Dina Boluarte in Davos: Optimistic speech in the face of a harsh reality in Peru.

The recent trip of President Dina Boluarte to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, has sparked not only interest but also a series of questions regarding the authenticity of her message and her leadership ability. In a setting where the planet's most influential leaders gather, the Peruvian president seemed to have brought with her not only her luggage but also a carefully rehearsed script that starkly contrasts with her previous statements. Let us remember that at the forum two years ago, when Boluarte was vice president and part of Pedro Castillo's government, her speech was incendiary, filled with criticisms of the private sector and the political opposition. On that occasion, the then-minister did not hesitate to label the right as an obstacle to the country's progress, arguing that she had been a victim of constant attacks since coming to power. Apparently, that fervor and confrontation were left behind in her most recent appearance in Davos, where the focus was on promoting a favorable climate for investment. President Boluarte presented a renewed and conciliatory image, trying to project a stability that, according to her words, had been regained in Peru. However, her statements seemed disconnected from the harsh reality of the country. Just two days after her optimistic speech, Trujillo was the scene of an attack that evoked dark times of terrorism in Peru, reminding the population that violence and insecurity remain latent. Beyond the dissonance between her words and the facts, Boluarte insisted that her government operates with "clean hands," a statement that may sound ironic to many. In a country where corruption is deeply entrenched at various levels of government, this assertion contrasts with the investigations facing her and her close circle for alleged acts of corruption. The situation regarding spoiled cans of tuna distributed to vulnerable children has become a symbol of the lack of transparency in her administration. In this context, it is hard not to wonder if Boluarte truly believes in what she says or if her speech is merely an attempt to divert attention from the deep-seated problems her governance faces. This suggests a concerning disconnection between the reality experienced by citizens and the perception her administration wishes to project to the world. The effects of her words in Davos could have repercussions beyond mere criticism. The country is at a crossroads, and the pursuit of foreign investments is vital for economic recovery. However, how can investors trust a government that seems more concerned with managing its image than addressing the real issues of security and corruption? The current situation in Peru is not a trivial matter. With an alarming increase in violence and crimes committed in the early weeks of the year, Boluarte's message comes across as an exercise in optimism in a bleak context. Her desire to attract investments must be accompanied by concrete measures that ensure a safe and reliable environment for business. The question of when the president will awaken from her “unreal world” becomes increasingly relevant, given the crisis her administration faces. It is evident that the disconnection between leadership and the reality of citizens can have catastrophic consequences, both in terms of political stability and economic growth. Meanwhile, the expectations and hopes of the population are at stake. The fight against corruption, the improvement of security, and the promotion of a stable environment for investments are challenges that must be addressed with seriousness and urgency. Dina's dual presence in Davos may symbolize an administration clinging to illusion rather than confronting harsh truths. The story is yet to be written, and time will be the judge of her administration.