Title: Obama, McCain Offer Stark Contrasts on Latin America Policy
Author: Interview with Michael Shifter
Source: America.gov
Date: September 8, 2008By Eric Green
Washington — The two major U.S. presidential candidates offer stark contrasts in their positions on Latin America and the Caribbean, several specialists on the region tell America.gov.
Michael Shifter, vice president for policy at the Washington-based nonpartisan Inter-American Dialogue, said Republican John McCain’s “rhetoric” on Cuba and Venezuela is “certainly tougher” than that of Democrat Barack Obama.
But Shifter said it is “unclear how that will translate in policy terms.” He said that under a McCain administration, the current U.S. “stance” toward Cuba probably will continue, “and it might even get more hardline.”
Obama already has proposed “some modest steps” toward an opening with Cuba, including lifting U.S. restrictions on sending remittances to Cuba and on travel restrictions for Cuban Americans to the Caribbean nation, Shifter said.
Obama’s “willingness” to talk with Cuban President Raúl Castro, “with a carefully prepared agenda, marks a contrast with McCain’s posture,” Shifter said.
He said McCain’s rhetoric aimed at Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez has been “harsher and more confrontational than Obama’s.” Shifter said Obama seems to favor a more diplomatic approach in dealing with Chávez, and that Obama’s “moderate tone would not, however, conceal basic policy differences with the Chávez government, especially on such issues as Iran and Afghanistan.”
Shifter said “tensions between the United States and Venezuela under a McCain or Obama administration would likely persist.”
COLOMBIA
Regarding Colombia, Shifter said that McCain’s concern with national security questions suggest the Republican is likely to be a strong advocate of continuing U.S. support for the next phase of Plan Colombia called the “Strategy to Strengthen Democracy and Promote Social Development.” Obama is “also a proponent of continued security aid” to the Andean nation, Shifter said. (See “United States To Shift Focus of Funds for Colombia.”)
But Shifter said McCain and Obama “differ sharply” on a pending U.S. free-trade agreement with Colombia, with McCain backing the pact and Obama opposed to it because of incidents of violence against Colombian union officials.
“Ironically, it may be easier to get” the trade agreement through the U.S. Congress under Obama rather than with a McCain administration, Shifter said. He said McCain could have a more adversarial relationship with the next Congress — very likely to be controlled by the Democrats — than would Obama. “Obama could more easily put together a larger package featuring social protections and benefits for U.S. workers and that could help pave the way for eventual congressional approval” of the trade pact.
Regarding how high a priority the Americas will be for the next U.S. administration, Shifter said “Latin Americans should have learned by now to keep their expectations in check.” Situations in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Russia and China are likely to command much attention from a new administration, “so Latin America is unlikely to get the attention it deserves.”
McCain has made several trips to the region, Shifter said. Obama never has visited, but either “will need to develop a more sophisticated understanding of an area” that has “undergone profound changes and no longer responds to Washington’s tutorial impulses.” (See “Next U.S. President Unlikely to Alter U.S. Latin America Policy.”)
McCAIN MUM, OBAMA VAGUE ON U.S. IMAGE IN THE AMERICAS
Reflecting Shifter’s comments, Greg Weeks, an associate professor of political science at the University of North Carolina, said the two candidates are divided on the U.S. trade embargo on Cuba. Obama, he said, has taken a “surprisingly skeptical view of the embargo and although he has not called for it to be dismantled, he has said that our policy toward Cuba has been a ‘failure.’”
Obama also has called for “engagement with the Cuban government, for which he has been criticized by McCain for being naïve,” said Weeks, who also writes a blog called Two Weeks Notice.
On whether either candidate could get immigration legislation passed by Congress, Weeks said that “my hunch is no, though the makeup of Congress after the elections will be important.”
He said that although Democrats won a majority in the last congressional election in 2006, many members of the House of Representative “were conservative and so opposed immigration reform. Given McCain's clear interest in [immigration] reform, though, he will be more likely to expend political capital to get it passed. Obama has said he would pursue reform, but my sense is that the topic is a lower priority for him.”
When asked how the candidates could improve the U.S. image in the Americas, Weeks responded that he has not heard McCain address this question, perhaps because doing so could be interpreted as a criticism of President Bush. McCain’s campaign has said it will ensure “top administration officials would have strong Latin American portfolios,” according to Weeks.
Obama has emphasized diplomacy and a policy of “helping the poor, shoring up civil society and strengthening democratic institutions, though the specifics are vague,” Weeks said.
He said that “ultimately, from a rhetorical standpoint, Obama offers more promise of policy change toward Latin America than McCain, whose policies [including immigration] remain very close to President Bush.” But because of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, renewed tension with Russia and myriad other global issues, “Latin America will not likely be a top priority once the new president is elected,” Weeks said.
Details of McCain’s and Obama’s positions on the Americas are available on the Web sites of the respective candidates.
The article highlights the possible neglect towards Latin America--and the sad tradition of paying attention only to the most vocal crowds of Venezuela and Columbia. Granted, the priorities in foreign relations will be those countries who represent the greatest security, diplomatic, or commercial threat. But, both of the candidates fail to recognize the loss of sentiment in Latin America as a whole representing a huge problem for future relations. We need to spend more time building up our allies than just breaking down our enemies, giving good press to the countries that stubbornly defend democracy against the squeaky wheels of Morales, Chavez, and Correa, and dedicate our diplomatic strengths to empowerment rather than subterfuge.
No comments:
Post a Comment