A Marshall Plan for Central America
The macabre exodus of tens of thousands of children who travel alone from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador to the United States constitutes the most strident denunciation of the horrific living conditions that prevail in their countries, infected by gangs, corruption and inefficiency. The North American government confronts a grave dilemma and cannot find a politically correct and humanitarian solution. The measures used prior to now have not worked. Neither the hermetic sealing of the borders nor deportation will stop this phenomenon that tears at the heart.
The recent meeting between President Obama and the highest authorities of those three countries that form the so-called Northern Triangle of Central America has been disappointing. They asked for more economic assistance to improve living conditions in those lands and meaningfully curb the desperate exodus. But the economic assistance alone has not produced, nor will it produce, results. In this field, there already exists a powerful experience that should be adapted and updated. This is the Marshall Plan, which many sent to the attic of the forgotten, but which managed nothing less than the reconstruction of Europe after World War II. It was economic assistance and strict supervision.
Let's do a brief review. The program was announced by then Secretary of State George Marshall in early 1947. He said that it was essential to have coordination between the United States and the European countries in order to carry out a successful investment plan. It was not enough to give money; the program should subject the internal economic situation of those countries to an intelligent plan and to rigorous external controls. After six years of bombs and shrapnel, much of Europe had fallen into ruin and not only had 50 million people died, but an unknown number had been disabled, orphaned or driven mad. Toward the end of the war in 1944, there was an awful famine in Holland, which became the prelude to widespread starvation. In that country and in various other countries, they could not resolve the devastation of the agriculture, which had become the object of abandonment and irrational destruction. The lack of food spread like a medieval plague. That situation was aggravated by the harsh winter of 1946 to 1947. On the other hand, the infrastructure of Europe had been decisively destroyed. This destruction included railways, bridges, roads, ports and power plants. The coal shortage caused hundreds of people to die of cold. The high levels of unemployment multiplied the desperation, which led to an increase in strikes, revolts and insecurity. Reinstating the quality of life and well-being prior to the war appeared to be an impossible ambition.
Shortly after General Marshall's announcement, a conference was held in Paris, to which the Soviet Union was invited, although it declined to participate in the initiative lest it be subject to U.S. leadership. Furthermore, the Soviet Union forced its satellite countries to reject the Marshall Plan with the argument that it was an operation of imperialism to colonize Europe. In spite of the smear campaign, many countries accepted the help that the plan offered and reunited in another conference, also in Paris, in September of 1947.
The communist coup in Prague in February 1948 precipitated the adoption of the Marshall Plan by the U.S. Congress. The reticence that until now had prevailed in its chambers, entertained with small-minded lobbying, came to an end with the clear outbreak of something which they did not want to recognize at all: the beginning of the Cold War. In that same year, in the month of April, the Organization for European Economic Cooperation was created in order to hand out and confirm assistance. It is estimated that the Marshall Plan represented $13 billion (in the value of the time) invested between 1947 and 1952. Once the plan was completed under strict supervision, the economies of all the participating countries had surpassed pre-war levels. In the two following decades, Western Europe achieved a growth and prosperity that was without precedent. Gone were hunger, cold and depression.
Meanwhile, Latin America was neglected by the United States, considered for too long its “backyard.” The United States was only interested in companies which sought to take advantage of Latin American resources. Republican and Democratic governments believed that if they provided support to the vile dictators who swore subservience to the U.S. government, this would count as the approval of their people. It is clear that the situation was not always equal or fair, and there were demonstrations of diverse tone and color. Also, there was no uniform development among the diverse nations. The democracy that the North Americans value so much and wanted to expand globally did not seem to matter in Latin America. The Organization of American States was characterized as more discursive than operational. That is, until shaking fists with fascist, communist or guerrilla demonstrations occurred. President Kennedy launched the Alliance for Progress, which collapsed unnoticed. Today, nothing can be achieved with that Alliance, which was a bit naive. Now a new, updated and powerful Marshall Plan would need to be designed.
The ideal plan would be to extend it to the entire continent, but the current dramatic situation suggests beginning in the Central American Northern Triangle. The three countries that expel children must enact very firm and agreed-upon measures to encourage progress on all of the issues. Of course, firm external control will be essential in order to avoid the consolidated tendency toward corruption and the trap that ruins any initiative. Now there is an excess of international bodies, many of them full of pustules. Thus, there needs to be a thorough evaluation. Also, it is crucial that the plan be thorough in the creation of infrastructure, job creation, encouraging quality education, public health care, and setting standards to stimulate massive investment of capital.
