Dubya south of the border – Analysis and opinion

The U.S. and Guatemalan president met on Monday to discuss issues like free trade and immigration. (Image via BBC News ).

While U.S. President George W. Bush continues his tour of Latin America, let’s take a brief look at five opinion articles written over the past few days.

* Bush’s tour of the Americas may be the beginning of a less confrontational stance towards the region, says columnist Marcela Sanchez.So far the Bush administration as not only taken a harsh stance against countries that don’t agree with him but U.S. policies have led to “devastating” relations with the Americas.Yet Sanchez goes on to note that:

"The fact that this is Bush's eighth trip to the region shows that the United States has not been disengaged from Latin America, but that its engagement has taken the wrong approach…The Bush administration is borrowing a page from the Clinton years to counter anti-Americanism abroad. Back in the late 1990s when globalization had generated so much bitterness toward the United States that McDonald's restaurants were being attacked in France, Felix G. Rohatyn, the U.S. ambassador at the time, sent diplomats out from the embassy in Paris to make themselves available to the French people. The initial goal wasn't to change minds, Rohatyn told me recently, but "to have an exchange of views" and to articulate the logic behind U.S. policy”.

* Guardian UK commentator Michael Lisman points out the importance of improving educational standards in order to allow free trade to flourish in the region. Skilled workers are necessary for free trade to work, and, therefore, requires an educated population. Lisman notes that:

“A good start would be committing some of DR-CAFTA's $40 million in earmarked funds for trade readiness and institution-building towards education and training programs. Participating governments should also renew their commitments to relevant teacher training and develop national education standards. As crucial as it is, education also needs government guarantees that free trade and increased privatization will not cause educational policy to be sold to the highest bidder”.

* An editorial in Britain’s The Daily Telegraph reminds readers of the importance of Bush’s trip. The editorial notes how vital a biofuel agreement with Brazil is; though it seems to take the disingenuous view that as long as Bush makes a good impression in Mexico and brazil then the trip will have been worth it:

“In São Paulo, Mr. Bush has the chance to deepen an already good relationship with a country whose economy, along with that of Mexico, the President's last stop, dwarfs all others in Latin America. That alone could make the tour worthwhile.”

* Fareed Zakaria would staunchly disagree with The Daily Telegraph’s article in that it is too little to late, and that Bush has very little to gain on his trip. He Bush administration squandered the “forward movement” seen by his previous four predecessors and now has very little leeway in the region:

“When Bush had enormous room to maneuver in 2001, when loaded with political capital in 2002 and 2003, he embarked on a series of ideological exercises that severely diminished American influence and prestige. Now, battered by failure, he has moved toward more-sensible policies—not just in Latin America, but in North Korea and even the Middle East. But the president is now walking alone, with few supporters at home or abroad, and little capital that he can draw on to execute any of his new approaches. In region after region, on issue after issue, that might well be the recurring theme of George W. Bush's foreign policy in his final 22 months.”

* Lastly, Cragg Hines from the Houston Chronicle observes that Bush’s trip aims to counter Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez no matter how much the Bush administration denies it. While Chavez goes on his own tour at the same time as Bush’s and both leaders are highly unpopular, Hines argues that Bush has far less to gain than Chavez. Hines concludes with the following:

“At least in its policy outline, the Bush trip seeks to broaden the agenda. In Brazil, for instance, Bush and Lula will focus on alternative energy, especially Brazil's success in converting sugar cane into ethanol.

A sustained emphasis on such points would mark a major shift in how the United States deals with Latin America.”

Links- La Tercera, Monsters & Critics, CNN, Washington Post, Guardian UK, The Daily Telegraph, MSNBC, Houston Chronicle