The Challenge in South America

By Michael Shifter
La Prensa (Bolivia), November 2, 2008

It’s a safe bet that the next President of the United States will spend relatively little time on Latin America. Other concerns – chiefly digging the US out of its deep financial hole, not to mention foreign policy priorities like Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and the Middle East – will consume most of his attention.

That Latin America will not rank high on the agenda is, of course, nothing new. What is new, however, is how the political landscape has been transformed – especially in South America. The new president will face a region where all governments are seeking greater independence from the United States. Some are more confrontational than others, but all want to diversify their alliances in a new global order. The traditional, paternalistic impulses from the North are out of sync with today’s realities.

The big question is whether either Barack Obama or John McCain will be able to understand such changes and have the capacity to respond constructively.

Obama’s own international background, along with his vision for cooperating with Latin America on a wide range of issues from energy to fighting inequality, are more in line with the region’s agenda and sensibilities. Particularly welcome will be Obama’s greater openness to engaging diplomatically with Cuba, where the US has had an unproductive and unpopular policy for nearly half a century.

It is easy to imagine him having good personal chemistry with South American presidents across the political spectrum, including with Colombia’s Alvaro Uribe. Though Obama has opposed the free trade agreement between Colombia and the United States, he has largely backed Uribe’s security policies. He would probably be sympathetic to keeping trade preferences with governments like Bolivia and Ecuador. His emphasis on engagement and concern for providing a social safety net for US workers might even make it easier to get free trade agreements through a Democratic Congress.

Under a President Obama, some governments would have a harder time capitalizing on the wave of anti-Americanism. Leaders will find themselves without their principal scapegoat, typically used to get mass support for more authoritarian political projects. Unlike with Bush, few will believe that Obama is the “devil,” meaning Hugo Chavez will have little choice but to change his script. Of course, he will probably measure up Obama and try to test him.

Obama may be expected to initiate a rapprochement, but he is likely to be guarded, mindful of how any embrace of the belligerent Chavez would be perceived at home. In fact, Obama has been notably cautious in the campaign, which has accounted for much of his success. South America should not anticipate any bold, dramatic moves towards progressive leaders or causes.

A McCain presidency would contrast sharply with Obama’s in style and tone, if not in policy. Much like President Bush, McCain tends to see Latin America (and the rest of the world) in terms of friends and adversaries. He sees competing blocs that oppose or support the US agenda in the region. During the campaign he made a point to travel to Colombia and Mexico, as a display of friendship towards Uribe and Felipe Calderon. His rhetoric aimed at Chavez has been much more aggressive than Obama’s, and he would most likely have a more conflictive relationship with Evo Morales and Rafael Correa. (Sometimes, though, personal relationships can be surprising, and McCain tends to rely on trusted friends. Few predicted that Bush would have had a good a relationship as he eventually had with Lula.) An easing of the embargo against Cuba would be far less likely under McCain than Obama.

Still, McCain’s ideas would have greater appeal for some South American governments. He has been a consistent advocate of free trade and has enthusiastically backed the pending agreement with Colombia. McCain, however, has not opposed the use of trade preferences for political purposes, as the Bush administration is doing in Bolivia. In contrast to Obama, he has taken a tough stand on ethanol subsidies, which would particularly please the Brazilians as they press for access to the US market.

Both Obama and McCain doubtless have a lot to learn about how Latin America has changed. The real concern is that whoever wins the election will fall back on old approaches designed for a bygone era. McCain, especially, carries a lot of baggage and his good versus evil vision is reminiscent of the Cold War. Obama is more open and attuned to the changes underway, but some of his proposals – increasing the number of US consulates or Peace Corps volunteers, for example – also echo the 1960s of John F. Kennedy, a time that has long passed.

In a new context of increasingly scarce resources (made even more acute by the financial crisis), fresh thinking is essential. One policy area that is critical for Latin America and the United States, but has received no serious attention by either Obama or McCain, is the drug problem. It has only worsened in recent years, and the US formula for combating it has patently failed. That is not only the view among most Latin Americans but, according to a September 2008 Zogby poll, about three quarters of all estadounidenses have reached a similar conclusion.

Hopefully, as president, Obama or McCain will take an honest look South and blaze a new trail, instead of relying on what John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton did. This will involve consulting with regional leaders, soliciting their ideas, and pursuing different policies that depend less on money than on imagination and will.