Tag Archives: Latin America

PATRICK LAWRENCE: Biden’s Summit of No-Shows

Latin America is tired of being treated like the help by the U.S. From Patrick Lawrence at consortiumnews.com:

Mexico’s President Andrés Manuel López Obrador in Mexico City, 2019. (EneasMx, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikimedia Commons)

I tip my cap, as we all should, to President Andrés Manuel López Obrador of Mexico. And to Presidents Luis Arce of Bolivia, Xiaomara Castro of Honduras, Alejandro Giammattei of Guatemala and Nayib Bukele of El Savador. They all pointedly declined to join President Joe Biden at his Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles last week, joining to protest Biden’s refusal to invite Miguel Díaz–Canel, Nicolás Maduro and Daniel Ortega, the presidents of Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua respectively.

Add it up. Eight of the region’s 33 nations were absent when Biden convened the summit “to demonstrate the resurgence of U.S. leadership in the region,” as the government-supervised New York Times forlornly put it. Don’t they ever get tired of these long-exhausted phrases over on Eighth Avenue?

“There can be no Americas summit if all the countries of the American continent do not participate,” López Obrador explained at a press conference announcing his decision. “Or there can be, but we believe that means continuing with the politics of old, of interventionism, of a lack of respect for the nations and their people.”

Continue reading→

Random Reflections on the Divine Imperium and its Southern Appurtenances, by Fred Reed

Is it time for the global South to shine? From Fred Reed at thesaker.is:

Random Reflections on the Divine Imperium and its Southern Appurtenances

By Fred Reed for the Saker Blog

Great fun. The Organization of American States on June Sixth began its big meeting in LA, probably unnoticed by most of the US but a big deal hereabouts in Mexico. America dominates the OAS pretending it doesn’t, as it dominates SWIFT, NATO, and the IMF as means of controlling other nations. Considerable uproar exists in Latin America because various Latin countries, most notably Mexico, have refused to attend on grounds that the United States has excluded countries it doesn’t like, such as Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. This is astonishing as it shows what may be a modicum of independence in the Latin South.

The White House says that it has excluded these countries because—brace yourself—of America’s almost erotic attachment to democracy, freedom, justice, democracy, human rights, and democracy, none of which the US conspicuously has. We must believe this, for is not Biden South America’s mommy? Which probably has something to do with transgender rights, though I prefer not to think about this.

I suggest that Biden actually excludes them because he cannot afford to allow anyone to speak who is not under American control. The Cuban president, unafraid of Washington, might speak thusly:

“Ladies and gentlemen, leaders of Latin America, you should begin this conference by admitting that you are all bootlickers, that you do not represent your populations who, as you all know, hate the Americans, but rather you toady to the Anglos who give you suitcases full of hundred-dollar bills, who flatter you with pretended respect while you do as they say.

Continue reading→

US and Latin America: Trouble in the Backyard by Ted Snider

Latin America has options besides abject subservience to the American empire. From Ted Snider at antiwar.com:

While the US is expanding into Russia’s sphere of influence, it seems to be having trouble consolidating and controlling its own sphere of influence. There may be trouble in America’s backyard.

The Biden administration has been so distracted by expansion and so asleep at diplomacy that the very fundamentals of diplomacy have been neglected in Latin America. A dozen ambassadorial postings in Latin America, including Brazil, Chile, and Bolivia, remain vacant sixteen months into Biden’s presidency.

All the while, the ever swinging pendulum of Latin American elections is swinging, once again, to progressive governments that are more likely to protect and advance the interests of their own populations than they are to sleep walk behind US hegemony.

There is no more sign of a domestic uprising against the government in Cuba than there ever was. The party of Chavez and Maduro remains solidly in power in Venezuela despite attempted US coups and recognition of interim coup president Juan Guaidó. The party of Evo Morales has returned to power in Bolivia, and the party of Manuel Zelaya has returned to power in Honduras, reversing US supported coups. Lula da Silva is poised to return to power in Brazil, which would reverse another US backed coup. Mexico, Argentina and Chile have all recently elected more progressive, independent governments

Continue reading→

The Democrats’ New ‘Latino’ Problem: The Ghost of James Monroe, by Robert Oscar Lopez

Not one nation south of the U.S. supports the U.S. government’s sanctions on Russia. From Robert Oscar Lopez at americanthinker.com:

On social media, some disturbing maps have circulated showing the globe in terms of which nations have sanctioned Russia over her invasion of Ukraine.  Bolivian writer Ollie Vargas posted this map, which makes clear that sanctions in Russia are seen as an absolute must in Europe, the English-speaking world, Japan, and South Korea.  Everywhere else, President Biden’s requests for economic war against Russia have been rejected.

