Home

News

Phillips Powderhorn
Nokomis
Riverside

Regular Features

Queen of Cuisine

Save The Planet

Re-Use-It Guide

Letter from Mexico

Urban Amusements

Powderhorn Bird Watch

Herbal Remedies

Spirit & Conscience

Art Review

Music

Southside Soul Volume I

Calendars

Arts
Community
Religious

Archives

Search

 

About Us

Advertising Info

 

Submit Articles

Submit Press Release

Phillips/Powderhorn
Nokomis
Riverside
December 2005
 
 

U.S. humiliation in Argentina: soccer or real life?

Part 1 of 2

The strongest opposition to U.S. policies under Bush comes, not from the Democrats (surprise, surprise), but from Latin America. Of the three world presidents least afraid to criticize U.S. domination, all are from Latin America (Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina).

Soccer star Diego Maradona embarrassed the United States earlier this month, but not on the field. Wearing a “Bush is an assassin” T-shirt, he said that if he got hold of Bush on the field he would “rip his head off.” He then participated in the biggest demonstrations ever against Bush on the occasion of the Summit of the Americas in Mar del Plata, Argentina. The event, held to cement the Free Trade Agreement of the Americas, turned out to be its burial, as presidents of five countries (the four of the Mercosur: Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay, plus Venezuela) refused to go along with the show of unanimity. (Cuba was not allowed to participate in the summit.)

The president of Argentina, Nestor Kirchner, eschewed the usual role of host at these events, giving an opening speech blaming the United States for the social malaise that has plagued Latin America in recent decades, including poverty and the destabilization of elected governments. He said to those present, including Bush: “Our poor people, our excluded people, our countries, our democracies will no longer permit that we not raise our voices. It is fundamental that we speak with respect and in a loud voice.” He added that democracy doesn`t mean that any country has ownership rights in any other country or region.

Kirchner`s Venezuelan counterpart, Hugo Chávez, spoke, as is his nature, more bluntly against U.S. hegemony. The presidents of the other Mercosur (Latin) countries, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay, were more timid but clearly not in the U.S. client-state camp. Uruguay’s center-left president, Tabaré Vázquez, is newly elected; Brazil’s Inacio Lula daSilva is weakened by allegations of corruption. He was elected as a leftist but has maintained and even strengthened cordial relations with the United States and is considered a sell-out by many on the left.

The stronger stands taken by Chávez and especially Kirchner are clearly the result of popular demand by the people on the streets in their countries. Kirchner, in fact, was criticized by the United States and by its client states like the current regime of President Vicente Fox in Mexico, who denounced Kirchner for listening to his people and not taking into account the greater needs of the international community (read: Bush and U.S. capital).

The behavior of Fox was so abjectly pro-Washington that a state department official told the Wall Street Journal that the United States didn`t have to speak out because Mexico did it for them. The result of the summit was, of course, an embarrassment to Bush: a lack of consensus to advance the FTAA. The Bush-Fox team has tried to save face by saying that a majority of countries supported the deal, but if we count population or Gross National Product, the countries opposed to FTAA—especially Brazil, Argentina and Venezuela—clearly represent more weight than, say, El Salvador, Trinidad and Tobago, and the other free traders.

The patronizing and mildly insulting comments directed by Fox toward Kirchner, Chávez and even Maradona provoked, several days later, the famous comment by Chávez that Fox is a “lapdog of the empire.” This has provoked varied reactions in Mexico. At the official level, the line—not so widely shared—is that an insult to Fox is an insult to Mexico, and that an apology from Chávez is the only thing that can prevent a rupture of diplomatic relations between the two countries. On the other hand, in an “anti-survey” in the mass-circulation left-of-center newspaper La Jornada, 77 percent of those who responded by e-mail said, in contrast, that Chávez did not offend Mexico nor insult Fox, rather he “told the truth.”

(To be continued next week)

Johnny Hazard is a frequent contributor to Pulse on Mexican and Latin American issues. See www.bopkabala.blogspot.com for more info.