My attention drifted from Brazil for a few weeks. That happens when a political story settles down. Bolsonaro was in prison, Lula had announced his run, and everything looked familiar: the right was weakened, the incumbent enjoyed the usual advantages, and the election seemed set to follow the same pattern of polarization.

But the story has changed faster than I expected.

After reading recent reports and talking with friends in Brazil, I’m seeing a situation I didn’t expect a few months ago. Lula is losing ground, not to a new outsider or a centrist governor. Instead, he is losing to Bolsonaro’s own son. A late March AtlasIntel poll for Bloomberg showed Flávio Bolsonaro slightly ahead of Lula in a runoff: 47.6 percent to 46.6 percent. While that’s basically a statistical tie, it’s important because it’s the first time Flávio has pulled ahead. Other recent polls also show the race getting much closer.

In the first edition of this newsletter, I joked that in Latin America, we can’t seem to elect presidents who don’t end up in prison. Brazil raises this joke to a new, far more serious level. The last presidential race was between two men who have both been jailed, but for vastly different reasons: Lula was imprisoned on corruption charges that were later overturned, while Bolsonaro is in prison for attempting to overthrow Brazilian democracy. These are fundamentally different, both morally and institutionally. Still, the unpleasant truth is that our societies often tolerate corruption more than attacks on democracy, and even that tolerance now stretches dangerously far.

This is part of what makes Flávio’s rise so interesting. He presents himself as a calmer, less extreme version of his father: he is less focused on culture wars, more polished in his political approach, and considered easier to govern with. While his father is known for a combative, divisive style, Flávio’s curated image is one of moderation and unity. When Tarcísio de Freitas, the current governor of São Paulo, stepped aside and endorsed him, much of the right united behind Flávio, turning him from a stand-in into a serious candidate.

Meanwhile, Lula looks more vulnerable as the political mood shifts. Americas Quarterly compared this to Joe Biden’s 2024 problem. I think that is useful up to a point. The issue is not that Lula looks physically diminished. He does not. He still projects energy, experience, and control. The question is whether the country is tiring of him. His disapproval has risen in recent polls, and the cost of living is now an everyday problem that can defeat even skilled incumbents.

What’s even more surprising is that replacing Lula doesn’t seem to help the left. Bloomberg reported that if Fernando Haddad, the former mayor of São Paulo and minister who lost the 2018 presidential election to Bolsonaro, were the PT candidate, he would do even worse against Flávio. So this isn’t just about Lula’s problems. It shows that the Brazilian left still hasn’t built a strong future beyond Lula, much like other Pink Tide movements in Latin America, such as the Kirchners in Argentina or Correa in Ecuador, who have also struggled to find new leaders after their original charismatic figures.

@flaviobolsonaro

Flávio Bolsonaro on Instagram: "A mudança já começou. O Brasil…

That’s why we must take Flávio Bolsonaro seriously now. The obvious comparison is Keiko Fujimori in Peru: both are political heirs with famous names and loyal bases. However, Keiko has been limited by her family legacy, and Flávio may confront similar barriers. A key difference is that Flávio enters this race with momentum, elite support, and a voter base seemingly more open to forgiving his family’s past, while Keiko has struggled to overcome her own legacy in multiple presidential bids. Maybe Brazilians will decide Bolsonaroism without Bolsonaro is still too much.

Brazil’s election is once again one of the main political stories in Latin America.

Trump and Noboa’s War on Drugs Is Missing Its Target

A New York Times investigation found that the March 6 bombing, which the Pentagon called a strike on a “narco-terrorist supply complex,” actually hit a cattle and dairy farm in Sucumbíos. Journalists on the scene saw no evidence of drug activity, only dead animals and scorched land. Workers said soldiers arrived days earlier, destroyed buildings, and then helicopters returned to drop explosives.

While it is possible the military has information it has not made public, this lack of transparency creates serious problems that need to be addressed.

This problem worsens when the war is portrayed as existential, with broad legal powers, external support, and pressure to deliver results. When that happens, accuracy becomes less important, accountability declines, and mistakes become more common.

Ecuador faces real threats, but poorly executed operations undermine the fight against organized crime and weaken the government’s credibility. The biggest danger is not just letting criminals go free, but making the crisis worse by losing the public’s trust.

If the government loses legitimacy, only its enemies win.

Arévalo: A President Without a Party

Bernardo Arévalo made it to the presidency against all odds. But that fight did not end with his inauguration, and this week made that clearer than ever: On March 27, Guatemala’s electoral authorities officially dissolved Movimiento Semilla, the party that supported his candidacy. As a result, Arévalo is now governing without a political party, something almost unheard of. Meanwhile, he announced plans to build a maximum-security prison, but a court suspended the project two days later.

This pattern has persisted throughout Arévalo’s presidency. As he works to make changes in a system still influenced by groups that previously challenged his election, these groups remain active. They continue to use the courts, prosecutors, and official decisions to influence what he can do as president.

The coming weeks will be important, especially because a new Attorney General will be chosen in May. This decision could shift the balance of power in the government.

With all of this unfolding, Guatemala is a country we need to watch closely right now.

Central America Dreams Big

This month, Panama and Costa Rica agreed to take the next steps on a cross-border railway project. The plan is bold: a new rail line would link Panama City to the Costa Rican border and might one day stretch farther north as part of a bigger regional network. For now, it is still only a proposal. There is no funding yet, and the schedule is uncertain.

Skepticism is understandable. In Central America, many infrastructure projects have stalled due to lengthy studies, political issues, or a lack of funding, and many never get built.

Still, this is the kind of project the region needs. Most trade in Central America depends on roads, which often leads to inefficient logistics and weak cross-border links. A working rail network could help by lowering costs, strengthening connections, and making regional trade more competitive.

There are real concerns, especially regarding the environment and land use, which deserve serious attention. But if every major project is always blocked or delayed, the region cannot progress. Central America needs to take action, start building, face challenges, and invest in its future now.

Mercedes Sosa: The Voice That Stayed

This week, I watched some documentaries about Argentina’s dictatorship, especially now that we’re past the 50-year mark since it began. And then yesterday, I saw Project Hail Mary. I didn’t think these would have anything in common, but somehow they did.

Mercedes Sosa was in both.

In the film, there’s a moment when Gracias a la Vida plays. I won’t give any spoilers, but it caught me off guard. I’m taking it as a sign to talk about her this week.

Mercedes Sosa was more than a singer. As a leader in the Nuevo Cancionero, she changed Argentine and Latin American music in the 1960s. The movement’s message was simple: music should reflect real life and speak to workers, indigenous identity, inequality, and memory.

Tracks like Alfonsina y el Mar, Solo le pido a Dios, and Canción con todos express shared experience. Even when she didn’t write the songs, she chose them carefully and sang them so they felt universal. Her slow, deliberate voice made every word matter.

That’s why she became a threat to the dictatorship after 1976. Her music wasn’t propaganda, but it didn’t need to be. It reminded people what they were losing. Her concerts became spaces of self-recognition. That was enough: she was banned, arrested during a show in La Plata, and forced into exile.

Like Celia Cruz, exile helped her reach more people. She recorded in Europe, toured Latin America, and became a symbol for a generation living abroad. When she returned to Argentina in 1982, she sold out every concert. People were waiting for her.

It’s interesting that her music still appears in unexpected places, like a sci-fi movie. This happens because her songs connect with people; they aren’t tied to one moment but carry memories and real emotion.

Argentine music legend Fito Páez calls her the voice of all the love in the world. I remember how significant her death was in 2009, all over Latin America. That’s why La Negra, as she’s affectionately called, Mercedes Sosac still matters: her politics and the way her music united people make her legacy all the more important.

That’s all for now. If you found this valuable, here’s how you can support me:

Subscribe for free to get editions like this every week: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural recommendation to help you understand our region better.

Subscribe now

Like this post by tapping the heart button. It helps more people discover LatAm Explained.

Leave a comment below. I read every single one, and your perspectives make my content better.

Leave a comment

Share this with someone who’d appreciate my analysis of Latin America. Forward this email, or use the button below:

Share

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more of my content.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

This piece was ready to send a week ago. Then new developments came in, and I waited one more day. Then another. Then Trump said he wanted “the honor of taking Cuba,” and a flotilla of leftist activists sailed into Havana, and the grid collapsed again. This is the first edition in two weeks, and Cuba is the reason why.

Seven weeks ago in this newsletter, I wrote that Cuba’s regime would either collapse or start collaborating with the Trump administration, much like Delcy Rodríguez in Venezuela. Something had to give.

Well, something gave.

On March 13, in a 90-minute televised address, President Miguel Díaz-Canel confirmed what Washington had been hinting at for weeks: Cuban officials are holding direct talks with U.S. representatives. “These are processes that are done with great discretion,” he said. “They are long processes.” He also confirmed, matter-of-factly, that no fuel has entered Cuba in three months.

Díaz-Canel and Raúl Castro are leading the talks for Cuba. Raúl Castro’s grandson, Raúl Guillermo Rodríguez Castro, also known as “El Cangrejo,” had already been mentioned as an informal U.S. contact. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has had “secret, high-level conversations with several people in Raúl Castro’s inner circle” at least six times recently. Castro and Díaz-Canel are watching Maduro closely. They don’t intend to share his fate.

Trump has been very direct. On March 17 at the White House, he said, “All my life I’ve been hearing about the United States and Cuba — when will the United States have the honor of taking Cuba? Whether I free it, take it — I think I can do anything I want with it.” The next day, Rubio said that Cuba needs “new people in charge.” Díaz-Canel replied on X: “Any external aggressor will clash with an impregnable resistance.”

All of this is happening during a humanitarian crisis that has only gotten worse in Cuba’s already fragile situation under Castroism. The crisis deepened after Trump signed Executive Order 14380 on January 29, blocking any country from sending oil to Cuba. This order targeted Venezuela, which had already stopped shipments, Mexico, which quietly ended its deliveries, and Russia, which sent almost nothing. The result has been blackouts lasting 18 to 20 hours, gasoline limited to 20 liters per car, almost all surgeries except emergencies canceled, and 11,000 children waiting for operations that cannot happen.

On March 16, the entire National Electric System failed, leaving all 11 million Cubans without power for 29 hours. It happened again on March 21. By Sunday, only 72,000 of 2 million houses in Havana had power restored. Three nationwide blackouts in March alone. Jorge Piñón from the University of Texas warned that Cuba would reach “zero hour” by mid-March. That time has come.

By early March, Cubans had reached their limit. Around March 6, cacerolazo protests began spreading through neighborhoods. On March 9, students gathered on the steps of the University of Havana. When they tried to meet again on March 10, the government organized a “popular celebration” with loudspeakers and children’s games at the same spot.

It didn’t work. On March 14, residents of Morón, Ciego de Ávila, attacked the municipal Communist Party headquarters, setting furniture on fire and breaking windows while shouting “¡Libertad!” Five were arrested. March 15 marked the tenth consecutive day of protests — the longest stretch since July 2021. As of this writing, protests have occurred every single day for nearly three weeks.

In response to the events in Morón, Díaz-Canel’s statement was revealing: “The complaints and claims are legitimate, as long as they are made with civility and respect for public order.” For a regime that has spent decades denying any legitimate grievances, that statement is a concession.

This was the situation when the Nuestra América Convoy arrived. On March 20 and 21, 650 delegates from 33 countries — including Jeremy Corbyn, Pablo Iglesias, Rashida Tlaib, and Twitch streamer Hasan Piker — sailed into Havana from Yucatán. They brought 20 tons of food, medicine, solar panels, and flashlights. The convoy was organized by Progressive International and CodePink, modeled after the Gaza flotilla. Several of its main organizers have documented ties to the Cuban government — one co-coordinator has met with Díaz-Canel multiple times and received a personal public defense from him on social media.

The Cuban exile community argues that aid going through the regime never reaches ordinary people. Mexican food aid has already been seen in Cuban stores, sold for U.S. dollars.

This is the main point. The Cuban people do not need Jeremy Corbyn arriving with flashlights. They need the government that has plunged the island into darkness to stop. Costa Rica understood this and closed its embassy in Havana last week, telling Cuba to withdraw its diplomats because of the government’s repression of its own citizens.

On March 12, Cuba released 51 prisoners through Vatican mediation. The government didn’t disclose names or clarify whether political prisoners were included, since it officially denies their existence. This follows the same Vatican approach as in January 2025, when 553 prisoners were released under Biden.

The regime is slowly, carefully, and deliberately giving ground. But these days, the island is completely dark. That changes everything.

Yes, Bukele Is Violating Human Rights

Nayib Bukele rose to power by tackling a real problem. El Salvador used to be one of the most violent countries in the world, and people were desperate for change. He delivered, or at least the homicide rate dropped sharply, and people felt safer than they had in decades. That gave him huge political capital. He still has it: his approval rating is 91.9%, the highest among world leaders.

Now he is using that power to strengthen his control.

On March 10, five respected jurists said there are “reasonable grounds to believe that crimes against humanity are being committed” in El Salvador, under Article 7 of the Rome Statute. This news didn’t surprise anyone who has been watching the region. More than 91,000 people have been detained under a state of exception that has lasted four years. At least 403 people have died in state custody. Over 3,000 children have been detained. There are also reports of torture and sexual violence at CECOT, the mega-prison that holds 40,000 people and lets inmates out of their cells for only 30 minutes a day. The report was presented to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. The jurists gave a legal name to what human rights groups have long said.

A few days before, the Salvadoran rights group Cristosal reported 86 political prisoners—the first since the 1992 peace accords. “For the first time since the armed conflict, there are political prisoners in El Salvador,” said Cristosal’s research director, René Valiente.

Bukele dismissed it as a Soros-funded conspiracy. El Salvador has ratified the Rome Statute, so the ICC has jurisdiction, but no investigation has yet begun, and recent history shows it is irrelevant.

Nicaragua Runs a Spy Network

As a Venezuelan in exile, this honestly scares me.

On March 10, the UN Group of Human Rights Experts on Nicaragua published its most detailed report yet. For the first time, it describes a transnational espionage network led by co-president Rosario Murillo that operates in at least five countries. This network includes military intelligence, the national police, telecom regulators who run troll farms, diplomatic missions, and FSLN informant networks. It even recruits people from outside Nicaragua. The report says most ambassadors serve as FSLN political secretaries and report directly to Murillo.

These operations include hacking, physical surveillance of exiles, death threats, misusing INTERPOL red notices, and at least a dozen killings or attempted killings of critics living abroad. One victim was Roberto Samcam, a retired army major who was killed at his home in San José, Costa Rica, in June 2025.

I know this kind of system. Venezuela built the same thing. The two governments have shared intelligence for years. The UN also found that $5 million in public money was used to fund paramilitary violence during the 2018 crackdown. With all the problems Nicaraguans face, this is what their regime spends its money on.

MAS Had All for 20 Years. Now It’s Gone.

Bolivia held subnational elections yesterday across nine departments and 335 municipalities. The Movimiento al Socialismo, which led Bolivia for almost twenty years, built its image around Evo Morales as a legendary indigenous leader, changed the constitution, and controlled every branch of government. It did not put forward a single candidate in any departmental capital city.

The collapse happened quickly, even by Latin American standards. The conflict between Morales and Arce split the party from within. In August 2025, MAS ran in the presidential election and received only 3.17% of the vote. By December, former president Luis Arce was arrested on corruption charges. Morales has not appeared in public since January 8 and now has an active arrest warrant for statutory rape and human trafficking. Nearly 200 political groups were on the ballot. Results are still being counted.

Two decades of dominance rarely end this way. There was no dramatic final moment. The party simply faded from electoral prominence before most people realized it was gone. MAS collapsed into itself.

We Are Champions. Finally.

My schedule has been completely upside down this past week. Most World Baseball Classic games started at 1 or 2 AM my time and finished at 4 or 5. I watched every one of them. It was completely worth it.

Venezuela won it.

On March 17 at LoanDepot Park in Miami, Venezuela defeated the United States 3-2 in the final. Eduardo Rodríguez pitched 4⅓ scoreless innings. Venezuela was up 2-0 going into the eighth, but Bryce Harper hit a 434-foot two-run homer to tie the game. In the ninth, Eugenio Suárez hit an RBI double to put Venezuela ahead. Daniel Palencia finished the game. Aaron Judge went 0-for-4, and Maikel García was named tournament MVP.

Venezuela has had world-class teams for years, but they always came up short. This time, they knocked out defending champion Japan in the quarterfinals, beat Italy in the semis, and then beat the Americans on their home ground.

But what made this special wasn’t just the baseball. For so long, Venezuelans haven’t had anything to celebrate without politics getting in the way. There haven’t been any clear victories or moments of pure pride without something overshadowing them. This felt like something many of us hadn’t felt in years. The sold-out crowd in Miami, the city with the most Venezuelan-born residents in the United States, was completely theirs.

@torresgianvittorio

Felipe Torres Gianvittorio on Instagram: "Ah, baseball and hist…

Venezuela declared the next day a national holiday, and for many people, it was finally a chance to celebrate openly. This came less than three months after the U.S. captured Maduro.

Also, Latin America now holds both the football and baseball world titles. We’re doing pretty well.

That’s all for now. If you found this valuable, here’s how you can support me:

Subscribe for free to get editions like this every week: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural recommendation to help you understand our region better.

Subscribe now

Like this post by tapping the heart button. It helps more people discover LatAm Explained.

Leave a comment below. I read every single one, and your perspectives make my content better.

Leave a comment

Share this with someone who’d appreciate my analysis of Latin America. Forward this email, or use the button below:

Share

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more of my content.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

🇪🇸 Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

Yesterday, Colombians went to the polls to elect a new Congress and select presidential candidates in three inter-party primaries. More than 3,000 candidates took part. Turnout was about 48 percent, and the UN said the election went smoothly, with no major security problems.

Results show that the new Congress is divided, with no party holding a majority. President Gustavo Petro’s left Pacto Histórico coalition got the most Senate votes at 22.8 percent, winning more seats than in 2022. Former President Álvaro Uribe’s right Centro Democrático came second with 15.6 percent, rising from 13 to about 16 or 17 seats. The Partido Liberal got 11.7 percent, Alianza Verde 9.8 percent, and Partido Conservador 9.6 percent.

For the first time in his career, Álvaro Uribe did not win a Senate seat he ran for. He was 25th on his party’s list, but Centro Democrático is expected to win only about 17 seats. Uribe, who’s been a main character in Colombian politics for decades, has been in the news lately after being convicted of procedural fraud and witness bribery, but the conviction was later overturned.

The presidential primary results now give us room to analyze.

Senator Paloma Valencia won the right-wing “Gran Consulta por Colombia” primary with 55 percent of the votes. Her primary had the highest turnout of the three. Valencia is Uribe’s protégée, and he campaigned with her across the country. In her victory speech, she said: “Uribe, you left a mark I intend to follow.”

She will now face Abelardo de la Espriella, a far-right populist who supports El Salvador’s Bukele and Argentina’s Milei and did not participate in the primary. De la Espriella is polling between 18 and 23 percent, while Valencia was polling at just 7 percent. The right-wing vote is split between the uribista establishment and the far-right outsider.

@palomavalencial

Paloma Valencia on Instagram: "Colombia debe ser el propósito d…

The left is already united. Iván Cepeda, a senator, human rights activist, and son of a senator killed by paramilitaries in 1994, leads all polls at 31.9 percent. He is Pacto Histórico’s candidate and could not run in the primary because he had already won his party’s internal vote. Petro’s recent rise in popularity and the strong congressional results on Sunday make Cepeda, his candidate, the clear frontrunner.

