Obama’s Visit
President Obama’s visit to Latin America will serve more to satisfy intentions than to provide results; but in foreign policy, intentions are valuable. Some analysts commit an error when they affirm that, because Latin America is not in the pages of U.S. newspapers, it isn’t important to the country. Canada doesn’t appear every day in American newspapers. Western Europe, in its totality, occupies less space than Pakistan and perhaps, in entire months, receives as much coverage as Somalia. But Canada and Western Europe are enormously important areas for the U.S. — as is Latin America.
Hillary Clinton has reiterated numbers that should be remembered. In economic terms, Latin America is three times the size of India or Russia. The exports from the U.S. to Latin America are three times the size of those that go to China. And — read these carefully — American exports to Chile are larger than those destined for Russia. In matters of energy, Mexico and Venezuela are the second and fourth providers of oil to the U.S. Given the enormous rise in production of crude oil, it wouldn’t be strange if Brazil later finds itself in that category. At the end of the decade, the U.S. will be more dependent on Latin America than on the Middle East for oil.
Furthermore, Western Europe, the United States and Latin America have a stronger cultural interdependence than that with Africa, China, India, Asia, Arabia or Russia. It can’t be denied that the governments of the United States and Latin America have too often been involved in assaults on human dignity; but it is clear, also, that beyond those faults (at times atrocious ones), the nations of the area aspire for democratic political systems, the rule of law and individual liberties, respect for human rights, an economy founded on liberty and the aspiration for greater equality. President Obama has noted the value he attributes to the relationship with Latin America and his compromise to work with "equal partners" to create a relationship founded on mutual respect, common interests and compromise with the values that we share. Hillary Clinton has given a good example of this effort, by visiting 17 Latin American countries in her first 18 months in office.
The gestures and the message are clear. Nevertheless, the Obama administration has had difficulties arriving at proposals that address some of the issues that affect Latin Americans the most. It hasn’t been efficient in reducing agricultural subsidies; there is an even more unsatisfactory and unclear policy for immigration; in the fight against drugs, despite Clinton’s recognition that American demand is the main factor fueling that market, neither is there a coherent policy; the unacceptable smuggling of arms from the United States to Mexico and further south continues; neither has it been able to approve the pending free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama. Beyond these faults, Obama’s visit should be recognized as a step in the right direction. This is something we should value.
Hillary Clinton has reiterated numbers that should be remembered. In economic terms, Latin America is three times the size of India or Russia. The exports from the U.S. to Latin America are three times the size of those that go to China. And — read these carefully — American exports to Chile are larger than those destined for Russia. In matters of energy, Mexico and Venezuela are the second and fourth providers of oil to the U.S. Given the enormous rise in production of crude oil, it wouldn’t be strange if Brazil later finds itself in that category. At the end of the decade, the U.S. will be more dependent on Latin America than on the Middle East for oil.
Furthermore, Western Europe, the United States and Latin America have a stronger cultural interdependence than that with Africa, China, India, Asia, Arabia or Russia. It can’t be denied that the governments of the United States and Latin America have too often been involved in assaults on human dignity; but it is clear, also, that beyond those faults (at times atrocious ones), the nations of the area aspire for democratic political systems, the rule of law and individual liberties, respect for human rights, an economy founded on liberty and the aspiration for greater equality. President Obama has noted the value he attributes to the relationship with Latin America and his compromise to work with "equal partners" to create a relationship founded on mutual respect, common interests and compromise with the values that we share. Hillary Clinton has given a good example of this effort, by visiting 17 Latin American countries in her first 18 months in office.
The gestures and the message are clear. Nevertheless, the Obama administration has had difficulties arriving at proposals that address some of the issues that affect Latin Americans the most. It hasn’t been efficient in reducing agricultural subsidies; there is an even more unsatisfactory and unclear policy for immigration; in the fight against drugs, despite Clinton’s recognition that American demand is the main factor fueling that market, neither is there a coherent policy; the unacceptable smuggling of arms from the United States to Mexico and further south continues; neither has it been able to approve the pending free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama. Beyond these faults, Obama’s visit should be recognized as a step in the right direction. This is something we should value.