Has the New York Times gone completely nuts on Latin America?

Or is there method to the madness?

The world has experienced yet again the bizarre machinations of our nation’s “newspaper of record” when it comes to reportage of events in South America. The latest strange effort came in the form of today’s page A9 article by Alexei Barrionuevo entitled (in the print edition), “Venezuela Acts to Help Revive Argentine Economy.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/world/americas/07argentina.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Barrionuevo’s piece is ostensibly a report about Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez’s Monday announcement that his country will agree to help the Argentine government of Nestor Kirchner refinance one billion dollars of foreign debt, and help Argentina increase its energy supplies. What’s odd about the article isn’t this particular news, which consumes the first half of the piece and which Barrionuevo reports with the usual snide remarks about Chavez and the usual belittling of Kirchner with unsubstantiated claims of undue Venezuelan influence. Nothing special or new in any of that. What is new, and where it starts to get wacky, is what happens in paragraph six and beyond:

“While the link between the two countries provides Argentina with an economic boost, it is also causing potential political problems. In recent days, Jewish leaders here – part of Latin America’s largest Jewish community – have begun expressing growing concern about Mr. Chavez’s close ties to Iran.”

From this point forward the article has a new thesis, despite the misleading headline. In particular, readers are informed, “Chavez has developed a close relationship with the Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who has called for the destruction of Israel and whose country is suspected of being behind the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center here…”

Barrionuevo proceeds to quote Sergio D. Wider, the Latin American representative of the Simon Wiesenthal Center (http://www.wiesenthal.com/site/pp.asp?c=fwLYKnN8LzH&b=242501) - “The question is, will the economic agreements also generate some type of political commitment?”

Read on and it soon becomes clear that the “political commitment” Mr. Widder fears is a rise in some sort of state sponsored anti-Semitism in Argentina. The piece expounds at length on the 1994 bombing and on Argentina’s unsuccessful efforts to bring anyone to trial. The piece continues:

“In addition to being concerned that Mr. Chavez could try to leverage his economic relationship with Argentina to influence politics here and the investigation into the 1994 bombing, Jewish leaders are also worried that Mr. Chavez’s anti-American statements could affect attitudes in Argentina.”

Barrionuevo continues on to quote a one Mr. Meir Javedanfar, a “Tel Aviv based political analyst” (see ** below) to say, "Jews are worried that Chavez’s anti-Americanism could turn into anti-Semitism.”

May I intercede in my summary of this article for just one moment to remind readers that the headline of this piece is “Venezuela Acts to Help Revive Argentine Economy,” and that the article is ostensibly about Venezuela’s economic assistance to Argentina; and yet, by paragraph 16, we are hearing from a Tel Aviv based “political analyst” telling us that “anti-Americanism” in Venezuela, “could turn into anti-Semitism,” in Argentina.

So what the heck is going on here? Has the Times gone nuts and lost all ability to focus on the heart of a story? Or is there more to this?

Let me begin by pointing out some of the more obvious flaws with Mr. Barrionuevo’s reporting:

Barrionuevo begins the actual thesis of his story, in paragraph 6, by suggesting that the Venezuelan assistance to Argentina “is causing potential political problems,” which we soon learn include “potential” anti-Semitism. May I state the obvious - that something cannot “cause” a “potential problem”. By definition, “potential” means something that has not actually happened and is purely speculative in nature. It is simply false to claim that someone “is causing” a “potential problem.” This implies the problem exists, when it fact it does not.

Barrionuevo and the Times once again revisit the “potential” problem canard later in the story when they discuss “Venezuelan influence in the 1994 bombing investigation.” It’s strange enough that an article about an inter-nation economic deal spends four paragraphs discussing a 13 year old terrorist bombing, but downright disingenuous to speculate about Venezuela influencing the investigation of that bombing without any evidence whatsoever of this actually being the case.

Another strange flaw in Barrionuevo’s “reporting” of this “economic assistance” story is that he fails to quote or cite any local authorities or officials whatsoever. In fact, the only sources he refers to are the “representative” of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and the so-called “Tel Aviv based political analyst” Weird primary sources for an article on Latin American economics, to say the least. Barrionuevo does attribute thoughts and fears to “Argentineans,” but he supports them only with quotes from his two strange sources.

So let’s review - Alexei Barrionuevo and The New York Times run a story about the Venezuelan government’s recent deal to help Argentina refinance foreign debt. The story proceeds to morph into a bizarre set of speculations about how Hugo Chavez is tight with Iran and therefore is anti-Semitic. It then moves on to speculate that this anti-Semitism may be foisted on Argentinean politics by virtue of the undue influence of Venezuelan economic assistance. The whole thing is supported by two strangely irrelevant sources, and the most important conclusion is that “Anti-Americanism” in Venezuela could “turn into anti-Semitism” in Argentina.

So why would The Times be pushing this speculation? Well, I can only speculate myself on this. My best guess would be that we are at the front edges of a propaganda push by American media about Chavez and his supporters and friends in Latin America. My further guess would be that this push will involve the labeling of all involved as Nazi-like in nature; and, that in order to do this, the bugaboo of “anti-Semitism” will need to be hyped. All guesses of course, but at least – unlike The Times – I identify them as such.

You would just think that the Times wouldn’t reach so ridiculously far in one silly piece. But hey, maybe they just think no one is paying attention.


Note: When I went to pull a link to the Web version of this article, I discovered that it's more appropriately headlined "Jews in Argentina Wary of Nation’s Ties to Chávez" in the on-line edition. It still quotes no actual Jews in Argentina, but it's a bit more to the point.

** From meepas: “Meir Javedanfar is an Iranian born and Iranian and British educated Middle East Analyst based in Tel Aviv... Meir is also a member of the prestigious Club of Rome – tt30 Think Tank, where he is currently involved in the management of the "Beyond Oil" project. This project assesses the preparedness of 26 oil exporting countries for the beyond oil age. http://www.meepas.com/aboutmeepas.htm

corresponds to the west coast edition's story title, although I agree that the article (which was buried anyway) was good for a raised eyebrow as I read the title, and then nothing more than chuckles over the sheer stupidity and long reaching. I read it as nothing more than Chavez-slamming over a connection that seems tenuous at best.

Buenos Aires has 5 Kosher MacDonalds restaurants now; the Jewish population is sizable, thriving and important. The last two Presidents of Argentina have been Jewish. I don't think it's out of line for Argentine Jews to be concerned with Hugo's coziness with Iran. On the other hand, Chavez's reaching out to Iran probably has little to do with Ahmedinejad's stance on Israel, but rather his fear that the US will attack Iran. Brazil, Russia, India and China (of the BRIC alliance) all feel the same way.

Please.

that Argentina has a thriving and sizable Jewish population.

The reach in the story is the effort to portray the relationship of Chavez to Iran as somehow representing a danger of rising anti-Semitism in Argentina. Just silly.

Absolutely; as I mentioned, Chavez's interest in Iran (he doesn't need the oil) is to ensure that Iran remain independent. I don't think Chavez advocates Ahmedinajad's stance on Israel. On the other hand, however one can see why the Argentine Jewish population is worried. I think Iran has pretty much admitted it supported BA's '94 bombing.

has pretty much admitted complicity in the 94 bombing, but... that was under a right wing pro-American regime in Argentina. These days, under Kirchner, I don't really think Iran poses a threat to them in the least.

to assassinate Chavez. How sweet. No sale.