The center remains divided. Former Bogotá Mayor Claudia López won the centrist primary, but turnout was low. She now faces Former Antioquia Governor Sergio Fajardo, who is running for president for the third time. Fajardo did not take part in her primary and is polling at 5-8.5 percent. He calls himself the “third way,” but in a polarized race, the center will likely struggle to gain support.

At this point in the campaign, we’ll see the main fight within the right and center as candidates try to convince their rivals to step aside and unite behind them. Because of this, the campaign will likely focus more on internal talks to avoid splitting the vote. A November poll showed that 62 percent of voters were undecided, with their main concerns being corruption, street crime, and violence from armed groups.

Most polls show that Cepeda would beat De la Espriella by a wide margin in a runoff, but he is in a “technical tie” against Fajardo. According to Polymarket, Cepeda has a 45 percent chance of winning the presidency.

The right faces a math challenge. If Valencia and De la Espriella do not unite before the first round, they risk splitting the anti-left vote and giving Cepeda a strong lead or even a first-round win. The first round of voting is on May 31, so there are two and a half months of intense campaigning ahead.

Kast Breaks With Chilean Tradition

A few days before his March 11th inauguration, President-elect José Antonio Kast suspended his collaboration with outgoing President Gabriel Boric during the presidential transition. Since the end of Pinochet’s dictatorship, Chile has usually had smooth and cooperative transfers of power since Pinochet’s dictatorship ended, so Kast’s move was unusual.

The conflict started over a Chinese-backed submarine fiber-optic cable project called the “Chile China Express,” which connects central Chile to Hong Kong. In January, Boric’s transport secretary approved the project without publicly announcing it. After that, the U.S. sanctioned three Chilean transport officials, saying they had “compromised critical telecommunications infrastructure.”

Kast and Boric met briefly on March 3rd. Kast asked Boric to retract his statement that he had already informed the new administration about the project, but Boric refused. Kast then said, “We are ending the handover process because we do not trust the information being delivered.”

Boric then said he called Kast on February 18th to discuss the cable issue before the U.S. sanctions happened. But after several tense days, both sides started talking again and are now working together on the final details of the transition.

Analyst Gonzalo Arana Araya told Latin America Reports that Kast might have wanted to “create a clear distinction between the current and incoming administrations, expanding the space to criticize Boric more forcefully.”

Personally, I think this was unnecessary. Everyone knows Kast is not Boric, and that his friends are not Boric’s friends.

Ecuador with U.S. Troops on the Ground

On March 3, U.S. Southern Command announced that Ecuadorian and American military forces had begun joint operations “against Designated Terrorist Organizations in Ecuador.” A few days later, on March 7, the Pentagon said that, at Ecuador’s request, a U.S. military team carried out a “successful” targeted operation against a suspected drug-smuggling site in Ecuador. They did not provide any details about casualties or which group was targeted.

This is the first time the U.S. military has operated openly in Ecuador since the Manta Forward Operating Location closed in 2009, when Rafael Correa was president. These operations are taking place under a Status of Forces Agreement rather than a permanent base, which is an important legal distinction in Ecuador.

Ecuador used to be known as Latin America’s “island of peace,” but violence increased after COVID. Criminal groups, especially those linked to Mexican and Colombian cartels, took advantage of Ecuador’s Pacific coast location between Colombia and Peru, the world’s largest cocaine producers. In 2023, the homicide rate jumped to 47.2 per 100,000 people, the highest in the Americas.

Crime was the main issue in both of Daniel Noboa’s presidential campaigns in 2023 and 2025. He promised to fight violence and organized crime, making security his top priority. In January 2024, he declared an “internal armed conflict” and called 22 criminal groups terrorists.

Noboa’s alignment with Trump is questionable. The broader implications of the U.S. military presence in Ecuador raise sovereignty concerns that cannot be ignored. At the same time, Ecuador’s security crisis is real and needs attention. People in Ecuador are living in fear, and violence has grown beyond what local forces can manage alone.

We can debate whether this approach is the right one, but everyone hopes it will help. Right now, Ecuador needs a solution that works.

A Corruption Case Shakes Paraguayan Politics

On March 4, José González Maldonado, the legal director of Paraguay’s social security institute, resigned under pressure because of a major corruption scandal at the Instituto de Previsión Social (IPS). IPS is the primary safety net for formal workers and has an annual budget of $2 billion.

González’s reported wealth grew by 215% in 15 months, rising from 276 million to 870 million guaraníes. He explained this increase as legal fees from a lawsuit he won for IPS, which brought him 412 million guaraníes. But investigators found that he did not mention other lawyers’ involvement, claimed the full amount as his own income, and approved three times as many external legal contractors, costing IPS 2.6 billion guaraníes each year. The National Tax Directorate started a fiscal investigation on February 26, and Senator Rafael Filizzola filed a criminal complaint.

González’s resignation is the latest in a series of IPS corruption cases that have led to congressional hearings and calls for impeachment. IPS awarded contracts worth about $23 million for laundry services and bed sheets, and the National Public Procurement Directorate approved them even though the prices were inflated. A group linked to the son of Colorado Party Senator Luis Alberto Pettengill also received a multimillion-dollar IPS contract, raising concerns about conflicts of interest.

IPS president Jorge Brítez was called to speak before Congress on February 19 and said the accusations were “political persecution.” Independent deputy Rubén Rubin called the IPS “a carnival” and is considering initiating impeachment proceedings.

President Santiago Peña has not made any comments, but the Paraguayan press has criticized him. ABC Color wrote in an editorial: “The maximum responsible is the one who appoints and sustains them: Santiago Peña.”

The World Baseball Classic Is On

After a long wait, the World Cup has finally started... just not the one you’re thinking of. The World Baseball Classic takes place from March 5 to 17. If you’re not from a baseball-loving country, you might not know how important this tournament is to us.

The WBC is the biggest international baseball tournament. It’s basically baseball’s version of the World Cup. It started in 2006, created by Major League Baseball and the World Baseball Softball Confederation. This is the sixth edition. Twenty teams compete in round-robin groups in Miami, Houston, San Juan, and Tokyo. The semifinals and final are in Miami.

This is the only tournament where Major League Baseball stars from the U.S. can represent their home countries. As we’ve seen before in this newsletter, baseball is a big part of life in the Caribbean and Latin America. This year, nine Latin American teams are competing: Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Mexico, Panama, Colombia, Nicaragua, and Brazil.

Along with the United States and Japan, the Dominican Republic and Venezuela are top favorites. The Dominican Republic has been impressive, averaging 12 runs per game in pool play and beating the Netherlands 12-1. Venezuela started with a 6-2 win over the Netherlands and then beat Israel 11-3. Luis Arraez had a standout game, going 4-for-5 with two doubles and two home runs.

@beisbolizando

beisbolizando on Instagram: "Explicando los equipos del Clásico…

I saw a great comparison from Instagram accounts @beisbolizando and @rematedegol that helps explain the teams:

• Japan is similar to Brazil: technically skilled, with many titles, and always entertaining to watch.

• The United States is like Germany: a powerhouse with lots of resources, but it took them a while to win a title.

• The Dominican Republic is like Argentina: passionate, talented, and probably the best team in terms of individual players.

• Venezuela is like England: always competitive, never quite winning, but maybe this is their year.

• Puerto Rico is like the Netherlands: they often outperform expectations, are scrappy, and have reached several finals but never won.

• And Mexico is Mexico: passionate, unpredictable, but never quite reaching the final round.

This tournament is a big deal. The top two teams from the Americas, along with the USA, will qualify for the baseball tournament at the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics.

Before the WBC, international baseball only had amateur tournaments without MLB players. It was kind of like watching football in the Olympics. The WBC changed all of that.

While it’s likely that Shohei Ohtani will lead Japan to its third title and confirm his status as the baseball GOAT, it’s still worth following and cheering for our Latin American teams, who could pull off a historic upset.

That’s all for now. If you found this valuable, here’s how you can support me:

Subscribe for free to get editions like this every week: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural recommendation to help you understand our region better.

Subscribe now

Like this post by tapping the heart button. It helps more people discover LatAm Explained.

Leave a comment below. I read every single one, and your perspectives make my content better.

Leave a comment

Share this with someone who’d appreciate my analysis of Latin America. Forward this email, or use the button below:

Share

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more of my content.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

🇪🇸 Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

Reporting on Mexico has never been easy for me. I’ve visited several times and spent time in states like Mexico, Campeche, Quintana Roo, and Yucatán. Even so, there’s so much to learn that it’s tough to grasp unless you’ve studied Mexico for years. I once told a Mexican colleague that, as someone from outside the country, it’s the hardest place in Latin America to cover. The regional differences, complex history, and economic gaps make it feel like you’re reporting on several countries at once. Here’s my best attempt:

On February 22, Mexican special forces killed Nemesio Rubén Oseguera Cervantes, known as “El Mencho,” the leader of the Jalisco New Generation Cartel, during a military operation in Tapalpa, Jalisco. U.S. intelligence, including the CIA, helped with the operation. Troops used helicopters to attack a compound in the mountains. Cartel gunmen fired powerful weapons. El Mencho was wounded and died while being flown to Mexico City. Eight cartel members were killed, two were arrested, and three Mexican soldiers were wounded.

El Mencho, who was 59, was one of the world’s most wanted men, with a $15 million U.S. bounty on him. The DEA considered his cartel as powerful as the Sinaloa Cartel, with operations in every U.S. state. He kept a very low profile, and all known photos of him were decades old.

The response was huge. Hijacked trucks, buses, and cars were set on fire. Banks, gas stations, and shops were attacked. More than 70 people died, including 25 National Guard members. One captain died in a car bomb attack. El Mencho’s right-hand man reportedly offered bounties of about $1,100 for each soldier killed. The cartel also used social media to spread false information and add to the chaos.

Guadalajara turned into a ghost town. Smoke rose over hotels in Puerto Vallarta. People ran through airports, and airlines cancelled flights. President Sheinbaum sent 10,000 soldiers to 20 states. Schools were closed, and public transport was suspended in Jalisco.

But here’s what most international headlines missed: most people in Mexico were living their normal lives. The violence was limited to certain states. Life in Mexico City continued as usual, and the northern industrial cities kept working. The violence was real and serious where it happened, but saying all of Mexico was “in chaos” wasn’t true for 130 million people living across almost 2 million square kilometers.

This is why I started this newsletter. International coverage often misses the scale and details of what really happens here.

But there’s one thing everyone should pay attention to. Guadalajara will host four 2026 FIFA World Cup matches in June, just three months away. One of these games will feature Mexico’s national team. Around 3 million visitors are expected.

The cartel has shown it can shut down Jalisco’s capital and tourist areas in just a few hours. Now, there’s a power vacuum. El Mencho’s brother, son, and daughter are all in U.S. prisons, and there’s no clear successor. When El Chapo was arrested, it led to a civil war between Sinaloa groups. History suggests that what happens next could be even worse.

FIFA hasn’t made any public comments. The Mexican government says security will be guaranteed. Still, the images of smoke over Puerto Vallarta and panicked tourists are from just last week. The World Cup starts in June, and that date is coming up quickly.

Milei Is Just Getting Started

Javier Milei kicked off Argentina’s legislative year on March 1st with a passionate two-hour speech. He showed no signs of backing down. Milei promised 90 structural reforms in 2026, saying there would be “nine uninterrupted months” to “redesign the institutional architecture of the new Argentina.”

He is already seeing results. In February, Milei scored two major legislative wins.

The labor reform passed the Chamber of Deputies on February 20th by a vote of 135 to 115. This law updates rules from the 1970s, such as reducing severance pay, making hiring and firing easier, limiting strikes, allowing 12-hour workdays, and encouraging formal job contracts. The government says 40% of workers lack formal contracts. In response, the unions called a general strike, thousands protested, and every Peronist deputy voted against the reform.

On the other hand, the glacier law reform passed the Senate on February 26th by a vote of 40 to 31. The original 2010 law banned mining on Argentina’s glaciers and periglacial areas. Milei’s reform keeps the ban on glaciers but allows mining in periglacial areas and gives provinces more authority. His government says this could attract over $40 billion in mining investment. Greenpeace activists climbed the gates of Congress, and 12 were arrested.

Although I do not agree with many of Milei’s policies or his style, it is clear he has managed to move his agenda forward. He is already the most reform-focused president in Argentina’s history.

The opposition still has not found an effective response. Peronism is divided and the left remains disorganized. Street protests did not stop the reforms, and the strikes did not affect him.

Ahead of the 2027 elections, I think the most likely alternative will not come from Peronism or the left, but from moderates within Milei’s own coalition. It would not be surprising if former President Mauricio Macri tries to fill that space, backing reforms but criticizing Milei’s style, and representing the center-right without kirchnerismo.

Milei seems stronger than ever. If his project faces a challenge, it will probably come from within his own ranks, and Macri knows this.

Peru’s Eighth President in Ten Years

I was surprised when Congress really went through with impeaching José Jerí. On February 17th, just two weeks ago, they voted 75-24 to remove him over “Chifagate.” The scandal was about secret meetings with a Chinese businessman who has a state energy concession. Jerí said the meetings were for a Chinese-Peruvian friendship event and described the visits as “shopping trips.”

After an unusual 24 hours without a president, Congress chose 83-year-old José María Balcázar as the new leader. He is a former Supreme Court judge and a leftist lawmaker from Perú Libre, the same party as former president Pedro Castillo. Balcázar beat three other candidates and promised to “guarantee a peaceful and transparent democratic and electoral transition.” He will serve until July 28th, when the winner of the April 12th election takes office.

Balcázar is the eighth person to become president of Peru in the past ten years. This Congress has now impeached three presidents: Castillo in 2022, Boluarte in October 2025, and Jerí in February 2026.

Balcázar is also facing serious allegations. Still, what Peru needs most right now is a pause from political conflict. It makes sense to let him stay in office until the elections. After the April 12th vote, hopefully the next president can finish their term.

This year, a record 34 candidates are running for president in Peru. The main contenders are Lima’s right-wing mayor Rafael López Aliaga and the well-known Keiko Fujimori. What’s striking is that, despite all the social and political challenges, the economy is still strong and stable, which is rare in the region.

Rodríguez Continues to Please Washington

Chavismo keeps dismantling its own system, or at least putting on a show of doing so to please Washington.

On February 12, thousands of Venezuelan students marched for National Youth Day in the first major opposition protest since Maduro was captured. That same day, the National Assembly passed an amnesty law, pardoning hundreds of political prisoners. By February 25, Attorney General Tarek William Saab, one of Chavismo’s most loyal figures, resigned. Analysts say this is part of Delcy Rodríguez’s efforts to strengthen her position and a reshuffling of institutions supported by Washington.

Even small acts of defiance are fading away. The Venezuelan government took down an official statement that quietly criticized the U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran. The government is making efforts to silence dissent.

But here’s what everyone is talking about: during Trump’s State of the Union address, former opposition presidential candidate and political prisoner Enrique Márquez was shown on camera. Don’t mix up Márquez with Edmundo González; Márquez ran his own campaign and stayed skeptical of the official results that declared Maduro the winner over González.

Some analysts have started to wonder if the White House is planning a role for him in the transition, maybe even as a presidential candidate. I doubt that. To me, his appearance seemed like a TV stunt. Trump understands television, and Márquez’s appearance felt just like that: a cameo.

@mariacorinamachado

María Corina Machado on Instagram: "Queridos venezolanos,
ten…

On March 1, María Corina Machado said in a video that she plans to return to Venezuela “in the coming weeks.” She is now in the United States, after leaving in December to receive the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo. She said she met with Trump, Rubio, several heads of state, 10 foreign ministers, 17 U.S. senators, and 27 members of Congress during her 80 days outside Venezuela. Acting President Delcy Rodríguez warned that if Machado returns, she will have to “answer to Venezuela” for allegedly supporting the U.S. invasion. The amnesty law clearly excludes anyone prosecuted for promoting foreign military action, a rule many think is aimed directly at Machado.

Now that Machado has announced her return, we can expect plans for a new presidential election to start coming together in the next few months. Whether Chavismo will allow a free and fair vote is still uncertain.

Willie Colón: Latin America’s Most Influential Musician

I knew that at some point I was going to write about Willie Colón here (and Héctor Lavoe, and Rubén Blades), but I didn’t think it would be under these sad circumstances.

As a Venezuelan writing this newsletter, I try to stay aware of my own perspective and avoid presenting it as the typical Latin American view. But when it comes to Willie Colón, who was incredibly popular in Venezuela, I can say without hesitation that with his death on February 21st at age 75, we have lost the most influential musician in Latin America over the past 50 years.

Willie Colón signed with Fania Records when he was just 15 years old. His first album, El Malo (1967), came out when he was 16 and sold over 300,000 copies. Even as a teenager, he led an orchestra and helped shape what would become salsa music, blending jazz, funk, R&B, and rock with Afro-Caribbean rhythms in a way no one had done before. He also brought the gangster theme into salsa, and his album covers are some of Fania’s most iconic. I’ve been trying to find an original poster from the album La Gran Fuga (1970). If anyone reading this has one, please let me know.

His partnership with Héctor Lavoe gave us some of the most iconic songs in Latin American music, like “Che Ché Colé” and “Aguanile.” Later, his work with Rubén Blades led to Siembra (1978), the best-selling salsa album ever. The standout track, “Pedro Navaja,” brought social themes to salsa by referencing Kafka and Brecht and telling a story about street life. My colleagues from Los 600 de Latinoamérica consider Siembra the most important album of all time in Latin American music, and I agree.

He kept pushing boundaries as a solo artist and producer. Throughout his career, he made more than 40 albums, sold over 30 million records, earned 9 Gold and 5 Platinum records, and was nominated for 10 Grammys. He also worked with artists like Celia Cruz, Ismael Miranda, and Soledad Bravo. His trombone, which isn’t usually a lead instrument in Latin music, became, as his manager Pietro Carlos said, “the voice of the people.”

Colón was a controversial figure in politics. He worked as a special assistant to New York City Mayor David Dinkins, ran for Congress in 1994, and ran for NYC Public Advocate in 2001. In his later years, he strongly supported Donald Trump. He was also active in causes like Latino issues, AIDS awareness, and immigrant rights. Some people admired his political work, while others found it divisive. Still, his influence on our culture is undeniable.

I think some of his best work came early in his career—with Lavoe, with Blades, and even with Celia Cruz—but I’d recommend the album Fantasmas (1981), where he also sings. My favorite song by him is on that album: “Amor Verdadero,” a merengue with a disco feel. You can also hear some of the Brazilian influences there, showing just how wide his musical range was and how he never let himself be limited to one style.

Latin America has lost a giant. His music spoke about identity, pride, resistance, and joy. That legacy will live on.

A Personal Note

You might already know that I run this project by myself. If you’ve read earlier editions, you also know I’m studying for my master’s in Prague, focusing on political transitions and totalitarian regimes through the Erasmus Mundus Journalism program at Charles University.

Recently, I lost my funding for the program, so I started a GoFundMe to help me keep working on my thesis. I explain everything in this video.

@torresgianvittorio

Felipe Torres Gianvittorio on Instagram: "One semester away fro…

That’s also why I missed sending the newsletter last week. I’m doing my best to fix this, and most of my free time is going into it.

I then, humbly, ask you for the following things:

1) Please share my Instagram reel or GoFundMe link, and if you can, consider making a donation. I’d really appreciate it.

2) I’ve also turned on the pledge option here on Substack. If you find my work valuable, please think about supporting it. The newsletter will always be free, so any donation is totally up to you.

Thank you so much.

