Resentment
towards the Bush administration abounds in many Latin American
political circles. They
have reason to complain, with each country more forgotten than
the next, the construction of a wall along the border with Mexico,
and a very unpopular war in Iraq. The Latin American governments and the Latino
population continue to criticize the “colossus of the North.” Now, in the face of appeals from the United
States Congress, President Bush appears obligated to lend a little
more attention to his neighbors and has decided to make a tour
of Latin America.
His
trip will take him to Brazil, Guatemala, Colombia, Uruguay y
Mexico. Curiously, none of these countries are representative
of the new left-wing governments that have democratically arisen
throughout the continent in the last two years. With the exception of Brazil, the other countries
have right-wing inclinations that favor the Bush government. Critics of the U.S. administration point out
the lack of attention that Bush has given Latin America in his
six years in office. They
attribute this shortcoming to the growing influence of Venezuelan
president Hugo Chavez. With its verbal wars against Chavez, Washington
has demonstrated its disgust towards the Venezualan president
and his socialist ideas. Now
that Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Argentina have publicly
aligned themselves with the “Movimiento Bolivariano” that Chavez
advocates, Bush has decided to pay some attention and visit the
region under the motto that “we care.” His goal is to counteract
the “eje chavista,” the powerful influence that Chavez holds
over Latin America.
Lamentably,
Bush’s actions are rather contradictory. On
one hand, he asks for liberty and democracy, but on the other,
he has tripled the funds to the “Escuela de las Américas.” This
institution supposedly trains soldiers to maintain peace in the
region, but it has historically only brought about death and
disturbance. Bush talks
of free trade and asks for economic opportunities, but these
neoliberal ideas have already been put in practice with the result
of augmenting social inequity. Bush
asks for regional cooperation and immigration reform, but he
is building a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border to separate the
riches of the First World from the misery of the south. The
president wants to restrain terrorism and drug-trafficking in
Colombia, but he has stopped providing resources to countries
that support the fight against narco-terrorism, such as Ecuador
and Bolivia.
Due
to these and other actions, Chavez’s anti-American sentiment
has significant weight these days. However,
it should be emphasized that the resurgence of new leftist governments
in Latin America is not connected to the United States. There
is no need for Bush to feel flattered. With their revolutionary
ideas, these new governments seek to solve the internal problems
that have constantly plagued Latin Americna, such as corruption,
inequality and poverty. These
countries represent the fundamental change that Latin America
so deperately needs, yet those are precisely the nations that
are the most ignored by President Bush. Bush’s tour is not going to change the fact
that Latin America is drawing farther away from mainstream Washington. It will not stop the growth of the socialist
movement that can so famously flourish in Latin American counries. The best thing that Bush could do would be
to quietly support the democratic movements that have gained
popularity throughout the Hispanic community. However,
it would be even better if Bush was no longer in the White House. Who knows what he will do next?
