Treatment of Posada Will Test Integrity of
Washington's Anti-Terrorism Crusade
The Bush administration's response to the Luis Posada
Carriles case brings to mind its similar mishandling of the 2002 attempted
coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez. The White House cheered the
temporary downfall of the democratically-elected Chávez, despite its
commitment to the "spread of democracy." Similarly, Washington appeared to
hesitate over its pledge to fight terrorism at home and abroad by not
acknowledging for weeks that it knew Posada was in the country, proof that
the $3.8 billion spent on border security each year is completely
ineffective in deterring terrorists from entering the U.S. The
administration's policy shift in both cases came only under intense
international pressure to abide by the White House’s own standards. Once
again, the Bush administration has revealed an enormous capacity for
selective indignation depending on whether the villainous act was
committed against a country with a political ideology acceptable to
Washington.
This analysis was prepared by COHA Research
Associate, Joseph Taves.
The Breakdown on Immigration Issues
President Bush’s May 11 decision to sign into law the
“Real ID” bill stung millions of Mexicans as it represented the last
likely opportunity that the Bush administration will have during the Fox
presidency to come forth with a dramatic move opening up the U.S to a more
hospitable treatment of would-be Mexican immigrants. It also makes it a
certainty that future immigration issues would be treated in a criminal
justice context rather than as an aspect of trade or employment. The new
legislation will prohibit thousands of illegal immigrants from obtaining
drivers licenses, which are critical to their economic livelihood, and
authorizes the financing of a fence along part of the U.S.-Mexico border.
On May 13, a frustrated President Vicente Fox expressed the anger and
outrage felt by many Mexicans when he hastily said: “There is no doubt
that Mexican men and women […] are doing the jobs in the United States
that not even black people want to do there.” While Fox managed to shoot
himself in the foot with patronizing remarks (despite his subsequent
apology), the distraction caused by Fox’s undiplomatic performance could
thwart Mexico’s hopes for a favorable immigration compromise with
Washington before Fox leaves office.
This analysis was prepared by COHA Research
Associate, Hampden Macbeth.
Brazil-Argentina Ties Worsen
Brazilian President Luis Inácio “Lula” da Silva’s
leadership initiatives have included orthodox domestic economic policies
and taking issue with the U.S. on trade and foreign policy initiatives,
while managing to maintain good relations with Washington as well as doing
no small service to the Bush administration by having the Brazilian
military head the U.N. peacekeeping mission to Haiti (MINUSTAH).
Meanwhile, Lula has Brazil well on its way to becoming, or at least acting
as, South America’s lone super power – much to the ire of Argentine
President Néstor Kirchner. While Buenos Aires, which was a very large
regional trading power until the financial crisis of 2001, should feel
miffed if Brasilia insists on exerting disproportionate influence on
cooperative ventures such as the proposed South American Community of
Nations and the Southern Cone trade bloc MERCOSUR, any opposition from
Argentina to Brazil’s efforts to seek permanent membership of the U.N.
Security Council almost certainly will be counterproductive. Brazil, whose
population is more than five times that of Argentina and whose GDP is
greater than that of Russia, possesses the numbers to be South America’s
definitive “big guy.” Without dispute, it could serve the area as an
effective advocate for South America’s interests, much more than any of
the council’s current permanent members. A permanent seat on the Security
Council would provide Brazil with increased leverage in its dealings with
dominant states around the world, allowing it to more effectively lobby
for favorable trade terms and debt repayment conditions from a position of
strength, thus benefiting the continent as a whole, including Argentina.
________________________________________
This analysis was prepared by COHA Research
Associate, Philip Morrow.
May 20, 2005
The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975,
is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and
information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as
being “one of the nation’s most respected bodies of scholars and policy
makers.” For more information, please see our web page at
www.coha.org; or contact our Washington offices by phone (202)
223-4975, fax (202) 223-4979, or email
coha@coha.org