Home › Features › Essays › The U.S. and Latin America: A Lost Decade?

The U.S. and Latin America: A Lost Decade?

By Margaret Daly Hayes
America and the World 1988
Article Summary and Author Biography

Covers US foreign policy in Latin America during 1988, discussing (1) Nicaragua (2) Panama and the Noriega problem (3) drug trafficking (4) the progress towards democracy (5) the debt crisis. Concludes that future US policy will have to centre around Mexico and the Caribbean basin, but that this should not obscure America's long-term interest in a steadily-improving economic situation throughout Latin America.

Margaret Daly Hayes is a political scientist and External Relations Advisor at the Inter-American Development Bank in Washington. She is the author of Latin America and the U.S. National Interest. The views presented in this article are personal and should not be construed as representing opinions of the bank.

Print Email
Login or Register to leave a comment.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.

The 1980s have been difficult years for the countries of Latin America. They have seemed to take one step forward and two steps back on many fronts. The return of democracy to the region has been heartening, but governance has proved difficult. Economically, many call this the lost decade for Latin America. U.S. policy has been helpful in some respects, but notably frustrated, and frustrating, in others. The next few years will be particularly challenging if Latin Americans are to change the pattern of the past.

Fortune looked favorably on Latin America in the 1960s and 1970s, then turned her back in this decade. Economic growth rates averaged six percent for the region in the 1970s but have been minimal in the 1980s, while populations have continued to increase. In 1988 Latin America's gross product grew by less than one percent, and per capita income, down one-and-a-half percent, has shrunk to 1970s levels. Investment is down as well, from 25 percent of regional product a decade ago to only 16 percent in 1987. Inflation is out of control in economies as varied as Brazil, Peru and Nicaragua. Foreign debt stands at $420 billion, compared with less than $100 billion in 1980, and debt service requires $33 billion per year-nearly one-third of the region's export earnings.

As for politics, nearly all Latin American countries replaced military governments with elected civilian governments in this decade. Chile, Haiti, Panama and Paraguay remain the exceptions, and the outlook for democracy in some is uncertain. Even those countries which returned to civilian rule are beset by problems. Balancing social and political aspirations against severely constrained economic realities has proved frustrating. The task of forging streamlined, more efficient and competitive states out of complacent bureaucracies has been daunting. The hoped-for results of unpopular policies seem further off than ever in many countries.

In 1988, the final year of the Reagan Administration, the United States continued with policies of past years. There were few new initiatives because this was an election year in the United States as well as several Latin American countries. The record of U.S. policy accomplishments was mixed, with some successes and several clear demonstrations of the limits of U.S. power and influence.

This is a premium article

You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.

Related

Essay, Winter 1988
Latin America: The President's Agenda
Sol M. Linowitz

Recent and forthcoming elections in key Latin American countries come at a time when US relations with many states in the region are particularly uncertain. Discusses six areas which should be addressed by policy-makers (1) the debt crisis (2) the need for co-operation between the USA, Europe, Canada and Latin American countries in ending Central America's wars (3) support of democratic institutions (4) the drug problem (5) the need to rebuild inter-American institutions (6) relations with Mexico and Panama. Concludes that too much attention has been devoted to Nicaragua at the expense of greater concerns, although straightforward solutions are unlikely. Former US ambassador to the Organization of American States, and co-negotiator of the Panama Canal treaties. A substantial criticism of Reagan's policy in Central and South America, and interesting for its view of both regions as one.

Read
Essay, Special 1985
Threat and Opportunity in the Americas
Abraham F. Lowenthal

Political leaders in Washington and in Latin America began 1985 with sharply different perspectives. The Reagan Administration was ostentatiously pleased with the state of the western hemisphere. It was gratified by Latin America's steady turn toward democracy, which it thought would foster more cordial inter-American relations. The U.S. government was confident that Latin America's debt crisis was easing, at least for the major countries, and that the debt management strategy employed since 1982 had proved largely successful. Washington was heartened that most Latin American countries were beginning to implement economic policies that were endorsed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), policies designed to cut public sector deficits and generate trade surpluses so the countries could service their debts.

Read
Essay, Special 1981
Latin America: Change or Continuity?
Paul E. Sigmund

The election of Ronald Reagan in November 1980 may not have actually led to victory parties in the capitals of the more conservative military regimes of Latin America, but it seemed clearly to indicate that there would be a significant change in U.S. policy toward that area. While Jimmy Carter's Latin American policy was not a central issue in the 1980 campaign, it appeared from statements by Reagan's advisers and from the conservative "think tanks" that prepared policy papers during the transition period, that there was likely to be a shift in Latin American policy as dramatic as the one that marked the early days of the Carter Administration--in an exactly opposite direction. While the furtherance of human rights would not be completely abandoned as an objective of U.S. policy (Roger Fontaine, one of Reagan's Latin American advisers, had told a Chilean audience in September that "a concern for human rights did not begin with the Carter administration nor will it end with it"), it was to receive a much lower priority; and with friendly governments it was to be promoted through "quiet diplomacy" behind the scenes rather than through public denunciations and aid cutoffs.

Read