That’s all for now. If you found this valuable, here’s how you can support me:

Subscribe for free to get editions like this every week: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural recommendation to help you understand our region better.

Subscribe now

Like this post by tapping the heart button. It helps more people discover LatAm Explained.

Leave a comment below. I read every single one, and your perspectives make my content better.

Leave a comment

Share this with someone who’d appreciate my analysis of Latin America. Forward this email, or use the button below:

Share

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more of my content.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

🇪🇸 Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

The other day, I was at a table with a few people from the U.S. and other international people, and the topic of Cuba came up. No one seemed to make the connection between Cuba and Venezuela. We in Latin America are so aware of it that we forget some other countries might not understand how deep this goes.

To put it simply, there are three dictatorships in Latin America: Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. (A fourth one is starting to form, and if you read this newsletter, you probably know which one I mean). These regimes have supported each other and worked together for years. Of the three, Nicaragua is probably the most repressive and brutal, which is saying a lot, but it gets the least attention.

When the U.S. invaded Venezuela and removed Maduro on January 3rd, the effort was led by U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is Cuban American. It was easy to guess he might eventually turn his attention to Cuba (or that Venezuela was a necessary step for him to take before going after the Cuban regime), and that is what’s happening now.

For the past twenty years, Cuba has received millions in oil and aid from Venezuela, enough to rebuild its electrical grid and modernize basic infrastructure several times. But the regime used those resources to keep its hold on power instead of helping ordinary Cubans. Now, that support is gone. Venezuela stopped shipments after Maduro was captured, and Mexico stopped Pemex deliveries on January 27th because of pressure from Washington, which is blocking shipments and warning them not to help Havana. Russia sent only two tankers in all of 2025 and is not making up the difference. Cuba needs about 100,000 barrels of oil a day, but produces only 32,000 to 40,000.

The humanitarian crisis is severe. On February 13th, the power shortage reached over 1,700 megawatts. Blackouts now affect 60% of the country during peak hours, and some areas have outages lasting more than 20 hours. Since February 10th, jet fuel has been suspended at all nine international airports, so airlines have had to cancel flights. The government declared a national emergency on February 6th and put measures in place: a four-day workweek, gasoline rationed to about 5.25 gallons (paid in dollars only), and hospital services limited to urgent care.

For more than sixty years, the Cuban people have lived under similar circumstances. Even during the hardest times, like the Special Period in the 1990s, Cuba’s leaders managed to stay in power because they controlled all sources of information. Back then, there was no internet or social media; all media was tightly controlled by the state, and dissent was much easier to silence. Yet despite decades of embargo, the island always found a lifeline, first from the USSR, then from Venezuela.

What’s different now is that the regime can’t control the narrative as before. With the internet and social media, information spreads quickly, and Cubans can see and share what’s happening around them in real time. The government’s grip is still strong, but it’s no longer absolute.

According to Polymarket, bettors assign a 34% chance that Miguel Díaz-Canel will leave the presidency by the end of the first half of this year.

If the U.S. attacks Cuba or the regime falls on its own, you don’t need to apologize to the Cuban people. Feel sorry for what people will face in the coming months, but don’t regret it if the Cuban Communist Party collapses.

My mom is a big fan of the Cuban salsa singer Willy Chirino, so I grew up listening to him. He hasn’t been able to return to Cuba since 1961 because of his criticism and his songs about the Cuban situation and the suffering of its people. He has a song called “Nuestro Día Ya Viene Llegando” (Our Day Is Coming), where he tells his story of leaving Cuba as a child and promises that his people will celebrate soon.

That song came out in 1991. Maybe he will finally get to sing it in Havana 35 years later.

Milei Takes On the Unions

Argentina’s Senate approved Milei’s “Ley de Modernización Laboral” by a 42-30 vote on February 12th after a 15-hour debate. This is the biggest change to Argentine labor law in decades. The bill now moves to the Chamber of Deputies, where the government believes it has over 129 votes to pass.

On February 11th, thousands of people clashed with police outside Congress. At least 71 were detained, and more than 15 were injured.

The reform is huge. It allows 12-hour workdays, stops expired union agreements from being automatically renewed, makes more jobs count as ‘essential services’ so that 75% of workers must keep working during strikes (including telecoms, aviation, ports, and education), limits severance pay to three times the average salary, and sets up a new fund paid for by employers to help workers. It also shifts wage talks from industry-wide deals to company-specific ones, making unions less powerful.

It is surprising that Milei has managed to do this in Argentina, a country with a long history of strong unions and Peronist influence. When you see images of the protests, remember these union workers have often supported Kirchnerism, the most left-leaning part of Peronism.

These protesters, even if they are sincerely opposing changes to their labor rights, are also pursuing an agenda to weaken Javier Milei. The same strategy was used against Mauricio Macri in 2018, and it proved effective. Street protests contributed to Macri’s downfall and helped pave the way for the Kirchnerists’ return to power in 2019.

Milei is aware of this. The real question is whether he can keep enough support to pass the bill in the lower house and withstand the strikes without giving in, as previous non-Peronist leaders did.

Mexico Discovers the Weekend

It’s an interesting contrast. Argentina, famous for its strong unions, is now passing reforms that weaken labor rights. Meanwhile, Mexico, with its own long history of workers’ movements, is only now beginning to discuss a 40-hour workweek.

On February 11, Mexico’s Senate voted unanimously to approve a constitutional reform that would reduce the standard workweek from 48 to 40 hours. The proposal now moves to the Chamber of Deputies, which is expected to vote on February 24 or 25.

The reform will roll out in stages: 46 hours in 2027, 44 in 2028, 42 in 2029, and finally 40 by 2030. It will affect 13.4 million workers. Important points include no pay cuts during the transition, electronic time-tracking starting January 2027, a 12-hour weekly overtime limit, and no overtime for minors. Workers will not have two required rest days until the 40-hour goal is met in 2030.

Mexico works more hours per employed person than almost any country in the world, at 2,226 hours per year, the highest in the OECD, and has had some of the least employee-friendly laws. This is great news for them, but it was about time.

From “Yankee Go Home” to “Welcome Back”

Last week, U.S. Energy Secretary Chris Wright visited Venezuela and announced investments totaling over $100 million to upgrade Chevron facilities. He told reporters the U.S. embargo on Venezuelan crude had “essentially ended,” and that production in some fields could double within 12 to 18 months. The first $500 million oil sale under U.S. supervision had already closed on January 14.

Wright is the highest-ranking U.S. official to visit Venezuela since Bill Richardson did so during the presidency of Bill Clinton.

Meanwhile, on February 12, thousands of Venezuelan students marched in the first major opposition protests since Nicolás Maduro’s capture. It was National Youth Day, and crowds gathered in Caracas, Bolívar, Táchira, and Carabobo, chanting, “Not one, not two—all of them.”

The students protested the stalled amnesty law and called for the release of over 600 political prisoners still detained. The Chavista National Assembly delayed the final vote on the amnesty bill because it is stuck on Article 7, which requires recipients to “submit themselves to the law.” The opposition sees this as an assumption of guilt.

It is striking that after 27 years of presenting themselves as the strongest opponents of U.S. influence and imperialism, Chavismo is now becoming the Trump administration’s most strategic partner in Latin America.

The irony is exquisite. The anti-imperialist revolutionaries are now taking orders from Washington, opening their oil sector to American companies with “preferential access,” and receiving the U.S. Energy Secretary like an honored guest. Twenty-seven years of rhetoric, gone in six weeks.

Juanes Did It in Spanish First

Decades before Bad Bunny was performing in Spanish at the Super Bowl, a Colombian artist had a #1 song in over 20 countries with “La Camisa Negra,” and this was Juanes.

Mi Sangre (2004) by Juanes was actually the first CD I ever bought. To be honest, it was a burned copy. His style even inspired me to grow my hair long for years.

Juan Esteban Aristizábal Vásquez was born in Medellín in 1972. Before his fame, he was a metal fan growing up in Medellín during the Escobar years, one of the city’s most violent times. At 15, he started Ekhymosis, a thrash metal band. When they broke up around 1998, he sold everything he owned to buy a plane ticket to Los Angeles.

There’s a lot of variation among his albums—rock, vallenato, cumbia—and he’s been doing a U.S. crossover in recent years. But his best work, for me, will always be his debut Fíjate Bien (2000). It has an interesting sound mixing rock with Colombian music and powerful protest lyrics. The title track, for example, addresses the landmine crisis in Colombia, a tragic legacy of guerrilla warfare and drug trafficking. (They took what you had / they stole your daily bread / they took you off your land / and it doesn’t end there ... Take a good look where you step / take a good look when you walk / lest a landmine / blows up your feet, my love.)

The song became an anthem—dark, personal, and urgent. That album won him three Latin Grammys in 2001.

He is also a committed activist. He founded the Mi Sangre Foundation to support landmine victims and co-founded “Paz Sin Fronteras,” which hosted massive concerts. In 2008, more than 300,000 people attended the Colombia-Venezuela border, and in 2009, over a million people came to the event in Havana.

He has won 29 Grammys, sold over 15 million records, and TIME named him one of the 100 Most Influential People.

That’s all for now. If you found this valuable, here’s how you can support me:

Subscribe for free to get editions like this every week: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural recommendation to help you understand our region better.

Subscribe now

Like this post by tapping the heart button. It helps more people discover LatAm Explained.

Leave a comment below. I read every single one, and your perspectives make my content better.

Leave a comment

Share this with someone who’d appreciate my analysis of Latin America. Forward this email, or use the button below:

Share

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more of my content.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

This is mostly a political newsletter. I analyze elections, institutions, democracies, and regional tensions. I also discuss culture—music, film, literature—but usually to help you better understand our region. What we witnessed at the Super Bowl halftime show, though, is a perfect match of both.

Politics and culture are completely intertwined, inseparable, speaking to each other in ways that matter deeply to Latin America and Puerto Rico.

I first heard Bad Bunny in 2016. Latin trap was becoming big, and Bryant Myers was the undisputed king at that moment. I was at my university in Caracas, sitting on the floor of Módulo 6 (people who went to Andrés Bello Catholic University will know what I mean), having lunch with classmates, when one of them mentioned Bad Bunny and played “Diles.”

After that, his music became a constant part of my life. It’s wild to think we almost grew up together; he’s only three years older than me. It’s even more surprising that the artist I listened to at house parties as a teenager is now the most-streamed musician in the world and performing at the Super Bowl.

So when I was watching the Super Bowl halftime at a bar here in Prague, and I was the only Spanish speaker in the whole crowd, and every single element of the show was in Spanish, it felt like such a vindication. Like, that was for us. I don’t think I’d ever experienced anything like it before.

Watching these intrinsically Hispanic Caribbean scenes—the coconut seller, the old men playing dominoes, the kid sleeping in chairs at a wedding party—that happen not only in Puerto Rico but also in the Dominican Republic, Venezuela, Cuba, Colombia, and beyond, felt like the world was being exposed to our culture. Not just Puerto Rican culture, but the broader Caribbean experience we all share. Those small, everyday moments that make us who we are were suddenly projected onto the world.

@elsnack.report

El Snack Report Noticias y Memes on Instagram: "Cosas que los g…

At a time of intense polarization, when the Trump administration threatened to send ICE to the Super Bowl, and conservative pundits complained the show was “too Latino,” Benito answered with love, unity, and beauty.

Aside from the obvious differences, he’s cementing his status as a modern Caribbean John Lennon, using his platform to celebrate culture, honor struggle, and insist that love and dignity can coexist with political resistance. At a time when every cultural moment becomes a battleground, and every symbol gets weaponized, Benito chose to make art that was unapologetically political but fundamentally about connection.

For years, Latin artists who wanted mainstream success in the United States had to sing in English, soften their identity, and make themselves more acceptable. Even Ricky Martin, who has represented Puerto Rico and Latinos worldwide for decades and sang “La Copa de la Vida” for the 1998 World Cup (the best World Cup song ever, in my opinion), performed it in English at the Grammys that year. Nearly 30 years later, he returned to the global stage to perform with Bad Bunny, this time entirely in Spanish. That change says it all.

Bad Bunny refused to code-switch. He appeared fully and unapologetically Puerto Rican and made 135 million people meet him on his terms. He invited, not argued. He celebrated, not confronted.

This is important for Puerto Rico because the island exists in a strange colonial limbo. Puerto Ricans are U.S. citizens who can’t vote for president. They live under U.S. laws but have no voting representation in Congress. The island’s infrastructure has been neglected for decades. The power grid fails often, recovery from Hurricane Maria took years, and gentrification is forcing locals out as wealthy Americans buy property without paying taxes.

Bad Bunny’s performance spoke to all of this, but with artistry instead of aggression. When dancers climbed electric poles that sparked, it referenced “El Apagón” (The Blackout), his song protesting Puerto Rico’s constant power outages and the colonial neglect behind them. The music video shows real scenes of Puerto Ricans living without electricity, waiting in line for ice, and cooking by candlelight. On the Super Bowl stage, Bad Bunny turned that suffering into art and made a statement: this is our reality, and you will see it.

The performance of “Lo Que Le Pasó a Hawai’i” was a strong message. The song is a bolero, a slow and romantic style, but its lyrics are a warning. It tells how Hawaii was annexed by the United States, how native Hawaiians lost their land and culture, and how it became just another American state. “I don’t want them to do to you what they did to Hawai’i,” the song says. Ricky Martin performed a gentle, beautiful melody about resisting statehood and cultural erasure on American television, in Spanish, with a message of unity and caution.

The symbolism kept growing. Bad Bunny held up the Puerto Rican flag with the light-blue triangle, which is linked to the pro-independence movement and was once illegal to display under U.S.-appointed governors. He shouted “God bless America” and then named every country in the Americas, from Chile to Canada, as performers ran out with each nation’s flag. He was reclaiming a word that the United States has claimed for itself. We are America, too. Our stories matter. Our languages matter.

Minutes after the performance, Trump posted on Truth Social. The message was clear. To Trump and his supporters, an all-Spanish performance celebrating Puerto Rican and Latin American culture isn’t “American” enough.

Benito wasn’t performing for Trump’s approval. He was performing for us, for Puerto Ricans, for Latinos, and for anyone who’s been told their language doesn’t belong, their culture isn’t valuable, or their identity needs to be changed for mainstream acceptance.

For the rest of Latin America, Bad Bunny stands for something just as powerful: the chance to succeed globally without fitting into Anglo expectations. We don’t have to speak in English, explain ourselves, or ask permission to take up space. We can do it with messages of love and unity, not by copying the anger and division around us.

It’s a bit ironic, since I’m writing this in English. But you understand what I mean.

Bad Bunny makes us feel celebrated, and I notice that effect wherever I go. It’s more than pride; it’s vindication. It feels like we don’t have to change to be seen. Our cultures, languages, struggles, and joy all deserve to be on the world’s biggest stages. We can be political without bitterness. We can resist and still choose love.

He has used his platform, sometimes taking more radical stances in the past, to deliver a beautiful, heartfelt, artistic show about love and unity while still making strong political statements. That’s the balance we need. In a world that pushes us to choose sides and stay angry, Benito showed a different path. You might not like his music, but he is a strong representative for us.

Petro Meets Trump at the White House

Colombian President Gustavo Petro went to Washington on February 3 for his first in-person meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump. The two met in the Oval Office for two hours, and the conversation was friendlier than expected, given their past. Trump had previously called Petro an “illegal drug leader” and even talked about possible military action against Colombia. Petro had criticized Trump’s policies as “war crimes” and described the U.S. raid that captured Venezuela’s Maduro as a “brutal imperial aggression.”

At the White House, though, they got along. Trump said, “We worked on it,” referring to their cooperation on fighting drugs. Petro asked for help catching drug traffickers and even wanted Trump to help solve Colombia’s dispute with Ecuador. Trump also gave Petro a handwritten note that said, “Gustavo – A great honor – I love Colombia.”

It almost seems like Petro wanted to check this meeting off his list before leaving office. Jokes aside, it’s obviously a positive sign that the U.S. and Colombia have eased tensions. Still, remember that Petro’s term is ending soon, as Colombia will hold presidential elections later this year.

Bolivia: Paz Approaches His First 100 Days

Rodrigo Paz is approaching his first 100 days as Bolivia’s president, and we can start thinking about the balance. After decades of socialist MAS party rule, Bolivia has its first center-right president since 2006. He inherited the worst economic crisis in four decades—20% inflation, critically low foreign reserves, fuel shortages, and lines at gas stations.

He responded boldly by ending government fuel subsidies, which had been costing $10 million a day. Fuel prices more than doubled overnight. The country erupted in general strikes and road blockades, and cities were paralyzed for almost a month. Earlier Bolivian presidents had given in under this kind of pressure.

But Paz stood his ground on the subsidy cuts and showed flexibility in other areas. He raised the minimum wage by 20%, increased pensions, and added cash transfers for the poorest. After weeks of a standoff, he reached a compromise that kept the subsidy cuts but dropped the controversial fast-track investment rules. The strikes then faded.

Meanwhile, Evo Morales, Bolivia’s former president and leader of the MAS party, has been missing for over a month. He vanished soon after he condemned the U.S. raid on Venezuela’s Maduro. His supporters claim he has dengue, but others believe he left the country to avoid an arrest warrant.

Bolivia is finally starting a new chapter. The question now is what comes next.

Spain: Sánchez Challenges Elon Musk

In this newsletter, we’ve talked about how our relationships with leaders in Latin America are shaped by how people in Spain relate to theirs. That might sound like an oversimplification, but it’s worth considering.

This is why it’s important to pay attention to Pedro Sánchez. On February 3, Spain’s Prime Minister announced plans to ban social media for anyone under 16 and to hold tech executives personally responsible for hate speech on their platforms. Elon Musk responded on Twitter, calling him “Dirty Sánchez” and a “tyrant.” Later, Musk called him “the true fascist totalitarian.”

At the same time, Sánchez approved a plan to grant legal status to about 500,000 undocumented immigrants in Spain. Many of these people are Latin Americans who will benefit directly.

It’s interesting how Sánchez handles crises by rallying his supporters. This time, he’s focusing on outside opponents. Musk represents Silicon Valley’s influence, and the decision to regularize migrants is framed as a humanitarian response to rising xenophobia in the West. This strategy turns opposition into motivation and critics into rallying points.

Tego Calderón and the Revolutionary El Abayarde

Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl performance honored reggaeton legends like Daddy Yankee, Don Omar, Héctor El Father, and Tego Calderón. I’ll cover the others in future newsletters, but today I want to focus on the most underground of them all.

Tego Calderón was born in 1972 in Santurce, Puerto Rico, and started his career in the late ‘90s when reggaeton, then known as “underground,” was still taking shape. While many artists focused on fast beats and party themes, Tego mixed salsa, reggae, and hip-hop, blending street style with strong social messages.

His first album, El Abayarde (2002), was an experiment. People weren’t sure if this rougher, slower, and more political style of reggaeton would catch on. Well, it sold over 300,000 copies worldwide and received a Latin Grammy nomination. The album became a classic, with hits like “Pa’ Que Retozen,” “Métele Sazón,” and “Guasa Guasa.”

Tego stood out because he was proud of his Afro-Latino roots and cared deeply about social issues. While most reggaeton focused on party and romance, Tego rapped about racism, inequality, and the challenges faced by Black Puerto Ricans. Songs like “Loíza” spoke directly about racism on the island. He gave reggaeton its soul, its political voice, and its connection to real life.

The music industry often didn’t know how to handle Tego. Record labels wanted him to tone down his message, but he refused. While artists like Daddy Yankee became huge stars, Tego’s following stayed more underground and grassroots. Still, his impact is clear. Bad Bunny has even said, “Tego Calderón is the biggest in the industry.”

The Super Bowl tribute showed that without Tego’s bold move and El Abayarde’s proof that reggaeton could be deeper than party songs, artists like Bad Bunny wouldn’t have the freedom to be political and creative. Tego opened the door, and a whole generation followed.

That’s all for now. If you found this valuable, here’s how you can support me:

Subscribe for free to get editions like this every week: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural recommendation to help you understand our region better.

Subscribe now

Like this post by tapping the heart button. It helps more people discover LatAm Explained.

Leave a comment below. I read every single one, and your perspectives make my content better.

Leave a comment

Share this with someone who’d appreciate clear-eyed analysis of Latin America. Forward this email, or use the button below:

Share

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more of my content.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

Laura Fernández won Costa Rica’s presidency in the first round on February 1st with 48.5% of the vote, easily passing the 40% needed to avoid a runoff. Her closest rival, centrist Álvaro Ramos, received 33.4%. No other candidate reached 5%. Fernández’s Sovereign People’s Party also won 30 out of 57 legislative seats. That’s a strong result, but still not enough for the supermajority required to change the constitution.

We’ve talked about outgoing President Rodrigo Chaves before in this newsletter. He’s known for clashing with institutions, surviving two failed impeachment attempts, and having a confrontational style. Fernández is his protégée—she was his chief of staff and minister—and she campaigned on continuing his approach. It’s “Rodriguismo without Rodrigo,” so to speak.

Here’s why this matters: In Latin America, Costa Rica—and maybe Uruguay—stand out as examples of strong democracies with solid institutions. When we look for countries that “do it right,” we look to Costa Rica. So when Costa Rica shows signs of trouble, the rest of us notice.

While Chaves was in office, I noticed some worrying trends: attempts to remove Supreme Court judges, efforts to allow his own re-election, extensions of emergency powers, attacks on the media, and rising insecurity even though he promised to be tough on crime. These issues aren’t disastrous yet, but they’re troubling because they’re happening in Costa Rica.

Fernández is more of a technical, less personalist politician than Chaves. She might be able to carry out his agenda more effectively, which could be positive or negative depending on what that agenda turns out to be. This situation reminds me of Lula da Silva and Dilma Rousseff in Brazil: the charismatic founder followed by a technocratic successor trying to make the project last. We know how that ended.

It’s also striking how similar Central America looks right now. Bukele is in charge in El Salvador, Asfura in Honduras, and now Fernández is continuing Chaves’s project in Costa Rica. Fernández’s main focus is crime—Costa Rica ended 2025 with record homicides, and voters liked her tough security message. All three governments are friendly with Trump, all three focus on hardline security, and all three are skeptical of international oversight. Chaves and Bukele are close—Bukele was the first foreign leader to congratulate Fernández. Central America seems to be moving toward a model that puts order above everything else.

But here’s what gives me hope about Costa Rica: its institutions are strong and will push back. Costa Rica got rid of its military in 1948. Its Supreme Electoral Tribunal is truly independent. The courts still work. The press is still free and outspoken. Even the fact that so many Costa Ricans are worried about Chaves and Fernández shows how strong their democracy is.

I really admire how alert Costa Ricans are. They expect a lot from their leaders. When a president clashes with the Supreme Court, Costa Ricans see it as a serious problem. In most of Latin America, people might just shrug and say, “Well, at least he’s not stealing that much.” Costa Rica’s democratic culture expects and demands more.

There’s also a practical limit: even though Chaves and Fernández have said they want to end the one-term presidential limit, they don’t have enough support in Congress to make it happen. The numbers just aren’t there.

So yes, everyone is watching Costa Rica. And yes, there’s some worry. But Costa Rica has faced tough times before, and its institutions have held up. The real question is whether they can handle another four years with a government that sees them as obstacles instead of safeguards. For the region’s sake, I hope they can. We need Costa Rica to remain Costa Rica.

Kast Visits Bukele’s Prison

We’re not done mentioning Bukele. What a guy. Just when you think he’s reached peak regional influence, Chile’s President-elect José Antonio Kast shows up at his doorstep.

On January 30th, Kast visited El Salvador’s well-known CECOT mega-prison, the “Terrorism Confinement Center,” where tens of thousands of accused gang members are held under Bukele’s state of emergency. He arrived with security ministers by helicopter, toured the cellblocks, and praised El Salvador’s approach. “We need to import good ideas and proposals to combat organized crime,” he said.

Kast has talked about mass deportations as part of his campaign. With Trump now sending migrants to El Salvador’s prisons and Kast showing clear admiration for Bukele’s model, it wouldn’t be surprising if he considers something similar. Still, Chile’s institutions and legal system are much stronger than those in Central America.

These weeks before Kast’s March inauguration can tell us a lot about his priorities. He’s a career politician in a strong democratic system, not a Bukele-style disruptor. But if he’s spending his transition period touring Bukele’s prisons and studying his methods, that signals where his focus will be.

The question is how he’ll adapt these ideas to Chile’s very different institutional reality.

Honduras: Asfura Takes Office

The presidential election in Honduras has finally ended. Nasry “Tito” Asfura became president on January 27 after winning by about 26,000 votes against centrist Salvador Nasralla. The race was extremely close, with loud fraud accusations and a vote count that took weeks. Still, the electoral tribunal confirmed Asfura’s win in mid-January, and the transition went ahead.

It’s a good sign that Asfura focused on unity in his inaugural speech. “The elections are over, now we must govern for all Hondurans,” he said. After months of chaos and division, a call for national unity is just what Honduras needs. Whether he can keep that promise is uncertain, but at least his message is encouraging.

Asfura has decided to take on the role of Health Minister himself. He chose not to appoint anyone to the position and will oversee the ministry directly, with support from new health sector deputies. This is unusual, since presidents rarely manage ministries themselves. It shows he is serious about tackling Honduras’ healthcare crisis, which includes hospital strikes over unpaid wages and major shortages of medical supplies. Time will tell if this direct approach helps or simply gives the president too much control.

Trump Doubles Down on Cuba

I’m not certain whether Cuba’s regime will collapse or, more likely, start collaborating with the Trump administration in a similar fashion to what we’re seeing with Delcy Rodríguez in Venezuela. But I do know something has to give.

Cuba has faced tough crises before. The Special Period in the 1990s, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, is a good example. But back then, the Castros were in charge, and Cuba always had the support of a major ally—first the USSR, then Venezuela. Now, both sources of support are gone. Maduro’s capture ended Cuba’s oil supply, and the U.S. is determined to block any new help.

Trump threatened tariffs on any country that supplies oil to Cuba, and it’s having an effect. Venezuela stopped sending oil. Mexico quietly paused its deliveries because of U.S. pressure, and Sheinbaum’s government will not risk its own interests to help Díaz-Canel. Within three weeks, Havana faced severe fuel shortages. The Cuban peso lost over 10% of its value in January. Blackouts in the capital now last up to 10 hours.

This is not the Special Period. It could be even worse. Cuba is being cut off economically, and there is no one left to help. The country is running out of options fast.

Carlos Santana and the Supernatural Phenomenon

Bad Bunny stunned the world this week when he was awarded the Grammy for Album of the Year for Debí Tirar Más Fotos. I kept seeing in the press that it was the first Spanish-language album to win that category, so I got curious and started looking for his predecessors. Who came closest?

Carlos Santana is the closest example, thanks to his 1999 album Supernatural. It won Album of the Year and eight other Grammys, tying Michael Jackson’s Thriller for the most Grammys won by a single album.

So let’s talk about Santana.

I still remember a tough loss from college. My friends and I nailed “Somebody to Love” by Queen at a karaoke contest. We got the harmonies right, hit all the notes, and really brought the energy. But we lost to a guy in a leather jacket who sang “Smooth” from this album. I’m still a bit salty about it.

Back to Santana: it’s wild to remember he played at Woodstock in 1969. His performance of “Soul Sacrifice” is legendary. He was only 22, yet he delivered one of the festival’s most iconic moments. That was 30 years before Supernatural brought his music to a new generation and revived his career.

Supernatural was a huge success, selling over 30 million copies worldwide. Collaborations with Rob Thomas (”Smooth”), Wyclef Jean (”Maria Maria”), and Maná (”Corazón Espinado”) helped connect Latin rock with mainstream pop.

If you want to understand Santana’s legacy, listen to Abraxas from 1970. It’s probably his most important album. My colleagues from the Los 600 Discos de Latinoamérica project rank it as the 52nd best Latin American album ever. Abraxas is where Santana perfected his mix of rock, blues, and Afro-Cuban rhythms, which became the base for all his later work.

That’s all for now. If you found this valuable, here’s how you can support this work:

Subscribe (it's free!) to get editions like this every week: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural recommendation to help you understand our region better.

Subscribe now

Like this post by tapping the heart button—it helps more people discover LatAm Explained.

Leave a comment below. I read every single one, and your perspectives make this newsletter better.

Leave a comment

Share this with someone who’d appreciate clear-eyed analysis of Latin America. Forward this email, or use the button below:

Share

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more of my content.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

Just when it seemed like the EU–Mercosur agreement was finally about to come to life, it stalled again. The European Parliament voted to send the deal’s legal framework to the European Court of Justice for review, a process that could take more than a year.

We’ve talked about this agreement many times in this newsletter. For a long time, I wasn’t sure it would ever move forward. A few weeks ago, I was surprised to see some progress. Now, it’s stuck again.

Until now, we’ve mostly viewed the EU–Mercosur deal from a Latin American perspective, which makes sense. But it’s also important to look at the European side. Why is there so much resistance in Europe? Who opposes the deal, and for what reasons? What does this tell us about how the European Union manages trade, politics, and national interests?

That’s why I invited my Italian colleague and dear friend Paolo Timossi to write a guest analysis for this edition. Paolo is a literature graduate from Sapienza Università di Roma and a student in the Erasmus Mundus Master’s program in Crisis and Conflict Journalism at City, St George’s University of London.

In the following section, he explains the current state of the agreement from the European perspective, and the motivations, pressures, and internal contradictions that might make it fail (or not).

What the EU-Mercosur deal means for Europe and why it’s now in standby

Guest analysis by Paolo Timossi

After nearly 25 years of talks, the European Commission and four South American countries—Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, and Uruguay—have finally agreed to sign the long-awaited trade deal between the EU and Mercosur. In addition to these four members, the bloc also includes Venezuela, whose membership has been suspended since 2016 for political reasons, while Colombia is currently negotiating its accession.

The agreement is expected to create a shared market of about 700 million people, making it the world's largest free-trade area. It is based on slowly removing tariffs on many types of goods. Over the next 15 years, Mercosur and EU countries are supposed to each remove more than 90% of these tariffs on goods from the other group. In theory, this should create big economic opportunities on both sides of the Atlantic.

From an EU perspective, the main winners would certainly be European industrial sectors. Exports are expected to increase notably in chemicals, plastics, rubber, metals, and machinery, benefiting Central European industries in particular and German manufacturers above all. European companies would also gain access to Mercosur countries’ public procurement markets, opening the door to large government-funded projects.

As with any trade deal, however, there are likely to be losers as well. In this perspective, European agriculture appears to be the most vulnerable sector. Many experts have warned that cheaper Mercosur food products could flood European markets, further pressuring EU farmers, who are already facing a long-standing structural crisis.

That’s the reason why an army of angry farmers and tractors has recently taken to the streets of Brussels to protest the Commission’s decision. And that’s also why, pressured from agricultural lobbies, and following a very narrow vote in the European Parliament, the agreement has now been sent to the European Court of Justice for review. A process that can take 12 to 18 months.

Once again, EU policymaking finds itself caught in a web of competing national interests, slowing down decision-making and complicating strategic choices. The Commission’s frustration becomes even more understandable when considering the deal’s geopolitical implications, which many observers see as even more significant than its economic outcomes.

One of the agreement’s key objectives was to counterbalance China’s growing influence in Mercosur. Indeed, over the past two decades, China has overtaken the EU as the bloc’s leading trade partner, both in exports and imports. The deal was therefore meant to help Europe regain ground in Latin America.

More broadly, the agreement fits into the EU’s strategy to diversify its economic partnerships and reduce dependence on the United States. In this context, it may not be a coincidence that the deal was finalised amid the rise of the so-called “Donroe Doctrine”.

With the White House increasingly threatening both South American and European interests (and sovereignty), the Mercosur agreement could be read as a political response to Donald Trump’s provocations.

When the Mercosur-EU deal will eventually become effective remains uncertain, but the current situation already confirms a deeper, evergreen dilemma within the European Union: while trying to act as a global body (both economically and geopolitically), its fate is, once again, affected by short-term interests, internal divisions, and national political pressures. Although nothing new, yet always frustrating.

Peru: Another Impeachment Attempt

It had been months since Peruvians last tried to remove their president. Sooner or later, it was bound to happen again.

Interim President José Jerí, Peru’s eighth president in ten years, held secret meetings with a Chinese businessman in late December and early January. He did not record these meetings on his official agenda. When the media revealed these off-the-record encounters, Jerí apologized and called it “a mistake” to meet “hidden” without transparency. The Attorney General has started a preliminary investigation for alleged influence peddling.

Congress responded quickly. Six censure motions have been filed, using a new legal shortcut that requires only a simple majority to remove him instead of the usual two-thirds supermajority.

The most surprising and sad part is that many Peruvians would rather keep Jerí in power until the April elections. He still has 44% approval, which is very high by Peruvian standards. More than 100 prominent citizens published an open letter urging Congress not to remove him, saying the country needs “stability” before the elections.

That’s how normalized it is in Latin America, especially in Peru, for politicians to act irregularly. Jerí is the lesser evil simply because removing him would mean more chaos. The bar is underground.

Colombia and Ecuador: Trade War Over Drugs

On January 21, Ecuador’s President Daniel Noboa announced a 30% “security tariff” on all Colombian imports, saying Colombia was not helping enough to fight drug trafficking and illegal mining that drive violence in Ecuador. Colombia responded within a day by putting a 30% tariff on 20 Ecuadorian products and stopping electricity exports to Ecuador.

Noboa clearly wants to follow Trump’s approach. He has said this move is inspired by Trump’s use of trade penalties to push for policy changes. His concerns about Colombia are real, since Colombia is the world’s largest cocaine producer. More cooperation on border security could help Ecuador, which is facing record homicide rates from gang violence.

However, Ecuador has a large trade deficit with Colombia, importing $1.67 billion while exporting much less. A 30% tariff across the board will raise prices for Ecuadorian consumers and businesses on Colombian fuel, food, and manufactured goods. With this trade imbalance, the move may not benefit Ecuador’s economy. Noboa may appear tough on crime and align with Trump, but ordinary Ecuadorians will end up paying more.

Guatemala: Arévalo’s Nightmare First Two Years

On January 18, President Bernardo Arévalo declared a 30-day state of emergency after the Barrio 18 gang led prison riots and attacks that killed at least seven police officers. Inmates took 46 prison guards hostage in three prisons, demanding their leaders be moved back to lower-security facilities. Security forces freed all the hostages and recaptured gang leader Aldo “El Lobo” Dupie. Afterward, the gang carried out more attacks on police across Guatemala City.

Arévalo’s first two years in government have been extremely difficult. He won the 2023 election on an anti-corruption platform, but the old establishment tried many ways to stop him from taking office, including trying to nullify the election results and blocking his party’s registration. He finally became president in January 2024 after months of uncertainty and protests.

Now he faces another crisis. By the end of 2025, Guatemala’s homicide rate reached 16.1 per 100,000, which is more than double the global average. Gangs control entire neighborhoods, and the prison system is so corrupt that some imprisoned leaders had king-size beds, air conditioning, and restaurant food delivered to their cells. Arévalo is trying to reform a deeply flawed system, but gangs are responding with violence. Democracy in Guatemala is still under threat from many directions.

Brazilian Cinema’s Sweet Moment

People in Brazil are excited about the four Oscar nominations for “The Secret Agent,” and even more after “I’m Still Here” won Best International Feature last year. Brazilian cinema is enjoying a strong moment. Over a million Brazilians have watched “The Secret Agent” in theaters, which stands out since fewer people are going to the movies these days. President Lula said it shows that Brazil can share stories with the world.

So the obvious recommendation is “The Secret Agent,” a film about a widowed father who is persecuted by Brazil’s military dictatorship in the late 1970s. Wagner Moura, who you might know as Pablo Escobar from Netflix’s “Narcos,” was nominated for Best Actor. He is the first Brazilian ever nominated in a lead acting category.

But it’s also worth checking out other films by Kleber Mendonça Filho. “Aquarius” (2016) stars Sônia Braga as a woman standing up to construction developers in Recife. “Bacurau” (2019) is a near-future thriller about a rural village fighting off foreign mercenaries, and it won the Jury Prize at Cannes.

Mendonça Filho is known for making political films, and it’s no accident that these two acclaimed Brazilian movies are set during the dictatorship years. Brazil is confronting its difficult history through film, using stories to reflect on authoritarianism at a time when these warnings matter again, and the world is watching.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

I spent the holidays in Spain, catching up with friends and family and staying out too late on New Year’s Eve. On January 2, still recovering, I decided to stay in. During the day, I sent out the last issue of this newsletter, and that night I binge-watched The Sopranos until nearly 5 in the morning.

At about 7:05 a.m., my phone started ringing. My best friend in Caracas kept calling, but I missed the calls. When I checked WhatsApp, I saw messages from him and videos flooding my Venezuelan group chats: bombings in Caracas, at La Carlota airbase, Fort Tiuna, La Guaira, and Higuerote. At first, I thought it was a military uprising from inside Venezuela. But a few minutes later, I saw OSINT experts on X analyzing the helicopters in the videos, saying they matched the ones the United States had at its base in Puerto Rico. That’s when I realized the U.S. was invading Venezuela. I hadn’t slept that night, and I wouldn’t get much sleep in the days that followed.

@karminreyes

Karmin on Instagram: "Helicópteros muchísimos pasando por Carac…

In case you haven’t followed the news—though if you’re reading this, you probably have—U.S. troops entered Venezuela early on January 3rd, bombed specific military sites, captured Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, and took them to the United States to face justice in New York. At least 150 aircraft took part in the operation. 77 military personnel died, including 32 Cuban intelligence and military officers who were guarding Maduro. Tell me about foreign intervention. Two civilians were killed in the strikes. The destruction was little and limited to specific areas, and while some people lost their homes, the operation was surprisingly precise. No one expected that if the U.S. bombed Venezuela, it would be so painless, at least in relative terms. Please read my words carefully here.

January 3rd was very confusing because there was a power vacuum. Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino López and Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello spoke early that morning, saying they were out in the streets with military and police forces. There were rumors, even confirmed by some international outlets, that Vice President Delcy Rodríguez was in Russia, and National Assembly President Jorge Rodríguez did not appear for hours. Venezuelans were excited about Maduro’s capture, but no one knew who was actually in charge. People couldn’t go out to celebrate as Venezuelans did abroad in Miami, Buenos Aires, Madrid, and other cities.

Then Donald Trump held a press conference in Florida. He said they didn’t think María Corina Machado had enough respect to lead the country and that they would work with Vice President Delcy Rodríguez. Since then, what has really surprised me is how united Chavismo has been. I always thought that if the U.S. invaded, which I considered possible, Chavistas would escape and try to find exile somewhere safe. But that hasn’t happened. They are still there, resisting in their own way, following U.S. policies but working together. They’re staying put.

