Advertisement

Opinion

Opinion

Opinion: Latin America should be a priority

January 29, 2013

Advertisement

Presumptive Secretary of State John Kerry’s Senate confirmation hearing on Thursday was a perfect example of what’s wrong with U.S. foreign policy — it was 70 percent about the Middle East and South Central Asia, 25 percent about Russia and China, and 5 percent about Latin America.

As expected, Kerry didn’t face many hard questions during his nearly four-hour hearing at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, where he has served for the past 28 years — the last four as its chairman — and most members are his close buddies.

Perhaps the ultimate U.S. foreign policy establishment insider, Kerry gets high marks from both Democrats and Republicans.

And, granted, most of what Kerry said during his testimony was right on the mark.

“More than ever, foreign policy is economic policy,” Kerry said in his opening statement, stressing that the United States must first solve its fiscal crisis at home and become more competitive abroad before giving lessons on good management abroad.

“American foreign policy is not defined by drones and deployments alone,” Kerry added.

“We cannot allow the extraordinary good that we do to save and change lives to be eclipsed entirely by the role that we have had to play since September 11th, a role that was thrust upon us.”

But after Kerry’s opening statement, nearly all of his fellow senators’ questions focused on the Middle East and South Central Asia, and most specifically on Afghanistan, the Taliban movement, Iran’s nuclear weapons program, Syria’s civil war, and the rise of Islamic parties in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and other parts of North Africa.

In other words, most of the hearing centered on issues tied to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks — the same issues that Kerry said should not “eclipse” other foreign policy priorities.

Regarding Latin America, if it hadn’t been for isolated questions by Sens. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., a Cuban-American who is likely to succeed Kerry at the helm of the Foreign Relations Committee; Marco Rubio, R-Fla, and Tom Udall, D-N.M., the region would have gone virtually unnoticed — an asterisk among the world’s most important regions.

Kerry himself has not paid much attention to the region since the mid-1980s, when he led a congressional delegation to Nicaragua and later campaigned to stop U.S. funding for the “contra” rebels. And, let’s face it, neither has the Obama administration, nor the Bush administration before it.

Nobody in his right mind will argue that Iran’s nuclear program, or al-Qaida’s cells in North Africa, should not be at the center of U.S. foreign policy concerns.

But if U.S. foreign policy is increasingly about economic policy, and if the United States needs to increase its declining share of global trade and investment, as Kerry said, it should definitely seek greater economic ties with Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Chile and other fast-growing Western Hemisphere neighbors.

Consider:

l Latin America is likely to continue growing at a much faster pace than industrialized countries, according to International Monetary Fund projections. This year, the region will grow at 3.6 percent, compared to a 1.4 percent average for mature industrialized countries, the IMF says.

l The United States already sends about 44 percent of its global exports to Western Hemisphere countries, according to International Trade Commission figures. In 2011, the United States shipped more goods to Mexico ($197 billion a year) than to the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Ireland combined, and exported more than three times more to Latin America ($366 billion) than to China ($103 billion), according to ITC figures.

When it comes to energy, you may be surprised to know the United States already relies on Western Hemisphere countries for 52 percent of its oil imports, compared with 22 percent from Persian Gulf countries, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

My opinion: The Obama administration has already launched an ambitious Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade plan that, while mainly aimed at Asia, could benefit some countries along Latin America’s Pacific coast.

But it’s about time to launch a similarly ambitious plan for willing countries throughout the Americas.

There is no question that a nuclear Iran and the threat of terrorism will — and should — continue to dominate the U.S. foreign policy agenda.

But if Kerry and the upcoming Senate Foreign Relations Committee leadership could raise Washington’s focus on the Western Hemisphere to, say, a mere 20 percent, they would leave a very positive mark behind them.

— Andres Oppenheimer is a Latin America correspondent for the Miami Herald.

Comments

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 1 year, 10 months ago

"The Obama administration has already launched an ambitious Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade plan that, while mainly aimed at Asia, could benefit some countries along Latin America’s Pacific coast."

Such agreements are for the benefit of large multinational corporations and Wall Street investment bankers. They do nothing for the vast majority of the populations of the countries that participate in them.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 1 year, 10 months ago

We can't control what happens in other countries. Never could. Never will. Doesn't matter who is president. Any attempts to do so will always result in blowback.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 1 year, 10 months ago

So do you want him to control things or not? Are you merely upset because someone from your team isn't pulling the levers of violent futility?

Leslie Swearingen 1 year, 10 months ago

If President Obama is making those decisions to please Iran, it would seem that he is being controlled, not controlling.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 1 year, 10 months ago

Yes, I'm sure he checks in with the ayatollahs on a daily basis to make sure they are pleased. I'd guess he as all the top ones on speed dial on his blackberry. (end sarcasm.)

Commenting has been disabled for this item.