In this short segment, we will examine the political, economic, and security context in our hemisphere, how the region views its dominant neight, and some of the issues that tie us together or pull us apart. Too often we lump the hemisphere together as a single entity ("them") and take them for granted with comments such as "Canada is really just the northern United States" or "Mexico is a concern for California and the Southwest because of drugs and illegal immigrants but of little interest to anyone else in the country." We will examine the region with an admittedly broad brush but recognizing that it is something affecting the U.S. strategists day in and day out.
Section Objectives
- Develop an understanding of the key political, economic, and social trends in the western hemisphere as they affect U.S. interests
- Examine U.S. interests and goals with respect to the region
- Evaluate challenges to these interests and goals, especially the trans-state issues addressed in Topics
- Critically assess U.S. strategies toward the states of the region
CHRONOLOGY OF MAJOR EVENTS IN LATIN AMERICA DURING 1995 - 1999
February 1995.- The international Monetary Fund approves $17.8 billion in loans to help Mexico bolster the peso, which was devalued in December 1994.
Peru signs a peace treaty with Ecuador to end a 3 week-old border war that has killed dozens of soldiers. The Treaty calls for the US, Brazil, Chile, and Argentina to oversee the demilitarization of the border.
March 1996.- President Clinton signs the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity (Libertad) Act (also known as the Helms-Burton Act) which imposes penalties on foreign companies doing business in Cuba, permits U.S. citizens to sue foreign investors who make use of American-owned property seized by the Cuban government, and denies entry into the U.S. to such foreign investors.
November 1996.- At the Vatican, President Fidel Castro meets with Pope John Paul II and invites the pope to visit Cuba in 1997.
August 1997.- In Geneva, signers of the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention agree to further investigate Cuba's accusation the US mounted a biological attack on Cuba in October 1996 by spreading the crop-eating insect thrips palmi from a crop duster plane.
President Bill Clinton lifts a 20-year-old ban on the sale of advanced weapons such as tanks and fighter jets to Latin America.
January 1998.- Pope John Paul II concludes his 1st visit to Cuba with calls for respect for the right to dissent, saying "the exercise of freedom of conscience [is] the basis and foundation of all other human right"; the pope also condemned the US economic embargo on Cuba.
March 1998.- The Pentagon concludes that Cuba poses no significant threat to U.S. national security, and senior defense officials urge increased contact with their counterparts on the island.
May - June 1998.- European countries call for an end to the embargo. Some warn that Title III of the Helms-Burton Act contradicts international law and may cause problems if not revoked.
January 1999.- The Revolution in Cuba celebrates 40 years.
February 1999.- Six members of the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus visit Cuba to evaluate the U.S.-imposed embargo.
The Coalition of Americans for Humanitarian Trade With Cuba join the United States Association of Former Members of Congress to call on the Clinton administration to end the embargo on food and medicines to Cuba.
TOPIC 5: THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE CONTEXT
Monday
10 January 2000
0830-1130 (LS)
Latin America and Canada are the largest partners with whom we share the hemisphere. This vast, diverse hemisphere includes the largest Catholic country in the world (Brazil), a state with one of the most serious and growing humanitarian crises facing the world (Colombia), and a volatile neighbor and trading partner (Mexico).
Latin America's shift to democracy has been one of the proudest accomplishments of the Reagan and Bush administrations. Both have noted that all the states in the region except Cuba have elected governments and have adopted some variation of laissez-faire economics. Until the problems in Colombia became so obvious they could not be ignored, the western hemisphere was essentially seen as a bastion of economic growth potential and optimism for U.S. strategists.
Current assessments on the hemisphere are not as positive of late. The Latin American states are experiencing the worst recession in generations, increasing doubts in the region about the efficacy of free market economics. These economic changes have resulted in what governments promise to be 'temporarily' high levels of unemployment. But, in societies where unemployment has largely been prevented by large state sectors and a philosophical orientation towards large state sectors, discontent with civilian governments is growing as well. Coupled with increased drug consumption, growing corruption scandals, and other societal factors which decrease support for civilian governments, conditions in the region appear far less stable than even a year ago. Election of a populist but apparently authoritarian former coup leader in Venezuela is only one of a number of disturbing developments.
