When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

eyes on the U.S.

Washington And Latin America: Time To Undo A Warped Alliance

How have U.S. governments treated their deferential Latin American allies and admiring societies in the past century? A hard look from Bogota.

Colombian President Ivan Duque at the White House on March 2
Colombian President Ivan Duque at the White House on March 2
William Ospina

-Analysis-

BOGOTÁ — For more than a century, Colombia has been the most trusted ally of the United States and its regional policies. This is actually surprising, since the 20th century began with Colombia's loss of Panama, a secession backed by this big neighbor to the north in order to implement its canal project.

It is natural however that Latin American countries should in time have sought in an alliance with a formidable country, which in a few decades rose to superpower status as the hardest working, most industrious, innovative and in time, most welcoming nation in the world.

Its light bulbs, cars, home appliances, highways and constant inventiveness changed the way the world has come to live. Its commercial techniques, industry, consumer society, peaceful neighborhoods, and vertical cities that "scrape" the sky have all given human life another direction. U.S. telephony, radio and television, and the dream machine that is its film industry all blossomed from seemingly nowhere, to shape and define our epoch.

And there was also the vision of democracy dreamed of by Walt Whitman, the demented lucidity of Edgar Allan Poe, Emily Dickinson's reflective solitude and refinement of the senses, Edgar Lee Masters's novels woven of poems or Henry David Thoreau's reasoned romanticism. There was Ralph Waldo Emerson's serene humanism and the poetic rebellion of Ezra Pound and Allen Ginsberg, William Faulkner's torrential labyrinths, Ray Bradbury's galaxy of dreams, Henry Miller's symphonic eroticism and Philip K Dick's visionary paranoia.

But the rulers of that country have been less admirable than the society they govern, and today, after a long century of being their allies and venerators, our countries may ask themselves whether or not the alliance is worth it. Because a good deal of our troubles and the violence affecting our societies are due to the policies occasionally sketched out for us, and much more frequently imposed on us.

The Peruvian novelist Mario Vargas Llosa recently published his novel Tiempos recios (Hard Times), wherein he questions the moment the United States crushed the democratic project of Guatemala's President Jacobo Árbenz, and scuppered a worthwhile experiment in liberalism, with the pretext of fighting communism. That opened the way for revolutionary radicalism on the continent, because it wasn't just Guatemala. A succession of U.S. governments entrenched themselves in anti-communist hysteria and not only canceled great democratic efforts and aborted liberal reforms, but sponsored coups, backed bloody tyrannies and even taught the continent's armies the practices of repression, torture and kidnapping.

If we seek alliances outside their sphere of influence, they react as if we were violating certain sacred norms.

One only need look at what Latin America has become to understand, that we may not have had the best neighbor. That is not because the United Sates owed us something, but because it came to expect of us unflinching loyalty, or simple obedience to its counsels and an unqualified application of its recipe. In Colombia, it found the most servile of servitors.

While the Cold War is supposed to have ended, U.S. governments still behave as if we were their backyard, and every time our countries seek alliances or collaborations outside their sphere of influence, they react as if we were violating certain sacred norms.

Clearly however, their dictated development theory has subjected us to a state of hopeless subordination. Their ban on drugs and handling of a public health issue as a military problem are what have turned this part of the world into a killing zone, and their neo-liberal consensus policies have ruined our economies. The multinationals take the lion's share of our contracts, but the policies toward the tragedy of migrants show they do not see us as allies, but as invasive and undesirable.

U.S. troops during 1983 invasion of Grenada — Photo: U.S. Army Sgt. Michael Bogdanowicz

Daily life and politics force the poor to migrate and become clever, pragmatic and astute. Certainly, precarious education and a total lack of opportunities have not made Latin Americans into silent, courteous neighbors. As Colombia recalls, the banana firms did not exactly treat us with kid gloves, the book México bárbaro (Barbarous Mexico) relates blood-curling happenings, and there are reasons for Cuba's distance from its opportunistic neighbor. Guatemala's Jacobo Árbenz, the Dominican Juan Bosch and Chile's Salvador Allende knew the great power to the north did not hesitate to thwart the wishes of majorities in other countries. Its 1983 invasion of Grenada and dropping parachutists into Panama were not peaceful takeovers.

