Mario Vargas Llosa y Yo

[ENGLISH VERSION BELOW]

Espero que después de leer este articulo, usted no piense que yo estoy haciendo alarde de haber conocido a Mario Vargas Llosa. Pero el haberlo conocido me hace sentir una sensación de honor y orgullo por un escritor ilustre, por un ensayista y, por un político (aún más raro) honesto quien inspiró mi interés en política.

Caí bajo el encanto de Vargas Llosa en 1990, cuando él era líder del Movimiento Libertad. En ese entonces, yo vivía en Perú, y yo fui voluntario para trabajar como organizador de grupos estudiantiles en la región de Ucayali. Poco después de haber empezado la campaña política, fui a una conferencia dirigida por el mismísimo Mario Vargas Llosa, en la capital, Lima. Así fue como lo conocí a él por primera vez, e inmediatamente quede impresionado por su comportamiento, su tono relajado, y su pasión por querer ayudar al Perú a salir de una crisis severa—una inflación de más de 6.000 por ciento, altísimo desempleo, y el terrorismo que amenazaba seriamente. Su discurso político hacia parecer que todo era posible. Yo, simplemente estaba anonadado. Mario Vargas Llosa tenía un plan de gobierno bien estructurado y documentado cuidadosamente, de manera que se pueda deshacer se de los males que destruían Perú. Esencialmente era una guía paso a paso de cómo curar “al hombre enfermo”.

Como político primerizo, Vargas Llosa fue muy honesto como para tener éxito en un país donde los políticos más experimentados y de trayectoria antigua, ya estaban destinados al infierno, sin posibilidad de redención. Sus más cercanos aliados fueron políticos incompetentes que los peruanos no querían ver de vuelta al poder. Y en un país tan católico y mojigato como lo fue/es Perú, decir en pleno debate televisivo, que cuando era joven él hizo cosas por diversión, puso a mucha gente sonrojar o gritar en horror. Era como contarle un chiste rojo a una pobre viejecita que rezaba ante la imagen de la Virgen María.

Lo curioso fue que aún que Vargas Llosa perdió la elección presidencial ante Alberto Fujimori, últimamente su plan de gobierno todavía pudo beneficiar al Perú. Fujimori implementó mucho de los planes económicos de Vargas Llosa—Aunque, lamentablemente, Fujimori lo hizo sin considerar el respeto de Vargas Llosa por los derechos humanos.

Después de los resultados a las elecciones de 1990, los peruanos expresaron sentimientos encontrados por Vargas Llosa. Para algunas personas, él es un hombre muy bien considerado y querido, para otros… sólo dimagos que ellos no piensan de él con admiración y cariño. Muchas veces él fue tratado como un extranjero en su propio país; incomprendido por la gente que se dejo cegar por extremado nacionalismo. Pero estos días, yo asumo que Vargas Llosa debe sentirse inmensamente complacido, haber sido galardonado con el Premio Nóbel de Literatura, y sentirse finalmente muy querido por el país que una ves sintió disgusto por él—aquel país que nunca dejo de ser mencionado en casi todos sus libros. Vargas Llosa nunca dejo de amar el Perú.

No sólo el Perú se siente con mucho orgullo y felicidad por tener un laureado del premio Nóbel, único en su clase; también América Latina puede sentirse orgulloso y feliz. Y realmente, Vargas Llosa representa América, desde los árticos del Canadá hasta la Tierra de Fuego en Chile—no simplemente por esa pequeña división nombrada por astutos padres fundadores, aquella patria que se hace llamar “América”, tampoco por divisiones particulares definidas por tendencias raciales o económicas. América es como dos niños que fueron criados por dos distintos padres.

Muchos años después de la campaña política de 1990, yo me encontré otra ves con Vargas Llosa en la universidad de Georgetown. Había tantos cosas que yo le quería decir, quería conversar con él como compatriotas que somos fuera de nuestro país, y talvez compartir recuerdos en común; pero al final, me quede corto de palabras, y simplemente le dije cuánto lo admiraba a él y cuánto gusto de sus libros. Que yo pienso que él es realmente un gran escritor. Pero entonces, él ya lo sabia. Inclusive, ahora el comité de los premios Nóbel lo ha reconocido así.

Espero tener el privilegio de encontrar lo algún día, otra vez.

[ENGLISH VERSION]

"MARIO VARGAS LLOSA and Me"

After you finish reading this, I hope you will not think that I was bragging about knowing Mario Vargas Llosa. But I feel a strong sense of pride and honor in having met this illustrious writer, essayist, and (even rarer) honest politician who inspired my interest in politics.

