U.S. Perspectives and Foreign Policy in Latin America - Essay Example

"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. " -- British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), April 2006 1 I. Introduction While much analysis has been made on the US Security policy in Middle Eastern terrorism, scant attention has been given to its policy with regard to Latin America. Given the rise of left-leaning leaders in countries like Venezuela, Argentina and Bolivia in recent times, there could be a no more relevant time than the present to critically analyze and explore US Security Policy in Latin America. The BBC, the world's largest broadcasting corporation, ran a series on Latin America early this year. The BBC asserted that while the U.S. government has been busy implementing its war against terrorism in Iran and Afghanistan, its relations with Latin America turned sour, from Mexico down to Peru. Strong anti-American feelings, or what one Peruvian leader called "the neo-liberal economic model that has failed to benefit our nation", converted into a string of electoral victories by what the West perceives as left-leaning governments. 2 A "leftward" drift is apparent in Latin America's southern hemisphere since the start of the decade. In Venezuela, leftist Hugo Chavez garnered 56.93% of the votes in 30 July 2000. In Brazil, center-Left Luis Inacio LULA da Silva won 61.27% in the second round of elections in October 27, 2002. In Argentina, left-leaning Nestor Kirchner was sworn in as president on May 25, 2003 to a four-year term of office after his rival, Carlos Menem, decided to stand down. In Uruguay, Tabar Ramn Vzquez Rosas of the Frente Amplio garnered 51.94% in the October 31, 2004 elections. In Bolivia, left-wing Evo Morales won a historic 54% of the vote in 18 December 2005. In Chile, center-Left Michelle Bachelet's second round votes of 53.49% beat Michelle Bachelet in 15 January 2006. In Peru, center-Left Alan Garcia beat Ollanta Humala in 4 June 2006. 3 Lula is again expected to win in the upcoming run-off elections this 29 October 2006. On December 3, Venezuela's Chavez will face liberal democrat Manuel Rosales. Elsewhere in the region, leftward shifts that are not necessarily anti-U.S. have also been observed in Honduras, Haiti, and Costa Rica. Former Nicaraguan Sandinista Party Chief Daniel Ortega will make another presidential re-election bid in November 2006. II. Independence, Regional Integration and Petroleum Politics Noam Chomsky, the renowned linguist and political analyst, noted in June 2006 that for the first time since the Spanish colonization, many countries in the hemisphere are "moving towards a degree of independence and towards a degree of integration." Petroleum-oil and gas-is a key issue. Chomsky adds that the United states is "terrified" considering that the largest energy producer in the hemisphere is Venezuela, which is one of the five founding members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). Bolivia, with its vast gas reserves, is second to Venezuela. 4 Last February, U.S. secretary of state Condoleezza Rice accused Chavez of "Latin brand of populism that has taken countries down the drain," and that Venezuela's relationship with Cuba is "particularly dangerous." 5 A controversial figure next to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez is Evo Morales of Bolivia. Last March 2006, Noam Chomsky said of Evo Morales's victory: "Morales' election reflects the entry of the indigenous population into the political arena throughout the continent. Along with other popular forces, indigenous people are demanding control over their own resources, a serious threat to Washington's plans to rely on resources from the Western hemisphere, particularly energy." 6 Otto Reich, former assistant secretary of state for the Western hemisphere and adviser to President George Bush, presents a different view however. In the same BBC interview with Noam Chomsky regarding Evo Morales challenge to the US, he said: "It depends on the policies that each Latin American leader is implementing. Three years ago, when President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva was elected in Brazil, many analysts warned that it would be difficult for the U.S. to work with him because of his leftist background. "However, Washington has a very constructive relationship with President Lula. The difference between Lula and Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, is that Lula is more focused on solving the problems of his own people, whereas Chavez is intervening in other country's affairs." 