U.S. -- Latin America International

U.S. -- Latin America International Affairs

The three articles each address a different aspect of the relationship between the United States and Latin America. Interestingly, these aspects appear quite divergent, with some being openly negative in nature, while others are more lenient in their opinion of U.S. policy and the reasons for this policy regarding Latin American countries. In this way, the three aspects provide an objective perspective of the issues under consideration.

The first article being considered is "U.S. Policy toward Cuban the 1980s and 1990s" by Jorge I. Dominguez. This is the most focused article in terms of the specific Latin American region being addressed. Dominguez is somewhat critical of U.S. policy in the country, but does not suggest that related problems do not have a solution. Indeed, he highlights the problem as he sees it, very specifically, being of the opinion that an undervaluation of negotiation and an overvaluation of penalties lie at the basis of American problems in their relationship with Cuba. According to the author, Cuba responds better to open, mutual negotiation than to penalties and threats.

What is most interesting about this article is the sense that it relates to humanity as a whole. It is generally easier to accomplish one's wishes with negotiation than with threat. With negotiation, both parties can reach an agreement that is relatively satisfactory. There is the sense of voluntarily engaging in action to satisfy the agreement. This is true in many sectors of society, including education, and all areas of the professional sector where superiors and their inferiors negotiate to reach a satisfactory end.

This appears to be the premise of the article, and the author's research seems to substantiate it. Dominguez cites examples of both threat and negotiation in U.S. policy in its relationship with Cuba. In almost all cases where force and threat are used, much less is accomplished than with negotiation.

The article creates a good impression of being both well-researched and well-argued. Although the author maintains that the United States tends towards force instead of negotiation, he does not suggest that this problem cannot be overcome. Instead, he suggests that the future could hold a mutually beneficial relationship between the countries, where both can negotiate to reach an optimal agreement to satisfy both parties.

The second article, written by Victor Bulmer-Thomas and James Dunkerley, is "The United States and Latin America: The New Agenda." This article leans to a somewhat more negative view of U.S. policy in Latin America. It is also more general than the piece by Dominguez, in that it addresses a larger time span and Latin America in general rather than one country specifically. The era being addressed is the Cold War and the effects and legacy of American policy regarding Latin America during this time.

The premise of the article is that the United States employs policies that are disproportionate to the country's stated goals in Latin America. At the basis for this type of illogical action on the part of the United States, according to the authors, is the American fear of communism. The authors categorize this fear within American ideology, as opposed to their economic and political ends. The authors note that American policy with regard to their political and economic goals are generally sound. The same is not however true in terms of their ideology.

This point is substantiated by a consideration of the American mentality during the time of the Cold War. There was an extreme, almost religious fear of the "communism" concept during the time. Both politicians and citizens regarded the communist ideology as directly opposed to the American ideal of democracy and freedom. The government therefore had the blessing of the people whenever policies were instated to combat communism in Latin American countries. In the name of their democratic ideology, and in opposition to communism, the United States government went as far as incurring disproportionate costs in its attempt to overthrow governments and fight wars to enforce its ideology.

While the authors make a compelling argument, one is left with the feeling that the anti-communist ideology was at the basis of all disproportionate policies regarding Latin America at the time of the Cold War. This appears to be a somewhat simplified version of the full story. Certainly other aspects of such policies should also be considered. Also, the authors appear somewhat pessimistic in their projection for the future relationship between the United States and Latin America. While this is doubtlessly a manifestation of the time of publication, I find the article somewhat narrow in its focus on a single aspect of the issue while not considering other arguments.