the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia) and the "chancellor" of the FARC in Latin America, it was Fidel Castro and not George W. Bush who diplomatically saved the day for him. And, how often is it mentioned that only three nations voted with the U.S. last year to continue the blockade of Cuba: Israel, the Marshall Islands (with about 72,000 people) and Palau. Yes, Palau with 17,000 inhabitants. Wow! What a political victory for the U.S.! And, after Jesus and Bolivar, who does Hugo Chávez see as his hero? Fidel.
Having written this last paragraph, not only do I have my criticism about TIME’s myopic selections but I also have to wonder as to whether Chávez was SEMANA’s best selection for the Man of the Year. Is it possible that Fidel Castro should have been chosen?