In just over two weeks, we’ve seen major changes that no one could have predicted. PDVSA, our oil company, announced it would give oil to the U.S. after Trump said they would take it. The CIA director visited Caracas and met with Delcy Rodríguez. They have started releasing political prisoners, but it’s happening very slowly. I want to point out that Venezuela has between 800 and 1,200 political prisoners, and fewer than 200 have been released so far, including some journalists, but not nearly enough.

So when people ask me what’s happening in Venezuela and what’s going on right now, this is my answer: We’re in a transition, but we don’t know where it will lead.

Chavistas have always been good at buying time and stalling, and it’s worked for them many times. Now, it seems they’re trying to follow U.S. demands in public, at least on the surface, to stay in power with as little damage as possible. In reality, Chavismo is still intact except for Maduro and Cilia Flores, who are now in prison. The real concern is that Chavistas could secure their position and stay in power by meeting some U.S. demands, but then U.S. attention might shift elsewhere, letting Chavistas remain in control for years, just as they have for the past 27 years.

However, there are signs that U.S. interests are long-term. A few days after the attack, Trump met at the White House with oil executives from 17 companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, and Shell, and invited them to invest in Venezuela. The oil executives were skeptical. Most who spoke publicly that day said Venezuela still isn’t stable enough, mainly because Chavismo is still in power. This is the same regime that seized and expropriated their assets several times before. For U.S. oil interests, a democratic transition will eventually be necessary. The instability that makes Chavistas acceptable partners now will eventually become a problem for investors who need guarantees.

There’s another factor: the U.S. forcing Chavistas to make these concessions is disappointing their own supporters. I haven’t been able to talk to many Chavistas since I’m not there, and people are afraid to speak to the international media. But if you look, for example, at the comments online about PDVSA’s announcement to give oil to the U.S., Chavistas aren’t happy either. They now make up less than 20 percent of the population, but if Chavismo wants to stay relevant, it needs its loyalists. Watching your government hand over the country’s oil wealth to the “empire” you’ve spent 27 years criticizing is not what Chavista supporters expected.

So I’m cautiously optimistic about Venezuela’s future right now. The contradictions are adding up. Trump wants stable oil for U.S. companies, which will eventually require democracy. Chavistas need to survive, so they need U.S. tolerance. The opposition wants power, which depends on both. Something will have to change.

I’m sorry I haven’t sent out the newsletter in the past two weeks. I’ve been busy reporting on daily developments, making short-form content mostly for Instagram, and giving interviews to other outlets. I also wanted the events to unfold until we had enough clarity to analyze. Thank you for sticking with me. Thank you for reading. And thank you to the subscribers who reached out and asked about my friend and family back home; it meant the world to me.

This edition is only about Venezuela, but we’ll have another one this week covering other news in the region.

Who Is Delcy Rodríguez?

Before January 3rd, most people had never heard of Delcy Rodríguez. After that date, international media, especially The New York Times, began describing her as a technocrat and pragmatic moderate. This view is off the mark. Both she and her brother Jorge Rodríguez are hardline Chavistas, and she has always shown an unapologetic approach in her career.

Journalist Ibéyise Pacheco has reported that Rodríguez once had a falling out with Hugo Chávez and insulted him during a diplomatic trip to Russia. This incident is said to be the reason she was not a key figure during Chávez’s last years. She only became prominent again when Maduro took office in 2013.

There is no doubt she is smart. She spent years representing Venezuela internationally, first as Foreign Minister and then as Vice President, where she managed Chavismo’s global alliances. She knows how to appear as a moderate technocrat when it suits her, and it seems the White House and Trump believe this image. However, she is actually a committed. Any reforms or concessions she makes are not based on her personal beliefs but are part of Chavismo’s strategy to survive, similar to the economic changes Maduro made in the late 2010s to face hyperinflation.

When Rodríguez was Vice President, she was in charge of SEBIN, Venezuela’s political police. This role made her directly responsible for the repression and torture many Venezuelans have experienced.

The legal process used to swear her in as interim president, called “forced absence of the president,” is not found in our Constitution. The Supreme Court, controlled by Chavistas, simply created it.

It is hard to say exactly what Chavistas want in the near or distant future. However, it seems likely they hope to put Rodríguez forward as a candidate in a future presidential election. She is their strongest option for keeping their movement going, and Trump is helping give her the legitimacy she needs—although this could backfire.

What Venezuelans Really Think

The first thing I want to point out is the enormous civility and dignity Venezuelans showed during the U.S. attacks. There were no riots, no violence, no outbursts. What were people doing? They went to supermarkets and lined up to buy food. They went to gas stations to supply gas. They organized themselves to buy U.S. dollars for the uncertainty ahead.

My sister María Verónica calls this the moral reserve of Venezuelans, and I saw it clearly that day.

Take the recent Economist poll from January 13th. Even though The Economist isn’t known for supporting Trump, the poll found that only 13 percent of Venezuelans opposed Maduro’s capture. That tells you how desperate people are for change after years under Chavismo. Nearly 80 percent now believe the country’s political situation will improve in the next year, and about 70 percent think their family’s economic situation will get better too.

People are most divided on who should lead the country. Still, almost half believe the U.S. should have a role in Venezuela’s government. More than a third think the Venezuelan government should control the oil industry. Nearly 70 percent want new presidential elections, and almost 70 percent want those elections within six months.

María Corina Machado remains the most popular leader, with almost 50 percent of people saying they would vote for her. Delcy Rodríguez has only 2.5 percent. Edmundo González gets almost 10 percent, so together with Machado, about six out of ten Venezuelans support the opposition.

One surprising fact is that Donald Trump and Marco Rubio have the highest approval ratings among political leaders in Venezuela. Both are viewed more favorably than Machado and González.

To people asking me if there are still Maduro supporters demanding his release: Did you ever watch the movie Good Bye, Lenin? That woman was still supporting the socialists until the very end.

Yes, there are some Chavistas still, but the vast majority of Venezuelans are happy Maduro is gone.

Machado’s Meeting with Trump

If Chavistas have been on a rollercoaster these past two weeks, the opposition has too. On January 3rd, during those confusing hours, the opposition stayed quiet until late in the day. When Trump said Machado couldn’t lead because she lacked the people’s respect, it hit hard. It took the opposition days to bounce back.

This is especially funny for people who claimed Machado was a puppet of U.S. interests. It turns out that anti-Trump views from Machado’s team in the past, along with Edmundo González’s meeting with President Biden at the White House, affected Trump’s perception. Remember, Trump was Juan Guaidó’s main ally when he claimed the presidency in 2019. He’s long been disappointed by the Venezuelan opposition.

We were happy when Machado won the Nobel Peace Prize because it meant the world recognized how much Venezuelans have suffered and fought. Still, for most of us, the prize doesn’t matter nearly as much as finally getting our democracy and freedom back.

Machado is not the typical Western political figure that you can scrutinize for every action. She’s a leader, a single-unit political force who has worked for decades to oppose the brutal Chavismo dictatorship. This woman has faced hardships in her personal life. So we see Machado’s words about Trump not as something she truly believes, but as someone doing everything in her power to get the opposition representation in this transition.

It looks like she pulled it off. Reports say that after their meeting, Trump gave her his phone number directly. I don’t think Edmundo González will end up taking office, and that might be better for him in the long run. If Venezuela heads toward open and free elections, with U.S. oversight and pressure on Chavismo, Machado will likely become the next president. That’s what people want.

The Music of Alí Primera

Over the past few weeks, I’ve seen many left-wing activists outside Venezuela condemning the U.S. military buildup in the Caribbean and the attack on Venezuelan soil. Almost all of them rely on the same cliché cultural references.

They don’t know the Venezuelan context. None of them mentions Alí Primera.

Alí Primera was one of Venezuela’s most important folk singers in the twentieth century. His songs were openly anti-imperialist, focused on social issues, and always defended the poor. With his beautiful voice, he sang about hunger, inequality, and oil long before Chávez, Maduro, or the Venezuela we know today.

I’ve always found his work fascinating, and I find tragic how Chavismo took over his legacy. First Chávez, then Maduro, used Primera’s music while leading in ways that made his lyrics feel painfully relevant again. The poverty he described in “Techos de cartón” is even worse today than it was over forty years ago.

Alí Primera died in a car accident in 1985. He had received threats from security forces, so many people questioned how he died. Still, there’s no doubt about his importance. He is still one of the clearest moral voices Venezuela has ever had.

My favorite song is “Ahora que el petróleo es nuestro,” which Primera wrote after oil was nationalized under President Carlos Andrés Pérez. (Now that the oil is ours / long live sovereignty / so tell me, Mr. President / what if it were turned into food? / I don’t say this out of obsession / or because I feel like it / but the people, my friend / are sovereignly hungry.)

It’s hard to read those lines without seeing the main contradiction in Venezuela today.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

Happy New Year! Thank you for supporting this project during its first year. I really appreciate it. If you want to help the newsletter grow, please share it with friends or anyone interested in Latin America. You can also find me on Instagram, TikTok, X, and follow LatAm Explained on Instagram.

This week’s issue is coming out a bit later than usual because I thought most people wouldn’t be reading the news earlier in the week. Maybe you’re not reading it now either, but I wanted to avoid overlapping with next Monday’s regular issue. So, I’m trying something new: instead of covering recent events, let’s look ahead to the major elections coming up in our region in 2026.

One thing stands out in all these elections: polarization. It’s made me think about journalism’s role and why I started this newsletter in the first place.

I’ve been called both a communist and a fascist, so maybe that means I’m doing something right. I try to stay in the center, sticking to the facts and aiming for balance, which I think is missing in journalism today. Over the past decade, it seems like people mostly want to hear their own views confirmed instead of looking for balanced information. Journalists are partly to blame, but it’s also a way to survive by adapting to what audiences want.

I can’t predict the future, but if I can help push back against that trend, even a little, I see that as my job as an independent journalist. But hey, if Residente and J Balvin reconciled, nothing says that our societies can't. So allow me to be optimistic.

@jbalvin

J Balvin on Instagram: "Frente a la inmensidad de las cosas que…

This year, four major Latin American countries will hold presidential elections: Costa Rica in February, Peru and Colombia in the spring, and Brazil in October. Each country is deeply polarized, with voters choosing between very different paths. In Costa Rica, 20 candidates are running during a crime wave. In Colombia, voters will decide whether to continue Petro’s left-wing experiment or return to the right. In Peru, 34 candidates are competing in a country that has had nine presidents in ten years. In Brazil, 80-year-old Lula is seeking a fourth term, while the right searches for someone to challenge him after Bolsonaro was imprisoned.

These elections will shape the region for the rest of the decade. We’ll see if Latin America’s recent shift to the right continues, whether voters put security ahead of social programs, and if institutions can stay strong as authoritarianism grows.

Let’s take a closer look at what to expect in each country.

Costa Rica: February 1

We’ve talked a lot about President Rodrigo Chaves in this newsletter, including his conflicts with institutions, two impeachment attempts, and his confrontational style. Now, Costa Rica is showing signs of strain in what was once Latin America’s model democracy.

The February 1 election is wide open. There are twenty candidates, and more than half of the voters have not made up their minds. Laura Fernández, a Chaves supporter, is slightly ahead. Far-right evangelical Fabricio Alvarado is in second. Centrist Álvaro Ramos and former First Lady Claudia Dobles are also in the race. Most voters are worried about crime and corruption, which could give hardline candidates an advantage.

Since no candidate is likely to get 40 percent of the vote, there will probably be a runoff in April. I hope Costa Rica has a smooth transition and keeps its strong democratic tradition. The country’s institutions have already made it through Chaves’s presidency. They will be tested again, but they have held up in the past. Costa Rica deserves better than division and strongman politics.

Peru: April 12

Peru is holding elections with a record 34 candidates, showing just how chaotic the country’s politics have become. This will be the ninth president in ten years, and no one has finished a full term in the past decade.

Even though Congress was dissolved a few years ago and its parties were banned, many of the same politicians have returned. Keiko Fujimori is running for president for the fourth time, and her main rival is Rafael López Aliaga, the far-right mayor of Lima. Both are strong conservatives who promise to fight crime and corruption, the issues that matter most to Peruvians.

Carlos Álvarez, a comedian running as an anti-establishment outsider, is also doing well in the polls. Many Peruvians are frustrated with career politicians, so it would not be surprising if a TV personality reached the runoff. Crime and corruption are the main concerns, and half of voters still have not decided who to support.

Colombia: May 31

After a 2018 constitutional reform, Colombian presidents can no longer seek re-election. That means Gustavo Petro, who ran for president multiple times before winning in 2022, is serving a single term. His disapproval sits above 60 percent, a sign of how badly his government performed: reforms stalled, peace negotiations faltered, and violence resurged.

These numbers also hint at what might happen next. Iván Cepeda, the left’s candidate, leads early polls with 32 percent. Abelardo de la Espriella, a far-right newcomer who openly admires Bukele and Trump, is second with 18 percent. Centrist Sergio Fajardo has about 8 percent.

Most importantly, 81 percent of Colombians want the next president to have good relations with the United States. This shows a clear rejection of Petro’s confrontational stance toward Washington. After electing a leftist leader, Colombia now appears to be shifting back to the right.

Brazil: October 4

Lula, now 80, is running for a fourth presidential term. By the numbers, this could be his strongest term yet: inflation is down, more people have jobs, and the economy is getting better. The right is struggling after Bolsonaro was sentenced to 27 years in prison for the January 2023 riots. His son Flávio is trying to win over his father’s supporters, but polls show Lula ahead by 10 points. Governor Tarcísio de Freitas is another possible challenger, but conservatives are divided.

I keep thinking about Lula’s age. Can he still lead Brazil with the energy and strength the job needs? He will be 81 on election day and 85 by the end of the term. Brazil faces big problems, like rising crime, deforestation in the Amazon, and dealing with Trump. These challenges require stamina and a long-term plan. Lula leads in every poll, but his age is the main issue people avoid discussing.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one cultural suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

El Salvador drew international attention this week when courts sentenced 248 MS-13 gang members to exceptionally long prison sentences. One man received a sentence of more than a thousand years. Ten others got between 463 and 958 years each. These convictions were for 43 murders, 42 disappearances, extortion, and other crimes committed from 2014 to 2022. President Nayib Bukele’s government called it historic justice. The Attorney General described the sentences as “exemplary.”

Bukele’s anti-gang crackdown has had a clear impact. Homicides fell from more than 6,600 in 2015 to about 500 in 2022. El Salvador went from the world’s highest murder rate to some days with no killings at all. Extortion, which once crippled businesses, has almost vanished. Neighborhoods that used to be under gang control are now safe to walk in. Since March 2022, authorities have arrested over 90,000 suspected gang members.

It makes sense that Salvadorans support these actions. After three decades of gangs killing thousands and terrorizing communities, people wanted real change. Bukele delivered that. His approval ratings are about 85 percent, and he won re-election in 2024 by a wide margin. When you have lived through so much violence, you are willing to accept trade-offs for peace.

But there is a problem. Bukele has used this success to strengthen his authoritarian image, which was already apparent before the crackdown. He now controls all branches of government after removing Supreme Court judges and the Attorney General in 2021. He changed the Constitution to allow his re-election, even though it was not allowed before. The state of emergency has been renewed more than 30 times, suspending basic rights for almost three years. Mass trials with up to 900 defendants at once raise real concerns about fair legal defense. With over 90,000 people arrested and only about 8,000 released, it is likely that some innocent people are now serving long prison sentences.

This is a difficult decision that no one wants to face. Naturally, people want safety from crime in their daily lives. But in the long run, Salvadorans may regret giving Bukele so much unchecked power and accepting actions that break constitutional rules. When indefinite emergencies, mass imprisonment without due process, and leaders changing rules to stay in power become normal, it is hard to reverse. The gangs may be gone, but the example set is risky.

It all comes down to deciding which difficult situation you can accept. Salvadorans chose safety. The real question is what they gave up for it, and whether the true cost will only become clear in the future.

Mercosur-EU Trade Deal: Almost Dead

A few weeks ago, we talked about the Mercosur-EU free trade agreement. Unfortunately, it’s now looking more likely to fall through. The deal was supposed to be signed at the Mercosur summit in Brazil on December 20, but Italy and France delayed it after facing pressure from their farmers. The new signing date is January 12, 2026, in Paraguay.

Brazilian President Lula pushed Europe to keep things moving, even suggesting he might withdraw from the deal if there were further delays. He changed his mind after Italian Prime Minister Meloni asked him to wait. The Mercosur countries agreed to the delay but said they will not change any terms already agreed on in 2024. They also accepted new European rules to protect EU farmers, but say these rules cannot be used to secretly block trade.

After twenty-five years of talks, the deal is still struggling to get across the finish line. Protests from European farmers now threaten to end an agreement that both sides say they want.

Costa Rica’s Chaves Survives Again

We have reported on President Rodrigo Chaves in the past, and once again he has survived an impeachment attempt. On December 16, Congress rejected a request to remove his immunity, with only 35 lawmakers voting in favor—three short of the 38 needed. The Supreme Electoral Tribunal wanted to try him for allegedly using his office to influence the February 2026 elections. This is the second time in 2025 that Congress has protected Chaves.

Chaves continues to reject the accusations, calling them political theater. He is set to finish his term in May 2026. His ability to stay in office shows how Costa Rica’s political culture is changing. The country, once seen as a model democracy in Latin America, is now showing signs of strain. Chaves has often argued that judges and lawmakers are blocking his plans, while they warn that his leadership is becoming too authoritarian.

Trump Escalates: Oil Seizures and “Stolen Resources”

Trump has changed his strategy on Venezuela, moving from stopping drug boats to seizing oil tankers. In the past few days, U.S. forces took control of several ships carrying Venezuelan crude in international waters. Homeland Security described them as part of a “shadow fleet” moving sanctioned oil. Venezuela called the action “international piracy.”

Trump’s language has become stronger as well. He says Venezuela “stole our oil, land and other assets” and promises to keep up the pressure until these are returned. While this is typical Trump exaggeration, it is true that American companies lost assets during the Chávez era. The legal basis for these actions is weak, but Trump’s goal is clear: he wants regime change.

The reality is complicated. Most Venezuelans living in exile would back these actions if they help remove Maduro. For people who have seen their country fall apart under a dictatorship, the outcome may matter more than the methods, even if Trump’s approach and reasons are open to question.

100 years of Celia Cruz

This year marks 100 years since Celia Cruz was born in October 1925. With only one newsletter left this year, I couldn’t let it end without talking about her.

When I was growing up, I had this image of Celia Cruz as a joyful woman in bright clothes, making music that made adults want to dance. She was all about “¡Azúcar!”, sparkling dresses, and that unforgettable voice. But her story goes way deeper than that.

Celia Cruz left Cuba in 1960, just a year after Castro’s revolution. She went on tour with La Sonora Matancera and was never allowed to return. The government kept her out. When her mother died in 1962, Celia couldn’t go to the funeral. The same thing happened when her father passed away years later. She lived with that sadness for decades, singing about her homeland even though she knew she would never see it again.

The regime disliked her because she stood for everything they wanted to erase: Cuban culture growing internationally outside their control, success based on talent instead of ideology, and a voice that wouldn’t stay quiet about her loss. In Cuba, her music was banned. Playing Celia Cruz became an act of rebellion.

For me, Celia’s most moving performance was actually her last one, which I watched live on TV with my parents during a tribute concert. You could see how important she was by the famous artists who came to honor her. When she sang “I Will Survive” in Spanish, she was frail but still defiant. That moment summed up her life: a woman who survived exile, being erased from her homeland, and turned her pain into music that made the world dance.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene, and Merry Christmas to those who celebrate.

Si quieres leer esta edición en tu idioma, suscríbete al canal de WhatsApp de LatAm Explained en español.

