Chavez Arrests Dissidents and Critics

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/04/world/americas/04venez.html?ref=todayspaper

Recently, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has spearheaded a flurry of arrests targeting dissidents and critics of his regime, notably Judge María Lourdes Afiuni who in December issued a ruling that "irked" Chavez. To make matters worse, Judge Afuini was placed in a women's prison housing numerous inmates convicted by Afuini herself. A quote taken from the New York Times illustrates the depth of corrupt practices exercised by Chavez:

"The arrests have taken aim at some of Mr. Chávez’s most prominent critics
ahead of legislative elections in September that put control of the National
Assembly in play, and they illustrate Mr. Chávez’s attempts to tighten
control over institutions like the judiciary."

Taken from a "corruption" stanpoint, Chavez's use of his authority almost fully satisfies the commonly held definition of what political corruption is, which is the use of public or elected office for the purpose of private gain. Moreover, many students of political corruption have noted the necessity of political turnover (ie high levels of political competition through frequent and fair elections) and a strong, independent judiciary in eradicating a society of corruption. The arrests led by Chavez indicate his desire to supress both.

Obama Meets with Karzai in Hopes of Curbing Corruption

http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_ID=15816822&fsrc=nlwwwp03-31-2010politics_this_week

A couple days ago, President Obama met with his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai to discuss the corruption that has come to typify his administration. A necessary but seemingly insufficient strategic partner in the Middle East, the Afghan government under Karzai has been marred with corruption beginning with reelection this past November, an outcome that continues to be disputed on the basis of electoral fraud and irregularities. The Economist makes mention of Karzai's half-brother, who has been bombarded with accusations of drug trafficking. While the battle against corruption seems to be clearly defined, requiring a cleanup of the existing administration, the overall situation in Afghanistan is about as clear as a quart of SAE-30. For the sake of argument, three independent actors can be identified: the West, the Afghan government, and militant groups. Overlapping objectives muddy the situation. While the West obviously has an interest in curbing corruption within the Karzai administration, and would like to end the conflict, it wishes not to make concessions to militant groups for fear of being seen as having lost the war. Militant groups share these objectives, that is to have Western troops out and a less corrupt government. Finally, while the Karzai administation claims to be taking strides to address internal corruption, how much it will actually accomplish is dubious. Moreover, corrupt interactions between militant groups and the members of the administration further complicate the situation. Similarly, just recently Karzai acknowledged the widespread presence of corruption in relation to his reelection, but deflected the blame from himself to Western actors hoping to tarnish his public image and obstruct future bids for office. Although recently phoning Secretary of State Clinton to apologize/explain himself, Karzai's action represents another dimension of division: the Middle East vs. the West.