Why has U.S. President Barack Obama decided to visit
Argentina? There are two basic reasons: to insist on Washington’s view that the
neo-liberal marketing approach is the ONLY option for those countries that want
to snuggle up to Uncle Sam and to work towards the construction of an
economic-political fence strong enough to keep China on the other side.
Argentine President Mauricio Macri’s enthusiasm for
market politics—verified in his naming of CEOs of multinational corporations to
key ministries—has given Obama the excuse he needed to announce a “new era” in
U.S. relationships with Latin-America. However, many Argentines and Latin-Americans
still find it hard to forget the history of invasions and support for brutal
rightwing military regimes during the 1970’s.
During the 1970’s, in the midst of the Cold War with
the Soviet Union, repressive anti-communist military dictatorships sprang up
throughout the continent with the clear backing of Washington and particularly
the Pentagon. Numerous military officers were trained in anti-subversive
tactics at the School of the Americas. These tactics, also promoted by the CIA
and other organizations, “inherited” policies used in Vietnam and by the French
in Algeria and included psychological warfare. These tactics were “reinterpreted”
by dictatorships which represented the elite that in country after country
opposed populist or leftist attempts to bring about social change.
The Latin-American dictatorships almost in unison
attempted to impose one or another form of neo-liberal economic medicine, in
line with Washington. In the “new era” military coups are out of the question.
However, the rightwing, the mass media and the corporate owned mass media have
begun to exert strong pressure on populist governments in Argentina, Brazil,
Ecuador, Bolivia and Venezuela, charging reformist governments with corruption
and other unverified abuses. In this context Argentina is a great “success
story.”
This is what Obama has come to applaud, the rise of
the “new” rightwing and its love affair with neo-liberalism, which presents a
good opportunity for U.S. banks and corporations; likewise the rise of the
rightwing is seen as a shield against growing Chinese involvement with populist
governments in the area.
Although the U.S. president plans to express his
concern for human rights by visiting one of the most abominable centers for
torture under the dictatorship of 1976-83, many view his intentions with a let’s
wait and see attitude. It is pointed out that human rights abuse was tolerated
or overlooked in the 1970´s due to the expediency of the U.S. global struggle
against the Soviets, likewise embargos such as that against Cuba are considered
gross violations of human rights, as are invasions and bombings with drones. In
today’s violent world the view of the U.S. as an “exception” is strongly
questioned.
There are of course strong sectors of the middle and
upper classes that hail Obama and Macri´s snuggling up to Washington as a great
event and an opportunity to warm up the traditionally distant relationships
between Buenos Aires and Washington. These sectors, traditionally anti-Peronist
and anti-populist, no doubt view the warm up as an opportunity to travel and to
import the latest technological gadgetry, while grain and cattle oligarchs see
good business in the making.
The question remains: will Washington’s formula of “democracy
and neo-liberalism” be the success story its advocates claim it will be, or
will it fail and bring about another struggle between reformists and
conservatives? Latin-America is one of the most socially unequal areas of the
world and an economic policy based on the drip down theory is not likely to
change that. In fact, countries in the area that have adopted neo-liberal
policies have actually seen an alarming increase in social inequality.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario