PERU: The state of the state

The public be damned. American TV showed scenes of the violence in Lima and Arequipa because the public likes violence. Conversely, commercial TV did not show scenes of President Alejandro Toledo giving his state of Peru address because it was quiet and constructive, not destructive, and therefor of no interest to the public. If the American public is badly informed about international affairs, it is the public which is to blame. Which, not who: an amorphous mass. Scenes of violence in Lima and Arequipa gave the impression that the Toledo government might collapse. His speech to congress depicted a Peru marching ahead.

He was careful to pay homage to the armed forces and the police, which have been reformed. He obviously realized that, were he to antagonize them, they would be tempted to stage a coup. He claimed that Peru was now the Latin American country making the most economic progress. The implication was that Peru was doing better than Chile. He spoke especially of improving relations with Ecuador, with which Peru had long been warring. He should welcome the new government of Bolivia, formerly Upper Peru, but he left that unsaid. He stressed improvements in education, and quoted figures to prove it.

He deserves international support because he represents a hope for all "Latin American" countries with a large Indian population. Usually the Indians appear as colorful, backward and oppressed. In Toledo we have an Indian who wants to modernize Peru and who speaks the language of the traditional governing class. He represents the reconciliation of races and classes. He is a model for countries such as Colombia which the old antagonisms are wrecking. ¡Viva Alejandro Toledu! ¡Viva el Perú!

Ronald Hilton - 8/6/02