As expected, José Antonio Kast won Chile’s presidential runoff, earning 58 percent of the vote and defeating communist candidate Jeannette Jara by a wide margin. This outcome was expected. In the first round, right-wing candidates together received almost 70 percent of the vote, making Kast the clear favorite.

Chilean politics often move in cycles. Since Michelle Bachelet was first elected in 2006, the country has switched back and forth between left- and right-leaning governments: Bachelet, then Piñera, then Bachelet again, then Piñera, then Boric, and now Kast. If this pattern continues, the left could return to power by 2030.

The main question now is not about Kast’s win, but how he will lead. During his campaign, he spoke forcefully, praised Pinochet’s rule, promised to deport many people, and said he would use the military to fight crime. At his victory rallies, supporters shouted chants for Pinochet. This caused concern for many people.

Since the results came out, he has acted in a conciliatory way. President Boric called him in a positive, publicly broadcast conversation, and Kast met with his opponent, Jara. In his victory speech, he promised to govern for all Chileans and tried to bring people together. Kast won in a divided country, with 42 percent voting against him even after crime became the main issue. If he wants to pass laws in a split Congress, he cannot pretend to have broad support.

Immigrants, especially Venezuelans and Haitians without legal papers, are most affected. During the campaign, they were blamed for various problems. Kast gained support by connecting migration to crime. He has promised to build barriers at the northern border and deport many people. Whether he can do this depends on Chile’s strong institutions. Courts can block illegal actions, Congress can refuse to fund them, and social groups can resist.

This is the main conflict to watch. Kast comes from a far-right background. His father was a member of the Nazi party, and Kast campaigned to keep Pinochet in power in 1988. He is open about his views. But Chile in 2025 is very different from 1973. Kast won a fair election and will have to govern fairly, even if he might want something else.

A bigger question is why Chileans voted this way. Crime has doubled in recent years, and the economy has stalled. Two attempts to change the constitution failed. Many voters picked Kast not because they agreed with his ideas, but because they wanted change and hoped he would restore order without hurting democracy. Boric’s mistakes made this risk possible.

What happens next depends on Kast’s first hundred days. If he focuses on crime and the economy, where he has broad support, he could govern well. But if he targets social issues that divide people or tries to take away LGBTQ rights, he will face strong resistance. We will find out after March 11, 2026, when he will take office.

Bolivia’s Arce Jailed: Is This Justice or Political Payback?

Former President Luis Arce was arrested on December 10 and put in jail before his trial for suspected corruption. The case focuses on about $52 million from a development fund he managed as economy minister, which was allegedly misused between 2006 and 2017.

After almost 20 years of Arce’s Socialist Party in power with little oversight, it is reasonable to look back at their time in office. The Fondioc scandal is real: money was diverted, fake projects were set up, and someone should be held responsible.

Still, the quick pace of these events is worrying. The case was ignored for years, but moved forward just days after the new conservative government took office. A judge soon ordered five months in jail. This timing gives critics a reason to say the law is being used for political reasons, no matter what the evidence shows.

Both things can be true: Arce may be guilty, and the prosecution could also be driven by politics.

Cuba Welcomes the US Dollar

On December 11, Cuba partially legalized the use of US dollars. Now, businesses can use foreign money, and exporters can keep up to 80 percent of their earnings in strong currencies. The regime says this will last only until the peso becomes stable.

The geopolitical context is very important here. For years, Chávez and Maduro helped keep the island afloat. While Venezuelan support is not entirely gone, it has been deeply affected by Venezuela’s own internal problems, leaving Cuba to deal with the consequences.

It’s good to see the regime making changes instead of sticking with old, failed policies. Still, Cuba’s economic problems are mostly due to years of mismanagement and rule by a small elite, not just the US embargo. They have often blamed Washington for its troubles while avoiding basic market reforms.

Partial dollarization treats a symptom, not the disease. Without addressing the fundamental dysfunction, this is just rearranging deck chairs.

Energized, Milei Targets Labor Reform

President Javier Milei sent his labor reform bill to Congress, only weeks after his coalition nearly doubled its seats in the midterm elections. The timing is intentional: just after completing two years in office, Milei is now pushing his boldest policies yet.

Labor law is at the heart of Peronism. Their political identity is built on group negotiations, strong unions, and worker protections. Milei waited for the right time to take on this issue. He avoided it during his first year, when his coalition was weaker and the economy was struggling.

The bill shifts negotiations to the company level, replaces severance pay with compensation funds, and limits strikes. Unions call it the most regressive reform since the dictatorship. From their perspective, they are right to be concerned: if Milei reduces union power, he also weakens Peronism’s main support. It will be voted on this week, along with the 2026 budget.

Charly García: Argentina’s Greatest Artist

On December 7, Buenos Aires unveiled “Esquina Charly García” at the corner of Santa Fe and Coronel Díaz in Palermo. The city put up a special street sign and a big ceramic mural to honor the 74-year-old rock legend. Hundreds of fans came out to celebrate.

@esquinacharlygarcia

Esquina Charly García 🎹Buenos Aires on Instagram: "Aguante el …

Honestly, it’s hard to put Charly García into words. I could go on and on. People often compare him to John Lennon, David Bowie, or Elton John, but that doesn’t really do him justice.

Charly stands among the greatest artists in global music history, no question.

Charly had his own iconic styles and different phases long before Taylor Swift made that idea popular. He was already showing up on English-language media in the early 1980s, like the Today Show, way before artists like Shakira or Bad Bunny became famous worldwide.

If I had to choose two people who represent Argentina, it would be Charly and Maradona. That’s how important he is.

Charly was a child prodigy with perfect pitch. He became a rebellious figure and lived the real rockstar life, even famously jumping from a hotel window in 1991 and somehow surviving a nine-story fall.

But more than the wild stories, he openly challenged the Videla dictatorship when speaking out could be deadly. He turned resistance into art.

I always knew he was one of the greats, but I didn’t really understand his work until I lived in Argentina. That’s when I saw how he turns the spirit of Argentina into powerful melodies and lyrics. The rhythm, the local attitude, the sadness, the defiance—it’s all in his music.

He’s also a mentor to other Argentine legends like Fito Páez and Andrés Calamaro. You can hear his influence in generations of Latin American rock. His MTV Unplugged is probably his easiest album to get into, but the song that always moves me is the studio version of “Ojos de videotape.”

Naming a corner after him in Buenos Aires isn’t just about honoring a musician. It’s a way of saying that Charly García stands for Argentina through his music. And it’s absolutely deserved.

The Follow-Up

María Corina Machado reached Oslo for the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in a dramatic way. She left Venezuela using a secret route and arrived in Norway after the ceremony had already started on December 10. Her daughter accepted the prize for her.

The head of the Norwegian Nobel Committee gave a speech that strongly criticized Maduro’s government, more so than at any previous ceremony. Presidents from Argentina, Ecuador, Panama, and Paraguay attended to show support. Machado dedicated the prize to all Venezuelans and promised to keep fighting.

@torresgianvittorio

Felipe Torres Gianvittorio on Instagram: "🇳🇴🇻🇪🕊 These Norw…

Now, the main question is what will happen next. Will Machado visit other countries to put more pressure on the government? When could she return to Venezuela, especially as Trump increases military pressure on Maduro? If she returns, she risks being arrested or worse. If she stays abroad, she might lose touch with the opposition at home. The government has clearly made her a target, so every choice she makes is risky.

Meanwhile, Honduras still does not have an official result from its November 30 election. About 15 percent of the votes have not been counted because of different problems. So far, the partial results show Trump-backed Nasry Asfura from the National Party leading Salvador Nasralla from the Liberal Party by about 40,000 votes, with 40.5 percent to 39.5 percent.

The situation is getting more chaotic. The voting system has failed, and both sides are accusing each other of cheating. President Xiomara Castro says there was an “electoral coup” involving Trump. A special recount was ordered on December 12 and is expected to take several days. Both candidates have claimed victory. Protests have started, and a group in Congress is refusing to accept the results.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

We’ve already talked about who María Corina Machado is and what her Nobel Peace Prize win means. Now, let’s look at what could happen in the days leading up to the December 10 ceremony in Oslo. This trip could be a turning point in one of the riskiest moments of her political career.

@felipaganti

Feli Paganti | Periodista on Instagram: "🇻🇪 Who is María Cori…

Machado has been in hiding since July of last year. This began after Maduro claimed victory in the presidential elections. Despite remaining in Venezuela, staying there is dangerous for her. In early 2025, state security forces detained and questioned her, then let her go a few hours later. Since that incident, she has kept out of sight. The government knows she is still in the country, but not her exact location, and she knows that appearing in public could mean arrest or being forced to leave.

It is now confirmed that she will travel to Norway, which is a big decision. Leaving Venezuela could set off a chain of events. Maduro’s government might block her from coming back, make up charges—the Attorney General has already advanced in this, or accuse her of “abandoning” the country. Or, they might let her leave, since stopping her before the Nobel Prize ceremony could cause an international scandal. Either way, the government has a tough choice, and the world will be watching.

She will not go to Oslo alone. Joining her will be several well-known international figures—including presidents Milei from Argentina, Noboa from Ecuador, and Mulino from Panama—as well as former presidents, lawmakers, members of the European Parliament, human rights activists, and politicians who see her win as a stand for democracy in the region. The Nobel ceremony will unite diplomacy, politics, and human rights in an unprecedented moment.

@maelvirasalazar

María Elvira Salazar on Instagram: "It’s a tremendous honor to …

At this point, arguing about whether she “deserves” the Nobel is tiring and misses the point. If people oppose her because of her views on Israel or her international ties, it really means they do not care about Venezuelans. Machado’s award is not a moral judgment from above. It honors twenty years of peaceful resistance against a government that has harmed, persecuted, and killed its own citizens.

All of this leads to what matters now: how she will get to Norway, what happens while she is there, and what will happen when she tries to come back. With Venezuela on the edge of a new chapter, this trip could either lead to something bigger.

Mexico Gets Ready to Host the World Cup

Last week’s bizarre World Cup draw announced that Mexico will host the opening match of 2026 at the renovated Estadio Azteca. If you ask me, this is a moment of pride and excitement, but I’m also disappointed the final won’t be there, especially since the Azteca hosted the 1970 and 1986 finals.

However, the bigger concern is the challenges Mexico faces as it prepares to host the tournament.

Mexico will host only 13 of the 104 World Cup matches, which shows its smaller role in a tournament mostly run by the U.S. Claudia Sheinbaum’s government is hurrying to finish airports, highways, and stadium upgrades, and not answering questions about the private deal for the Azteca renovation. Officials promise everything will be ready, but building things is just one part of the challenge.

For many, preparations for the World Cup underscore a troubling trade-off: spectacle is prioritized over solving urgent, everyday problems for the local people.

A Mayor Was Killed in Broad Daylight in Guatemala

Guatemala was shaken this week by the murder of Nelson Luciano Marroquín, the mayor of Masagua, who was shot during a Christmas parade. His bodyguard was seriously injured. The attack happened in front of families gathered for a holiday event, which made it even more disturbing.

This is not a new problem. In recent years, many local officials in Guatemala have been killed. Mayors often handle daily issues like road repairs, permits, and land disputes, which puts them in the middle of conflicts involving gangs, drug groups, and political rivals. In over 90 percent of these cases, the attackers go unpunished.

President Bernardo Arévalo has asked for a quick investigation. This is his first big security challenge since he took office. The murder happened soon after twenty members of Barrio 18 escaped from prison, and gang activity has gone up in several areas. Guatemala’s institutions need to respond quickly, or violence will continue to affect the country’s politics.

Puerto Ricans Will Have to Pay More for Electricity

Puerto Rico is about to see electricity rates go up again, and it’s no surprise that people are upset. The island already pays some of the highest prices in the country—usually between 27 and 30 cents per kilowatt-hour—but the service is still unreliable. Blackouts are common, and repairs take a long time. Privatization was meant to fix these problems, but most people feel things have only gotten worse.

LUMA, which delivers electricity, and Genera PR, which runs the power plants, are both unpopular. The Oversight Board says higher prices are needed to fix the Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority’s financial problems, but that does little for families who now pay more each month for a service that often doesn’t work.

The political arguments are nothing new. Washington blames mismanagement, the local government blames the private companies, and the companies blame years of public neglect. Meanwhile, Puerto Ricans keep paying more for electricity that still goes out when it shouldn’t.

Bad Bunny: Four-Time Global Streaming King

Speaking of Puerto Rico. If you’re reading this, you already know who Benito is. Being the most streamed artist in the world for the fourth year in a row isn’t just luck. His journey started far from stadiums and global charts.

Bad Bunny used to bag groceries in Vega Baja and record songs in his bedroom. He shared his music on SoundCloud while juggling school and work. After “Diles” became popular, DJ Luian found him, and soon his deep voice and unique style were everywhere. From there, his path wasn’t easy. He didn’t let his first managers control him. He chose his own direction and built his career with Rimas. That freedom made all the difference.

Benito is known for more than just his streaming numbers. From the start, he’s used his fame to celebrate Latin American culture and musicians. In 2019, he made Oasis with J Balvin and invited Marciano Cantero from Enanitos Verdes to sing “Un Peso”.

In 2020, he started his album with a bit of “The Girl from Ipanema” in “Si Veo a Tu Mamá”. Later that year, he paid tribute to Billo’s Caracas Boys by including “Cantares de Navidad” on El Último Tour del Mundo. And to me, “Trellas” feels like a love letter to Gustavo Cerati.

His latest album, Debí Tirar Más Fotos, once again shows his pride in being Puerto Rican. Now he’s a global superstar, still singing the music he loved growing up and staying true to his language and style. That’s what makes him different. The world’s biggest artist is a Puerto Rican who once worked at a grocery store. Benito really earned this.

The Follow-Up

Last week, I held off on sending the newsletter for a few hours to see if the election results from Honduras would come in. Looking back, I’m glad I didn’t wait any longer, since a week later, the country still doesn’t have a president.

With almost 90 percent of the votes counted, Trump-backed Nasry Asfura has about 40.2 percent, while Salvador Nasralla has 39.4 percent—a difference of less than twenty thousand votes. Rixi Moncada from the government party is still far behind, but her party is now calling for the entire election to be canceled. They say the digital vote count was tampered with, the results system was down for long stretches, and more than 5,000 vote records have problems. The electoral authority has missed several deadlines, and now even international observers are openly urging them to move faster.

This situation is unusual. Honduras went from a peaceful election day to a slow-building crisis, much like what happened in 2017. Until the final results are released and people trust them, the country is stuck in limbo, and there is plenty of reason to question the outcome.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

This edition is late because, as of the afternoon of December 1, Honduras still has no official winner in the presidential election. The November 30 vote is still too close to call.

The preliminary results show how tight the race is. With 58 percent of polling stations counted, Nasry “Tito” Asfura has 39.91 percent and Salvador Nasralla has 39.89 percent, a difference of only 515 votes nationwide. Rixi Moncada is in third place with 19.16 percent. Since the margin is so small, no credible sources are predicting a winner yet.

The National Electoral Council has called for patience and asked everyone to wait for the full count before claiming victory. Both Asfura and Nasralla said on Sunday night that it was too soon to declare a winner, which is unusual in a region where early victory speeches are common.

But this election is about more than just numbers. The United States played a big role in the campaign. Trump openly supported Asfura, threatened to stop U.S. aid if the left won, and even pardoned Juan Orlando Hernández, the former president and ally of the conservative candidate who was extradited to North America in 2022. This kind of open interference does not happen often.

Rixi Moncada called this election a historic fight between a “coup-plotting oligarchy” and a democratic socialist project that will continue the current government’s policies. Her campaign focused on the Zelaya 2009 crisis and the idea that the country still needs real democratic change.

Between these two sides is Nasralla, the centrist who has run and lost several times, making him a familiar figure in national politics. He is always competitive but never the clear favorite.

Observers were less worried about who would win on Sunday and more focused on whether the voting process would work. The campaign was full of fraud accusations, including supposed audio leaks of vote-rigging plans. Asfura’s party said these leaks were made with AI. The electoral authority asked all sides to stop “fanning the flames.”

The most important thing right now is that Sunday’s vote took place peacefully. There was no major violence, no breakdown of institutions, and no street clashes. None of the worst-case scenarios people feared after a tense campaign. Tegucigalpa’s streets stayed quiet while ballots were counted slowly.

Asfura might win, or Nasralla could still take the lead. Rural precincts may change the outcome. No matter what happens, I truly hope the days after the vote remain as calm and responsible as election day itself. After years of unrest, Honduras has given itself and the region something rare: a democratic process that, so far, has worked just as it should.

The EU-Mercosur Deal: A Story That Never Ends

Every time I hear the EU-Mercosur free trade deal is close to being signed, it feels like déjà vu. This time, France is calling to sabotage the agreement. Once again, the deal seems trapped in the same cycle it’s been in for more than twenty years.

France’s National Assembly voted 244 to 1 against the deal. Politicians from every party in France are urging its government to oppose it. They worry that South American beef and soy could harm European farmers, that the deal could lead to more deforestation in Brazil, and that Mercosur countries should follow the same environmental rules as the EU.

These concerns are real, but they also serve a purpose. French farmers hold significant political power. Macron is under pressure from many sides, and with European elections approaching, he has little reason to oppose them.

On the South American side, Lula says the deal will be signed on December 20 and calls it “the biggest trade agreement in the world”. For Mercosur, the deal would bring lower trade taxes, more opportunities, and new partners beyond the U.S. and China.

The longer Europe delays, the more credibility it loses in South America. If France blocks what has been negotiated for 25 years, Mercosur countries will simply look elsewhere — and China will be the first to knock on the door.

Everyone Wants a Piece of the Canal

The Panama Canal is back in the news, and we need to pay close attention. After two years of drought that slowed ship traffic and reduced income, the Canal Authority is launching new construction projects and inviting companies from around the world, including China, to bid.

Panama says these projects focus on general infrastructure, like expanding water storage, updating the gates, and making sure ships can keep moving through the canal for years. But there is more at stake than just upgrades. The canal is crucial for global trade, a source of national pride, and a place where the United States and China compete for influence.

The main question now is how Panama will manage this situation. The country needs investment, but it also wants to avoid getting into a complicated position.

The canal is more than a waterway; it gives Panama, a small country, global influence. Whoever takes part in these projects will help shape the canal’s future and Panama’s role in the world for years to come.

Peru Jails Yet Another Former President

Does it surprise you to hear that another former Peruvian president is sentenced to jail? At this point, it seems almost normal. Still, this situation stands out. Pedro Castillo hasn’t been in the headlines lately, and many have forgotten how much his time as president sped up Peru’s political collapse.

This week, Castillo was sentenced for rebellion and abuse of power after he tried and failed to shut down Congress in 2022. That event didn’t just end his time in office. It also set off a series of problems that led to Peru’s current crisis: months of violent protests, an very unpopular interim government, and a public worn out by constant turmoil.

Castillo wasn’t the only person at fault, but he had the biggest impact. He led without much planning, didn’t trust others, and often fought with Congress. His removal didn’t solve the problems, and his conviction won’t either. It just reminds Peruvians of a familiar truth: presidents come and go, but the crisis continues.

We’re in December, So Let’s Talk About Zulian Gaita

Every Latin American country has its own Christmas music, like parrandas or cumbias navideñas. I could talk about any of them, but for me, nothing is as special or meaningful as the Zulian gaita from Venezuela.

Gaita comes from a region famous for its pride, rich resources, and a history of standing up to the central government in Caracas. Many classic gaitas are political, played with tambora drums, and have lyrics that speak out against being ignored, corruption, and unfairness.

