debe el gobierno enfrentarse en gobiernos como el de venezuela, bolivia, argentina?ecuador, nicaragua no son positivas. no le sirven a amÉrica latina el problema es que los estados unidos esto no lo puede hacer sÓlo si lo empieza a ser sólo va a resultar nuevamente un ejemplo de imposiciÓn norteamericana, de unilaterales o norteamericano lo que tenÍa que hacer obama es convencer a sus aliados naturales en amÉrica latina como mÉxico, colombia, chile ahora con un nuevo presidente. perÚ, quizÁs el caso de brasil un poco mÁs adelante tal vez cambiarÁ de presidente brasil a fin de aÑo, actuar con sus aliados, insisto no por la vÍa militar. por la vÍa de el debate, la confrontaciÓn ideológica para mostrar los avances de amÉrica latina en estos aÑos jorge. las economÍas que carecen, la democracia representativa, el respeto los derechos humanos. todo eso estÁ en peligro por la actitud de el gobierno como el de chÁvez, como el de cuba. y hay que enfrentar los pero por la vÍa del debate.ion >> quisiera terminar con el tema de mÉxico. seÑor castaÑeda usted publicÓ un libro que

bolivia's event one year. a pastor at canadian on the shores of lake to a. everything had gone really well. the entity gave about 15 grain come at the local municipal party another 15 grand. community members themselves have popped up 200 for themselves and we are still shy about $3000 it's out there for about performance. we didn't have the money to buy the pump. and so, the people were getting very frustrated. we didn't have a mechanism for change orders. a work of the public water sector here is a part of reality. and so the people realize that they would have leveraged to force our hand and that was the day before the international bikes event was to pass to their community. so it's no fun being in front of 100 community members who are quite livid. it's the night before and you're hearing radio reports whether natural negotiations are going well. and so were able to pull it off for midnight. basically it cost sharing arrangement we agreed upon. but just one of various instances we had in my life. >> and the other comments for the panel? >> the only thin

it is important to give a quick overview of the context in bolivia over the last decade.l period where they've been able to achieve power, and as you can imagine, this has not come easily. i waste being blockaded for three or four weeks that time -- highways being blockaded for three of four weeks at a time. generally peaceful, but some tremendous brutality by government forces of order. two of those were induced by water-related issues, another by gas or in 2003, leaving 60 of our fellow residents murdered in cold blood. there are continuous water development efforts despite that. peace corps volunteers have been pulled out in 2002. i bring that up because it it amazes me as an engineer to realize that we cannot just look at development without looking at the structural issues in play. let's see if my slides can punch up with a. -- can catch up with me. first of all, i would like to thank some key people. crs gave me free rein on this book. no topic was taboo. what a conflict has -- water conflict has tremendously powerful interests at play. it speaks truth that i think

i would like to know, from jason's experience in bolivia, since you were there during this conflict, do you think that there was actually a constructive process? has it resulted in change? if not, what could we have done to make sure that that pushed up the line could have been more constructive? >> thank you. can i take one from the back? yes. >> my name is shannon and i work with the larouche action committee, we always reverenced genesis, that mankind is made in god's image, human beings have the ability to make technological improvements and discoveries to support a larger population and living conditions. one of the key concerns they have is a conflict management. if the assumption is made that water is a scarce resource, we have to figure out how to manage conflicts. we -- why are we not talking about nuclear power and desalinization? why not talk about modern irrigation? we could greene the deserts' of africa the same way that we did in the united states, not to mention the rest of the solar system. that is my first question. you also talked about political structures, but no

and bolivia, ecuador and peru, they have the coca leaves. mexico doesn't have the. >> right.this talk about them starting to grow cocoa, seriously. >> coke is big, very big in mexico. comes from south america. >> but they don't have the trees that grow it. >> what's your point though exactly? >> well, i mean, they are getting the raw stuff from wherever. and south america, central america, or south america mostly. because it's all over the place in peru. and i think the soldiers are a big nuisance in mexico. because the soldiers are hiring people from the city. politicians are hiring people from the city to run the soldiers out. sebelius. the problem there is with the arms thing. all the arms go from here over there. i did a lot of charity work, and i don't anymore. i don't live there. i know all these areas because i hung out supposedly with the wrong people. and we might be here with, because america is the biggest consumer of drugs. >> no question. >> because of the money. it's easier to get to. they are trying to legalize marijuana in mexico. for what? they can't afford i

host: in bolivia and with morales, was the shape of the country?t: the imf has just about with a very favorable view of president carlos' leadership -- president moralises is doing in that country. it is an interesting case with how the leader can turn around the economy and begin to deal with the issues he needs to address. host: debbie in albuquerque. caller: listening to you and i'm quite amused with your take on history because a lot of people in america do not know the history of what on in central america and south america. i noticed you did not seem to mention anything about chile except they are doing so great. we talk about 9/11 here, but there was a 9/11 in chile in an 1970's, which we did. we basically destroyed the country. we try to come across in the world with this altar was to get to that we're going to help everybody, but we do not -- this altruistic attitude that we're going to help everybody. but we do not. we do not like to talk about the mistakes that we have done, only the good things. but we almost destroyed chile and million

it's still coming from an area where the united states has some soldiers in colombia, and bolivia, ecuador and peru, they have the coca leaves. mexico doesn't have that. >> right. yeah, there's talk about them starting to grow coca, seriously. >> they're doing more with methamphetamines than they are with anything else. marijuana -- >> coke is big, very big in mexico. it comes from south america -- >> of course. but they don't have trees that grow it. >> right. but what's your point, though, exactly? >> well, i mean, they're getting the raw stuff from wherever. >> right. >> from south america, central america or south america mostly because it's all over the place in peru. >> right. >> and i think that the soldiers are a big nuisance in mexico because the soldiers are hiring people from the city -- politicians are hiring people from the city to run the soldiers out. civilians. in and the problem there is with the arm thing. all the arms go from here over there. i used to -- i grew up in -- [inaudible] i did a lot of charity work, and i don't anymore, i don't live there, but i know all this

there're different racial issues at year -- and geographical and territorial issues in bolivia, but itis doing better than it would have been three or four years ago. it is a case of foreign intelligence, pragmatic leader can turn around a -- an economy and deal with the issues he needs to address. host: debbie in albuquerque, go ahead. caller: i am listening to you and i am amused by your take on his trip because a lot of people in america do not know what went on in central america and south america. and i noticed you did not seem to mention anything about chile except they're doing so great. we talk about 9/11 here in new york. there was also a 9/11 in chile, which we did in 1973 when we put pinochet charge. we try to come across with this altruistic attitude that we are going to help everybody, but we do not. we're just down there to get the resources that we want. we do not like to talk about the mistakes that we have done, only the good things. but we have almost destroyed julie and millions of people were killed under pinochet, which we showed under the cia how to do. pinochet.

most contentious moments at the end, with a handful of countries including venezuela, sudan, cuba, boliviated to the very weak accord that countries were agreed to in terms of addressing climate change internationally. there are a number of reasons for that, including the fact that a number of those countries are oil producers, so they would stand to lose from a global cap on greenhouse gas emissions. several of these nations who are opposed to what the united states does -- hugo chavez from venezuela basically compared bush -- compared obama to bush in his speech and implied that obama was as much as the devil as bush was. so i do the know to what extent the administration will be able to bring those countries into the fold. it underscores the challenge you have when you are working internationally trying to get a consensus agreement with 193 countries. that is a hard thing to do. host: what does on the agenda for 2010? is there another level meeting? guest: -- is there another global meeting? guest: there is another meeting. that is really going to be one of the top issues, and in some s

host: in bolivia and with morales, was the shape of the country?>guest: the imf has just about with a very favorable view of president carlos' leadership -- president moralises is doing in that country. it is an interesting case with how the leader can turn around the economy and begin to deal with the issues he needs to address. host: debbie in albuquerque. caller: listening to you and i'm quite amused with your take on history because a lot of people in america do not know the history of what on in central america and south america. i noticed you did not seem to mention anything about chile except they are doing so great. we talk about 9/11 here, but there was a 9/11 in chile in an 1970's, which we did. we basically destroyed the country. we try to come across in the world with this altar was to get to that we're going to help everybody, but we do not -- this altruistic attitude that we're going to help everybody. but we do not. we do not like to talk about the mistakes that we have done, only the good things. but we almost destroyed chile and mi

jonathan already referred to the fact of the emerging economies and bolivia is trying to bring together an alternative conference call the europeans want to convene something administerial or heads of state level. there will be a lot of follow-up on this specific second track that jonathan referred to with the head of state level. but copenhagen and what will be resolved is at the head of state level and then the more formal process. there will be another meeting at a technical level in me to me or early june and a meeting in december and that process will struggle with the question had is it absorber the directives tickets through the copenhagen accord? that is a big area but some they to watch through the first six months. >> case a given example where it will spend 12 hours negotiating? >> i cannot think of anything it sounds like something out of the 19th century where heads of state could get together and stop the war but that genuinely have been here. the negotiators are not entirely pleased. [laughter] arrow be a tension between the negotiation establishment and the commitment of

doesn't have a right to exist, britain doesn't, bolivia doesn't.untries exist and they can get along with their neighbors, if they have a thriving economy and social system that is equitable. it countries deserve to exist we would be resurrecting the soviet union, the latin kingdom of jerusalem and every other country that has gone down the tubes. every country has a right to defend itself but no country has the right to exist. >> host: michael scheuer, your folks want to read your posting is an editorial, as? >> guest: we are just about to start a website called on the intervention.com which will be available in the next month or so. >> host: we appreciate you joining us this morning. >> guest: thank you, sir,. up next a senate hearing from last summer on high-speed rail travel. the heads of the federal road administration in amtrak were among the witnesses along with federal regulators and high-speed rail advocates. this is about an hour 45 minutes. >> [inaudible conversations] >> we could do several things here parent often add events. with germ