« Waiting for snow, among other things... | Babalu Blog - Main Page | Thursday Ajiaco »

Putting aside Dodd's Cuba fixation for the moment, his analysis of the U.S. investment in the anti-drug fight in Mexico is spot-on and his call for a new American commitment to the region is welcomed. The Washington Consensus has been rejected virtually everywhere in the region and something needs to replace it. Latin America is full of leaders--Chavez, Morales, Kirchner, Lula, Ortega--whose politics are all infused with a deep anti-Americanism. That's not good for the people of their countries and it's not good for us.

So what youre saying is that we should give these anti-American leaders what they want? Taxpayer funded socialist foreign policy?

Ay, Val. Por favor. Where did you get that from what I wrote. Honestly. What I'm saying is that in the late 80s and early 90s there was a sense that free markets, representative government and respect for human rights could create wealth and stability in Latin America. For some reason--and I'm open to examining the "why"--that consensus is dead. It is in our strategic interests to figure out how we help the region get back on track. How that is a "socialist foreign policy" is beyond me.

What I'm saying is that in the late 80s and early 90s there was a sense that free markets, representative government and respect for human rights could create wealth and stability in Latin America.

Exactly my point. All you need to do is look at Colombia to realize that statement above still rings true, in 2008. Thus, apparently some aspects of current policy toards Latin America are working.

Why in the world then would a) Pelosi block what could only be considered a good thing and b)Dodd not use the Colombia example as a model for improvement in latin American relations? hell, he doesnt even make mention of the one country that despite the region's decline, is prospering.

Val,

There is no denying that Colombia has enjoyed an economic resurgence in the last few years, especially given the severity of the recession that it endured during the late 80s. That being said, the United States has provided Colombia with some 4 billion dollars in aid in the last several years and that money has gone a long way toward providing the foundations upon which Colombian economic growth has been built. I can't see us spending that kind of money in other places in the region. Which raises the question: "How, in the absence of billions of dollars in aid, do we get the other countries in the region to enter into mutually beneficial trade and security agreements?" I don't have an answer to this question but I do know that our current de facto policy of ceding the region to anti-American demagogues will come back to bite us in the ass. (BTW, I will spare any mention here of the serious questions raised by human rights groups and our own CIA about the actions of US-supported elements of the Colombian military.)

Here's handy link where all US aid to Colombia is noted:

http://www.ciponline.org/colombia/aidtable.htm

I suppose a free trade agreemnt with Colombia would go a long way in diminishing the need for further US aid, no?

How, in the absence of billions of dollars in aid, do we get the other countries in the region to enter into mutually beneficial trade and security agreements?

Well,Dodd wants the "strengthening civilian law enforcement and justice institutions, replacing black market economies with legitimate economic investment and creating smarter anti-drug programs." Which, for all intents and purposes, is a pipe dream, given that the likes of Chavez, etal. would never go for US meddling in their law enforcement or justice institutions or their economies. they dont even want to deal financially with the US anymore, given that theyve just started their own "world bank" type institution. Thus I suspect that the only way to make relations with the anti-americans in Latin American is to crawl into bed and under the covers with them.

I'm not sure Dodd has a Cuba "fixation," unless, of course, he's mentally ill and that's a manifestation of his disorder. I expect there is/are definite reason/s, clearly covert and unfit for disclosure, for what may seem to be an irrational approach to the Cuba issue. Needless to say, there are other comparable cases in Congress of this "fixation," including Joe Garcia's new promoter, Mr. Rangel.

Val,

What do you expect from the party of Ted Kennedy, Christopher Dodd, John Kerry, Charlie Rangel, Bill Delahunt, Jose Serrano, Nancy Pelosi and company?

The reality is simple and goes back several administrations and over forty years of history.

1. Which political party allowed Fidel Castro to consolidate as a dictator in Cuba?

The Democratic Party.

2. Which political party opposed Ronald Reagan during the 1980s while he established an anti-communist policy of supporting the Nicaraguan Contras to overthrow the Marxist dictatorship of Daniel Ortega?

The Democratic Party.

3. Which political party has the most members that support the enemies of the United States in both Latin America and around the world?

The Democratic Party.

Yet the Democrats get extremely insulted when the conservatives rightfully label them as unpatriotic and supportive of an anti-American agenda.

Unfortunately for them historical evidence support the claims made by conservatives.

So what do you expect the Democratic Party behavior and policies will be towards Colombia?

Actually I’m not surprise at all, I always expected it.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: