The U.S. has combined its geopolitical interests with its domestic interests, and expressed its reservations about revolutionary plans in the region, both domestically and internationally.
The United States has had a diverse response to issues of political change and the foreign policy of a number of governments in the Americas. Washington has a history of negotiating with countries that have led to coexistence agreements in spite of the latter’s desire for independence. Relations between the U.S., Latin America and the Caribbean have been, in most cases, respectful and stable.
Beginning in the 20th century, the United States has pursued a global hemispheric policy that’s been put to the test at least four times: During World War I, the European geopolitical presence was displaced. Containment of the Axis powers during World War II transitioned into containment of the Soviet Union in 1947. The Missile Crisis of 1962 guaranteed Cuba’s existence, and, at the same time, its ties with the Soviet Union. The 1982 Falklands War pitted Washington militarily against a Latin American country as well as against its allies.
In this context, the United States has combined its geopolitical interests with its domestic interests, and expressed its reservations about plans for revolution in the region both domestically and internationally. This objective is based upon four historic pillars: (1) continental defense, (2) a strong multilateral and bilateral alliance, (3) containing the presence of intercontinental powers, (4) avoiding the propagation of radical governments. At times, Washington has achieved its objectives and at other times it hasn’t, whether through negotiation or confrontation.
EEUU ha combinado sus intereses geopolíticos con sus intereses domésticos, manifestado sus reservas sobre proyectos revolucionarios en la región, tanto en el plano doméstico como en el internacional.
Estados Unidos ha tenido diversas respuestas a los temas del cambio político y a la política exterior de algunos gobiernos en el continente americano. Washington posee un historial de negociaciones con países que llegaron a acuerdos de convivencia, a pesar de su deseo de tener una política independiente. Las relaciones entre EEUU y América Latina y el Caribe han sido -en la mayoría de los casos- respetuosas y estables.
Desde el siglo XX, Estados Unidos ha seguido una política hemisférica global que se ha puesto a prueba al menos en cuatro oportunidades: Durante la Primera Guerra Mundial se desplazó la presencia geopolítica europea. En la Segunda Guerra Mundial la contención del Eje se convirtió desde 1947 en la contención de la Unión Soviética. La Crisis de los Cohetes en 1962 garantizó la existencia de Cuba y a su vez su vinculación con la URSS. La Guerra de Las Malvinas en 1982 enfrentó militarmente a Washington en contra de un país latinoamericano y sus aliados.
En este contexto, Estados Unidos ha combinado sus intereses geopolíticos con sus intereses domésticos, manifestado sus reservas sobre proyectos revolucionarios en la región, tanto en el plano doméstico como en el internacional. Este objetivo se ha basado en cuatro pilares históricos: 1) la defensa continental; 2) una alianza fuerte, multilateral y bilateral; 3) contener la presencia de potencias extra-continentales y 4) evitar la propagación de gobiernos radicales. A veces Washington ha cumplido sus objetivos y a veces no, sea a través de la negociación o de la confrontación.
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link
.
The reconciliation culminated in Al-Sharaa’s visit to the White House last week, the first by a Syrian president, and the announcement that Syria had become the 90th member of the US-led Global Coalition Against Daesh.
And the man behind “Vision 2030” has shown that he is well aware that the U.S. can offer Saudi Arabia what few others can: economically, politically, in defense, in technology, and in artificial intelligence, the new key to progress.
Even Jake Sullivan, former United States president Joe Biden’s national security adviser, said “the Washington Consensus is a promise that was not kept[.]”
While Washington claims Tehran desires an agreement, Iran insists no dialogue will take place without the lifting of sanctions and guarantees respecting its nuclear rights.
Senator Ted Cruz's warning to the Christian establishment about the rise of antisemitism on the American Right applies equally to the Israeli establishment. This poison is spreading among young Christians who will form America's leadership in the next generation.
Those who trusted Donald Trump when he pledged during the election campaign to keep U.S. soldiers out of foreign conflicts can scarcely believe their eyes.