Why Trade and Conflict Will Mix in Latin America

Continent: South America Contact: TAKEN FROM Stratfor.com Summary President George W. Bush declined an invitation from Colombian President Andres Pastrana to engage the United States directly in that country's recently revived peace negotiations with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia. Bush explained that the Colombian civil war is a matter only Colombians can resolve. But internationalization of the Colombian peace talks will make it impossible for Washington to keep the conflict from entangling the U.S. agenda of free trade. Analysis Peace negotiations between the Colombian government and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) will be re-launched March 8 with the official presence of 24 Latin American, European and Asian countries. These will include Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Netherlands, Norway, Panama, Peru, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and Venezuela. Officials of the European Union, United Nations and the Vatican also will participate. The United States will not participate in the de facto internationalization of the Colombian civil war. On Feb. 27, President George W. Bush rejected invitations from Colombian President Andres Pastrana and the FARC to send an official U.S. delegation to the meeting in the FARC-controlled town of Los Pozos in southern Colombia. Bush explained that finding a peaceful solution for the decades-old Colombian civil war is strictly a matter for Colombians. The Bush administration will find it impossible, however, to keep the Colombian conflict at arm's length while advancing a broader hemispheric trade agenda now that peace negotiations in that country have been internationalized. In particular, the direct engagement of Brazil, Cuba, Mexico and Venezuela in the Colombian government's peace negotiations with the FARC could create obstacles to the Bush administration's intentions of placing more emphasis on trade expansion in Latin America than on the drug war in Colombia. These four countries are united in their opposition to the U.S.- funded $1.3 billion military component in Plan Colombia to eradicate the coca trade. Of the four, Mexico has been the least vocal in its opposition to the military anti-narcotics element of Plan Colombia. But all four view the U.S.-funded deployment of three Colombian army anti-narcotics battalions as the beginning of a dangerous incremental U.S. military intervention in South America. Besides their opposition to what they perceive as increased U.S. military involvement in Colombia, the four countries - Brazil, Cuba, Mexico and Venezuela - share many economic and political linkages that will come into sharper focus as a result of their involvement in the Colombian peace talks. For example, Mexico and Venezuela are Colombia's commercial partners in the decade-old Group of Three (G3) trade organization. Venezuela-Colombia bilateral trade totaled about $2.4 billion last year. An expanded civil war in Colombia could damage Mexican and Venezuelan trade and investment interests. In addition to their opposition to U.S. drug policy in Colombia, Mexico and Venezuela also oppose the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba and maintain friendly trade and diplomatic relations with the Cuban government. Mexico is one of Cuba's top trading partners, as are Canada and Spain. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez is providing Cuba hundreds of millions of dollars in energy and financial assistance. The governments of Mexico, Cuba and Venezuela also maintain direct relations with the FARC. Brazil is officially neutral to the Colombian conflict but shares Venezuela's concern that the U.S. presence in Plan Colombia threatens regional stability, and is also concerned about spillover into the Amazon. Brazil's engagement in the Colombian peace talks as of March 8 may provide it with more regional political leverage to successfully block or postpone U.S. efforts to speed up the FTAA process at the third Summit of the Americas next April in Quebec. Brazil may also view its engagement in the Colombian peace talks as a way of countering U.S. leadership in South America. President Chavez and Cuban leader Fidel Castro see their direct engagement in the Colombian peace process as a way of helping to legitimize the FARC's political status, while deepening their joint opposition to what they call the single-power hegemony of the United States. Last October in Caracas, Chavez and Castro jointly committed Venezuela and Cuba to the task of building a global multipolar alliance to counter U.S. hegemony. In pursuit of this goal, the two leaders have built bridges to both Iran and Iraq, while strengthening their economic and military linkages to the People's Republic of China. Chavez and Castro can leverage their direct engagement in the Colombian peace talks to enhance their own leadership