Since coming to power, peter castle has had one of its strongest supporters in the European press in The country. Prisa’s newspaper has presented the Peruvian president as a much stronger leader than he really is, has hidden his intellectual shortcomings and the totalitarianism of Peru Librethe party with which he ran in the elections, and of course his numerous ties to the Shining Path, the heinous terrorist group that filled Peru with innocent blood in the 1980s and early 1990s.
In the year that has already passed with Castillo as president The country he has offered very biased and sectarian information about a presidency that can only be described as disastrous; those of Prisa have also given fuel to all that information that allowed the Castilista regime manage public opinion at your convenience.
Until this Sunday, or so it seems, when a harsh editorial from The country titled “Castle of No Return” it seems that has definitely broken the idyll between the newspaper and the attempted Peruvian communist regime.
In the text, the editorialist assures that “Peru is heading towards a dangerous point of no return”, he cites the numerous cases of corruption and scandals in which the Peruvian government is immersed and, worst of all, he says that “it has parked the agenda of changes and unfulfilled the promises with which he fed the hopes of millions of people” and that and “Castillo is on his way to becoming the umpteenth president processed for deviating from the path”, note that the wording leaves much to be desired. For all this, “the precariousness of the Peruvian Government is as evident as the social discontent”.
The hurt reaction of Pedro Castillo’s executive was immediate: the same night last Sunday, the Peruvian embassy in Madrid sent a letter to The country published in almost midnight in which the management of the Peruvian president is defended, although it is true that without excessive success.
Signed by the ambassador Oscar Maurtuathe letter makes truly gross mistakes, such as simply comparing the economic figures for all of 2021 with those of 2020, when the country was being hit hard by the pandemic, or boasting of having the highest growth figures in the subcontinent, forgetting that the of the collapse of the Peruvian economy also were the highest in Latin America.
In addition, it warns of the “lack of an objective definition of the presidential vacancy due to permanent moral incapacity and its arbitrary use has resulted in the fact that since 2016 the country has had 5 presidents and 3 parliaments”, as if wanting to subtract legitimacy from one of the mechanisms to remove Castillo from power.
The letter, which of course ignores the serious problems of the Peruvian president with the Justice and the very important accusations of corruption, wants to be an example of cordiality and affection – do not miss the last sentence: “I make the occasion propitious to present you with the assurances of my special consideration and esteem” – but the very fact that it was sent reveals the spite for the end of a relationship that had become privileged.
.
