/https%3A%2F%2Fblueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fcard%2Fimage%2F238816%2FAP_16281523866904.jpg)
Hurricane Trump
The year that ended has not been the best for the South American region. The social successes over the last decade, including the lifting of almost 100 million people out of poverty, are threatened by low levels of economic growth and the absurd decision by some governments to adjust their economies through reductions in social investment, which in some countries have even become constitutional regulations.
This gloomy outlook is compounded by the difficulties of democratic governance born of insurgency — economic and communications groups, judges and public prosecutors turned into media stars, non-governmental organizations, social networks and ratings agencies have replaced the representative function of political parties, discredited by clientele-ism and corruption.
These de facto powers were apparent in Brazil with the destabilization of President Rousseff; in Argentina with the move to take President Christina Kirchner’s government to court; in Bolivia with the interference in the referendum on Evo Morales’s right to re-election; in Chile to question Michelle Bachelet’s irreproachable honesty; and in Colombia to sink the referendum for peace.
The impact of these new actors on regional democratic governability has been much more relevant than the model changes that occurred this year in Argentina, Peru or Guyana as a result of lawful electoral processes. It is difficult to ignore, in this balance of light and dark, that Venezuela’s current situation has polarized the region's political climate, even leading some countries to transfer their political and ideological differences with the Bolivian government to integration-specific scenarios such as Mercosur.
In case things were not complicated enough in the region, hurricane Trump arrived. Latin America was accustomed to following the United States’ international agenda in issues that had to do with the defeat of foreign “enemies” of American security, such as communists, drug traffickers and terrorists, more recently.
With Trump, this will be the first time in many years that national interests, such as protectionism and the defense of domestic employment or local investment will be converted into foreign policy priorities, and will openly contradict those of the hemisphere.
According to statements made by the president-elect, he is to persecute illegal Latino migrants inside of the United States, punish products that come from the southern hemisphere with high tariffs by applying current free trade treaties, and penalize those American investments that dare to be made in Latin America. The world is upside down. And alongside these threats are these big questions: What will happen to the process of re-establishing relations between the United States and Cuba, when the commercial embargo that has stifled the island’s economy for more than half a century is still pending? What fate awaits the recently signed peace accord between the Colombian government and FARC that distances them from the orthodox handling of the traditional American fight against drugs in Latin America? What will happen to the political dialogue in Venezuela that has been encouraged by the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Vatican between the opposition and the government? [This dialogue] has, with great difficulty, replaced violence as a form of political action and seeks instead to prioritize a balanced coexistence of powers in the face of upcoming elections as well as explore solutions to serious social problems, such as the scarcity of food and medicines that currently overwhelms Venezuela.
The new president of the United States’ threatening policies toward Latin America should be seen, by those in the region, as an opportunity to close ranks in defense of hemispheric interests, to strengthen current processes of integration and consolidate alliances with other countries and regions of the word, such as China and the Pacific.
Ernesto Samper Pizano is Secretary General of UNASUR and was president of Colombia.
This gloomy outlook is compounded by the difficulties of democratic governance born of insurgency — economic and communications groups, judges and public prosecutors turned into media stars, non-governmental organizations, social networks and ratings agencies have replaced the representative function of political parties, discredited by clientele-ism and corruption.
These de facto powers were apparent in Brazil with the destabilization of President Rousseff; in Argentina with the move to take President Christina Kirchner’s government to court; in Bolivia with the interference in the referendum on Evo Morales’s right to re-election; in Chile to question Michelle Bachelet’s irreproachable honesty; and in Colombia to sink the referendum for peace.
The impact of these new actors on regional democratic governability has been much more relevant than the model changes that occurred this year in Argentina, Peru or Guyana as a result of lawful electoral processes. It is difficult to ignore, in this balance of light and dark, that Venezuela’s current situation has polarized the region's political climate, even leading some countries to transfer their political and ideological differences with the Bolivian government to integration-specific scenarios such as Mercosur.
In case things were not complicated enough in the region, hurricane Trump arrived. Latin America was accustomed to following the United States’ international agenda in issues that had to do with the defeat of foreign “enemies” of American security, such as communists, drug traffickers and terrorists, more recently.
With Trump, this will be the first time in many years that national interests, such as protectionism and the defense of domestic employment or local investment will be converted into foreign policy priorities, and will openly contradict those of the hemisphere.
According to statements made by the president-elect, he is to persecute illegal Latino migrants inside of the United States, punish products that come from the southern hemisphere with high tariffs by applying current free trade treaties, and penalize those American investments that dare to be made in Latin America. The world is upside down. And alongside these threats are these big questions: What will happen to the process of re-establishing relations between the United States and Cuba, when the commercial embargo that has stifled the island’s economy for more than half a century is still pending? What fate awaits the recently signed peace accord between the Colombian government and FARC that distances them from the orthodox handling of the traditional American fight against drugs in Latin America? What will happen to the political dialogue in Venezuela that has been encouraged by the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) and the Vatican between the opposition and the government? [This dialogue] has, with great difficulty, replaced violence as a form of political action and seeks instead to prioritize a balanced coexistence of powers in the face of upcoming elections as well as explore solutions to serious social problems, such as the scarcity of food and medicines that currently overwhelms Venezuela.
The new president of the United States’ threatening policies toward Latin America should be seen, by those in the region, as an opportunity to close ranks in defense of hemispheric interests, to strengthen current processes of integration and consolidate alliances with other countries and regions of the word, such as China and the Pacific.
Ernesto Samper Pizano is Secretary General of UNASUR and was president of Colombia.
Previous article![]( "The Wild Card")
Next article![]( "The Trump Effect: the Boom of Migrants from Mexico to the US")
