|
U.S. losing sway
in Americas
Several Latin American countries are now rebuffing Washington as distracted White House ignores their interests PETER MCKENNA AND JOHN M. KIRK Amid all the talk about informal empire, the so-called "hyperpower," and its domination of the Group of Eight summits, the pre-eminence of the United States in the Americas has recently exhibited signs of serious decline. In 1823, under the guise of the Monroe Doctrine, Washington forcefully designated Latin America as part of the U.S. sphere of influence or its so-called "backyard." From that point onward, the U.S. has dominated, directed and defended virtually every political and economic development in the region. Today, this is no longer the case. America has effectively gone from being the main hegemon to struggling to find its footing in the Americas. It simply does not possess the ability to get its way by merely throwing its considerable military might around. Several countries in the region are now rebuffing official Washington and asserting their independence from U.S. policy preferences. Last month, Washington was unsuccessful in getting its candidate El Salvador's former president Francisco Flores anointed as the new secretary-general of the Organization of American States. To add insult to injury, it couldn't even secure the nomination of its second choice, Mexico's Foreign Minister Luis Ernesto Derbez, as head of the hemispheric forum. In the end, it was Chilean Interior Minister Jose Miguel Insulza, a long-time socialist backed by the influential and left-leaning Brazilian government who got the nod. Moreover, at the early June OAS annual general assembly in Florida, the United States was stymied in its efforts by other member states to have the organization play a larger role in "monitoring" democratic developments in the region. Many thought this was aimed at meddling in Venezuela's internal affairs. Another sign of Washington's decline is its seeming invisibility in the region, even as it experiences significant difficulties, as evidenced by internal problems in Haiti, Ecuador and, most recently, Bolivia. But it is Brazil, not the U.S., that is taking the lead in confronting these trouble spots. For instance, the lion's share of peacekeepers in strife-torn Haiti come from Brazil. U.S. policy toward Latin America is largely defined by an expensive and ineffective "war on drugs" and support for the neo-liberal economic model. This focus is leading to a political rift in the hemisphere between the U.S. (along with Canada, the current government in Mexico and Central America) and a Brazil-led South American diplomatic bloc. Many of these countries, including Argentina, Venezuela, Uruguay and Ecuador, are led by leftist governments that are not afraid to challenge Washington. Significantly, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the leading candidate in the Mexican presidential elections for 2006 is also left-of-centre. Brazil is also the dominant player in South America's expanding customs union, Mercosur, which stands as a regional alternative to any wider U.S.-backed free trade area of the Americas. Evidently, China is already knocking at the hemispheric door, looking for energy supplies, investment opportunities and friendly allies. Anti-Americanism is also raising its head once again in Latin America, underpinned by opposition to the U.S. war in Iraq, the Bush administration's inattention to the 2001-2002 economic crisis in Argentina, and Bush's failure to secure a formal migrant accord with Mexico. If Washington doesn't take steps soon to counteract these disturbing trends, it may find its influence in the region even further diminished. To begin with, the United States needs to focus a portion of the time, energy and resources it has earmarked for the war on terror to the needs and aspirations of peoples in the Americas. The U.S. should launch a 21st-century version of FDR's "Good Neighbour" policy for Latin America, which shuns imperialism and intervention and embraces partnership and co-operation. President George Bush should immediately undertake a major diplomatic mission to the region, with stops in Mexico, Argentina, Chile and Brazil. He should press the world's international financial institutions to write off (or improve the repayment conditions) of any outstanding debts held by countries in the region, increase official development assistance to Latin America, and tone down the shrill rhetoric toward Venezuela and Cuba. Washington's ongoing failure to recognize its loss of influence in the Americas could have profound implications for the economic, political and security interests of the United States. Indeed, the White House, by continuing to ignore Latin America, does so at its own peril. Peter McKenna teaches at the University of Prince Edward Island in Charlottetown and John M. Kirk teaches at Dalhousie University in Halifax. Complete archives at http://www.sitbot.net/ Please let us stay on topic and be civil. OM YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
|