What makes gaita special is that every December, it becomes the soundtrack of the entire country. You hear it on the radio, in supermarkets, and at family gatherings. Even in Caracas, where some zulianos might roll their eyes at kids from wealthy private schools singing gaita in glee clubs, people still sing it with joy. This music is beautiful, emotional, and deeply Venezuelan.

If you want to understand the soul of gaita, start with La Grey Zuliana. It’s probably the most iconic song. I won’t say it’s the most, since I’m Caraquenian and don’t want to offend anyone. The lyrics, dedicated to the Virgin of Chiquinquirá, patron of the region, ask her to make the corrupt pay for not ignoring them: (Mother, if the government won’t help the people of Zulia / you’ll have to intervene / and send them straight to hell.)

But the one that always moves me, the one that always makes me tear up, is Sin Rencor. It captures nostalgia, longing, and unrequited love in just three minutes: (And it will always be this way / that every time you hear a gaita / you’ll end up in tears / because it will make you think of me / with beautiful verses that will remind you / of all those lovely things we never got to have.)

There’s plenty of Christmas music across Latin America, but gaita is more than just seasonal music. It’s identity.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

The last few days have been intense. I keep getting messages from friends, colleagues, and even people I haven’t heard from in years, all asking the same question: what will happen in Venezuela?

I take it as a compliment. It means a lot to me that people trust my judgment, or at least believe I follow the news and talk to enough people to understand what’s going on. But here’s the truth I keep telling everyone: if someone claims to know what’s next for Venezuela, they’re lying.

Our media is a big part of the problem. For at least the last ten years, the regime has, by design, made it impossible for Venezuelans to get reliable news, leaving a big gap (IPYS Venezuela calls this news deserts). That gap is now filled by old-school, outdated journalists, younger exiled journalists trying to earn a living by monetizing their content, analysts, influencers, consultants, former officials, and commentators with their own agendas. International media often relies on these same people, so much of what you see on English-language TV comes from sources whose motives aren’t always clear.

Take Juan González as an example. He’s a former Biden advisor who’s been in the news again this week. The Human Rights Foundation accused him of having conflicts of interest with creditors and lobbying against sanctions on Maduro, though he denies it.

Some critics say his connections control his opinions, while others think he’s being blamed unfairly. The main point is that when these people talk about Venezuela, none of them really speaks for Venezuelans.

Here’s what we do know: the United States is taking more action. The Cartel de los Soles, which I’m not sure is described accurately by Washington, is, as of today, officially considered a terrorist group by them. Warships with twelve thousand military personnel are now close to Venezuelan waters. This is real, not just talk.

Do most Venezuelans want foreign troops here? No. We care a lot about our country’s sovereignty, especially because it is already being violated thanks to Cuban, Russian, Chinese, Iranian, and Turkish influences, among others.

Do most Venezuelans want Maduro gone? Yes, and not just in theory. People have taken to the streets many times—in 2014, 2017, 2019, and 2024. They marched, protested, organized, and voted. The regime answered with violence, prison, torture, exile, and a total disregard for human life.

So when people ask why there’s an aircraft carrier off the coast or why Washington is now thinking about options that once seemed impossible, the answer is simple. Venezuelans have already tried everything they could. The regime just didn’t care.

One last thing: in 2024, Venezuelans voted and chose to remove Maduro. If the crisis ends with that result, Venezuelans have already made their decision at the polls. Machiavelli would say that the end justifies the means, and in realpolitik terms, that is true in this case.

Bolsonaro Still Acts Like the Rules Don’t Apply to Him

We’ve already discussed Bolsonaro’s conviction in this newsletter, the one that meant he would end up in prison eventually. This week just sped things up. He was supposed to be taken into custody, but when investigators found out he had used a soldering iron to tamper with his ankle monitor at midnight, the Supreme Court decided to arrest him sooner. This wasn’t just for show, but a direct response to an obvious escape attempt.

Judge Alexandre de Moraes ordered his arrest before trial after police learned Bolsonaro was considering hiding in embassies and that his supporters were preparing to stop police from reaching his house. This kind of behavior isn’t new. Bolsonaro has always acted as if he didn’t have to answer for what he did, whether it was encouraging people to break into government buildings or thinking about overturning Lula’s win.

Now he’s sitting in a federal police cell, and the irony is hard to miss. After years of denying reality, it’s finally the one thing he can’t get away from.

This Isn’t the Usual News We Read from Costa Rica

Rodrigo Chaves, Costa Rica’s president, came just four votes short of losing his immunity and facing trial. This is the first time a president in Costa Rica has ever reached this point, which shows how serious the accusations are.

The Assembly rejected the first case, which involved audio recordings where Chaves allegedly asked for “cariñitos,” or small payments, to reward a campaign financial supporter. The second case, still being reviewed, is even more unusual. It involves beligerancia, an electoral offense that means openly supporting a candidate when campaigning is not allowed. No president has ever done this so openly before.

Chaves responded by accusing the courts, the Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones, and Congress of planning a “left-wing coup” against him. In reality, he is the one trying to change how institutions work. He has openly pushed for a strong legislative bloc that would let him control Congress and eventually influence the courts. This is risky in any democracy, especially when the president is still very popular, even with ongoing investigations.

Costa Rica is the last place in the region where you’d expect to see democracy under threat. But if anyone could put that reputation at risk, it’s Chaves.

I want to thank my friend Alonso Martínez, who talked with me about this and provided more context. What he described is worrying.

Colombia Deserves Better Than This

Gustavo Petro’s latest scandal isn’t really about money or legality. He shared his bank records to answer Trump’s claim that he’s connected to narcotrafficking, which is reasonable. But among the transactions was a €40 charge at a Lisbon strip club. Instead of addressing it seriously, he joked that he doesn’t need to pay for sex because he still has “seduction and poetry.”

Right now, Colombia is dealing with an economic slowdown, rising insecurity, and tense pre-election times. People are tired. They want seriousness, not jokes.

Authorities have already said there’s nothing illegal about the charge. The real issue is how embarrassing it is that Colombia’s president is once again making headlines for behavior that would shame any public official, let alone a president.

Colombians deserve a president who doesn’t turn himself into a joke every few weeks. This isn’t normal for a leader. It’s just one more scandal in a long list, and people have every right to be tired of it.

Spain’s Memory is More Relevant Than We Think

I’ve said it before, and it’s still true: if we want to really understand Latin American politics, we need to look at Spain too. The way Spanish society handles power, leaders, and institutions has influenced how politics work in our region. This week, as Spain marks 50 years since dictator Francisco Franco’s death, the country has spent several days thinking about the tyranny that shaped the twentieth century.

Franco ruled Spain for almost forty years, keeping a tight grip on the country, limiting freedoms, and building strong connections between the military and the Catholic Church. After his death, Spain didn’t instantly become a top democracy (it ranked 19th in the 2024 Democracy Index). Instead, the transition was a slow process between old officials, new leaders, and a country worn out by years of fear. This complicated story is important, especially for Latin Americans who often hear a simpler version of Spain as either a villain or a model.

Two recent cultural works explain this period better than any textbook. The podcast XRey tells the story of King Juan Carlos I, who Franco chose as his successor. Juan Carlos later helped end the regime, but eventually became infamous for his scandals.

The miniseries Anatomía de un Instante looks back at the 1981 coup attempt, following President Adolfo Suárez and how he and others stood firm during the storming of Congress.

These stories remind us that transitions are complicated, heroes aren’t perfect, and democracy depends on people choosing restraint instead of force. By seeing how Spain deals with its past, we can better understand our own history.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Today is November 17, and I’m getting ready to go out and report on the Velvet Revolution celebrations in Prague. Every year, Czechs mark 1989, the year their dictatorship ended peacefully and they began building a democracy. As I reflect on Central Europe’s changes, I also think about Chile and see a similar story there.

In 1988, a year before Prague’s revolution, Chile held a referendum. Pinochet lost, and the dictatorship ended. Like Czechoslovakia, Chile took on the hard work of rebuilding its government and finding a peaceful path forward, hoping for a better future.

Both countries are still seen as examples of how to end a dictatorship without destroying the nation.

But the reality is that, decades later, democracy has not given people in either country what they hoped for. Many feel overlooked, and when democracies let people down, frustration leads to division. In both Chile and the Czech Republic, this split is now helping right-wing movements.

For those of us who viewed Chile as a model of stable government, peaceful leadership changes, and careful economic decisions, this election feels odd. Gabriel Boric’s 2022 appointment looked like a major change from the post-Pinochet years. Although he came from a coalition that included communists, he has led with more common sense and restraint than many expected, and he has avoided the extreme ideas some feared.

The results from yesterday’s first round of the presidential election are clear. With mandatory voting restored, turnout rose to over 80 percent, making it one of the highest participation rates in the world. Boric-backed Jeannette Jara came in first with 26.8 percent, just ahead of José Antonio Kast with 24 percent. However, the bigger picture is that when you include Kast’s far-right allies, the right-wing vote adds up to more than 55 percent, while the center-left and left are still divided. Candidates like Evelyn Matthei, Franco Parisi, and Johannes Kaiser each won smaller but still important shares of the vote, showing just how divided Chile’s political scene is now.

This brings us to Jeannette Jara. Many people outside Chile call her a “hardline communist,” but that label is too simple. Her ideas follow the Chilean center-left tradition of slowly expanding social programs and working within the system. Even if you don’t agree with her, it’s clear she isn’t the threat some foreign commentators claim.

@globalsouthworld

Global South World on Instagram: "Is Chile heading toward great…

Still, the numbers speak for themselves. Jara had the most votes, but the second round is likely to favor the right. Unless something significant changes, José Antonio Kast will probably be Chile’s next president.

Now is the time to watch closely, before victory changes him or global newspapers misrepresent him. Kast is more than just a conservative. He represents a part of Chilean politics that openly remembers the dictatorship with nostalgia, downplays state violence, and sees social rights as risky ideas.

Chile made it through Pinochet’s rule and built one of the region’s strongest democracies. Now, it faces another big decision. The question is whether Chileans want real change or if they really miss the past that badly. We’ll find out on December 14, when Jara and Kast compete.

Ecuador Voted, and Noboa Lost His Momentum

We’ve talked a lot in this newsletter about how Ecuador keeps turning to referendums and changing its constitution. Every president seems to believe that rewriting the rules will fix the country’s problems. But Daniel Noboa just learned that timing matters more than having big ideas.

Earlier this year, Noboa was re-elected with more support than many people expected. His tough stance on crime and his promise to modernize the government helped him gain popularity. But instead of using that support, he called for a four-question vote while people in Ecuador were frustrated by rising prices, less government help, and weeks of protests against his policies.

The result was clear: voters said no. All four proposals failed, including letting the US army operate in Ecuador, reducing the number of seats in the legislature, writing a new constitution, and cutting state funding for political parties. People didn’t start supporting Correa or the opposition. They just didn’t trust Noboa enough to give him more power during a tough time.

In Ecuador, when presidents lose referendums, they often lose their hold on power as well. That’s what just happened to Noboa. Even though he accepted the results calmly, we’ll have to see how this affects his ability to govern.

Mexico’s Gen Z Has Had Enough

Mexico just saw its biggest anti-crime protests since 2008, but the most striking thing was not the size of the crowd. It was the leaders. After Mayor Carlos Manzo was killed, thousands of Gen Z Mexicans marched in cities across the country.

They called for what their parents never got: real safety, real accountability, and a government that can protect them. Their slogan, “Más educación, menos sicarios,” summed up their message. For once, it seemed like a whole generation was speaking clearly.

Even so, the government ignored them. Officials said non-organic protesters had taken over the march and claimed it was not real. This was just a way to avoid facing people’s anger. The opposition was not much better. They tried to take credit quickly, hoping to gain from something they did not start.

One thing is clear: young people are leading these protests. They are tired, scared, and impatient. They want a Mexico that keeps its promises and protects its people.

The Blackout That Said What No Official Wanted to Admit

This week, the Dominican Republic experienced a nationwide power outage. A single manual switching mistake at the San Pedro substation triggered a chain reaction that shut down the entire grid for hours. Officials called it “human error,” but many Dominicans saw it as proof that the system is weaker than the government says.

Leaders have promised for years to invest in and modernize the power system. They keep saying the grid is stronger and ready for the country’s growth. But one mistake was enough to cause a nationwide blackout.

The government responded quickly, restoring power within a day and removing two top officials. Still, the blackout made one thing clear: the money spent so far hasn’t been enough, and the changes haven’t solved the real issues. People in the Dominican Republic are tired of promises that break down when problems arise.

The Universe of Miranda!

Dua Lipa has shown genuine respect for Latin America during her tour. In Argentina, she surprised everyone by singing Miranda!’s “Tu misterioso alguien” in perfect Spanish. In Chile, she performed songs by Mon Laferte and La Ley. In Brazil, she sang with Caetano Veloso. Earlier in her tour, she covered Soda Stereo. But for me, the most moving moment was Dua Lipa’s homage to the Argentine duo.

@flow.arNo estás soñando, Dua Lipa está cantando Tu misterioso alguien y lo estás viviendo por Flow🔥😭

Tiktok failed to load.

Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser

They topped my Spotify Wrapped in 2023 because of their recent album Hotel Miranda!, but my connection with their music started long before that. I grew up listening to them. My sister had a pirated Sin Restricciones CD, and we played it nonstop in the mid-2000s. I remember adults shaking their heads at the lyrics, the campy style, the dramatic synths, and the queer energy they didn’t understand. They were everything parents disliked, which made them even more appealing to young people.

Here’s the thing: back then, Miranda! was seen as a guilty pleasure, a pop group critics didn’t take seriously. But they didn’t mind. They created their own world of glitter, electro pop, heartbreak, and humor. They were pioneers of a sound that’s now common in Argentine pop. Their melodies stuck with you, their choruses were unforgettable, and their style was bold long before the industry caught up.

Now they’re considered classics. They fill venues all over the region, and young artists name them as influences. And if you say “es un solo” to anyone, you already know the answer:

“Es la guitarra de Lolo.”

That’s why it meant so much to see Dua Lipa sing their songs on Argentina’s biggest stage. What once seemed like kitsch now feels like part of our cultural identity. If you’ve never listened to them, you can start with any album—Sin Restricciones, El Disco de tu Corazón, or Es Mentira.

For many of us, Miranda! is more than just music. It’s a part of our memories.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

President Claudia Sheinbaum was walking through the historic center of Mexico City when a drunk man came up from behind, grabbed her by the waist, and tried to kiss her. The video is short and disturbing: you see her turn, push him away, and keep walking, surrounded by her aides. Within hours, she filed a criminal complaint and publicly called the incident what it was: harassment. Then she said the line that summarized everything: “If they do this to the president, imagine what they do to the rest of the women in this country.”

In Mexico, gender violence is so normalized that even the head of state can’t walk a few meters without being touched against her will. Sheinbaum’s reaction was strong but calm. She didn’t make a big scene or blame her security team. Instead, she did something that sent a message: she pressed charges. She turned something that happened to her into an example for everyone.

That action matters in a country where more than 70% of women say they have faced harassment in public. It also matters in politics. Sheinbaum’s simple security style, walking through crowds with almost no visible protection, has been one of her trademarks since she started the job, just as her predecessor López Obrador. It’s part of her effort to seem open and friendly, unlike some of the distant, heavily guarded presidents before her.

However, that same approach is now being questioned. Critics call it risky. Supporters say it is the cost of staying close to the people. Sheinbaum herself does not seem willing to stop: “We cannot isolate ourselves from society,” she said after the attack.

The opposition stayed quiet, not wanting to look like they supported her or made light of the attack. Their silence said more than any press release could. Violence against women is still one of the few issues Mexican politicians can’t use for their own gain without showing their own double standards.

In the end, showed that being a leader is not about acting like nothing can hurt you, but about facing what hurts everyone else.

All We’re Saying: Give Paz a Chance

Rodrigo Paz has officially taken office, ending nearly twenty years of Movement for Socialism rule and beginning a new chapter for Bolivia. His main message is clear: “capitalism for all.” However, he faces big challenges. The economy is struggling with 20% inflation, fuel shortages, and very little money left in national savings. Paz says he wants to focus on practical solutions instead of political theories, but his first day in office showed that politics still depends on strong symbols.

Among the foreign guests was Chile’s Gabriel Boric, a left-leaning president congratulating a right-leaning leader. This shows that Bolivia’s changes do not mean it will isolate itself from the world. Paz says he wants to restore normal relations with the U.S. and even work with the DEA, which would not have happened under Evo Morales or Luis Arce.

Socialists still hold significant power in Congress, and there is a real risk of protests or unrest. For now, though, people in Bolivia are giving Paz a chance. After twenty years of major changes, they seem ready to try a more balanced path.

Petro’s Dream of a New Great Colombia

Colombian President Gustavo Petro has brought back one of Latin America’s oldest and boldest ideas: bringing together Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador, and Panama again, just like Simón Bolívar did in the 1820s. Petro calls it a “confederation for the 21st century,” with shared citizenship, open borders, and even a digital common currency.

The original Gran Colombia collapsed in 1831, undone by distance, egos, and national ambitions. Two centuries later, the political divides are wider than ever. Venezuela is under dictatorial rule, Ecuador leans conservative, and Colombia itself is fractured.

The idea came up again in April during Daniel Noboa’s inauguration in Ecuador, and now Petro is talking about it again as he deals with a weak economy and dropping approval ratings. He says bringing countries together is the way to bring back “Bolívar’s legacy” and make the region stronger. Critics say it is just a way to avoid dealing with problems at home, a distraction that sounds nice but does not solve anything.

As a Venezuelan, I can say the thought of a reunited Gran Colombia feels powerful, almost romantic. But nostalgia isn’t politics. In today’s Latin America, Petro’s dream looks less like unity and more like wishful thinking.

The U.S. Deports a Victim of the Dictatorship It Condemns

In 2018, Yadira Córdoba lost her son when Nicaraguan police shot protesters during an uprising against Daniel Ortega’s regime. She fled to the United States to seek asylum, bringing evidence of her son’s killing and hoping to share her story in court. Last week, her request for help was denied, and she was told to leave for Honduras, where she has no family or legal status.

Her case caused outrage because it shows a clear contradiction. The U.S. government sanctions Ortega, supports opposition media, and calls Nicaragua a dictatorship, but is still deporting someone harmed by that regime. Congressman Joaquín Castro put it simply: “If we fail to protect Yadira Córdoba, America’s beacon of light will dim.”

That beacon has already dimmed. The U.S. cannot claim to defend democracy abroad while turning away people fleeing from oppression.

Nicaragua also deserves more attention. The government’s actions against its people are as severe as those in Cuba or Venezuela, but they receive less notice. Córdoba’s story is a reminder not to overlook them.

The Dominican Who Taught the World to Dance

Juan Luis Guerra just released a duet with Sting which feels both unexpected and completely right. The British rock legend sings “Estrellitas y Duendes” all in Spanish. His accent is soft and respectful, and his voice fits naturally with Guerra’s poetry.

This isn’t a gimmick or a crossover for show. It’s a tribute from one global musician to another, proving that some music speaks for itself, no translation needed.

For many of us, Guerra is more than an artist. He’s part of our childhood memories. At home, his CDs played often. Sunday mornings smelled like coffee and cleaning, adults danced merengue in the living room, and I learned that happiness has its own rhythm.