In this manner, it is probable that El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala will leave their awful present situation behind and turn to a path that other countries could follow. It is a dream that could turn into reality if it proceeds with the same rigor and commitment that characterized the original Marshall Plan.
The recent meeting between President Obama and the highest authorities of those three countries that form the so-called Northern Triangle of Central America has been disappointing. They asked for more economic assistance to improve living conditions in those lands and meaningfully curb the desperate exodus. But the economic assistance alone has not produced, nor will it produce, results. In this field, there already exists a powerful experience that should be adapted and updated. This is the Marshall Plan, which many sent to the attic of the forgotten, but which managed nothing less than the reconstruction of Europe after World War II. It was economic assistance and strict supervision.
Let's do a brief review. The program was announced by then Secretary of State George Marshall in early 1947. He said that it was essential to have coordination between the United States and the European countries in order to carry out a successful investment plan. It was not enough to give money; the program should subject the internal economic situation of those countries to an intelligent plan and to rigorous external controls. After six years of bombs and shrapnel, much of Europe had fallen into ruin and not only had 50 million people died, but an unknown number had been disabled, orphaned or driven mad. Toward the end of the war in 1944, there was an awful famine in Holland, which became the prelude to widespread starvation. In that country and in various other countries, they could not resolve the devastation of the agriculture, which had become the object of abandonment and irrational destruction. The lack of food spread like a medieval plague. That situation was aggravated by the harsh winter of 1946 to 1947. On the other hand, the infrastructure of Europe had been decisively destroyed. This destruction included railways, bridges, roads, ports and power plants. The coal shortage caused hundreds of people to die of cold. The high levels of unemployment multiplied the desperation, which led to an increase in strikes, revolts and insecurity. Reinstating the quality of life and well-being prior to the war appeared to be an impossible ambition.
Shortly after General Marshall's announcement, a conference was held in Paris, to which the Soviet Union was invited, although it declined to participate in the initiative lest it be subject to U.S. leadership. Furthermore, the Soviet Union forced its satellite countries to reject the Marshall Plan with the argument that it was an operation of imperialism to colonize Europe. In spite of the smear campaign, many countries accepted the help that the plan offered and reunited in another conference, also in Paris, in September of 1947.
The communist coup in Prague in February 1948 precipitated the adoption of the Marshall Plan by the U.S. Congress. The reticence that until now had prevailed in its chambers, entertained with small-minded lobbying, came to an end with the clear outbreak of something which they did not want to recognize at all: the beginning of the Cold War. In that same year, in the month of April, the Organization for European Economic Cooperation was created in order to hand out and confirm assistance. It is estimated that the Marshall Plan represented $13 billion (in the value of the time) invested between 1947 and 1952. Once the plan was completed under strict supervision, the economies of all the participating countries had surpassed pre-war levels. In the two following decades, Western Europe achieved a growth and prosperity that was without precedent. Gone were hunger, cold and depression.
Meanwhile, Latin America was neglected by the United States, considered for too long its “backyard.” The United States was only interested in companies which sought to take advantage of Latin American resources. Republican and Democratic governments believed that if they provided support to the vile dictators who swore subservience to the U.S. government, this would count as the approval of their people. It is clear that the situation was not always equal or fair, and there were demonstrations of diverse tone and color. Also, there was no uniform development among the diverse nations. The democracy that the North Americans value so much and wanted to expand globally did not seem to matter in Latin America. The Organization of American States was characterized as more discursive than operational. That is, until shaking fists with fascist, communist or guerrilla demonstrations occurred. President Kennedy launched the Alliance for Progress, which collapsed unnoticed. Today, nothing can be achieved with that Alliance, which was a bit naive. Now a new, updated and powerful Marshall Plan would need to be designed.
The ideal plan would be to extend it to the entire continent, but the current dramatic situation suggests beginning in the Central American Northern Triangle. The three countries that expel children must enact very firm and agreed-upon measures to encourage progress on all of the issues. Of course, firm external control will be essential in order to avoid the consolidated tendency toward corruption and the trap that ruins any initiative. Now there is an excess of international bodies, many of them full of pustules. Thus, there needs to be a thorough evaluation. Also, it is crucial that the plan be thorough in the creation of infrastructure, job creation, encouraging quality education, public health care, and setting standards to stimulate massive investment of capital.
In this manner, it is probable that El Salvador, Honduras and Guatemala will leave their awful present situation behind and turn to a path that other countries could follow. It is a dream that could turn into reality if it proceeds with the same rigor and commitment that characterized the original Marshall Plan.