In 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry stated that “…the era of the Monroe Doctrine is over”, burying a near-200 years policy of US hegemony in the region. This could look as a gesture of liberal politics by the Obama administration and a historical justice to the region, but the real fact is that Latin America has changed and the Monroe Doctrine is just a paper on the wall with an old reminiscence for a superpower that is not what used to be anymore.
Let’s face it, neither Latin America or U.S. are the same countries from 40 years ago, when the U.S. had a wide abidance within the region through several dictatorships with a doubtful respect to human rights, and the only governments crazy enough to object U.S. designs were Castro in Cuba and Torrijos in Panama.
Latin America has been walking on its own for the past five or ten years, sometimes disregarding or even defying the voice of the United States. Several examples can be delivered. In 2002, in Argentina, a proposal of free trade area for the entire region backed by North America was rejected, which caused the early departure of President George W. Bush of the 4th Summit of the Americas, and forced the United States to sign bilateral agreements on free trade with some governments who were interested. There is even a consensus among Latin American governments about not celebrating a 7th Summit in Panama without representatives from Cuba, despite the rejection of United States and Canada about the presence of that country in the summits. This week, Panamanian Foreign Minister, Isabel De Saint Malo de Alvarado, has declared to the foreign press accredited in Panama that an invitation to Cuban representatives for the 7th Summit of the Americas is a decision “already taken”. The celebration of the CELAC Summit with the presence of all presidents except Panama’s (due to internal issues) in Havana last January has been a step that many observers inside and outside the region have seen as defiant.
The predominant economic power that still having the United States in the region has weakened especially since the world crisis of 2008 and the rise of emerging economies such as Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, called BRICS. In this sense, “China has become the largest importer of goods from Brazil and Chile, and the second largest in the case of Costa Rica, Cuba and Peru. It is also the third-largest source of goods imports for Latin America and the Caribbean, accounting for 13% of the region’s imports. At the same time, the Latin American and Caribbean region has become a major destination for Chinese Foreign Direct Investment”, according to a report from ECLAC´s.
The preponderance of Brazil as an economic partner inside Latin America has grown without precedents. Several Brazilian companies like Odebrecht, Petrobras and Banco do Brasil are investing like never before not just inside the Brazilian economy, but also in other countries of Latin America, mainly Argentina, Venezuela and Cuba. In Cuba, Odebrecht is building one of the top projects in decades for the Cuban government, the port of Mariel. The Port of Mariel is a huge bet for both former President Lula and incumbent President Rousseff as it shows their multiple dealings with the construction pier.
The deep interest of BRICS economies, mainly China and Russia, in the pursuit of new markets have given billionaires credits disregarding the spirit of President Monroe when he stated in 1823 during his seventh annual State of the Union speech that: “The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.”
That policy, interpreted as the extra-regional powers should not tie relations to any independent government and stay aware of Latin America, subsequently, an United States sphere of influence, ruled the relations in the continent for near 200 years. But even when Obama administration has practically been obliged by current situation to declare the end of Monroe Doctrine as a gesture to ease tensions with several Latin American countries and to get a new approach with a region that each day is more defiant to the United States hegemony with a partnership rhetoric, still existing a wide numbers of neo conservators politicians and lawmakers that disagree.
After the scandal of U.S. espionage due to NSA intercepting emails, text messages and phone calls from President Dilma Rousseff and his top aides, as well as officials of the state-run oil company, Petrobras; President Rousseff decided to postpone (what looks like a cancelation) a State Visit scheduled for October 2013, despite several calls of President Obama to not postpone the visit, she also demanded an explanation by U.S. officials about the spying. This has been an unprecedented action taken by a Latin American President to Washington and could show the determination that is prevailing these days.
In some sectors of American policy, this action was seen as a snub and Senator Rubio, a son of Cubans and a potential presidential contender in 2016, see as “exaggerated” the concerns expressed by European and Latin American governments over the revelations of spying on their citizens and authorities. In a speech he delivered in 2012, he clearly referred to Brazil as the power to be counterbalanced in the Americas.
Even Secretary Kerry himself called Latin America a U.S. backyard on April 2013, months before his statement at OAS, which raised a protest of several presidents and the public opinion around the “backyard”. This ulterior change of speech by U.S. Secretary of State is not a minor issue. The speech in OAS as neighbors and equals, is a smart try to speak what Latin America wants to hear, but in the real sense, still counting the appellative of backyard used in front of the U.S. lawmakers.
In these weeks, the Associated Press has been reporting on several actions taken by USAID affecting the sovereignty of Cuba, a government with strong leadership in Latin America. Among them is the attempt to promote a “Cuban Spring” when installing a network via SMS, called Zunzuneo, in what is an adaptation of Twitter. This has sparked condemnation from most Latin American governments. Lately AP also reported that USAID recruited and sent to Cuba young people from some countries in the region to identify young Cuban leaders to promote a change of government. These actions are very likely to be backed by the CIA.
So we have on one side, a region that is starting to walk by itself, looking for new horizons and welcoming new partnerships with European and emerging economies, and on the other side is the United States, an old actor in the sub-continent, that publicly wants to change its role in the relations from Big Brother to partner, looking for a new kind of interchange, but the actions taken are very questionable. Finally, to be honest, what most matters is not the position that United States has adopted in the relationship, but the role Latin America has decided to adopt.
At the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad & Tobago in 2009, the leaders of Latin America and the Caribbean made it clear to the then novice US President that a change of policy toward Cuba was a condition for an improved relationship with the region. In his departing statement at the summit, President Obama seemed to have understood the call, as well as the evident manifestation that south from the Mexican border the region had changed. The Monroe Doctrine had no future. Yet, after five years this Administration seems locked in a failure to face reality, with a stubborn policy that indeed does damage Cuba in unquestionable ways, but also compromises US long term interests in the region.