Fifty years ago, author Eduardo Galeano described the relationship between the US and Latin America in his book, “The Open Veins of Latin America”: “Our wealth has always generated our poverty by nourishing the prosperity of others — the empires and their native overseers.”
Times change, though. As we enter the third decade of this 21st century, Latin American nations are again discussing ways to seek greater unity and mutual support for each other — and Mexico has been leading the way.
This September, Mexico was host to the sixth summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC). The regional bloc of 32 sovereign nations was formed in 2011 in Caracas, Venezuela. Since its inception, it was seen as an alternative to the Organization of American States (OAS), a tool of US domination created during the Cold War. Throughout the previous century, the OAS played a key role in Yankee invasions, espionage, destabilization, and interference throughout Latin America.
In anticipation of this year’s CELAC summit, Mexico’s center-left government made a bold proposal: CELAC should grow to eventually replace the OAS. Latin America needs a regional bloc that serves its own interests, Mexico said, rather than pandering to the interest of the US.
The idea is certainly not new: it goes back to Simón Bolívar, the liberator of several South American nations. In the early 19th century, Bolívar envisioned a union of Latin American nations. Long after his death, the idea of a united Latin America remained an elusive dream throughout the region, echoed by both radicals, like Che Guevara, and moderates, such as José Martí. Mexico’s current administration has invoked this dream yet again.
On July 24, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (known by the acronym AMLO) gave a speech at the historic Castle of Chapultepec, in honor of the 238th anniversary of Simón Bolívar’s birth. He spoke of “keeping Bolívar’s dream alive” and promoting regional unity in Latin America and the Caribbean, describing the OAS as “a model imposed on us more than two centuries ago [which] is now outdated; it has no future and benefits no one.”
Shortly thereafter, AMLO’s Foreign Minister, Marcelo Ebrard, critiqued the OAS for its lack of leadership during the pandemic. He emphasized, instead, the cooperative actions taken by Latin American countries to support each other. “If we had not worked together on this,” he told La Jornada in an interview, “Mexico would not have had even a third of the vaccines that we have now, thanks to our collaboration with Argentina and AstraZeneca.” He described the OAS as having grown “morally and politically bankrupt,” and called for the creation of a new regional organization. “We cannot keep thinking like we did 70 years ago.”
A month later, he called for a regional organization that would respond to Latin America’s needs in the 21st century, rather than promoting Cold War-era interventionism. “It is time for another organization, built by our political will, in mutual agreement with the United States.”
Outside of Mexico, a broader shift has taken place in Latin America at large. Of the six major pro-U.S. countries that formed the anti-Maduro “Lima Group” in 2017, only Brazil and Colombia still have neoliberal administrations. Several major Latin American governments have recently moved to the center and the left.
Meanwhile, Mexico has been emerging as a regional leader on several fronts. The administration has been actively brokering discussions between governments and opposition groups in Nicaragua and Venezuela. It is among the top 10 nations worldwide in sheer numbers of vaccinations, and has donated thousands of vaccines to Central American nations. While Mexico was historically a mere route of passage for migrants heading to the US, it has recently become the end destination for thousands of refugees. The representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Mexico, Giovanni Lepri, praised Mexico’s resettlement work as “very successful, an example at a worldwide scale of an effective process of integration.”
In addition, Mexico will become president pro tempore of the UN Security Council in November. Regardless of what emerges from the CELAC summit, the country’s emergence as a regional leader cannot be ignored. Shortly before the gathering, AMLO emphasized the significance thereof: “We are a free and sovereign nation, and our principles are those of non-interventionism, self-determination and peaceful conflict resolution, as well as the defense of human rights.”
Considering this progress, it’s no wonder that the administration has faced hostility from both Mexico’s right-wingers as well as the US corporate media. Following the summit, the newspaper El Universal immediately criticized AMLO for inviting leaders from Venezuela and Cuba. The Biden administration has not yet officially responded to CELAC’s statements. Meanwhile, the US media continues to depict the Mexican president as a reckless rogue, remaining hellbent on depicting him as an absolute failure in handling the COVID-19 pandemic. (This, despite the country’s proactive strategy and impressive vaccination rates: See “The Myth of ‘the Careless Mexican Government’: US Media Continue to Pandemic-Shame Mexico’s Center-Left President,” http://www.populist.com/27.10. Schmidt.html)
Only time will tell how cohesive CELAC will be. During this recent summit, tensions rose at certain points, with the presidents of Uruguay and Paraguay speaking out against Cuba and Venezuela. In order for any coalition or bloc to survive, it must be broad and inclusive enough to survive such differences. How much room will there be for plurality, for diverse models of development and socioeconomic policy? In the words of the Zapatistas, will CELAC become “a world with enough room for all the worlds that are necessary”?
AMLO described such disagreements as an integral component of democracy itself. “They are a part of diversity, of what democratic plurality is all about. I have always sustained that political confrontation is an intrinsic element of democracy: we can’t all just think the same way.”
Despite such differences, the countries were able to come together for essential matters of health and vaccine supplies, as well as planning for a fund to support nations facing natural disasters. Discussion even turned to the possible creation of a Latin American Space Agency. As the nations and peoples of Latin America fight for their own autonomy and interests, the words of Simón Bolívar remain applicable:
“It is even harder to maintain the equilibrium of liberty than to shoulder the yoke of tyranny.”
David J. Schmidt is an author, podcaster, multilingual translator and homebrewer who splits his time between Mexico City and San Diego, Calif. He is a proponent of fair and alternative forms of trade, has published a variety of books, essays, short stories and articles in English and Spanish, and is the co-host of the podcast To Russia with Love. See holyghoststories.com or Twitter @SchmidtTales
From The Progressive Populist, November 1, 2021
Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us