7 Reich's remarks are in apparent reference to the souring of relations between Brazil and Bolivia due to the fallout from the latter's nationalisation policy of its vast natural gas fields. Bolivia is landlocked and has no pipelines to the Pacific Ocean; it has been selling its gas to Brazil and Argentina. Brazil's state-owned energy firm, Petrobas, was severely affected by Morales's nationalisation move. Petrobas controls 45% of Bolivia's gas production and has invested more than $1 billion in Bolivia. The more than 20 companies affected are mulling if they would continue investing in Bolivia at all, thus forcing Bolivia to take "a business-friendly approach", especially with Petrobas. 8 III. U.S. Perspectives and Foreign Policy in Latin America The Heritage Foundation is a key U.S. think-tank on foreign policy issues. Stephen Johnson is the Foundation's senior policy analyst on Latin America, Public Diplomacy, Counter narcotics, Counterterrorism. 9 Apart from the war on terror paradigm, a key framework for the Foundation's foreign policy initiatives in Latin America is "neoliberalism." In 2003, Johnson wrote that neoliberalism meant different things to different people, i.e.: "To Marxists looking for a new cause, it means policies that enrich multinational corporations as they trample over the world's poor and the environment. To anti-globalists it is western expansionism. To economic fundamentalists it is the infallibility of the market." For Johnson, neoliberalism is "the foundation for civil liberties, markets, and democracy" that "derives from the classic liberalism of 18th century moral philosophers who proposed that individuals should be free to do as they see fit and own and dispose of property as they wish with minimal state interference." 10 On U.S. foreign policy, hereunder is Stephen Johnson's recent appraisal of the Latin American situation: "Since September 11, 2001, America's support for electoral reforms, free trade, and security in Latin America has been supplanted by the global war on terrorism and liberating Iraq. Time is running short for governments that are ill-equipped to deal with expanding populations, crime, and globalization. Seeing little change in their daily lives as a result of half-implemented reforms, voters in Latin America's poorest countries are choosing populist authoritarian leaders who think confronting the United States is the solution to lagging prosperity. If economies falter, the exodus of migrants will rise, transnational crime will spike, and markets for U.S. exports will shrink." 11 From this assessment, Johnson lays down the following broad recommendations for U.S. policy on Latin America: (1) "encourage greater support for better governance;" (2) "beyond free trade, promote free economies;" (3) "promote regional collaboration against transnational crime and terrorism;" and (4) "eliminate self-imposed roadblocks to better relations." 12 More particularly, Johnson outlined a three-pronged strategy in March 2006: "To regain influence and foster a more prosperous, stable hemisphere, the United States should recommit to a three-part strategy of: * Broader democratic reforms, * Economic restructuring to establish truly competitive markets, and * Greater collaboration to fight transnational crime and terrorism. "To facilitate the implementation of this strategy, the U.S. should: * State clear objectives and ensure that actions match words, * Target support for better governance and an open economy, * Eliminate self-imposed roadblocks to better relations, and * Revive lagging public diplomacy efforts." 13 Johnson cited the new left-leaning Latin American regimes as "Cuba's new friends". He was more emphatic, however, about China's increasing role in the region. Johnson observed that China is taking advantage of the US's waning ties with Latin America and the shifting political trends in the region. China is now the world's fourth largest economy with an estimated 9% GDP growth per annum. To beef up its energy and mineral requirements, China has started to strike cut petroleum deals with Venezuela, Ecuador, Colombia, Argentina, Brazil, and even Mexico since the 1990s. China is geared to offer investments in infrastructure projects. There is also an on-going Sino-Brazil collaboration on spy satellite technology. China is also seen as a recipient of Cuba's electronic espionage and information on warfare capabilities.14 The region is a major U.S. trading partner wherein trade volume in 2004 totalled $409 billion. For the Heritage Foundation, Latin America is as important as the Middle East, not only in economic terms but also in international politics. 15 IV. Venezuelan "Bolivarian Revolution" and Bolivia's "Movement Towards Socialism" In April 2006, Chavez initiated a state takeover of foreign owned major oil corporations in Venezuela. Sixteen firms that included The Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron Corp., and Spain's Repsol YPF agreed to the new arrangement that was geared towards increased revenue shares and control by the Venezuelan government. Such a move is in line with what Chavez announced as the "Bolivarian Revolution". Simn Bolvar, born July 24, 1783 in Caracas, Venezuela was a leader of several independence movements throughout South America, collectively known as Bolvar's War. 16 According to Dr. Michael A. Weinstein of the independent Power and Interest News Report (PINR), Chavez's Bolivarian ideology is "a set of broad principles and goals around which to mobilize Venezuelan society that reflects adaptation to the country's economic underdevelopment and its sharp social divisions." 