[A-List] Latin America Looks Hard at U.S.

[Macdonald Stainsby <mstainsby@xxxxxx>]

Latin America Looks Hard at U.S.

Mistrust of Washington Complicates
Proposal for Hemispheric Free Trade
By DAVID LUHNOW
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL


MEXICO CITY -- Following the recent failure of global trade talks in
Cancun, the U.S. has focused its attention on creating a hemisphere-
wide Free Trade of the Americas Accord that would accomplish much of
what the World Trade Organization has failed to do. The catch,
according to a new poll: Many Latin Americans don't want closer
trade ties to the U.S.

>From Brazil to Bolivia, where the pro-U.S. president was ousted
nearly two weeks ago, skepticism has grown about U.S. intentions in
the region and the wisdom of having close ties to Washington.
Brazil's popular leftist leader, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has
positioned himself as a counterweight to U.S. influence and is
taking a tough stand in negotiating a trade deal -- winning plaudits
at home and abroad.

The results of a survey of opinion makers, government officials and
other prominent Latin Americans by Zogby International and the
University of Miami School of Business Administration bear this out.
Just 18% of respondents want their economies more integrated with
the U.S. Most prefer integration with other Latin American countries
or with Europe.

The reason: They feel the U.S. would benefit more from free trade
than would Latin America. Some 51% said a trade deal would benefit
the U.S. more than Latin America, compared with 39% who said both
Latin America and the U.S. would benefit more or less equally. Just
8% said Latin America would benefit more than the U.S. The survey
interviewed 537 leaders in government, the media, academia and
business in Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Chile, Mexico and Peru.

The perception that the U.S. wants to protect its own interests at
the expense of others has become particularly acute in Latin America
in the past two years. Many in the region see hypocrisy in the 2001
U.S. Farm Bill that increased subsidies to American farmers, and in
the imposition of tariffs to protect an aging U.S. steel industry.
The Iraq war heightened the sense that the U.S. wants to go it alone
in the world.

The survey shows that taking a tough line against Washington can be
a popular move. The most respected leader among regional opinion-
makers right now is Mr. da Silva, whose job performance gets
approval from 69% of the region's elite, according to the survey.
The former labor leader has shifted to the political center since
taking power at the start of this year -- easing concerns on Wall
Street -- but he is also growing more outspoken as a critic of rich
nations.

Brazil and the U.S. have bickered for months over how to build a
trade deal stretching from Alaska to Patagonia. Brazil insists the
U.S. end agricultural subsidies as part of a deal -- a move
Washington flatly rejects. It was a similar demand by Brazil and
other developing nations that helped scuttle the WTO talks in Cancun.

Both nations are hosting a meeting in Miami next month to get the
trade talks unstuck. But the tension between the two giants is
palpable. Last week, U.S. Deputy Trade Secretary Peter Allgeier said
during a visit to Brazil that a regional trade deal would still go
ahead without Brazil, sparking an angry reaction. Brazil's
agricultural minister, Roberto Rodrigues, said any deal without
Brazil would be "second-rate."

"We're at a stalemate right now, and the Miami meetings are going to
be key to get this trade deal unstuck," says Miguel Diaz, head of
the Latin American Center at the Center for Strategic and
International Studies in Washington.

Making matters worse, many in Latin America feel the U.S. has badly
neglected the region since launching the so-called war on terror.
Asked to rate President Bush's job performance concerning Latin
America, 87% rated him negatively, 12% positively.

Not all Latin American nations or intellectuals feel the same way,
of course. Costa Rica and Colombia are eager to strike a regional
deal and don't want bickering to sink the talks. They believe a deal
would bring badly needed investment to the region.

The survey wasn't all bad news for U.S. policymakers. Latin
America's opinion makers are willing to bet on opening the region's
economies more to the outside world, despite a recent groundswell of
popular opinion against multilateral institutions such as the
International Monetary Fund. Some 60% said economic liberalization
has been good for their countries, while 36% disagreed. Even in
Argentina, which suffered an economic crisis during 2001-02 after
carrying out IMF-style reforms for a decade, a majority -- 53% to
41% -- said opening the economy had been a positive. Support for
economic liberalization was strongest in Brazil and Chile, weakest
in Mexico, Colombia and Venezuela.

Like the move to open economic borders, the spread of political
freedom in the past decade has produced mixed results. Latin
America's elite are somewhat disillusioned with the way democracy
has worked in their countries. The poll found 48% of respondents
satisfied with democracy, and 45% dissatisfied. Brazil and Chile
were the most satisfied, while Mexico and Venezuela were the least
satisfied. That could be explained by the fact that Chile and Brazil
have a longer track record with democracy than Mexico, while
Venezuela -- with a much older democratic tradition than all three --
 is governed by populist Hugo Chavez, who many fear wants to set up
a Cuban-style dictatorship.

Write to David Luhnow at david.luhnow@xxxxxxx

Updated October 28, 2003


--
Macdonald Stainsby
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/rad-green
In the contradiction lies the hope
                            --Bertolt Brecht