Last month, when even our key Latin American allies supported the creation of an alternative to the Organization of American States that included Cuba but excluded the United States and Canada, alarm bells went off in Washington -- and rightfully so.
This was not your traditional statement of frustration with U.S. policy, but rather an indictment of the OAS -- the institution charged with helping all countries in the hemisphere speak with a unified voice.
We agree that the OAS is an embattled institution. It has had its wins and its share of losses -- as well as missed opportunities. However, as others have said about the United Nations, if it did not exist, it would have to be created. Our task is to make the OAS better, not irrelevant.
Our hemisphere, with few exceptions, is unified in its commitment to an enduring set of noble objectives -- democracy, human rights, fairness, transparency and justice. Latin America today is home to some of the greatest democratic transition success stories of the last 50 years, and they reflect those values. But there is more work to be done. The ongoing abuses of the Castro regime, the erratic authoritarianism in Venezuela, the recent coup in Honduras and human-rights abuses in Colombia underscore that progress is not universal.
http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/03/17/1532935/make-the-oas-relevant.htmlI started to read this with trepidation because Senator Menendez, who is good on many issues, is very anti-Castro. Maybe because of that fear or DU influence on me, I at first had problems with the last paragraph I quoted, until I recognized that it is extremely and appropriately balanced - on the left, there are abuses in Cuba and I can't think of a better phrase than "erratic authoritarianism in Venezuela in and on the right, they call the coup a coup and in listing it imply it was wrong and they call out the human rights abuses in Columbia.
The editorial then speaks of legislation (S3087) they wrote that seeks to improve the OAS.
Stepping back, and remembering the reception in Latin America given to Hillary Clinton, this seems to be a step taken to try to regain influence that we have lost in Latin America. However, I wonder if the confused US policy (or even some tacit support of the coup (hopefully only after the fact) in parts of our government) on Honduras might have been the straw that finally broke the camel's back. The OAS was against the coup, but I wonder if the US being part of it helped or hurt.
It is in our strategic interest to have influence in Latin America. But, our history there between supporting the Contras and overthrowing Allende has not been pretty. I can see why, given their different culture and the way the US has treated them, they want to replace OAS with an organization that excludes the US and Canada. To them, everything from the Monroe Doctrine on has treated them like the "child" in an unequal relationship.
It will be interesting to see if the legislation can help us retain any influence or whether it can even get past right wing biases on Latin America - that extend even into the Democratic party.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
