Now that the 'obsessions' of the Reagan era can be laid to rest, it is time for the USA to reformulate the premisses and goals of its Latin American policy, and to develop a 'positive agenda' which moves beyond the calculations of US domestic political interests.
Abraham F. Lowenthal is Professor of International Relations at the University of Southern California and Executive Director of the Inter-American Dialogue. His most recent book is Partners in Conflict: The United States and Latin America in the 1990s.
Almost 500 years after Christopher Columbus found the New World, nearly sixty years after Franklin D. Roosevelt's Good Neighbor Policy, and some thirty years since John F. Kennedy proclaimed the Alliance for Progress, George Bush in 1990 appears to be rediscovering Latin America.
Late in June the president announced an economic initiative-affecting debt, trade and investment-that could signal a fundamental U.S. policy decision of great potential significance: to build strong western hemisphere partnerships for the 1990s. The medium-term future of inter-American relations may well be shaped in the coming months as the president and his administration define in practice how they understand Latin America's importance to the United States in a rapidly changing world.
President Bush came to office at a moment of opportunity in the western hemisphere. After nearly a decade of sharp tensions between Latin America and the United States-and of deep divisions within this country over Latin American policy-a broad consensus was beginning to emerge by the end of 1988 on the immediate steps needed to reverse the deterioration of inter-American relations.
-It was widely accepted that Latin America's massive debt-service burden of some $400 billion had become unsustainable, and that substantial debt relief would be needed to release the region from an excruciating economic trap that might otherwise produce dire social and political consequences.
-It was increasingly recognized that burgeoning drug trafficking from Latin America to the United States was becoming an urgent problem, eclipsing traditional "national security" issues, and that the impulse to export primary responsibility for the problem to the producing and trafficking countries in Latin America was ineffective and counterproductive.
-It was broadly understood that Latin America's democratic openings during the 1980s were extremely fragile. Incumbent governments were being rejected in every election, sometimes by humiliating margins; labor violence was mounting in many countries; insurgent movements were gaining strength in a few; the narcotics network was eroding state authority in some nations; and armies throughout the region were restive.
This is a premium article
You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
In any analysis of United States policy in Latin America, the first question which should be considered is: What priority is attached to Latin America in the whole spectrum of our foreign-policy considerations? Once the relative importance or unimportance of hemispheric problems is established, one can then move on to consider the question of basic U.S. policy in Latin America. Having delineated the fundamental lines of policy, one can consider finally the effective means of implementing it. On these three questions I shall focus my discussion.
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.
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.
