Different Priorities between the United States and Argentina

The U.S. is the world’s greatest power, although it is not nearly the superpower that emerged after the dissolution of the USSR. It compromises approximately 22 percent of the global GDP, while holding 44 percent of defense spending.

Argentina, by contrast, is a moderately emerging country, as are Pakistan and Indonesia in Asia; Turkey, Iran and Saudi Arabia between the Near and Middle East; South Africa, Nigeria and Egypt in Africa; Mexico and Colombia in Latin America; and Australia in Oceania.

In the last decade, either with Bush or Obama, the priority in Washington’s eyes toward Argentina has been on strategic issues, whereas Buenos Aires has viewed the U.S. in more of an economic light, whether it be financially or commercially.

Of the 42 bilateral treaties signed between 2000 and 2010 between the two countries, 20 have focused on defense and security issues and only one has focused on economic and financial relevance. Between these extremes there are six that emphasize space and nuclear issues, a new area in the bilateral relationship that seems to have a similar priority.

Beyond what has been discussed in the meeting between Cristina and Obama, it is clear that today, for the U.S., that Iran is the priority, with the current Israeli president — to moderate his government — saying publicly that an attack on Iran is likely and that there is a need to involve other countries in it.

Meanwhile, regarding Argentina’s priorities, the country is increasing its access to the U.S. market, which continues being the first in the world; at the same time, it is changing the vote against the granting of loans for the country in international financial institutions.

It all boils down to the fact that the agenda between the first world power and an emerging medium do not have similar viewpoints on priorities, beyond mutual desires for world peace and economic growth.

In times when ALBA countries, headed by Cuba and Venezuela, prepare to support Iran in confronting Israel and the U.S., and with Brazil possibly not supporting a preemptive strike, coinciding thereunto with China, Russia and certainly India, and with Argentina being the only country that has a cause against Iranian officials for terrorism, the relationship between Tehran and Buenos Aires is an important aspect for Washington.

In turn, the Argentinian government is faced with currency difficulties; the Central Bank, just like other banks, continues losing dollars, despite increased controls. Receiving signals of financial support from Washington may have a concrete effect on reducing doubts and uncertainties that feed the so-called capital flight.

For Argentina, continuing to carry out programs with NASA that allow access to high levels of technology — which in turn enhance national scientific knowledge — and gaining U.S. support for our country in nonproliferation issues allow a possibility of generating a relatively similar realm of priority.

The meeting between Cristina and Obama opens up an opportunity in a time when the European crisis could globalize and the conflict in the Middle East could escalate if, finally, a preemptive strike is carried out against Iran. Both governments should now take the responsibility of going head-on with these conflicts.