With some interesting remarks about Brazil at the end of the article.
Latin America: Toward true independence or regional hegemony? PDF Print E-mail
By Eduardo Dimas Read Spanish Version
During his two-day visit to Mexico last week, President Rafael Correa of Ecuador and his Mexican counterpart, Felipe Calderón, spoke out in favor of a new Latin American organization "that can be effective in the solution of conflicts."
As several news agencies point out, that joint statement was made some weeks after the diplomatic crisis between Ecuador and Colombia, after the murder of the commander of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), Raúl Reyes, and 24 other persons, and the violation of Ecuadorean sovereignty by the Colombian Army.
The Reuters news agency notes that, according to Correa, "the new OAS" (Organization of American States) should have a defense council for the solution of that type of conflict. It should also exclude countries that have nothing to do with the region -- the United States and Canada -- and include others that are alienated today, such as Cuba.
In a joint message with President Calderón, Correa referred to an "organization of Latin American states that rejects tutelage <...> and includes Latin American countries that have been absurdly excluded from international forums."
For his part, Calderón said that "We have agreed <...> on the idea of pushing the fraternal countries that compose Latin America toward a formal organization. <...> We agree with the purpose of fostering a greater integration, a greater unity among all the Latin American peoples, without any distinctions."
For the Ecuadorean president to have made these statements is absolutely logical, because he has been one of the leading proponents of the process of Latin American integration, of independence, along with the presidents of Venezuela, Brazil and Bolivia.
However, those statements do not coincide in the slightest with the neoliberal and pro-United States stance of the Mexican president, who has honored the North American Free Trade Agreement he inherited from his predecessors and now intends to privatize Mexican Petroleum S.A., something forbidden by his country's Constitution.
Perhaps Calderón thinks that this is only a new attempt at independence from the United States, an effort without major consequences, and that supporting it does not mean a commitment. Maybe not. It is known that the new Mexican government is trying to move closer to the rest of Latin America, to break the isolation into which it was plunged by the slavish policies of Vicente Fox.
The truth is that the idea to create an Organization of Latin American States and a Regional Defense Council without the participation of the United States came from several of the most important countries in the region. Mexico is an important country but is not among the concept's promoters.
The idea, we should remember, is not new. On other occasions, it was proposed by this or that president but was not supported by the other governments. At this instant, it has a greater chance to become reality, because of the correlation of forces existing in Latin America and the weakness -- temporary or definitive -- of the United States.
After the summit of the Rio Group, in early March in the Dominican Republic, the idea picked up momentum. Earlier, in late February, the Brazilian government had announced its intention to create "a South American military union" that was supported by Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay and Venezuela -- not by the United States, of course.
The Rio Group summit also demonstrated that it is better prepared than the OAS to peacefully solve the conflicts that may arise between nations in the region, such as the rift between Ecuador and Colombia, after the former's sovereignty was violated by the latter.
The Santo Domingo summit managed to prevent a major confrontation between Ecuador, Venezuela and Colombia, while simultaneously ratifying the principle of inviolable borders, or national sovereignty, in contrast with the United States, which aspired to turn Colombia into the Israel of Latin America.
Later, at the OAS meeting in late March, the OAS had no choice but to accept the accord of the Rio Group summit, despite the opposition of the governments of the United States and Colombia, as well as the reservations of the Mexican delegation.
If, as a result of the U.S. policy, the OAS became ineffectual, why not create an organization of Latin American states without the participation of the United States and Canada? The foundations have already been laid, in the form of the Rio Group.
One element in favor of the creation of an Organization of Latin American States (OLAS) and a Latin American Defense Council (LADC) is the existence of several revolutionary governments (Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua) and nationalist governments (Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay) that, each in its own fashion, have opposed the hegemonic policies of the United States.
Another favorable element is the relative weakness of the United States, mired in a deep economic recession, and bogged down in Iraq and Afghanistan, with the government of George W. Bush in its lowest indices of support and popular acceptance.
In an article published in Rebellion, under the headline "Hegemony questioned," journalist Fernando López D'Alessandro states that:
"On March 21, the Mexican daily La Jornada reported that the meeting between Brazilian Defense Minister Nelson Jobim and U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates ended in a historical manner. Jobim told Gates about the South American defense initiative and when Gates asked him 'What can we do?', Jobim answered: 'Stay out of it. It's something South America is doing.'"
To make matters worse, during a brief press conference, Jobim said: "I made it very clear that the initiative is ours," and added that the basic objective is for South America to have a forum "where it can speak out loudly," because "the continent needs to think big." Such a position would have been unthinkable years ago.
López adds that Lula later delivered what may have been the hardest slap to the White House.
"On March 27, Bush was very angry at Lula, as the Brazilian president learned from British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. And with reason. One day earlier, Lula and Bush had spoken on the phone about the crisis of high-risk mortgages and Lula (in his own words) paternally counseled: 'I told Bush: This is the problem, son. We went through 26 years without growing. Now you come to interfere? Fix your own crisis.'"
It is hard to imagine that, until recently, any Latin American president (except for the well-known cases) would dare to treat the president of the United States that way, even if Bush is a fool. To López D'Alessandro, that's a sign that things "are changing more rapidly than we expected."
He may be right. As I have said in the past, several factors are coming together to speed up the changes. However, I think it's still too early to declare victory. The offensive of the empire and the Latin American oligarchies is strong and could create serious problems in several countries of Latin America. Besides, there are several governments that remain the empire's unconditional allies.
Some point, not without reason, to the possibility of civil war in Bolivia, in the event the department of Santa Cruz declares autonomy -- with White House support -- next May. In fact, the Santa Cruz separatists are already announcing the move. The situation would be worse still if it gain the support of the departments that form the so-called Half Moon: Pando, Tarija and Beni.
It is not possible to rule out new actions by the oligarchy in Ecuador and Venezuela, with White House support. The recent farmers strike in Argentina, promoted by the agro-exporting oligarchy, is a classical operation to create problems for the government of Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, whose nationalistic policy does not please the United States government.
Brazil seems to be the only government that maintains cordial relations with all social classes in the country, except with the landless peasants and the workers, whose votes enabled Lula to win the election.
The oligarchy is pleased with the production of biofuels; the industry will get a colossal investment of $147 billion. Commerce has expanded; last year, Brazil's exports totaled more than $137 billion. GDP growth was 5 percent. As if that weren't enough, Petrobras located large oil fields.
Brazil is the world's 10th-largest economic power and one of the four emerging nations with the greatest chances to occupy a hegemonic place in the world's political context, next to Russia, India and China. Economists and politologists use the acronym BRIC to refer to them.
According to them, these nations are called to rule the destiny of the planet before the end of the 21st Century. It would be a polycentric hegemony, that is, with four poles of world power.
Naturally, Brazil would lead Latin America, in competition with the United States and Canada. On the basis of the statements of Defense Secretary Jobim and Lula, we could think that the competition has already begun.
One thing we must take into account when analyzing any aspect of Brazil's policy: that country has the most powerful bourgeoisie in Latin American, and the most nationalistic. And it aspires to occupy a leading role on the international arena. The Brazilians have both resources and ability.
I only remind you of this background because Brazil, with its Latin Americanist policy, could be creating the conditions for its future hegemony over the region. An Organization of Latin American States and a Latin American Defense Council could be the tools to end (or at least reduce) U.S. domination, but could also serve to prepare another form of domination. I'm not saying it will. All I do is think while I write.
http://progreso-weekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=430&Itemid=1http://snipurl.com/24r2q
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