at home and abroad, while opposing and undermining U.S. interests and influence throughout Latin America Mexican President Vicente Fox wants to expand Mexico's trade and diplomatic presence in Latin America. He appointed as foreign minister Jorge Castaneda, a leftist intellectual and writer who is strongly critical of both the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Cuban revolution. The appointment was widely interpreted as a sign Mexico's new president will pursue an assertive and independent foreign policy that may clash more frequently with U.S. interests. Mexico's engagement in the Colombian peace talks will be the first big test of the Fox administration's new foreign policy. Fox has an opportunity to position Mexico as a moderating force in the Colombian peace process to counter the more hawkish positions likely to be assumed by the Venezuelan and Cuban leaders. The Bush administration's main challenge will be identifying and exploiting the cleavages between Brazil, Cuba, Mexico and Venezuela in order to advance U.S. policy interests in Colombia and throughout Latin America. Of the four countries, Mexico is the country where the Bush administration may have the greatest success. Mexico's NAFTA partnership with the United States is vital to its economic development and social stability. Strengthening bilateral Mexico- U.S. relations is a top priority for the Fox government. Fox also has staked out a position as Latin America's newest leading advocate of free trade and democracy. Mexico likely will be a leading voice for moderation in the Colombian peace negotiations, leveraging its role in the talks to boost Mexico's international status in South America and Europe, two regions where the Fox government wants to grow Mexican trade and investment linkages rapidly. The United States is one pillar of a hemispheric free trade area. But Brazil is also a vital pillar of the proposed FTAA. Without Brazilian cooperation, President Bush will have little success in his efforts to speed up creation of the FTAA. Nevertheless, Brazil today is a more distant neighbor than Mexico ever was in the past before NAFTA was conceived and put into effect. Brazil views the United States as its principal competitor for economic and political leadership in South America. Brazil is determined to expand and consolidate the South American Customs Union (Mercosur) and build trade linkages with Europe before negotiating a hemispheric free trade agreement with the United States. Brazil also will be a moderating force in the Colombian peace talks, but at the same time will exploit its participation in the talks to block the Bush administration's broader trade agenda in Latin America. Venezuela is one of America's largest foreign oil suppliers, and recently President Chavez has toned down his rhetoric against the free market and the United States. This is a tactical move by Chavez, not a change of heart. Chavez is a cunning populist and still enjoys widespread popular support in Venezuela, but he is not by nature a conciliatory and inclusive leader. Chavez will not interrupt the flow of oil to the United States; he needs the export revenues to keep the Venezuelan economy afloat and sustain his "Bolivarian revolution." Chavez will continue to oppose the U.S. presence in Colombia, however, and may join Brazil in resisting the Bush administration's attempts to speed up the pace of hemispheric trade negotiations. As a substitute for an FTAA, Chavez has proposed a "political confederation" of Latin American republics that would include Puerto Rico. Cuba is opposed to anything in Latin America viewed by Washington as important to U.S. economic and political interests. The Colombian civil war is the region's most explosive flash point. Cuba's participation in peace talks between the Pastrana government and the FARC provides Castro a potentially powerful wedge issue to create divisions between the United States and Latin America. The Bush administration can do little to neutralize Castro with respect to his involvement in the Colombian peace negotiations since Mexico, Venezuela and Brazil maintain friendly relations with Cuba and are longtime opponents of the U.S. trade embargo. President Bush insists the United States will not get more deeply involved in Colombia's civil war. But the Bush administration will find it impossible to keep the Colombian conflict at arm's length while advancing a broader hemispheric trade agenda now that peace negotiations in that country have been internationalized. SERJ: Ok, so the U.S. is willing to pour a couple of extra billion dollars to fight its competition in the drug trade, the FARC of Columbia, while supporting its allies in the drug trade, (the paramilitary troops supported by the army), with weapons. But it does not want to lend a hand to ending the civil war in that country....Hum... Obviously Bush doesn't see dollars in peace.. Neither did his dad...

go back