Among the speakers were various senior figures of European politics, including Karel De Gucht, European Commissioner for Trade, Guy Verhofstadt, President of the Liberal and Democratic Alliance in the European Parliament, and Elsa Fornero, Italian Minister of Labor. The private sector was represented by numerous management executives of major multinational companies, such as General Electrics Europe, Sanofi, and Deutsche Bank. A renown group of transatlantic academics, diplomats, and NGO representatives rounded off the picture.

The format of the conference, which was held at both the Kennedy School and Business School, left room for informal talks among speakers and participants. The latter were predominantly graduate students from leading European and US East Coast Universities.

Recurring topics discussed throughout the weekend included the recently announced talks on a Free Trade Agreement between the United States and the European Union, Green Technologies as a field of competitive advantage for Europe, the electoral outcome in Italy, and the future design of a EU Banking Union. A key point that was repeatedly raised by both politicians as well as academics and business representatives was the need for EU politicians to go beyond mere technical fixes to the current structural problems and to win publics for a shared long-term vision of future European integration.

While the conference would have benefited from a stronger involvement of legitimate eurosceptic voices, it can be regarded as a highly promising launch-edition for the years to come. In terms of participation costs, a $25 admission fee (including lunch and coffee breaks) and another $25 optional reception ticket, are also a plus.

CISS was represented at the Conference by Lukas Keller, Regional Director Latin America and the Caribbean.

While most of the media coverage on the pervasive drug and gang violence in the region concentrates on Mexico, it is in fact Guatemala and the two countries to its South, Honduras and El Salvador – together constituting Central America’s “Northern Triangle” – that have been hit hardest by the shift in US-bound illicit drug trafficking routes since the 1990s. Testimony to this gives the 55% average increase in the countries’ intentional homicide rate between 2001 and 2010, which already then stood at global record levels. While this development is unfortunate and alarming enough, the three countries also provide exceptional examples for the process by which public insecurity impinges upon the quality and legitimacy of democratic governance.

Few topics lend themselves better to populist promises than crime. This was evident in recent elections across the Northern Triangle. Ballots were won by candidates promoting a “mano dura” (iron fist) approach against crime, while proposals concerning the more complicated underlying causes of the problem such as deficient welfare policies and high income inequality took a backseat in the campaigns. In all of the three countries this leads to a growing militarization of the security forces and an overburdening of the judiciary, which is incapable of processing the cases of an exploding prison population. At the same time, the programmatic void that is left behind by politicians’ focus on “law and order”-approaches is increasingly filled by organized criminal groups such as the drug cartels. According to a recent report by the Organization for American States the latter have begun to run their own candidates in local elections.

An overemphasis of mano dura policies thus contributes to a steady decline in the efficiency and legitimacy of political institutions in the Northern Triangle, a trend that experts say will soon hamper the states’ capabilities to develop and implement much needed social development policies.

To avoid this situation, the governments of the countries would be well advised to overhaul their anti-crime strategies and promote policies that focus on prevention and rehabilitation as well as broader citizen participation. Best-practice examples may be found nearby: Nicaragua’s experience with crime prevention programs like community policing and job training for youth indicates that alternative strategies can be more effective at curbing crime. Likewise, recently launched regional initiatives and co-operations with multilateral organizations focusing on the transnational alignment and bolstering of crime prevention agencies raise awareness for the common cause and alternative strategies and should be furthered. Bilateral donors, including the German GIZ, have an important role to play in this regional promotion of best-practice anti-crime policies.

Rodolfo Quezada Toruño’s legacy of helping to end Guatemala’s civil war may be somewhat overshadowed by the disappointed promise of a more democratic development of the Guatemalan society during the past 16 years. This is all the more reason for his unconventional leadership skills to be a powerful inspiration for politicians seeking to devise innovative and effective anti-crime strategies in the Northern Triangle.

Lukas Keller
Regional Director Central & South America at CISS

This article is co-published with our partners of Diplomatisches Magazin.