That’s why this collaboration is special: it honors someone who brought Dominican music to the world. Guerra blended merengue, bachata, and jazz to write songs about love, humor, and faith. “Ojalá que llueva café” turned hope for a better life into music. “Visa para un sueño” made the story of moving to a new country sound beautiful. Later, after becoming a Christian, he wrote “Las Avispas,” using only Bible verses, and turned it into a song people could dance to.

I mean it, when these verses play, you’re about to witness some serious moves on the dance floor. (I have an admired God in heaven / and the love of His Holy Spirit / by His grace I’m a new man / and my song overflows with joy.)

For decades, he has made people think while they dance. His music is elegant, deeply connected to his culture, and full of spirit and energy. I’ve always thought of him as one of the Caribbean’s great thinkers, like Rubén Blades—musicians who use their songs to tell stories.

Sting didn’t discover Guerra; he honored him. With this duet, the rest of the world finally gets to see what the Caribbean has always known: joy can be profound, and Juan Luis Guerra has shown this for decades.

I could write about Juan Luis Guerra for pages, but to keep it simple, I’ll just suggest you listen to his 2012 concert in Santo Domingo, where he plays most of his best songs.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

This newsletter covers Latin America, so starting with Spain might seem off. But if you look closely, many of our political habits began there. We inherited more than language or religion. We also learned a certain way of relating to power: a fascination with charisma, a tolerance for personalism, and the idea that politics is as much about performance as about governing. That’s why Pedro Sánchez, Spain’s prime minister, feels so familiar to us.

Sánchez is the kind of leader who splits opinions, even among his supporters. Some say he is opportunistic, self-centered, or just lucky, but it’s hard to deny he’s one of the smartest politicians of his time. His career is full of comebacks: he was pushed out by his party, embarrassed by the press, and then returned to lead Spain twice. He has survived broken alliances, corruption scandals, and internal party fights thanks to good timing, bold moves, and a talent for shaping the narrative.

The Spanish prime minister was called to speak before the Senate to explain a growing corruption scandal linked to government contracts given to businessmen close to his party. It was supposed to be a big moment: the opposition, led by the conservative Partido Popular and the far-right Vox, had been saying this was when Sánchez would finally be held responsible. Instead, it became a masterclass in political optics. Literally. All anyone could talk about afterward were his glasses.

Halfway through the hearing, Sánchez put on a pair of oversized black Dior frames. By the next morning, Spanish media and social networks were filled with memes, comments, and fashion discussions. What should have been a serious debate about corruption and political deals became a national obsession with his accessory. Supporters saw the eyewear as a sign of calm, boldness, and style under pressure. Critics saw them as a sign of arrogance, saying the prime minister was more focused on his image than on answering questions.

That reaction is very Spanish, and also very Latin American. It shows the ability to turn weakness into style. Politics is not just about making decisions, but also about putting on a show. Sánchez has survived by following that instinct: knowing when to fight, when to charm, and when to seem calm.

You don’t have to admire Sánchez to learn something from him. Whether you see him as a trickster or a genius, he shows that in today’s politics, public perception is not just a bonus; it is the main thing. The glasses are only a symbol. The real story is how he keeps moving forward when others expect him to fail.

Mexico Welcomes Spain’s Gesture on Colonial History

This time, the debate over Spain’s colonial past started with an acknowledgment instead of a demand. At a cultural event in Madrid, Spain’s foreign minister José Manuel Albares openly recognized the “pain and injustice” caused to Indigenous peoples during the conquest of Mexico, saying it was right to “lament it today.”

President Claudia Sheinbaum welcomed the remarks the next day, calling them “a first step” and “an act of historical honesty.” She said this was a chance to move from confrontation to understanding, and added that recognition does not weaken nations but instead dignifies them.

Still, there is a clear irony. Latin American leaders often use colonial guilt as a moral cause, but many still neglect or exploit Indigenous peoples in their own countries. Former president López Obrador demanded an apology from Spain in 2021, while Sheinbaum now welcomes one that was never formally given. Both are right to address the past, but the real reckoning is not finished yet.

While Mexico talks about injustices from the 1500s, more than 16.9 million Indigenous Mexicans still face unfair treatment today. Almost half do not finish elementary school, one in five cannot read or write, and most start working before age twelve, according to El Mundo Indígena 2025. Five hundred years later, the real problem is not Spain’s silence, but the lack of action from Latin American leaders.

Brazil: A Raid Without Accountability

This week was one of the darkest in Brazil’s history. Over 100 people lost their lives during a police operation in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro, making it the deadliest ever in the country. Officials said the raid was aimed at the Comando Vermelho gang, but people living there felt it was more like a massacre. In response, families carried the bodies of their loved ones into the streets, asking for answers about why they were killed.

Some international commentators blamed President Lula, but that misses the main point. The operation was not run by the national government, but by the Rio state police. In Brazil, each state is responsible for its own public safety decisions. Still, Lula is under pressure to respond, facing the same problem as other presidents: how to back the police without supporting their violent actions.

Human rights groups and the UN described the raid as ‘extremely deadly,’ pointing to reports of torture and people being killed without a trial. Governor Cláudio Castro defended the police, saying everyone who died was a criminal. Sadly, this shows how often tragedies like this now happen.

Honduras: Elections Under Suspicion

Honduras will hold elections at the end of November, but many doubt the process will be fair. Alleged leaked recordings have surfaced, supposedly showing opposition members and election officials planning to rig the results. The government called it an “electoral coup,” while the opposition claims the recordings are fake. So far, no one has confirmed if the audios are real, and both sides are using the story to support their own arguments.

Honduras is not often in the news, but this is a time when it should be. People have not trusted politics since the 2009 coup that took Manuel Zelaya out of office, and every election since then has made things worse. People still remember 2017, when protests over supposed irregularities led to more than 20 deaths.

International observers are expected, but new regulations forbid them from reporting in real time. In other words, transparency itself is being regulated. Honduras will vote, but the result may matter less than whether anyone believes it.

The Dodgers, Latin America, and the Game That Never Left Us

The Los Angeles Dodgers have won the World Series again, earning back-to-back titles for the first time since the Yankees did it in the early 2000s. Latin America was a big part of their success. Miguel Rojas, a Venezuelan shortstop who plays for La Guaira in the winter, hit a home run to tie Game 7 in the ninth inning and then stopped a run at home plate. If you don’t know baseball, imagine a football player scoring a late goal to tie the game and then saving a penalty right at the end of a final.

As a Tiburones de La Guaira fan, that moment meant a lot to me. Seeing Rojas, who wears the same colors I cheered for as a kid, succeed on baseball’s biggest stage felt like a win for all of us, no matter where we are.

I watched that game at 3 a.m., and someone asked why I was up watching “an American sport.” But for people in the Caribbean, baseball is more than just American. It belongs to us. It’s a shared language that brings together Cuba, Mexico, the Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Panama, Venezuela, and everyone from those places, no matter where they live now.

Baseball arrived in the Caribbean in the 1800s and has been part of our lives ever since. It’s something we take pride in, but it’s also a way to move forward. In places with few opportunities, the sport became one of the only real paths to a better life. A professional contract can help a whole family escape poverty, and a big league salary can change the future for an entire neighborhood.

If you want to see what that world is like, watch Ballplayer: Pelotero, a documentary filmed in the Dominican Republic. It shows what goes on behind the dream, and how skill, hope, and the need to get by all come together on every dusty field in the Caribbean.

So yes, I was up watching that game at 3 a.m. When Miguel Rojas hit that home run, it wasn’t just a win for the Dodgers. It was a win for La Guaira. It was a win for all of us.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

Argentina voted again, and what happened is striking. Javier Milei’s La Libertad Avanza won the midterm elections by a large margin, strengthening him as the leader of Argentina’s anti-Peronist movement. It’s amazing how long that split has lasted: Peronists on one side, anti-Peronists on the other. The people change, the slogans change, but the country keeps circling the same issues.

In the past, Peronism has changed its forms with each leader. Carlos Menem brought market-friendly policies in the 1990s, the Kirchners leaned left, and now Axel Kicillof pretty much defends that legacy. Their opposition, on the other hand, keeps changing parties: the Radicals after the last dictatorship, Mauricio Macri’s Cambiemos in the 2010s, and now Milei’s push for liberalism. Every new version promises to finally break the cycle, but each one ends up keeping it going in a different way.

What makes this election stand out is how strongly Milei’s government consolidated power despite economic hardships and painful reforms. In Buenos Aires province, his party had lost by fifteen points just weeks ago, but now it flipped the map and won nationwide by nearly ten. That’s not a fluke; it’s a message. People are exhausted, but they’re choosing to endure the pain if they believe it leads somewhere better.

Kicillof’s early-election gamble backfired badly. He tried to shield his base with the voto castigo against Milei’s policies, but it seems people did punish Milei in the early elections in Buenos Aires province, and now, after delivering that message, they have put their trust back in the president. This failure matters because Kicillof, the Governor of Buenos Aires, is the Peronist best positioned for the 2027 presidential ballot — and his loss shows how little patience voters have left for the old guard.

Markets are relieved. The peso held, bonds rose, and investors openly praised Milei’s discipline. I’ve been familiar with Milei for a long time. I met him in person in 2018 while I was living in Argentina, and I appreciated his role as a political commentator, which I found necessary. Still, his style makes me uneasy, but there’s no denying the confidence he inspires among those who control capital. His victory speech was not the shouting monologue of the campaign trail. It was calm, conciliatory, even presidential. The real question is whether that tone will survive the next crisis.

There’s a past example worth remembering. Former president Macri also won big in the 2017 midterms, promised stability, and two years later gave power back to the Peronists. Argentina’s politics change quickly. For Milei, the challenge now isn’t getting votes — it’s building something that lasts longer than a feeling.

He has the votes in Congress to do it now.

Argentina remains a country split in two, but for now, the anti-Peronist half feels in control. People aren’t just tolerating Milei; they’re betting on him. In a nation where faith in politics is often fragile, that’s not nothing.

Colombia’s Left Finds Its New Face

Colombia’s left-wing primaries delivered a clear winner. Senator Iván Cepeda earned over 65% of the vote and will lead the Pacto Histórico in the 2026 election.

This result stands out not only because Cepeda is a longtime human rights advocate and a strong critic of Álvaro Uribe, but also because he now takes over a movement from a president who cannot seek re-election.

Gustavo Petro’s presidency has divided opinions and left many people feeling tired, but his disputes with Trump and the U.S. seem to have united his supporters. Many on the left turned out, perhaps more to resist than out of enthusiasm.

The challenge now is whether that momentum will continue after the primaries. Cepeda is thoughtful, principled, and respected, but he still needs to convince a hesitant middle class and a divided opposition. While Petro’s influence may help him for now, Cepeda might eventually need to distance himself from it.

Chile’s Democracy Faces Its Reflection

Chile held its final presidential debate before the November 16 election, and what stood out was not a dramatic moment, but rather how the debate reflected the country itself. The candidates represented opposite ends of the spectrum: Jeanette Jara on the left, José Antonio Kast on the right, and several centrists struggling to stay relevant. Jara aimed for a more moderate image, easing her stance toward the Communist Party. Kast, on the other hand, lost his temper briefly. It was a minor slip, but it said a lot for someone who wants to appear calm.

The polls are close: Jara leads with 25%, Kast is just behind at 22%, and Kaiser and Matthei are not far off. Chile has changed a lot since the Pinochet era, building strong institutions, a stable democracy, and a culture of consensus. Still, watching this debate, it is hard not to sense the anxiety of a country that now sounds more like its neighbors—loud, divided, and weary of moderation.

Lula Outsmarts Trump (for Now)

The meeting between Lula da Silva and Donald Trump in Kuala Lumpur seemed at first like a battle of personalities. But if politics is about timing and style, Lula came out ahead. Trump showed up bragging about taxes on imports and his power; Lula left with a handshake, a promise to talk about easing trade rules, and did not give in on Bolsonaro’s imprisonment.

It’s the kind of political showdown that could only happen between two men who see themselves as important figures, both leaders who know how to put on a show. But as the saying goes, “más sabe el diablo por viejo que por diablo.” Lula’s age and decades-long experience gave him the advantage. He has already said he will run for president again, and this moment fits well with the story he wants to tell at home: Brazil standing proud, respected, and on the same level as Washington.

Trump may call it a deal. Lula knows it was a lesson in who’s still the elder statesman.

Isabel Allende, Forever Modern

Isabel Allende has been everywhere lately —from podcasts to TikToks —and I love it. My mom’s favorite writer is suddenly trending again, which feels poetic in itself.

I grew up surrounded by her books. My mom’s favorite has always been Paula, the one she rereads every few years and cries over every time. Through her, I learned that Allende isn’t just a novelist; she’s a whole emotional education.

Her new novel, My Name Is Emilia del Valle, is already a global bestseller. It tells the story of strong women during Chile’s 1891 civil war, yet it somehow feels very current. Even more amazing is seeing her reach new fans, talking about love, loss, and memory in a quick 30-second podcast clip.

patriciafedez

A post shared by @patriciafedez

So yes, read the new one. But also read The House of the Spirits, Aphrodite, Of Love and Shadows, and The Stories of Eva Luna. Read them all. Isabel Allende’s work isn’t just literature; it’s Latin America talking to itself.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.

After eight years of debate, Uruguay’s Senate passed the ‘death with dignity’ law, letting people with terminal illnesses ask for help to end their lives. The vote passed easily, with no protests. The president is expected to sign it soon. This is just the latest in Uruguay’s list of progressive policies, which already include abortion, same-sex marriage, legal marijuana, and adoption rights for same-sex couples.

And yeah, I’m jealous.

I often talk about Uruguay and Costa Rica as the two countries that the rest of Latin America watches, sometimes with admiration, sometimes with resentment. While Costa Rica faces its own struggles with democracy, Uruguay keeps making progress. It does so quietly, confidently, and with a political maturity that’s now rare in the region.

So what makes Uruguay so different?

First, there’s Uruguay’s history. It’s the only country in the region that really separated religion from government. In the 1800s, public schools stopped teaching religion. Civil marriage became law in 1885, and divorce was allowed in 1907. By 1917, the constitution didn’t mention God anymore. The Catholic Church never had much power there, so politicians didn’t need religious leaders’ approval to make laws.

Politics in Uruguay also works differently. In much of Latin America, politics often relies on favors or waiting for strong leaders to solve problems. Uruguay chose another way, building a system that focused on helping people and supporting democracy from early on. During the Batlle era in the early 1900s, the country introduced workers’ rights, retirement benefits, public schools, and public services. Back then, Uruguay was already a small version of a European-style social democracy, even before other countries in the region had basic record-keeping.

The country has strong organizations and little corruption. People trust one another. Politicians may change, but life remains steady. When Uruguay discusses something as serious as euthanasia, the conversation happens slowly, thoughtfully, and with respect. There’s no moral panic or church leaders warning of disaster. Instead, this older, more secular society recognizes that people facing terrible suffering should have a legal option to end it.

To put Uruguay’s action in context, it isn’t the first in the region to allow euthanasia. Colombia has permitted it since a 1997 court ruling, with official rules set in 2015, and Ecuador followed in 2024 with a similar decision. However, Uruguay is the first to pass a law through Congress, which matters. It shows there’s real public and political support, not just a court ruling or legal loophole. In a region where even discussing euthanasia can cause a crisis, Uruguay handled it with calm debate and broad support.

That’s why this week matters. Euthanasia is a very personal issue, and Uruguay made it legal without any trouble. In most other countries in the region, just talking about it would cause a huge political problem.

Uruguay isn’t perfect, but it shows the rest of us that sometimes, progress just comes down to good politics.

The Complicated End of an Era in Bolivia

Rodrigo Paz will become Bolivia’s new president. For the first time since 2006, MAS isn’t in charge and wasn’t even an option in the final vote. That alone makes this election historic. But it’s not a simple change in beliefs. Both the left and right in the region have tried to make Bolivia fit their narratives, but the truth is, Bolivia operates within its own logic.

This marks the end of the Evo Morales era, which lasted almost 20 years and reshaped Bolivian politics. However, Paz is not a hardline conservative. He campaigned as a moderate, pledged to focus on practical economic solutions while keeping some of MAS’s social programs, and picked a well-known ex-police officer with a big TikTok following as his vice president.

Now the real challenge begins. Bolivia is out of money, fuel is scarce, and people are worn out. Paz is taking over a country in crisis, where politics do not fit into clear categories. The future will not be a repeat of MAS, but it will not be easy either.

New Peruvian President Is Already Killing Protesters

José Jerí has been president for less than a week and already has a dead protester to his name. His name was Eduardo Ruiz. He was shot in the chest during a demonstration in Lima on October 15. The shooter was a plainclothes cop. The police admitted it.

This pattern has become familiar in Peru. People protest for change, a new president takes office, and someone loses their life. It happened during Dina Boluarte’s presidency, and now it is happening under Jerí. The government’s response to dissent remains unchanged.

Ruiz was unarmed and nonviolent. He was marching to protest crime and insecurity, issues the government claims to prioritize. He was also a rapper, known as Trvko, and a father to a 10-year-old son. While these personal details should not be necessary to highlight the tragedy, they remind us that those who die in these events had full lives.

As I have mentioned before, Peru’s main issue is a lack of trust in its leaders. Instead of addressing this problem, those in power often respond with violence.

Let’s Talk About Imbabura, Ecuador

We’ve been talking about protests in Ecuador for a few weeks now. This week, I want to focus on Imbabura.

Imbabura is one of the provinces where protests have been especially intense, and there are clear reasons for this. Most people in the area are Indigenous. Like in previous times of unrest in Ecuador, Indigenous communities are the ones who organize, block roads, and often face violence from the government.

Over the past month, three people have been killed in protests there.

The protests are about more than just diesel prices. They come from a long history. In Ecuador, Indigenous people do not protest because it is popular or trendy. They protest because they have always needed to. They know what it means to be left out, and they have built the only groups in the country strong enough to stand up to the government when it goes too far.

Noboa sees them as a problem to handle. But they are the reason the country has not completely fallen apart. If anyone still believes in working together for change in Ecuador, it is these communities.

Shakira Is a Rockstar, and We Should Say It More Often

I don’t own many vinyl records, but one of the few I’ve hung on my wall is ¿Dónde Están los Ladrones? by Shakira. When friends who aren’t Latin American visit, they’re always surprised. They know Shakira as the global star, the one behind Waka Waka and the hips that don’t lie. But they don’t know this version of her.

This is the Shakira who meant something to us. She played guitar, wrote all her own lyrics, and gave us songs in Spanish about heartbreak, identity, and anger. She didn’t hold anything back. ¿Dónde Están los Ladrones? came out in 1998, when she was only 21.

At 28, I listen to this album and feel like I’ve wasted my twenties.

My favorite track is “No Creo,” a love song written like a manifesto. (I don’t believe in Venus or Mars / I don’t believe in Karl Marx / I don’t believe in Jean-Paul Sartre / I don’t believe in Brian Weiss / I only believe in your blue smile / in your glassy eyes / in the kisses you give me.)

She did more than write catchy songs. She wrote poetry. She managed to fit big ideas about life, society, and meaning into three-minute tracks that still sound amazing today.

This week, I went back to the 600 Albums from Latin America list that a group of music journalists published in 2024. ¿Dónde Están los Ladrones? made the top ten. And I agree. No hesitation.

Shakira really is a rockstar. She’s brilliant. If people have forgotten that, it’s their loss—not hers, and definitely not this album’s.

That’s all for this week. If you liked what you read, please subscribe.

You’ll get something like this every Monday: one main analytical piece, three important stories from Latin America, and one media suggestion to help you learn more about our region.

Subscribe now

You can also follow me on Instagram, X, and TikTok for more.

Gracias por leer. Hasta la semana que viene.