White House press secretary Jen Psaki recently claimed that we have “basically crushed” Russia’s economy through sanctions, but is this true?  The sanctions can’t work in crushing the Russian economy and forcing the ouster of Putin if only a small percentage of the globe is really sanctioning Moscow.  Despite how important the United States and her allies are, Russia still has a huge playing field in which to recover trade.

Continue reading→

China and the Monroe Doctrine: What’s Good for the Goose Is Good for the Gander? By Doug Bandow

Notwithstanding the Monroe Doctrine, the Chinese are making themselves at home in Latin and South America. From Doug Bandow at antiwar.com:

Nearly two centuries ago President James Monroe ordered the world’s powers to stay out of the Western Hemisphere. The still young American republic, which lacked a serious navy or army, thereby compounded the hubris of its earlier claim to be creating a novus ordo seclorum, or new order for the ages.

Although among the states targeted by Monroe, the United Kingdom turned out to be America’s greatest ally in deterring intervention by other powers. London had the world’s finest navy and wasn’t inclined to encourage competing powers’ imperial ambitions. Moreover, Latin America never was an arena of great power conflict. The European wars after Napoleon’s defeat focused on Europe, not more distant colonial territories.

In its naked form the Monroe Doctrine was shamelessly self-interested. Said Monroe: “We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the United States and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety.” Notably, the U.S. was little concerned about the “peace and safety” of other residents of the region.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt claimed to change direction with the Good Neighbor policy, which emphasized nonintervention and noninterference. However, that pretense did not long survive. During the Cold War the US was active, militarily as well as economically and politically, throughout Latin America. Officially, little has changed since.

Continue reading→

China Rises in Latin America as Sun Sets on the Monroe Doctrine, by Martin Sieff

China has quietly made substantial inroads into Latin America. From Martin Sieff at strategic-culture.org:

China’s rise in trade, business and influence in Latin America has been comparatively ignored. But it is happening. It is real.

China is rapidly surpassing the United States as the most influential nation across Latin America, in the U.S.’s own backyard. This is not a boast by the Chinese government. It is the considered assessment of the five star admiral who heads U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) in his testimony on March 16 to the SenatUe Armed Services Committee.

For almost 200 years since President James Monroe first adumbrated it in a regular message to Congress in December 1823, successive generations of U.S. policymakers and the American people have taken it for granted that the entire vast continent of South America, as well as giant Mexico, the small and much-put-upon nations of Central American and the Caribbean have been and should always remain the United States’ backyard, with all the supposedly evil and repressive powers of the Old World kept out of them — in the sacred names, of course, of Democracy, Freedom and Free Trade.

In fact, with the exception of a handful all too brief eras of genuine shining idealism and goodwill under Presidents Ulysses S. Grant (1869-77), Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-45) and John F. Kennedy (1961-63), U.S. domination of the Spanish- and Portuguese-speaking Western Hemisphere has been characterized, not by benign neglect but rather by a monstrously malign attention.

Continue reading→

U.S. Regional Imperialism: Big Sticks, and Even Bigger Guns, by Danny Sjursen

There are a myriad of good reasons why people in Latin America want Yankees to go home. From Danny Sjursen at theamericanconservative.com

Our history in Latin America is marked by arrogance and aggression. Is what’s happening in Venezuela any different?

Uncle Sam straddles the Americas while wielding a big stick labeled ‘Monroe Doctrine.’ American cartoon by Louis Dalrymple, 1905. (public domain)
Uncle Sam doesn’t have the best track record in Latin America. Few foreign policy elites seem to care. Yet, in what the regional proconsul, Admiral Craig Faller of Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), recently called “our hemisphere” and “our neighborhood,” the actual residents haven’t forgotten. Odds are, the U.S. will be even less welcome after the latest local adventure, the bizarre foiled American mercenary-led coup meant to topple President Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela.

