Share

The Beginning of the End

By Alan Stoga

The presidency of George Bush has entered its last act. With the Democratic victory in the mid term election, the 2008 presidential election campaign has begun. Partly as a result, the next two years will be a period during which the domestic U.S. political debate becomes increasingly nasty, inward looking, and partisan. Bush’s ability to shape events will decline and his willingness to compromise—never his long suit—is likely to disappear completely.

The elections demonstrated that clear majorities of Americans are unhappy with the direction in which the country is heading, with the war in Iraq, and with the performance of the Bush government. In a hostile, post 9/11 world, Bush was expected—but has failed—to deliver two things: security and competence. The ever- deepening Iraqi quagmire, with its growing body counts and daily images of carnage, has destroyed the argument that Bush’s war would make the world safer. The government’s response to Hurricane Katrina, also played out in the harsh light of 24/7 news coverage, embarrassed the country and made the Bush government look like the gang that couldn’t shoot straight.

America’s relationship with Latin America has not fared much better since President Bush came to office. During the past six years, U.S. Latin American policy has mostly developed along two vectors: trade and security. The high water mark in the trade arena was the negotiation and passage of the Central American Free Trade Agreement. Even though that agreement has yet to be fully implemented and the broader regional Free Trade of the Americas initiative has died, the Administration continues to push bilateral deals with Peru, Colombia, and Ecuador—although the Congress shows less and less appetite for them.

There is no comparable record in the security area. While most Latins empathized with the United States after the tragedy of 9/11, almost everyone south of the Rio Grande has been appalled that Washington’s obsession with terrorism swept all other issues off the U.S. regional agenda. Only Colombia has managed to leverage U.S. security concerns to its own domestic benefit.

No where has this dynamic been more evident than in the bilateral relationship between the United States and Mexico, which should always be one of the United States’ most important foreign policy concerns. The good news is that, during the presidencies of Bush and Fox, the two governments have significantly improved their ability to work together on the practical issues which inevitably flow from sharing a 2,000 mile border—especially one that separates a rich and a poor country. The bad news is that, on the single most important bilateral issue—the constant and growing flow of undocumented Mexicans into the United States—there has been no progress.

Instead, the legacy of the Bush Administration in the U.S.-Mexican context will be twofold: a dramatic increase in the number of undocumented Mexicans in the country and a wall, every bit as ugly as the one that divided Germany for decades. The difference is that our wall, which seems destined to its own infamy, is at least as likely to discourage illegals from leaving the United States, as it is to keep new migrants out. Not only an historic mistake, but a dumb one.

That such a wall is being built by a government which has tried to make the export of democracy its hallmark is one of the delicious ironies of our time, but also a powerfully negative message to the whole region. If George Bush, who—as a former governor of Texas should be as sympathetic to Mexico and Mexicans as anyone— ends up building the North American version of the Berlin Wall, what might his successor do?

The obvious, unfortunate conclusion from the combination of what the Bush administration has done as well as from what it has not done, is that next two years are likely to be even more of wasteland when it comes to America’s relationship with Latin America. Walls are in; creative, sympathetic diplomacy is out. No new trade agreements. No development initiatives. Nada.

The most important point is that this is the consequence of decisions made in Washington, not of Fidel’s health, or Chavez’ ravings, or Morales naiveté, or even the export of Venezuela’s petrodollars. The United States has the ability to engage the region creatively, it just lacks the will and the imagination.

With Bush’s presidency in terminal decline, this will not change anytime soon.

* Alan Stoga is president of Zemi Communications.

Related

Explore