PDA

View Full Version : Analysis: How the US 'lost' Latin America


Fade the Butcher
04-04-2006, 04:26 AM
Things aren't looking so good for globalization advocates in Latin America: Castro in Cuba, Kirchner in Argentina, Lula de Silva in Brazil, Chavez in Venezuala, Morales in Bolivia, and soon to be Obrador in Mexico and Humala in Peru. Chile and Uruguay are also in the leftist camp. Ortega coming back to power in Nicaragua? What has brought Latin America to this point? The realization that neoliberalism doesn't work; that globalization is a scam.

BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4861320.stm)

There is trouble ahead for Uncle Sam in his own backyard. Big trouble.

It is one of the most important and yet largely untold stories of our world in 2006. George W Bush has lost Latin America. While the Bush administration has been fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, relations between the United States and the countries of Latin America have become a festering sore - the worst for years.

Virtually anyone paying attention to events in Venezuela and Nicaragua in the north to Peru and Bolivia further south, plus in different ways Mexico, Argentina and Brazil, comes to the same conclusion: there is a wave of profound anti-American feeling stretching from the Texas border to the Antarctic.

And almost everyone believes it will get worse.

President Bush came into office declaring that Latin America was a priority. That's hardly surprising. It's been a priority for every American president since James Monroe in 1823 whose "Monroe Doctrine" told European nations to keep out of Latin American affairs.

In pursuit of American interests, the US has overthrown or undermined around 40 Latin American governments in the 20th Century.

For his part, President Bush even suggested that the United States had no more important ally than... wait for it... Mexico.

None of that survived the attacks of 9/11.

More ulcers?

Mr Bush launched his War on Terror and re-discovered the usefulness of allies like Britain.

While Washington's attention turned to al-Qaeda, the Taleban, Iraq and now Iran, in country after county in Latin America voters chose governments of the left, sometimes the implacably "anti-gringo" left, loudly out of sympathy with George Bush's vision of the world, and reflecting a continent with the world's greatest gulf between rich and poor.

[Violeta Chamorro] told me that Washington politicians could always find money for wars in Latin America - but rarely for peace

The next country to fall to a strongly anti-American populist politician could be Peru. Voters there go to the polls on 9 April to elect a president and Congress.

The presidential frontrunner is Ollanta Humala, a retired army commander who led a failed military uprising in October 2000 and who is now ahead in the opinion polls.

Now, opinion polls in Peru are not especially reliable. They under-represent poor voters in the countryside.

But that is the point. The rural poor form the backbone of Mr Humala's support. If he is ahead even in the flawed opinion polls which tend to under-count his key constituency, Mr Humala is confident he can take the presidency.

And if he does, there will be more ulcers in George Bush's White House.

Shades of red

Like President Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and President Evo Morales in Bolivia, Mr Humala talks of the evils of what he calls "the neo-liberal economic model that has failed to benefit our nation".

He dismisses the role of multinational companies that "offer no benefits" to the people of Peru, and he speaks of a new division in the world.

Where once Cuba's Fidel Castro could harangue the US with talk of the colonisers and the colonised, Ollanta Humala attacks globalisation as a plot to undermine Peru's national sovereignty and benefit only the rich on the backs of Latin America's poor. "Some countries globalise, and others are globalised," is how he puts it. "The Third World belongs in the latter category."

All this may discourage foreign investment, but it is mild compared to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez.

He compares President Bush to Hitler.

"The imperialist, genocidal, fascist attitude of the US president has no limits," Mr Chavez says. "I think Hitler would be like a suckling baby next to George W Bush."

If you were to colour a map of anti-Americanism in Latin America, for nearly 50 years Fidel Castro's Cuba has been the deepest red. Three of the most economically developed countries - Brazil, Chile and Argentina - are now in varying shades of left-of-centre pink.

Peru - if Mr Humala wins - would join Venezuela and Bolivia in bright post-box red, with two other countries - Mexico and Nicaragua - possibly about to follow.

Bogeyman returns?

Nicaragua is close to my heart. What has happened there for the past 20 years sums up the failures of US policy across Latin America.

As a young reporter I travelled across Nicaragua witnessing the fall of the left-wing Sandinista government led by the revolutionary Daniel Ortega.

Now in this new century things are changing, and [Latin America's] potential is being realised

For years Mr Ortega was Washington's Enemy Number One, the ultimate bogeyman. President Bush's father, George Bush senior, was a key player in undermining Mr Ortega and the Sandinistas.

Mr Bush senior had been Director of Central Intelligence and Ronald Reagan's vice-president before he became president of the United States in January 1989.

During the Reagan administration money was channelled - illegally Democrats said - to the Nicaraguan "Contra" guerrillas, a motley crew of CIA trained anti-communists, paramilitaries and thugs.

The resulting scandal - known as "Iran-Contra" - almost brought down the Reagan administration. George Bush senior survived the scandal, and as president managed to see his policies finally work when Nicaragua's own people threw out the Sandinistas in a democratic election in 1990.

After the polls closed in the capital, Managua, I stood in a counting station next to a young Sandinista woman in green military fatigues. Shaking with emotion she brushed away a tear as the voting papers piled up for the Washington-supported opposition candidate, Violeta Chamorro.

"Adios, muchachos," the Sandinista girl called out to her defeated comrades, "companeros de mi vida!!!" (Goodbye boys, comrades of my life.)

Money issue

That was then. This is now. The young Sandinista revolutionary, Daniel Ortega, is back. He may well be re-elected president of Nicaragua.

Can you imagine it? The man who survived CIA plots and Contra death squads, who relinquished power peacefully to Washington's candidate, Violeta Chamorro, sweeping back into the Nicaraguan presidency?

It will be a huge embarrassment for George Bush junior, a symbol of everything that has gone wrong with American foreign policy in the hemisphere. And guess who predicted it would go wrong? Violeta Chamorro herself.

The night before her election victory over Mr Ortega I was invited to dinner at the walled compound of Mrs Chamorro's house in Managua. She told me that Washington politicians could always find money for wars in Latin America - but rarely for peace in Latin America.

She said even a slice of the money used to back the anti-communist Contra guerrillas could build a new Nicaragua - but she predicted that if she won the election Washington would declare victory - and then cut off the money supply. She was right.

Potential realised

And now? Well, most of my travelling in Latin America in the 1990s was to cover bad news: insurgency in Peru, American troops invading Panama, the killings by the Contras in Nicaragua, the repressive regime of Fidel Castro in Cuba, and armed thugs burning the rainforest in Brazil.

Even then, the potential of this wonderful continent was obvious.

Now in this new century things are changing, and the potential is being realised. With the exception of Cuba and Haiti, democracy has flourished, almost everywhere.

Latin American voters have thrown out their governments and - often - given a two-fingered salute to Washington. That is their prerogative.

Economically, some countries - including Peru - have been roaring ahead.

Their cultures are flourishing too. A new generation of novelists is following the path blazed by Gabriel Garcia Marquez, Mario Vargas Llosa, and Carlos Fuentes.

The music? In this special series, we'll be hearing from Novalima from Peru - just one of the talented new bands.

And the cinema? If you haven't seen some of the new hot films from Mexico or Argentina, then you are missing a real treat.

I will be reporting shortly for Newsnight from Argentina on the New Generation cinema which is hotter than a chilli pepper and cooler than a long-neck beer. Plus we'll be covering the run-up to Peru's elections live from Lima, and assessing the huge leftward shift from Argentina to Venezuela.

Oh, yes, and I've also been an extra in a film being made in Buenos Aires. (I don't think the Oscar judges are likely to get too interested. But it was fun.)

I hope, in other words, that Newsnight's Inside Latin American season will capture some of the spice and rhythms of a continent full of life, and hope and promise - plus a lot of problems for Uncle Sam.

Dan Dare
04-04-2006, 05:30 AM
So what's the big deal?

It's not as though the US needs L.A. for anything important. Bananas grow in Florida too.

I say kick the buggers out, build a very large fence, cancel all commercial flights and tell 'em to go jump in the lake.

Fade the Butcher
04-04-2006, 06:00 AM
It's good news for those of us who oppose globalization. The Mexican election is especially important. Mexico is one of our largest trading partners.

Felix the Cat
04-04-2006, 06:05 AM
Paradoxically, it's the collapse of the Soviet Union which has made this situation possible

Absent the danger of Soviet intervention, the US simply no longer cares what happens down there, and no longer bothers trying to prop up friends and overthrow enemies

Roland
04-04-2006, 03:56 PM
I think it’s more complicated than the U.S. losing Latin America. The U.S. is economically and militarily more powerful than those states combined; we also know that the U.S. is capable of formulating a false cause to allow our military forces to be used to pacify markets for international (not necessarily U.S.) corporations.

A viable solution for the liberation of Latin America would require them to harness their own economic "comparative advantages" more efficiently, and find total consensus on the exclusion of international capital amongst all the presidents (neo-liberal privatization is still rampant throughout Latin America). When the U.S. military, under the direction of international capital, came invading under pretenses of human rights, Latin America could, as Che argued, create many "Vietnams" (and now Iraqs) to drain the military resources of the U.S.

Consensus is very important, though. If each state is allowed to be economically and militarily attacked independently, then Latin America cannot continue on their path of vague leftist liberation.

Felix the Cat
04-04-2006, 11:04 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4872522.stm

While the United States has been fighting its war on terror, a new political idea has begun to punch through with such weight that alarm bells have begun ringing loudly in Washington.

Under the slogan of "peaceful rising", China is selling itself to the developing world as an alternative model for ending poverty.

The pitch is now winning an audience in Latin America, and Washington is despatching the assistant secretary of state responsible for the region, Thomas Shannon, to Beijing to find out what is going on.

His aim is to negotiate the precise line which China must not cross in creating its new strategic alliance with Latin America, which has seen billions of dollars of Chinese money earmarked for infrastructure, transport, energy and defence projects there.

"We want to make sure we don't get our wires crossed," said one official arranging the talks.

The spectre of an encroaching China is made worse by a string of elections which has produced populist and US-sceptic, left-wing leaders. During the Cold War they would probably never have survived in office.

The latest may be retired army commander Ollanta Humala, who is leading the opinion polls in the Peruvian presidential election due on 9 April.

"We're concerned about the leftist countries that are dealing with China," says Congressman Dan Burton, the Republican chairman of the sub-committee on the Western Hemisphere.

"It's extremely important that we don't let a potential enemy of the US become a dominant force in this part of the world."

'Alliance of giants'

While China pleads innocence, more and more voices in Washington are chastising President George W Bush for failing to act as decisively against China.

"As a nation we need to understand that this Communist dictatorship is a government without a conscience," says Senator Lindsey Graham who has recently been to China.

"The status quo cannot be accepted and tolerated by this country any more than the Soviet Union's practices were tolerated by Ronald Reagan."

In Brazil itself, the view is very different. It is about two developing countries, the giants of their regions, forming a natural alliance.

"It's wonderful. It's amazing," says Alexandre Solis, an aircraft engineer who spent more than two years in the Chinese city of Harbin, setting up a joint venture for the ultra hi-tech Brazilian Embraer commuter jet company.

"They wanted all the information we could give them because they are determined to be best in the world."

'Nowhere else'

The flurry of China-Brazil business began less than two years ago after an exchange of visits between Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

Since then China's influence can be seen everywhere in Latin America: oil, gas, railways, ports, steel and - worryingly for the US - defence.

In Sao Paulo, Chinese language classes are packed. Not only are students taught how to speak Mandarin, but they are also guided in cultural habits such as attending banquets and singing Chinese folk songs.

"Everything I do is with China now," says one student Priscila Marques, who runs a freight forwarding company. "It's Brazil-China; nowhere else."

The nub of Mr Shannon's Beijing visit, however, is to determine how much can be put down to simply business and how much China plans to export its own political system and power.

"The Chinese government has achieved the greatest victory in the history of human rights," says Charles Tang, who heads the Brazil-China Chamber of Commerce and who has been behind many of the joint-venture initiatives.

"It has removed 400 million Chinese people from poverty and enabled them to live with dignity and take part in economic life. That is the true measure of human rights.

"Brazil should analyse why China grows so much and Brazil so little."

Monroe doctrine

Washington's political protectionism of Latin America dates as far back as 1823 when President James Monroe decreed that no foreign power would have more influence there than the US itself.

The Monroe Doctrine was last used in earnest during the Cold War, when just about every Latin American country which veered to the left - from Chile to Nicaragua - experienced some form of US intervention.

This time, as China gathers confidence, ideological debate will be over which economic system - Western democracy or Chinese authoritarianism - delivers more people from poverty, and whether wealth or elections are a greater measure of freedom.

In Beijing and Washington it might be viewed as a contest of ideas, but on the ground in Latin America it could turn into something darkly familiar.

"We should always look at Latin America in relation to the Monroe Doctrine," says Congressman Burton.

"There already are [Chinese] military exchanges and hardware being sold - or given to Latin American countries. You can rest assured the US is going to do everything it can to make sure this hemisphere is safe."