17 Chavez's Bolivarian ideology also incorporates regional integration such as pipeline deals with Colombia and Argentina, a trade pact with Brazil, and partnership with Cuba on medical and education efforts. A larger dimension to the ideology's so-called "South-South" component is through closer cooperation with China, the Middle East and India--all aimed to reduce alliance with or bypass Washington. The Bolivarian ideology, with its broad socialist trajectory, is thus viewed as an alternative economic model that challenges the basic pillars of neoliberalism, i.e., open markets, privatization, and deregulation. 18 The political platform of Bolivia's Evo Morales is evidently inspired by Chavez's Bolivarian ideology. Morales's version, however, is geared towards "communitarian socialism" due to his vast mass base of indigenous peoples. 19 There are not only governments and political parties but social movements, too. Evo Morales victory was propelled by his political party, Movement Toward Socialism (M.A.S.), which is Bolivia's largest political party. More importantly, the M.A.S. is founded on social movements comprising of indigenous peoples, peasants, labor and student groups. The M.A.S. seeks to replace Bolivian elite rule which is tied down to multinational corporations and the U.S. As a variant of the Bolivarian ideology, the M.A.S. ideology particularly leans towards the interests of Bolivia's majority, or the traditional indigenous population dominated by the Quechua and Aymara groups. 20 The economic pillars of the M.A.S. ideology are the nationalisation of the gas or hydrocarbons industry and land reform. Like Venezuela, Bolivia relies heavily on gas revenues. The success of the M.A.S. largely depends on Morales's balancing act of satisfying the demands of his social movements base with that of the regional and international investors' in its hydrocarbons industry. 21 V. Left versus "Left" James Petras, a former Professor of Sociology at Binghamton University and an adviser to the landless and jobless in Brazil and Argentina, maintains a radically different view on Latin American politics. Petras does not see the left-leaning regimes in Latin America as left-leaning leaning at all. When asked about these governments last January 2006, Petras said: "I don't think they're left-leaning, because -- for many reasons. Lula, for example, has opened the country up to more foreign investment. He's paid more on foreign debt than any previous, supposedly, conservative president. Certainly Bachelet is not anything leaning to the left. She's led the arms race, free trade agreements, promoted enormous increases in arms spending. Chile leads per capita arms spending. "I think you have to look at what the business press says, what they're saying in Washington, and when you get pronouncements from Condoleezza Rice and others, saying that Chile is the U.S.'s best ally and we're talking about the U.S. that has been aggressively pursuing bellicose policies, we have to moderate that that perception that is left-leaning. Washington has shown an enormous capacity to tolerate rhetoric, as long as it's not consequential. And the main problem for Washington continues to be Chavez, because of his increasing nationalism and, of course, Cuba. And their attitude to the rest of Latin America is one of accommodation by necessity and also a recognition that big property interests are not going to be effect. In fact, they're being promoted by some of these governments." 22 The radical Marxist in Petras sees the new regimes more as "reformist nationalist populists" clothed as "center-left". Petras wrote that the more potentially revolutionary social movements in the region started to wane by 2002, and gave rise self-styled "center-left" politicians. He wrote: "By 2003, the social movements began to ebb, as many leaders were co-opted by the new wave of self-described 'center-left' politicians. The promises of "social transformations" were reduced to patronage, subsidies and orthodox macro-economic policies following the same neo-liberal dogma. Yet, in some countries, the mass struggles of the 1990's/2002 led to new political regimes, which were neither U.S. clients nor free of neo-liberal influence, namely, Venezuela and Bolivia." 23 Petras does not see Latin America turning Left. For him, the major bones of contention besetting the new regimes are not socialism, nationalization, nor social revolution, but the following: "1) Increases in taxation, prices and royalty payments, 2) the conversion of firms to joint ventures, 3) representation on corporate boards of directors, 4) distribution of shareholdings between foreign appointed and state-appointed executives, 5) the legal right to revise contracts, 6) compensation payments for presumed assets and 7) management of distribution and export sales." 