I first fell under the spell of Vargas Llosa in 1990, when he was the leader of Movimiento Libertad. I was living in Peru at the time, and had volunteered to work as the student group organizer in the region of Ucayali. Soon after the campaign began, I went to a conference in the capital, Lima, with Mario Vargas Llosa himself. That was the first time I met him, and I was immediately impressed by his demeanor, his relaxed tone, and his passion for helping Peru get out of a severe economic crisis—inflation was over 6,000 percent, unemployment was very high, and terrorism was a serious threat. I was, quite simply, in awe of him. His political speeches made everything seem possible. Mario Vargas Llosa had a carefully structured and well-documented plan for ridding Peru of all its maladies. It was essentially a step-by-step guide for how to cure “the sick man.”

As a fresh politician, Vargas Llosa was too honest to succeed in a country where the more seasoned, old-school politicians were already destined for hell without redemption. His closest political allies were incompetent politicians whom Peruvians didn’t want back in power. And in a country as Catholic and as prudish as Peru was/is, for a politician to confess during a televised debate to things that he had done for fun when he was young makes many people blush or almost cry out in horror. It’s a little like telling a dirty joke to an old lady while she’s praying before the Virgin Mary.

The funny thing is that although Vargas Llosa ultimately lost the presidential election to Alberto Fujimori, his plan still benefitted Peru. Fujimori went on to implement most of Vargas Llosa’s economic plans—though, sadly, he did so without Vargas Llosa’s respect for human rights.

In the aftermath of the 1990 election, and even today, Peruvians have mixed feelings about Vargas Llosa. For some people, he is a beloved and well-regarded man; for others . . . well, let’s just say that they don’t think of him with fondness or admiration. He was treated like a foreigner in his own country. He was misunderstood by people who were blinded by extreme nationalism. But these days, I assume that it must be immensely gratifying for Vargas Llosa, having been awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature, to feel loved at last by the country that had once so disliked him—the country that never stopped appearing in almost all his books. Vargas Llosa never stopped loving Peru.

Not only can Peru feel pride and happiness at having the Nobel Laureate as one of its own, but all Latin America can also feel proud and happy. And in truth, Vargas Llosa represents America, from the Arctic in Canada to the Tierra de Fuego in Chile—not merely one small division outside the portion named “America” by clever founding fathers, and not a particular division defined by economic or racial trends. America is like two kids raised by two different fathers.

Many years after the 1990 campaign, I met Vargas Llosa again at Georgetown University. There was so much I wanted to say to him. I wanted to address him as a fellow Peruvian abroad, to share common memories. But in the end, I fell short of words. I simply shook his hand and told him how much I admire him and his writing. I told him that I think he is truly a great writer. But then, he already knew that. Now, even the Nobel Committee has recognized it.

I hope I will have the privilege of meeting him again someday.

Elections in Brazil, a Mess in Ecuador

As BBC Brasil observed today, the presidential election has divided the country. Roughly half of all Brazilians endorse Dilma Rousseff’s plans to continue Lula’s policies, while the other half endorse Jose Serra’s proposal to introduce strong market regulations. The skepticism about Rousseff’s candidacy--in Brazil and abroad--centers on the prospect of maintaining continuity with a different face. In less than a month, the results of a run-off ballot will determine the winner. And so both candidates are currently wooing Marina Silva’s voters, 19 percent of the Brazilian electorate.

If I were Brazilian, my vote would go to Serra because electing Rousseff would be tantamount to reelecting Lula Da Silva. A Rousseff government could even resemble the current situation in Russia, where Putin seems to be pulling the strings of a puppet president. Can Brazilians really know for sure whether Rousseff would be the puppet or the puppeteer? With Serra, by contrast, the answer is clear.

The outcome of the presidential election is important because Brazil still needs to solidify its market economy. The implementation of sound economic policies, which would help ensure a well-regulated market, are needed in order for Brazil to show it’s serious about becoming a hegemon in the region and increasing its influence in the international arena. The economic policies pursued by Lula were, more or less, an extension of the policies of his predecessor, Henrique Cardoso. And those policies were optimal for the times, giving good results--reducing poverty, for example, and improving education and literacy rates. However, I believe Serra has made a compelling case for following the same economic recipes but with some important new ingredients, including an improved financial regulatory scheme.

Yet most Brazilians are not primarily focused on economic issues in this election. Instead, the voters are divided based largely on questions of political style and the personalities of the candidates. In the end, Marina Silva’s voters will make the difference on October 31st.

Meanwhile in Ecuador . . . what a mess!! Or should I say, the mess continues. I wonder whether Ecuadorians have really grasped the concept of democracy or the consequences of military action taken against their own democratically elected government. Ousting Rafael Correa would not have solved Ecuador’s internal problems. What’s so sad is that it’s the indigenous population that suffers most due to the ineptitude of both the left and the right. Don’t be surprised if a candidate with an indigenous background emerges as a viable candidate in the next presidential campaign. Such a candidate could make a huge difference, simply by appealing to the solidarity of his or her fellow indigenous people.