A Primer on Recent Peruvian History

In amongst the microfinance discussion, it would be remiss of me not to mention the political dimension here in Peru. As Jeffrey Sachs repeatedly says in his rather good book The End of Poverty, you cannot think about altering the economic situation of a country without giving ample thought to all the factors which affect it: political, geographical, historical, infrastructural, personal.

The president of Peru is currently Alan Garcia and this is his second go at running the country. He was previously in charge between 1985 and 1990 and left office with hyperinflation causing economic havoc and Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) and the MRTA (Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement) causing havoc of a different kind. Strong evidence for not electing a 36 year old to head the government it might be suggested. With the country needing some strong direction Alberto Fujimori, a half Peruvian half Japanese politician whose birthplace is disputed (he claims Lima, others claim Japan and it's of importance because only people born in Peru are allowed to run for president) beat writer Mario Vargas Llosa in an unexpected victory in 1990. Interestingly five years later Fujimori beat Javier Perez de Cuellar, former United Nations Secretary General in the 1995 elections.

Fujimori turned out to be quite the authoritarian during his two terms. He succeeded in bringing the economy under control and eventually in crushing Sendero Luminoso and the MRTA. On the other hand, because Vargas Llosa's party retained control of Congress after the 1990 election and since Fujimori was finding it hard to get anything done during his first term, he simply dismissed the entire Congress and judiciary in 1992. ("If only...", Bill Clinton must have been saying a few years later when he faced the same problem.) At the end of his second term, Fujimori tried to circumvent the 1993 constitutional two-term limit which he himself had introduced and ran in and won the 2000 election against Alejandro Toledo. The ruse only lasted until evidence of political bribery eventually forced Fujimori to resign the presidency from the safety of Tokyo.

Worse than the political machinations however were the extra-judicial torture and murders. In 1993 Fujimori became close to an army Captain by the name of Vladimiro Montesinos who alerted Fujimori that certain elements of the army were planning a coup. Montesinos later became the head of Fujimori's security apparatus and was responsible for fighting the terrorists as well as for the political espionage and bribery. The findings of the CVR (Truth and Reconciliation Committee) after the downfall of the Communist terrorist groups found that up to 70,000 people were killed during the fighting. Most of these were innocents in the battles between government forces and the terrorists and their blood was not only on the hands of the terrorists. The tactics used in bringing the terrorists to their knees as well as the bribery landed Montesinos with a lengthy prison sentence with Fujimori similarly awaiting trial on human rights abuses. He was extradited from Chile in September 2007 and the trial is scheduled to start in December.

This is likely to be an unwelcome distraction for the Garcia administration as Fujimori still commands considerable public support. I was recently in the centre of Lima and saw a huge banner hanging from a hotel exclaiming "Fujimori Libertad". This time around Garcia is attempting to cast himself as the economically responsible type and is attracting foreign investment to the country as well as looking to get a Free Trade Agreement signed with the U.S. which is likely to be passed by the U.S. Senate in December, having already passed the House of Representatives. It is likely to sail through the upper house of the U.S. Congress as it did the lower house because from the U.S. point of view Peru is an important ally against the "red tide" of Chavez (Venezuela), Ortega (Nicaragua), Correa (Ecuador) and Morales (Bolivia).

For the good of the country, Alan Garcia needs to be careful to attract investment to all areas of the country and not just around the big cities and the mineral and gas deposits. A little bit of money can achieve big results in a country like Peru and a little bit of patronage can go a long way. When I was visiting Puno last month, on the shores of Lake Titicaca, I met with the head of one of the floating islands of Los Uros who told me at least three times that the solar panels they had attached to their houses providing them with electricity were provided by Fujimori. "And what has Garcia done for you?", I asked. "Nothing."

The danger is that Garcia's political base is along the coast north of Lima and in the centre of the country. Outside of those areas but particularly in the south Ollanta Humala, a man the U.S. would lump in with Chavez and the rest, is the popular politician. In the first round of the most recent presidential election in 2006, Humala came top with 33%. Given that an outright majority is required to win the presidency, a second round was held in which Humala lost to Garcia who had lapped up the votes of the third placed finisher from the first round.

Peru has fantastic advantages relative to some other developing nations. Natural wealth (copper, other metals, natural gas), agriculture (top exporter of asparagus in the world, potatoes, maize, fish), access to the sea, an entrepreneurial workforce and significant tourism. Inflation has been below 4% since 1999 and GDP growth averaged 5.7% between 2002 and 2006. What Peru requires for development, to the advantage both of the poor and the country, is leadership which will, in addition to keeping the economy ticking over, ensure that the benefits of increasing wealth are distributed widely. That's not to say the leaders should tax the rich and kill the entrepreneurial spirit. More that the right combination of fiscal, monetary, trade, diplomatic and social conditions are needed to increase the general wealth of the country, which are best managed by a centrist party with an active and targeted social agenda rather than a more extreme party of one wing or the other with misplaced ideas of how to run an economy and a country.