Latin America: Toward true independence or regional hegemony?
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.