Asked about his position on the two main contenders in the Republican race for the presidential candidacy, an Ohioan voter on Super Tuesday said “I am not really convinced by either one of them. If there was someone combining the two virtues they stand for (economic expertise and a strong stance on conservative values), that person would be something.”

Well, while merging the two hopefuls into a sweeping Romtorum is at least physically impossible, voters might be presented with a satisfying alternative soon. When Republican delegates gather in the Tampa Bay Times Forum in late August, a number of predictors say they will choose Romney as their presidential nominee and Santorum as his vice presidential running mate.

Would this team be a game changer in the race for the White House, able to seriously challenge a weakened Obama in the November election?

The first question is whether they would actually make a credible team. I would think so, judging by their appearances and the lack of fierce attacks launched against each other – well, there has been the usual “He’s not fit for the job” palaver, but then again, Hillary Clinton said the same about Obama back in 2008 if I remember correctly, and we know how that worked out.

On the question of whether Romney and Santorum would be better able to capture voters together than either one with a different VP, the picture is less clear. Some commentators say that Santorum would be capable of winning back those parts of the Republican base that are alienated by Mitt the Liberal Massachusetts Mormon – a logic applied by McCain when he chose Sarah Palin as his VP in 2008 to quell voters concerned with his apostate views. At the same time however, Santorum’s image as a staunch conservative with extreme views on issues such as abortion and immigration will make him a risky choice when the aim is to win over swing voters, especially women and Latinos.

For precisely the latter reason, the most likely candidates for the vice presidential spot on the ticket have until recently been Florida Senator Marco Rubio and Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell. Rubio could harvest the Hispanic vote for Romney, who himself is extremely unpopular with Latinos. Unfortunately, Rubio’s prospects suffered heavily after having been identified as a former Mormon and a sponsor of a recent controversial contraception bill. McDonnell, a light version of Santorum in terms of values, saw his hopes being swept away when he endorsed and then suddenly backed away from a flawed abortion bill.

Thus, Santorum currently seems to be Romney’s most promising running mate. This appears to be the case simply due to a lack of better alternatives. But there are still a number of primary elections to be held, offering opportunities for Santorum and other candidates to fine-tune their profiles. And who knows, maybe we’ll see a complete unknown as the final pick. It’s not like anyone had the Alaska governor on the map in March 2008.

This is the first in a series of CISS blog posts on the 2012 U.S. presidential election. Upcoming contributions will deal with the external dimension of the race to the White House by focussing on the Republican contenders’ views on key foreign policy issues and perceptions of Obama’s efforts to shape a post-American world.

 by Lukas Keller

The struggle over the adoption of the Colombo-American deal had been fought feverously between leftist lobbying groups and conservative advocates in both countries for more than five years.

In the US, opposition against the FTA was turning around the argument that before rewarding Bogotá with the benefits of the deal the country should increase its commitment to ensuring the basic human rights of those caught between the lines of its internal conflict – paying special reference to trade unionists, which are getting killed in the dozens every year. As President Obama expressed his support for this viewpoint during his campaign in 2008, there is no need for a forensics team to assert that the recent move of approval has been, amid dim economic conditions, literally a victory of business over human rights considerations. Some of the mentioned lobbying groups have now announced their willingness to continue to challenge the legality of the act.

Meanwhile, although the Colombian congress itself ratified the FTA in as early as 2007, socialists and representatives of the agricultural industry in the country are even unsure whether the framework will really yield the promised long term economic benefits. For the five years of bilateral deliberations, Colombia repeatedly committed itself to modernizing its infrastructure and ports to cope with the forecasted increased in- and outflow of goods. But poor enforcement of the plan as well as several corruption scandals prevented Bogotá from making any progress in that area. Fears, that this backlog could heavily shift the gains of the FTA unilaterally towards the US are joined by concerns over whether Colombia’s farmers will actually be capable of competing with agricultural imports from the US.

As these discussions demonstrate, the dispute over the US-Colombian FTA is going to continue for a while and might even bring – at whose end is probably everybody’s guess – the eventual implementation to a halt.

Lukas Keller