It is tempting and not unreasonable to dismiss the recent folly as an incompetent one-off. No doubt, by any practical measure it must be judged—an appropriate term since “Operation Gideon,” was named for a biblical Hebrew jurist—a total failure. Karl Marx famously intoned that “history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.” Seen thus, the disastrous 1961 CIA-sponsored Bay of Pigs invasion of Fidel Castro’s Cuba counts as the tragedy; and the newest escapade as farce. Neat though the analogy be, this would be a mistake.

The broad contours of the coup attempt are widely reported. Combat-seasoned former U.S. green berets from the private military company Silvercorp, allegedly negotiated a lucrative contract with the Venezuelan opposition to violently replace Maduro with Juan Guaidó. The mission fell apart for a variety of reasons: incompetence, internecine division, and regime infiltration. Yet, for all the drama involved its occurrence wasn’t a total shock.

Continue reading→

Quieter and Quieter: The Evolution of Latin America’s Silent Coups, by Ted Snider

The US government is always working on ways to make its regime changes less noticeable. From Ted Snider at antiwar.com:

American interference with Latin American regimes began early and happened often. As early as the close of the nineteenth century, McKinley had betrayed and stolen Cuba. In 1903, Theodore Roosevelt severed Panama from Columbia, declared it an independent nation and put in power a government whose first act was to sign over the future Panama Canal. By 1908, America was already executing regime changes in Venezuela, cooperating in the removal of Venezuelan President Juan Vicente Gómez. A year later, President Taft took Nicaragua’s José Santos Zelaya out of power. McKinley, Roosevelt and Taft: the three presidents who steered America onto the path of regime change.

In these early days, the coups were usually won with the violence of the gun. That trend would continue in America’s backyard in the modern era. In 1954, Eisenhower ordered the overthrow of Guatemala’s Jacobo Arbenz. Eisenhower would also start the covert action to remove Fidel Castro from Cuba that Kennedy would continue. A decade later, in 1964, Kennedy would kick off the Brazilian coup that took out João Goulart and undertake the political action to encourage the removal of Cheddi Jagan from power in Guyana.

Continue reading

A Pattern of Passing Up Peace, by Ted Snider

For the warfare state, peace is the worst possible prospect. From Ted Snider at antiwar.com:

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear agreement with Iran was working. Iran was consistently in compliance, the US and Iran were talking and diplomacy was working. Then Trump turned his back on peace, shattered the diplomacy and resuscitated the hostile relation with Iran.

This pass that Trump took on peace was not the first time the US had been offered peace by Iran and passed it up. In 2003, Iranian president Seyyed Mohammad Khatami and Ayatollah Ali Khamenei approved a comprehensive nuclear proposal that they offered to President George W. Bush. Bush ignored the overture and refused to respond.

Illegally pulling out of the JCPOA was not only not the first time the US took a pass on an Iranian offer of peace, it was also not the last. Iranian general Qassem Suleimani went to Baghdad to deliver Iran’s response to a Saudi de-escalation overture. A de-escalation of violence between the leaders of the Sunni and Shi’ite worlds might go a long way toward potentially calming the middle east. So, the US assassinated him.

Continue reading

Is Trump’s New Drug Cartel Terrorism Designation Masking a More Sinister Agenda? by Alan Macleod

Does calling drug traffickers terrorists open the door for some US regime changing in Mexico and points south? From Alan Macleod at mintpressnews.com:

Everybody in Latin America knows what happens to leftist heads of state who challenge the power of the local elites and of the US government.

President Donald Trump announced that he will designate Mexican drug cartels as “terrorists”, paving the way for a potentially massive increase in American military involvement directly south of its border. “They will be designated,” Trump told ex-Fox Newsanchor Bill O’Reilly during an interview, revealing that he asked the Mexican government for permission to put soldiers on the ground: “let us go in and clean it out,” Trump said, revealing that they have “so far has rejected the offer. But at some point, something has to be done.”

Mexico’s left-wing president, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, commonly referred to by his initials, AMLO, hit back Friday, insisting that his country had not been invaded for more than a century and that he would not permit an invasion under his watch, revealing exactly how he understood Trump’s offer.

Continue reading

%d bloggers like this: