Thanks to Foreign Policy Blogs, I ran across this piece by Noam Chomsky in The Huffington Post. While discussing the decline of U.S. influence worldwide, Chomsky makes this statement about the situation in Latin America:
In the past decade, for the first time in 500 years, South America has taken successful steps to free itself from western domination, another serious loss [to US hegemony]. The region has moved towards integration, and has begun to address some of the terrible internal problems of societies ruled by mostly Europeanized elites, tiny islands of extreme wealth in a sea of misery. They have also rid themselves of all U.S. military bases and of IMF controls. A newly formed organization, CELAC, includes all countries of the hemisphere apart from the U.S. and Canada. If it actually functions, that would be another step in American decline, in this case in what has always been regarded as “the backyard.”
Okay, fair enough. But even if I can’t disagree with Chomsky on the facts, I think his overall tone overstates the extent to which U.S. influence has declined in the region. Moreover, I think he is wrong insofar as he seems to suggest that Latin America has been able to thumb its nose at a United States that remains committed to controlling its “backyard.”
This last bit is key. From the Monroe Doctrine through the Cold War, the U.S. became accustomed to viewing Latin America as its backyard, a place where it had unrivaled influence. Since the Cold War’s end, however, and especially under the Bush and Obama administrations, Latin America has become less of a priority. With so many other fires to tend around the globe, Latin America has taken a back seat. I’m not saying that’s wise, but I think it’s a dynamic that must be acknowledged in any analysis of U.S. influence in Latin America. All that being said, Chomsky’s main argument–that the U.S. is neither the only kid on the block nor the only one with muscle–is hard to deny.
-NF
