Colombian Discomfort over Obama’s Speech

A few years back, the fact that a U.S. president could organize a tour of South America and not visit Colombia would sound almost unthinkable. But in the era of Barack Obama, everything indicates, things are different.

In his State of the Union speech last Tuesday, Obama announced a tour of Latin America — Brazil, Chile and El Salvador — but did not include their so-called “best friend in the region.”

This is despite the new occupant in the Presidential Palace, without the same baggage as his predecessor, Alvaro Uribe Velez.

As National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer told El Tiempo, omitting Colombia from the trip does not indicate that the relationship with Colombia is not of great importance, as demonstrated at the September meeting between Obama and President Juan Manuel Santos in New York.

Officials in the Obama administration were so conscious that the decision could be seen as a snub that they informed Ambassador Gabriel Silva personally a few hours before the speech — something that wasn’t done with other countries in the region.

Colombian Vice President Angelino Garzon, who is in Washington, tried to downplay the issue by saying that presidents only visit three countries on trips such as these, and that there was nothing to be upset about by the failure to include Colombia.

What’s more, White House officials explained to El Tiempo that Obama is very interested in visiting Colombia and will possibly attend the sixth Summit of the Americas, which will be held in April 2012 in Cartagena.

In other words, if Obama is planning on coming next year, why come now? But there may be a deeper reason: a free trade agreement (FTA).

“The truth is that the FTA is very complex, and Obama can’t go to Colombia and respond to a question to which he has no answer,” says Mauricio Cardenas, director of the Latin America Initiative at the Brookings Institute.*

For Cardenas, however, the U.S. has remained in diplomatic debt and will probably soon invite President Santos to the White House.

That said, the expert added that the central reason for this regional trip is Brazil. The U.S. seeks to emphasize the change in tone facing Washington from President Dilma Rouseff and the great importance of Brazil in U.S. foreign policy.

Disappointed

In his speech Tuesday, Obama also clarified the destiny of the FTA. Republicans and some Democrats showed disappointment at his words, which, to some, are a death sentence for free trade agreements in 2011.

“Our free trade agreements with Colombia and Panama were signed more than three and a half years ago, so it’s extremely disappointing the president did not lay out a timeline for submitting them to Congress. The delay has been costly for our ranchers, farmers and businesses, who are losing business to competitors from countries that have negotiated their own trade agreements with these fast-growing markets,” said Sen. Max Baucus, the highest-ranking Democrat on the Finance Committee. Baucus, a member of Obama’s party, plans to visit Colombia in February.

For Cardenas, Obama’s words in the State of the Union make it clear that the White House is not ready to send the Colombia FTA to Congress and will bury the Republican hope that the three pending agreements of the Bush era — with South Korea, Panama and Colombia — could be considered simultaneously.

“It is clear that nothing will pass this spring, if at all in 2011,” concludes the analyst.*

*Editor’s Note: These quotes, accurately translated, could not be verified.