The U.S. strategist must address this region, for the illegal migration question alone. Not only do large numbers of illegals stream across the Rio Grande from Mexico but a high number of people are fleeing Colombia to find a safer life in the United States. Migration woes also break down relations within the region and affect the U.S. ability to carry out its strategy. As presidents in Washington increasingly focus on economic growth through trade, Latin America's role, along with that of our largest trading partner Canada, takes on an important dimension.
Required Readings.
a. M. Delal Baer, "Mexico's Coming Backlash," Foreign Affairs, vol. 78, no. 4 (July/August 1999), pp. 90-105.
b. Bernard K. Gordon, "The Natural Market Fallacy," Foreign Affairs, vol. 77, no. 3 (May/June 1998), pp. 13-17.
c. Lars Schoultz, Beneath the United States (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1998), pp. 367-386.
d. Carlos Contreras Q, "Interstate Relations in Latin America," Security Dialogue, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 239-246.
e. Document: Secretary Albright, "Ensuring Democracy and Prosperity in the Americas," Dispatch, U.S. Department of State, May 1999, pp. 1-4.
TOPIC 6: COLOMBIA: THE CONTAGION SPREADS
Tuesday
11 January 2000
0900-1030 (L)
Colombia is the third most populated state in Latin America with forty million citizens and the fourth largest in land mass. It has an unparalleled history of civilian, elected governments in the twentieth century. It also has the most serious conflict facing any part of the hemisphere, with the potential for significant spillover into one of the two major suppliers of petroleum to the United States (Venezuela) and several other states in the region. The number of desplazados (displaced people)--either because of ideological views or being at the wrong place at the wrong time-- has mounted to one and a half million over the past decade, or one of every nine citizens of the Republic.
Discussions in Washington have settled into whether Colombia is actually a war against drugs or a war against a thirty five-year-old insurgency. Neither of these descriptions is close to correct. Instead, the conflict has five distinct actors: narcotraficantes, paramilitary death squads, the central government and national military, the various insurgent groups, and the desplazados. At various times, these groups align in a marriage of convenience so that the 'good' guys are hard to differentiate from the 'bad' guys.
If the United States sends financial support, to the tune of a billion dollars over the next three years as the Drug Czar, General McCaffrey, and the administration have requested, it is unclear whether the assistance will really help Colombia. Other players in Washington are arguing that the United States ought to completely abandon the counter-drug fight for the more overt need to counter insurgents.
Issues For Consideration.
- Should the United States send financial assistance to Colombia? What are our national interests in this country and region?
- If the conflict continues and/or intensifies, should the United States commit ground forces? Why or why not?
- If the humanitarian crisis continues spreading, why should the United States not get further involved in Colombia
- Should the United States completely abdicate responsibility for this region to the Latin Americans themselves, even if the conflict becomes a direct threat to interests of the United States?
Required Readings.
a. Cynthia Watson, "Can the Civilians Hold on? Civil-Military Relations in Colombia," in Nibaldo Galleguillos and Jorge Nef, eds., Civil-Military Relations in Latin America in the Post-Cold War Era (Boulder: Lynne Rienner Books, 2000). (29 p)
b. Gabriel Marcella and Donald Schulz, Colombia's Three Wars: U.S. Strategy at the Crossroads (Carlisle Barracks, PA: U.S. Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, 1999) (41p)
c. Andrés Pastrana Arango, "Plan Colombia" (Bogotá: Government of Colombia, 1999), (30 p)
d. Robert White, "The Wrong War," The Washington Post, September 12, 1999, p. C-2.
e. Michael Shifter, "Columbia on the Brink," Foreign Affairs, July/August 1999, Volume 78, Number 4, pp. 14-21.
 |
 |
 |