Entrevista a dos expertos en relaciones internacionales, a cada lado de Río Grande, sobre el próximo viaje del presidente estadounidense, Barack Obama, a Brasil, Chile y El Salvador. El especialista argentino Roberto Russell y Sebastián Royo, profesor en la Universidad de Suffolk en Boston, dan las claves de la actual relación entre EE UU y América Latina y el posible futuro de la región.
Foreign Policy: When Obama came to the White House many thought that Latin America would recover the lost place on the agenda of U.S. foreign policy. What has changed in U.S. relations with its southern neighbors in the past two years?
Sebastián Royo: Unfortunately, little has changed in the relationship between Latin America and the U.S.. Washington's policy toward the region is marked by grandiose and vacuous homilies and interest in "promoting the social and economic opportunities for all" that are not accompanied or resources, or actions to achieve them. The country is semi-paralyzed by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and continues to ignore, largely, its strategic interests in the area.
U.S. still considers it as its backyard and pays relatively little attention. With the exception of illegal immigration and the fight against drug trafficking, there is little high on the agenda with these countries. The relationship with one of his closest allies in the region, Colombia, has been impaired by the delay in approving the bilateral free trade between two countries, which remains stalled in Congress. Former Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula de Silva, was regarded with admiration and concern, and its relations with Iran were sources of tension with the White House. It is still early to assess how it will change the relationship with Dilma Rousseff, but as it more pragmatically, there may be more meeting points on issues such as presenting a common front against China's currency appreciation.
Roberto Russell: Who certainly thought so were mistaken. In the case of Barack Obama's expectations of changes in policy toward the region were increased more than other times because it was the first black president, being an intellectual, for his guidance and pragmatic centrist and critical view, so dominant, what is done in international relations by his predecessor, not only to Latin America, but in general. However, once again the expectations were frustrated.
interesting and promising the Obama speech at the summit in Trinidad and Tobago in 2009, proved to have little or no substance. A well-known pattern re-occur: internal constraints and external priorities, emphasized in this period by the burden of domestic financial crisis, which alienated the neighbors to the south of the radar of the President and the Department of State. Also nothing bad happened in the region that might take away the dream to the White House.
Although there has been a change of style, as Basically, the U.S. position has retained its paternalistic tone and shown a poor understanding of the changes that have occurred in much of Latin American and its new place in the world. Nevertheless, it seems that something may be changing in the perception of government on how Obama must be linked to these countries. What I am saying has nothing to do with the old cliché of priority or not the region for Washington, not with renewed expectations of changes.
I think there is a very clear vision of two things. First, recognition of the growing importance of links with many countries in the area, and much of America America and what she has or it happens, good and bad, increasingly influences the daily lives of millions of Americans. Second, the feeling that America can not go against your neighbor distracted showing greater autonomy in handling external relations and attracts strong interest from other extra-hemispheric actors. Moreover, this occurs in a context in which the relative importance of the Obama for some South American States will inevitably lower.
I think this is the reading that the White House inter-American relations and their future, and what milestones mark next trip. The president's political capital is not intact but remains significant. If Washington does things well find open ears in most of Latin America to discuss ways to "more productive cooperation." I would add, from the south, forms "least asymmetric" of cooperation.
Foreign Policy: On your next trip Obama has chosen Brazil, Chile and El Salvador. What makes this reading selection?
Sebastián Royo: The inclusion of Chile and Brazil seems clear by the economic and political importance of these countries in the area. U.S. wants to strengthen their relationship with both and have become benchmarks for the region. The case of El Salvador is interesting to have, for the first time since the democratic transition, a left-wing government in the country. This decision is motivated by the desire to support a moderate in a state where it is producing a shift to the left.
At the same time, the highlight is the absence of Colombia (since the other country not included on the agenda is Mexico, and Mexican president is because the U.S. has just a few days) and the reason seems clear: it would humiliating to the Colombian president, Juan Manuel Santos, Bogota Obama receive without having signed the free trade agreement. Moreover, the U.S. administration recently cut $ 350 million (EUR 250 million) aid to the country. Moreover, after the close links with the previous leader, Alvaro Uribe, is a little fatigue from Bogota to Washington (one of the cables published by Wikileaks Colombian presidential palace described as "a branch of the U.S. embassy). Santos is being much more independent and even has rebuilt his relationship with Hugo Chávez. Robert Russell
: The selection is a natural consequence of what I have already explained. Simplifying things would you have chosen Brazil for what it's like country and its promise as a rising regional power with global, Chile to be a model that Washington wants to be imitated and El Salvador to be seen as a key policy to be submitted to Central America, linked to the fight against poverty, organized crime and drug trafficking.
relationship with Brazil, as is well known, has been or will be in a bed of roses. There is an objective element that makes things to be as follows: the loss of U.S. relative power in South America and Brazil progressive increase in the subregion. This transition of power long ago that the link involves a time of conflict and cooperative aspects. Obama's visit to Brazil, you just change of Government, seeks to emphasize and renew the bilateral cooperation in a wide range of topics, especially in science and technology, energy, bilateral trade and environmental protection. You may also include the establishment of bilateral consultation forms wider and permanent aimed at better understanding the position of the other, enhance mutual understanding and prevent failure of perception. A key point to consider when thinking about the future of this relationship is that Brazil will continue to differentiate itself from the United States on many issues, both regional and global, but also approached him, since Washington needs the support of their aspirations to play a more active role in politics and economics international. Brazil will be the place chosen by Obama to refer to the alignment of its foreign policy towards Latin America, considering a long-term horizon, the same style he gave in Berlin and Cairo in order to renew the bonds of United States Europe and Arab nations, respectively.
stop in Chile has another character, is the recognition of a country that from the perspective of the White House is an example for the region in political, economic and social. The other side of the populist experiences that occur in some countries. Moreover, the choice of El Salvador is easy to understand. This is a country friend, who has proven to be an ally of Washington on important issues, living a democratic process interesting since the signing of the Peace Accords of 1992 and has a large community of citizens living on American soil. Sung is the place to launch an American outreach initiative aimed at combating poverty and especially against organized crime. This will be the focus of the visit.
Foreign Policy: While the United States seemed to lose interest in the region and the European Union kept their distance, the role of China has been growing unchecked. Is it going to turn the Pacific into the economic hub and most important political Latin America?
Sebastián Royo: No doubt. In the U.S. it is not already feeling the impact and penetration of China in the region and so far is doing little to counter it.
The Asian giant has become a key trading partner for Latin America and in many cases, already the largest importer. The demand for food and raw materials from China are having a significant impact on these countries that are moving from production to take advantage of high demand in Beijing. In places like Argentina, the development of soybean has become one of the main exports and the replacing other traditional grains.
This is the first global crisis in which the raw material prices have not fallen and the rationale has been the demand from China. This has greatly benefited the countries of the region are growing at a phenomenal pace.
This economic power is beginning to translate into political influence. There are Chinese delegations traveling through the area almost every week. Beijing Colombia has recently proposed to build a rail system would cost U.S. $ 7,600 million to cross the country and compete with the Panama Canal and President Santos is negotiating with a consortium of Chinese and European investors building a city, designed by architect Ricardo Bofill, to house 250,000 people south of Cartagena, which include an industrial park to produce and export goods from neighboring states.
Countries in the region are in a strategic position of much greater strength in its relations with the U.S. to become less dependent on its northern neighbor and have commercial alternatives. Obama's trip has to be interpreted also from that key. Robert Russell
: In fact, the U.S. has been quite isolated in the region and the visit has something to recover lost territory and time. Although, nothing will be as before. There extra-regional actors now have more weight and presence in Latin America and, as I said, many countries in the region are more autonomous and develop links of all kinds with the rest of the world. The game has changed and everyone has to accommodate this new situation, including, of course, Washington. The Pacific is increasingly important, especially in economic matters, but not the same for the entire region. It's important for most South American countries like Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Peru. However, the White House will remain for long the economic and political hub of greater significance for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean.
-
Foreign Policy: When Obama came to the White House many thought that Latin America would recover the lost place on the agenda of U.S. foreign policy. What has changed in U.S. relations with its southern neighbors in the past two years?
Sebastián Royo: Unfortunately, little has changed in the relationship between Latin America and the U.S.. Washington's policy toward the region is marked by grandiose and vacuous homilies and interest in "promoting the social and economic opportunities for all" that are not accompanied or resources, or actions to achieve them. The country is semi-paralyzed by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and continues to ignore, largely, its strategic interests in the area.
U.S. still considers it as its backyard and pays relatively little attention. With the exception of illegal immigration and the fight against drug trafficking, there is little high on the agenda with these countries. The relationship with one of his closest allies in the region, Colombia, has been impaired by the delay in approving the bilateral free trade between two countries, which remains stalled in Congress. Former Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula de Silva, was regarded with admiration and concern, and its relations with Iran were sources of tension with the White House. It is still early to assess how it will change the relationship with Dilma Rousseff, but as it more pragmatically, there may be more meeting points on issues such as presenting a common front against China's currency appreciation.
Roberto Russell: Who certainly thought so were mistaken. In the case of Barack Obama's expectations of changes in policy toward the region were increased more than other times because it was the first black president, being an intellectual, for his guidance and pragmatic centrist and critical view, so dominant, what is done in international relations by his predecessor, not only to Latin America, but in general. However, once again the expectations were frustrated.
interesting and promising the Obama speech at the summit in Trinidad and Tobago in 2009, proved to have little or no substance. A well-known pattern re-occur: internal constraints and external priorities, emphasized in this period by the burden of domestic financial crisis, which alienated the neighbors to the south of the radar of the President and the Department of State. Also nothing bad happened in the region that might take away the dream to the White House.
Although there has been a change of style, as Basically, the U.S. position has retained its paternalistic tone and shown a poor understanding of the changes that have occurred in much of Latin American and its new place in the world. Nevertheless, it seems that something may be changing in the perception of government on how Obama must be linked to these countries. What I am saying has nothing to do with the old cliché of priority or not the region for Washington, not with renewed expectations of changes.
I think there is a very clear vision of two things. First, recognition of the growing importance of links with many countries in the area, and much of America America and what she has or it happens, good and bad, increasingly influences the daily lives of millions of Americans. Second, the feeling that America can not go against your neighbor distracted showing greater autonomy in handling external relations and attracts strong interest from other extra-hemispheric actors. Moreover, this occurs in a context in which the relative importance of the Obama for some South American States will inevitably lower.
I think this is the reading that the White House inter-American relations and their future, and what milestones mark next trip. The president's political capital is not intact but remains significant. If Washington does things well find open ears in most of Latin America to discuss ways to "more productive cooperation." I would add, from the south, forms "least asymmetric" of cooperation.
Foreign Policy: On your next trip Obama has chosen Brazil, Chile and El Salvador. What makes this reading selection?
Sebastián Royo: The inclusion of Chile and Brazil seems clear by the economic and political importance of these countries in the area. U.S. wants to strengthen their relationship with both and have become benchmarks for the region. The case of El Salvador is interesting to have, for the first time since the democratic transition, a left-wing government in the country. This decision is motivated by the desire to support a moderate in a state where it is producing a shift to the left.
At the same time, the highlight is the absence of Colombia (since the other country not included on the agenda is Mexico, and Mexican president is because the U.S. has just a few days) and the reason seems clear: it would humiliating to the Colombian president, Juan Manuel Santos, Bogota Obama receive without having signed the free trade agreement. Moreover, the U.S. administration recently cut $ 350 million (EUR 250 million) aid to the country. Moreover, after the close links with the previous leader, Alvaro Uribe, is a little fatigue from Bogota to Washington (one of the cables published by Wikileaks Colombian presidential palace described as "a branch of the U.S. embassy). Santos is being much more independent and even has rebuilt his relationship with Hugo Chávez. Robert Russell
: The selection is a natural consequence of what I have already explained. Simplifying things would you have chosen Brazil for what it's like country and its promise as a rising regional power with global, Chile to be a model that Washington wants to be imitated and El Salvador to be seen as a key policy to be submitted to Central America, linked to the fight against poverty, organized crime and drug trafficking.
relationship with Brazil, as is well known, has been or will be in a bed of roses. There is an objective element that makes things to be as follows: the loss of U.S. relative power in South America and Brazil progressive increase in the subregion. This transition of power long ago that the link involves a time of conflict and cooperative aspects. Obama's visit to Brazil, you just change of Government, seeks to emphasize and renew the bilateral cooperation in a wide range of topics, especially in science and technology, energy, bilateral trade and environmental protection. You may also include the establishment of bilateral consultation forms wider and permanent aimed at better understanding the position of the other, enhance mutual understanding and prevent failure of perception. A key point to consider when thinking about the future of this relationship is that Brazil will continue to differentiate itself from the United States on many issues, both regional and global, but also approached him, since Washington needs the support of their aspirations to play a more active role in politics and economics international. Brazil will be the place chosen by Obama to refer to the alignment of its foreign policy towards Latin America, considering a long-term horizon, the same style he gave in Berlin and Cairo in order to renew the bonds of United States Europe and Arab nations, respectively.
stop in Chile has another character, is the recognition of a country that from the perspective of the White House is an example for the region in political, economic and social. The other side of the populist experiences that occur in some countries. Moreover, the choice of El Salvador is easy to understand. This is a country friend, who has proven to be an ally of Washington on important issues, living a democratic process interesting since the signing of the Peace Accords of 1992 and has a large community of citizens living on American soil. Sung is the place to launch an American outreach initiative aimed at combating poverty and especially against organized crime. This will be the focus of the visit.
Foreign Policy: While the United States seemed to lose interest in the region and the European Union kept their distance, the role of China has been growing unchecked. Is it going to turn the Pacific into the economic hub and most important political Latin America?
Sebastián Royo: No doubt. In the U.S. it is not already feeling the impact and penetration of China in the region and so far is doing little to counter it.
The Asian giant has become a key trading partner for Latin America and in many cases, already the largest importer. The demand for food and raw materials from China are having a significant impact on these countries that are moving from production to take advantage of high demand in Beijing. In places like Argentina, the development of soybean has become one of the main exports and the replacing other traditional grains.
This is the first global crisis in which the raw material prices have not fallen and the rationale has been the demand from China. This has greatly benefited the countries of the region are growing at a phenomenal pace.
This economic power is beginning to translate into political influence. There are Chinese delegations traveling through the area almost every week. Beijing Colombia has recently proposed to build a rail system would cost U.S. $ 7,600 million to cross the country and compete with the Panama Canal and President Santos is negotiating with a consortium of Chinese and European investors building a city, designed by architect Ricardo Bofill, to house 250,000 people south of Cartagena, which include an industrial park to produce and export goods from neighboring states.
Countries in the region are in a strategic position of much greater strength in its relations with the U.S. to become less dependent on its northern neighbor and have commercial alternatives. Obama's trip has to be interpreted also from that key. Robert Russell
: In fact, the U.S. has been quite isolated in the region and the visit has something to recover lost territory and time. Although, nothing will be as before. There extra-regional actors now have more weight and presence in Latin America and, as I said, many countries in the region are more autonomous and develop links of all kinds with the rest of the world. The game has changed and everyone has to accommodate this new situation, including, of course, Washington. The Pacific is increasingly important, especially in economic matters, but not the same for the entire region. It's important for most South American countries like Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Peru. However, the White House will remain for long the economic and political hub of greater significance for Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean.
-
0 comments:
Post a Comment