24 Petras further contends that for over the past 15 years, Washington showed political flexibility in establishing strong ties and positive relations with "nationalists" in Argentina, "socialists" in Chile, "populists" in Ecuador, and "laborites" in Brazil (President Da Silva of Brazil). Petras sees the new left-leaning regimes more as modern "client states", than socialists. 25 VI. Prognosis The U.S. has not at all lost the plot in Latin America. The rise of left wing presidents in Latin America does not represent a threat to the United States, in the same manner as the elected socialist and social-democratic parties in Europe do not represent a menace either. The new regimes are far from socialist in a revolutionary sense, but are more of mixed economies with strong state sectors. U.S. foreign policy has shown flexibility on Latin America through the past decades. Such political flexibility is fully compatible with the recommendations of the Heritage Foundation": elections and democratic reforms, competitive markets, and collaboration against transnational crime and terrorism. Time will tell whether the Bolivarian or M.A.S models for development will succeed. So far, these models are already being adjusted from their pure form to accommodate the need to raise government revenues. The resurgence of militant social movements that waned during the early 2000s could possibly force a rethinking on the part of the current crop of populist leaders. China, India and Brazil are becoming key players in an increasingly multi-polar tendency. The realignment of the world balance of forces from a unilateral set-up dominated by the U.S. towards a multi-polar world can possibly feed on the development of new alternative models. And such prospect is largely dependent on the outcomes of U.S.'s emphasis on the war against terrorism, as well as and the efforts of international finance agencies to promote growth while eradicating poverty in the region. At any rate, oil politics deserves close watching because a prolonged crisis in the Middle East has the potential of a major U.S. policy shift on petroleum producing countries in South America. References British Broadcasting Corporation [BBC] (2006), Analysis: How the US 'lost' Latin America , http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4861320.stm, Date Accesed 6/10/2006. BBC (2006), US warns against Chavez 'danger', http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4723902.stm , Date Accesed 5/10/2006. BBC (2006), Viewpoints: US-Latin America relations, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4813378.stm, Date Accesed 5/10/2006 . Chomsky, N. (2006), The United States is Terrified" - Noam Chomsky on Latin America's Move Towards "Independence and Integration", http://www.democracynow.org/article.plsid=06/06/06/1337219 , Date Accesed 5/10/2006. Democracy Now. (2006), Evo Morales Sworn in as Bolivia's First Indigenous President, Hails Election as End of "Colonial and Neo-Liberal Era", http://www.democracynow.org/article.plsid=06/01/23/1441200, Date Accesed 1/10/2006. Heritage Foundation (2006), Staff, http://www.heritage.org/about/staff/experts.cfm, Date Accesed 5/10/2006. IFES (2006), Election Guide, http://www.electionguide.org/ , Date Accesed 4/10/2006. Johnson, S. (2006), Is Neoliberalism Dead In Latin America, http://www.heritage.org/Research/LatinAmerica/wm332.cfm, Date Accesed 4/10/2006. Johnson, S. (2006), Latin America, http://www.heritage.org/Research/features/issues/issuearea/latinamerica.cfm, Date Accesed 4/10/2006. Johnson, S. (2006), U.S.-Latin America Ties Need Commitment and Strategy http://www.heritage.org/Research/LatinAmerica/bg1920.cfm, Date Accesed 4/10/2006. Petras, J. (2006), Myths and Realities: Is Latin America Really Turning Left, http://www.counterpunch.org/petras06032006.html, Date Accessed 3/10/2006. Petras, J. (2006), Latin America: The Empire Changes Gears, http://www.counterpunch.org/petras12072004.html, Date Accessed 3/10/2006. Piskur, M. (2006), Venezuela Moves to Nationalize its Oil Industry, http://www.pinr.com/report.phpac=view_report&report_id=492&language_id=1, Date Accesed 3/10/2006. Plummer, R. (2006), Bolivia takeover alarms powerful allies, BBC, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4964432.stm, Date Accesed 5/10/2006 . Weinstein, M. (2006), Bolivia's Evo Morales Launches His Movement Toward Socialism into the Political Trenches, http://www.pinr.com/report.phpac=view_report&report_id=510&language_id=1, Date Accesed 3/10/2006. Wikipedia (2006), Simn Bolvar, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sim%C3%B3n_Bol%C3%ADvar, Date Accesed 7/10/2006. Read More