Certainly we are responsible for our problems, but the policies of a bad neighbor have undoubtedly helped. Many countries on the continent are now reconsidering this alliance, and some are cured of illusions and busy finding themselves new partners. Colombia should probably start to do this too.

Today, when climate change is the world's foremost challenge, when its consequences of calamities, pandemics and mass extinctions are becoming clearer every day, we cannot go on with business as usual. We cannot remain beholden to those who take our riches but raise walls and shut their door when they see us coming in destitution.

There is another hope of course, that people inside the United States should now understand the scale of this threat, and how much is at stake. We can hope that they will not just change their government, but recover the lofty dreams that shaped that great nation.

Then, they may come to respect us again, even as we too must learn to respect ourselves, and understand the value of our world. It was precisely an American woman, the poet Emily Dickinson, who found a great secret of life and death, when she wrote, "Who has not found the heaven below, Will fail of it above."

You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
  • $2.90/month or $19.90/year. No hidden charges. Cancel anytime.
Already a subscriber? Log in

When the world gets closer, we help you see farther

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
FOCUS: Russia-Ukraine War

When Did Putin "Turn" Evil? That's Exactly The Wrong Question

Look back over the past two decades, and you'll see Vladimir Putin has always been the man revealed by the Ukraine invasion, an evil and sinister dictator. The Russian leader just managed to mask it, especially because so many chose to see him as a typically corrupt and greedy strongman who could be bribed or reasoned with.

Putin arrives for a ceremony to accept credentials from 24 foreign ambassadors at the Grand Kremlin Palace on Sept. 20.

Sergiy Gromenko*

-OpEd-

KYIV — The world knows that Vladimir Putin has power, money and mistresses. So why, ask some, wasn't that enough for him? Why did he have to go start another war?

At its heart, this is the wrong question to ask. For Putin, military expansion is not an adrenaline rush to feed into his existing life of luxury. On the contrary, the shedding of blood for the sake of holding power is his modus operandi, while the fruits of greed and corruption like the Putin Palace in Gelendzhik are more like a welcome bonus.

In the last year, we have kept hearing rhetorical questions like “why did Putin start this war at all, didn't he have enough of his own land?” or “he already has Gelendzhik to enjoy, why fight?” This line of thinking has resurfaced after missile strikes on Ukrainian power grids and dams, which was regarded by many as a simple demonstration of terrorism. Such acts are a manifestation of weakness, some ask, so is Putin ready to show himself weak?

Stay up-to-date with the latest on the Russia-Ukraine war, with our exclusive international coverage.

Sign up to our free daily newsletter.

However, you will not arrive at the correct answer if the questions themselves are asked incorrectly. For decades, analysts in Russia, Ukraine, and the West have been under an illusion about the nature of the Russian president's personal dictatorship.

Keep reading...Show less

When the world gets closer, we help you see farther

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter!
You've reached your monthly limit of free articles.
To read the full article, please subscribe.
Get unlimited access. Support Worldcrunch's unique mission:
  • Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.
  • Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries
  • $2.90/month or $19.90/year. No hidden charges. Cancel anytime.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Writing contest - My pandemic story
THE LATEST
FOCUS
TRENDING TOPICS

Central to the tragic absurdity of this war is the question of language. Vladimir Putin has repeated that protecting ethnic Russians and the Russian-speaking populations of Ukraine was a driving motivation for his invasion.

Yet one month on, a quick look at the map shows that many of the worst-hit cities are those where Russian is the predominant language: Kharkiv, Odesa, Kherson.

Watch VideoShow less
MOST READ