.gif)
The prospects for US/Latin American relations after a new US president takes office next year.
By Michael Shifter
Oxford Analytica, June 12, 2008
LATIN AMERICA/US: With the presidential candidates set and the campaign underway, details about the Latin America policy of Senators Barack Obama and John McCain should become clearer, and key issues in hemispheric policy will feature in the general election campaign -- particularly immigration and trade.
Regardless of who wins, the next US president is committed to closing down the controversial facility at Guantanamo and will probably pursue a more multilateral approach to foreign policy.
Even absent a sharp departure in policy, those steps alone will go a long way towards improving relations with Latin America and the Caribbean.
I LATIN AMERICA/US: Regional relations
SUBJECT: The prospects for US/Latin American relations after a new US president takes office next year.
SIGNIFICANCE: With presidential candidates set and the campaign underway, details about the Latin America policy of Senators Barack Obama and John McCain should become clearer. While foreign policy debates have focused on Iraq and Iran until now, key issues in hemispheric policy will feature in the general election campaign, particularly immigration and trade.
ANALYSIS: With Senators John McCain and Barack Obama now the presumptive Republican and Democratic nominees for the November presidential elections in the United States, their past records and policy positions -- the latter laid out in their separate speeches in Miami in May -- offer clues about how an Obama or McCain administration will relate to Latin America. Though Obama's perspective is the more wide-ranging of the two, both would benefit from a more nuanced understanding of the new political geography in the Americas that has rendered the US role less influential than in the past:
- Cuba. The Miami speeches highlighted a sharp contrast on what has long been a principal source of irritation in regional relations: Cuba. While McCain maintained a hard line and refused to ease any aspect of the embargo, Obama advocated modest reductions on travel and remittances for Cuban-Americans. His gradualist approach sought to appeal to a younger segment of the changing exile community, whereas McCain relied on a tried and true formula for securing Cuban-American votes. Moreover, Obama has agreed to meet Cuban leaders once a clear agenda has been set, leading McCain to attack him as weak on national security issues.
- Venezuela. Similarly, Obama has signaled that, under the right conditions, he would be willing to engage in direct diplomacy with the government of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. While Obama described Chavez in his Miami speech as a "demagogue," McCain has used even harsher rhetoric. McCain's approach would probably represent continuity -- or even become more confrontational, since the interest of the petroleum sector in keeping oil flowing will likely receive less weight than under President George Bush.
- Colombia. Obama and McCain have adopted a comparably hard line on Colombia's security challenges, strongly supportive of the government's efforts to combat drug-fuelled violence. Many were surprised by Obama's firm statement backing Colombia's military raid in pursuit of a FARC rebel camp in Ecuadoran territory on March 1. Like McCain, he also favours continued support of the current version of "Plan Colombia," albeit with greater emphasis on social rather than security assistance and greater conditionality on human rights concerns.
- Trade tribulations. On the trade issue, the two candidates take substantially different positions:
- Although Obama supported the free trade deal with Peru partly because it included abour and environmental provisions, he strongly opposes the pending agreement with Colombia. His stance, in line with the dominant view of the Democratic party, was on display during the primary campaign, when both he and Senator Hillary Clinton promised to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) if elected.
- McCain, by contrast, has enthusiastically backed such agreements and is an unabashed free trade advocate. McCain has also been at the forefront of efforts to reduce US agricultural subsidies, a crucial issue for many Latin Americans who want access to the US market, though he has backed off this issue during the campaign.
- Immigration issues. Of enormous interest to Latin Americans, especially Latinos in the United States, both McCain and Obama support comprehensive immigration reform (see OADB, February 5, 2008, III.). Although their positions are barely distinguishable, McCain has been more identified with this issue, as he sought -- unsuccessfully -- to strike a bipartisan agreement last year.
This was in defiance of much of his party, which exhibits some anti-immigration tendencies. As part of his campaign strategy, McCain is hoping this issue will help him cut into the Democratic party's decided advantage among Latinos, who in the primaries tended to prefer Clinton over Obama.
Domestic constraints. The prospects for a significant shift in US policy towards Latin America will be conditioned by formidable domestic political constraints:
- Only gradual, modest reforms of immigration legislationmight be feasible, rather than a sweeping overhaul, especially in view of the economic downturn and growing anxiety in the United States.
- Progress on trade will also be difficult, given resistance within the Democratic party and even parts of the Republican party.
- Any reduction in agricultural subsidies will be fiercely opposed by strong political interests.
Taken together, US economic realities will necessarily limit any potential advances in forging a more constructive Latin American policy.
Regional expectations. After years of disappointment, Latin Americans have few expectations for dramatic change, recognising that the next US administration will be dealing with more urgent foreign policy priorities in Iraq, the Middle East and elsewhere. They do not expect -- or want -- a grand US initiative like the Alliance for Progress. Still, they are generally hoping for some changes, at least on the margins.
They are looking for a less patronising posture in Washington and a more sophisticated understanding of the profound transformations that have taken place in the region in recent years.
Although McCain's positions on some key issues such as trade may be more in line with some Latin American opinion, Obama seems better placed than McCain to adopt a more respectful tone and genuinely consultative approach towards the region. In addition, Obama's background -- the product of a racially mixed marriage and son of a Kenyan immigrant -- and relative youth suggest open-mindedness and offer greater possibilities for comprehending and appreciating the impact of globalisation in regions like Latin America. Moreover, Obama can make a more credible claim than McCain that his government would mark a sharp change from current US foreign policy, making him the preferred candidate in much of the region:
- Rejection of the war in Iraq and the treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib is reflected in polls that universally reveal rising anti-US sentiment in the region, with a particular dislike for Bush.
- Obama's criticism of the current Iraq policy -- in contrast to McCain's position -- is widely shared in Latin America and has automatically earned him considerable goodwill.
- Obama would be more likely at least to change the tone and style of the Bush administration, which would be welcomed in a region seeking a fresh approach.
Foreign policy focus. Before November's election, the foreign policy teams of both campaigns will likely become better defined, and the names that emerge as the principal advisers on Latin America will offer better insight into the potential direction of regional policy. To date, the McCain campaign has relied on former Bush administration officials, whereas Obama's Latin America team has featured an eclectic mix of younger regional specialists, established academics and some former Foreign Service Officers from the Clinton administration.
CONCLUSION: Obama's message of 'change' appeals to a region suffering from 'Bush fatigue' after eight years, but it is unclear how much leeway he will have to make substantial modifications in key US policies. Regardless of who wins, the next US president is committed to closing down the controversial facility at Guantanamo and will probably pursue a more multilateral approach to foreign policy. Even absent a sharp departure in policy, those steps alone will go a long way towards improving relations with Latin America and the Caribbean.
