Latin America prominent in Republican presidential debate on foreign policy
But, says guest blogger James Bosworth, the Republican presidential candidates are all too busy being afraid of Hezbollah and Hugo Chávez, and trying to apply old doctrines to the modern era.
(Page 2 of 2)
Well, I've spent a lot of time and concern -- and Rick mentioned this earlier -- about what's going on in Central and South America. I'm very concerned about the militant socialists and there -- and the radical Islamists joining together, bonding together.Skip to next paragraph
In surprise landslide, Jamaican opposition wins back power
Parading back to Rio de Janeiro: the bookish and brainy
After dramatic 2011 in Cuba, will US-Cuban policy shift in 2012?
Boom goes the churro: Chilean court upholds damages for exploding sweets
Why did Hugo Chavez spam Venezuelans on Christmas?
Subscribe Today to the Monitor
I'm concerned about the spread of socialism and that this administration, with -- time after time, whether it was the delay in moving forward on Colombia's free trade agreement, whether it was turning our back to the Hondurans and standing up for democracy and the -- and the rule of law.
And we took the side with Hugo Chávez and Fidel Castro for a corrupt President. We've sent all the wrong signals to Central and South America.
Former Gov. Mitt Romney:
But I happen to think Senator Santorum is right with regards to the issue that doesn't get enough attention. That's the one that may come up that we haven't thought about, which is Latin America. Because, in fact, Congressman, we have been attacked. We were attacked on 9/11. There have been dozens of attacks that have been thwarted by our -- by our security forces. And we have, right now, Hezbollah, which is working throughout Latin America, in Venezuela, in Mexico, throughout Latin America, which poses a very significant and imminent threat to the United States of America.
Is there any chance a GOP candidate can talk about Latin America without mentioning Hezbollah, Islamic terrorists and Iran? It makes them sound incredibly out of touch with the major issues in the region.
Beyond that point, to the extent Latin America policy is discussed in this election, I think Rick Perry's comment about wanting a "21st century Monroe Doctrine" sets up the basic debate between the Republicans and Democrats, no matter who the GOP candidate ends up being. The Republicans want to return to a position in which the US dictates the policies and alliances of the region. Contrast that with President Obama's comments at the 2009 Summit of the Americas in Trinidad:
All of us must now renew the common stake that we have in one another. I know that promises of partnership have gone unfulfilled in the past, and that trust has to be earned over time. While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms. But I pledge to you that we seek an equal partnership. There is no senior partner and junior partner in our relations; there is simply engagement based on mutual respect and common interests and shared values.
There isn't any GOP presidential candidate who has "an equal partnership" as his stated policy towards the hemisphere. They're all too busy being afraid of Hezbollah and Hugo Chávez, trying to figure out how to apply a 19th century doctrine to the current situation.
--- James Bosworth is a freelance writer and consultant who runs Bloggings by Boz.
Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.
The Christian Science Monitor has assembled a diverse group of Latin America bloggers. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here.