130 likes | 147 Views
This analysis delves into the intricate ties between the global stage, U.S.-Latin America relations after the Cold War, and post-9/11 dynamics. It explores evolving stances, regional responses, and the impact on U.S. soft power and prestige in Latin America.
E N D
The Post-Cold War Era And the Global War on Terror
THE PROBLEM • How to conceptualize the connection between the global arena and U.S.-Latin American relations in the wake of the Cold War? And then 9/11? • Widespread view: little if any connection • My contention: the connection exists but is complex and contradictory
READINGS • Smith, Talons, chs. 9-11 • DFC, Contemporary, chs. 1, 3
After the Cold War: The Global Arena • Collapse of the Soviet Union • U.S. military primacy: the “unipolar moment” • “The End of History”? • Transnationalization and non-state actors • Process of “globalization” • Shift from geo-politics to “geo-economics” • Economic multipolarity: Europe, Japan, others?
BUSH AND THE WAR ON TERROR • PHASE 1: BEFORE 9/11 • High level of presidential interest • Relationship with Mexico • (and Vicente Fox) • Near-agreement on immigration reform (?) • Support for FTAA • Administrative team • Isolation of Cuba • PHASE 2: AFTER 9/11 • Change in regional priorities • Unilateralist impulses • End of wholesale immigration reform
RESPONSES FROM LATIN AMERICA • Broad sympathy; scores of own citizens • Occasional satisfaction • OAS support for action “as appropriate” • Appeals for proportionality • Fidel Castro: against terrorism and against war • Preferred option: the sidelines • Entanglements at the UN
GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR:THE RULES OF THE GAME • Nations can respond however they choose—including the use of indiscriminate force. • Preventive action is appropriate and acceptable. • There is no need to adhere to international treaties or conventions. • Alliances are formed around one central issue—the anti-terror campaign under U.S. leadership. Support is black-white. Democracy and human rights are secondary issues. • Spectator nations must tread cautiously.
CHANGING VIEWS OF U.S. • Distaste for Abu Ghraib, Haditha, “collateral damage” and loss of life • Solidarity with innocent civilians, hidden admiration for Osama bin Laden • Rejection of American society, not just U.S. foreign policy • Resentment of unilateral approach • Distrust of “democratic crusade”
TWO-LEVEL GAMES • Geo-economic game + new geopolitical game, superimposed and simultaneous • Geopolitics > geo-economics if necessary • Low priority for region • Benefits of inattention (benign neglect?) • National preferences: which game to play? • Examples: • FTAs on basis of geopolitics • Reluctance on immigration reform • Allies in wars on drugs • Contradictions and trade-offs
…AND BARACK OBAMA? • Redefinition of war against terror • Afghanistan > Iraq • Al Qaeda ≠ Taliban • Rules of game more subtly applied • ISIS/Islamic State • Re Latin America, changes in rhetoric and emphasis rather than substance • Immigration • Drugs and drug trafficking • FTAs • Lingering effects