Go, Canada!

March 2, 2010

Once all the post-mortems of the just-completed Olympic Winter Games in Canada are written, one major success will stand out above the others: Canada’s national effort to ensure the success of their athletes on the slopes and frozen surfaces of British Columbia.  Say what you will about Canada’s “Own the Podium” initiative, but the bottom line is that it worked.

Canada previously hosted two Olympics: the Summer Games in Montreal in 1976 and the Winter Games in Calgary in 1988.  At neither of these games did the host nation win a gold medal, results that led to snickering about Canadians wanting to be such great hosts that they refused to upset their guests by claiming the top of the podium in any one event, including national sports like hockey.  Indeed, the Canadians were outstanding hosts this time, too, but they did not let that get in the way of a fierce determination to move up in the medal count.

Apparently, the third time is the charm.  At the final bell, Canada had amassed more gold medals than anyone else, and had finished third in the overall medal count.  The final event, the hockey championship against the United States, went according to some Hollywood script, calling for the hosts improbably to give up the tying goal just before time, while then fighting back in overtime for the game-winner from national golden boy Sidney Crosby.  Canada went berserk, and the celebration began in earnest.

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Strengthening the U.S. Relationship with Spain

February 9, 2010

I was in Madrid for our major conference on U.S.-Spain-Latin American relations the day that the White House announced President Obama was going to skip the U.S.-EU Summit scheduled for May, and it went over like a lead balloon.  Subsequently, the Financial Times (editorial of February 3), Anne Appelbaum (op-ed in the Washington Post) and others opined that it was in fact the right decision. Their reasons: Europe still doesn’t have its act together, Europeans have generally been churlish in support of U.S. priorities in Afghanistan and elsewhere, and, in fact, Europe still lacks a structure whereby the U.S. president can confidently engage its “leadership.”  Or, as Henry Kissinger famously quipped, when you want to talk to Europe, whom do you call?  So the lack of White House interest in the May summit was perhaps unsurprising, and was less of a snub than some have portrayed it.

More surprising, however, was the apparent lack of interest of the White House in meeting with Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero when he was in Washington last week for the annual Prayer Breakfast.  It’s a tried and true tactic of foreign leaders to come to Washington for other activities, and then attempt an unscheduled courtesy call on the U.S. leader—I’ve seen it myself from both in and outside government, and sometimes it works.  Sometimes it doesn’t, and the risk is all the foreign leader’s.  If it always worked, the U.S. president would face a constant stream of global leaders, some invited, many not, and as short-sighted as it may seem, it’s simply impossible to meet with anyone who shows up.

Read More

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Massachusetts Senate Election has Implications for Latin America

January 20, 2010

Yesterday’s election in Massachusetts to fill Ted Kennedy’s U.S. Senate seat had little to do with Latin America, but the implications of Scott Brown’s victory over Martha Coakley will nonetheless resonate across the region. That’s because the victory of the Republican candidate breaks the Democrats’ super majority of 60 votes in the Senate, and will likely require renewed negotiation and accommodation in order to pass the massive health care bill that has been the top priority of the White House and Congressional leaders since early 2009. Further delay on health care means that other agenda items will have to wait even longer for the political attention required to address them, and the mood on Capitol Hill could well become still more partisan and sour.

That’s doubly true for controversial legislation, particularly as we move further into 2010, which is a midterm election year. Since President Obama was inaugurated one year ago today, three out of the four special elections have been won by Republicans (the Massachusetts Senate seat and the Governorships of Virginia and New Jersey). Only an upstate New York Congressional seat was won by the Democratic candidate, and that was after the Republican vote split over two candidates. Looking ahead to the elections in November, many observers predict that Democratic losses will mount, which means the White House and Congressional leadership will do whatever they can to improve the midterm prospects by juicing the economy, creating jobs and strengthening the support of the Democratic base, particularly organized labor.

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Another Lion of the Senate Announces his Departure

January 6, 2010

Latin America is losing another champion in the Senate, Chris Dodd (D-CT), who has announced that he will not seek re-election in November.  The five-term Senator was facing a tough fight and soft poll numbers, and the announcement was not really unexpected by political observers.  Nonetheless, coupled with the recent passing of Senator Ted Kennedy, the Western Hemisphere is losing another strong voice for the region.  Senator Dodd is the Chairman of the Western Hemisphere Subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee, and both formally and informally he has played an important role regarding U.S. policy in the region. 

It’s true that over the past couple years a presidential run and then the financial crisis diverted the Senator’s attention somewhat away from the region.  Then again, the presidential elections and the financial crisis diverted everyone’s attention away from other priorities.  But at a time when Western Hemisphere issues are not prominent in the Washington policy-scape, Senator Dodd’s retirement will leave a void, and it will be noted ruefully by many across the hemisphere.

*Eric Farnsworth is a contributing blogger to americasquarterly.org. He is Vice President of the Council of the Americas in Washington DC.

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Time to Act: the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement

November 23, 2009

Sunday marked the three-year anniversary of the signing of the U.S.-Colombia free trade agreement (FTA).  The signing provided a tangible signal of U.S. support for the U.S.-Colombia relationship broadly, and, more specifically, for job creation in the United States through export expansion to a large and growing Latin American economy.  On strategic, foreign policy, counter-narcotics, and economic grounds, the deal appeared to be a no-brainer for the United States to conclude.  It still does.  Unfortunately, that’s not how many policy and interest group advocates see it, raising one objection after another in an attempt to derail the agreement.

And derail it they have.  Despite its many advantages, and the fact that our market is already open to Colombian products through unilateral trade preference programs while theirs remains closed to ours, the agreement remains stuck on high center, without any action taken until Colombia reaches some undefined, and perhaps indefinable, level of development and progress.  Such an approach is unjustifiable, given the dramatic, sustained progress that Colombia has already made in virtually every area.  Equally importantly, U.S. actions have been strategically shortsighted, as many across Latin America—friends and foes alike—take note of the way that we continue to treat an erstwhile friend and ally. 

Read More

2 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Ann Coulter Takes Singapore

November 17, 2009

In Singapore recently for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders meeting, I was reminded again of the global influence, for good or ill, of American politics and culture.  Given the 13 hour time difference, one wakes up in the morning just as U.S. television is in prime time.  That means that if you turn on the hotel television to CNN, Fox, or in my case, in Singapore to CNBC, one is treated to the daily shout-fests that now pass for political dialogue in the United States. 

In this case the topic happened to be the decision by Attorney General Eric Holder to try Khalid Sheik Mohammed, or KSM for those who want to portray themselves as insiders, in a U.S. court in New York.  Turning on the television to Lawrence Kudlow (host of CNBC's The Kudlow Report) prior to my first cup of tea (this was Singapore not Lima), I was verbally and visually assaulted by Ann Coulter screeching at some deer-in-the-headlights type about the decision by the Attorney General.  Honestly, I didn’t even listen to what she said other than to note that she was against it.  And loudly against it. 

Here’s the thing.  I don’t know whom Ann Coulter speaks for other than herself, although she must have a following if she keeps getting invited to express her views on cable shows.  But is this really the face of America that we want to show to the world, especially so early in the morning?  I don’t know what she said and I don’t really care that much, but it’s not even the substance it’s the tone: mocking, irreverent and dismissive of alternative views. 

If we want to abuse ourselves domestically by watching these programs in the United States, so be it.  But why do we need to export the loudest, most aggressive aspects of American politics and culture to the rest of the world?  Why not, for example, run a short camera shot for international transmissions of a burning fireplace or waves gently lapping at the seashore whenever these sorts of programs come on, like some people do on Christmas morning as the children tear open presents.  Or even a test pattern.  Goodness knows, that could do more for our standing overseas than even the closing of Guantánamo. For one, it would ensure that those who live in or travel to Asia would be able to wake up in peace.

*Eric Farnsworth is a contributing blogger to americasquarterly.org. He is Vice President of the Council of the Americas in Washington DC.

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Beware of Triumphalism in the Honduras Crisis

October 30, 2009

The news today from Tegucigalpa is good. After months of political impasse in Honduras, a delegation led by Assistant Secretary of State Tom Shannon and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Craig Kelly found a way to get representatives of both Micheletti and Zelaya to agree on a path that will provide a credible means forward to the elections scheduled for November 29.

This is important, because as I’ve noted many times, including in The Christian Science Monitor and other blog postings here, it is the elections that provide the surest, most appropriate escape valve for the crisis that has threatened to overwhelm Honduras and occupy U.S. policymakers who could usefully be focused on other matters. Steps to undermine or undercut the elections are counterproductive. At the same time, for the elections to be credible, they must be open, transparent and fair, and preparations must therefore begin in earnest immediately. Thus the timing of Shannon’s travel was important, and dictated by the need to get going purposefully on the elections.

Some analysts suggest that the trip should have been taken and heads banged earlier to get an agreement even before today. But that would not have allowed the Arias process—which the United States conceptualized and mid-wifed—to run its course. How ironic it would then have been for the United States to put itself in the position to be criticized, likely by the same analysts, for undercutting the multilateral Arias process and returning to the unilateralism they consistently decry. Fortunately, that did not occur.

Read More

2 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

World Cup Helps to Explain Latin America: Honduras Results Muddle Negotiations; Argentina's Win Provokes Maradona's Reaction

October 16, 2009

Honduras' soccer win in San Salvador on October 14, guaranteeing a World Cup berth for the Catrachos in South Africa in 2010, has potentially muddled negotiations to resolve the political crisis that erupted on June 28.  As I noted in this space last week and also in Sports Illustrated, the prospect of a Honduran berth in the World Cup would provide the de facto government with the opportunity to use the result to rally the population around the flag, potentially providing an excuse to remain intransigent in the face of immense international pressure. 

Indeed, with the declaration of yesterday as a national holiday, that is exactly what the Micheletti government did.  But wait, it gets even more cynical, because just as the determining game was getting underway in San Salvador, a Micheletti spokesman was walking away from an apparent agreement in principal that had been struck by the opposing parties earlier in the day to resolve the crisis.  The calculation now appears to be that the Honduran win will buy additional time for the de facto government in its efforts to keep the deposed president Zelaya holed up in the Brazilian Embassy. 

Micheletti’s gambit is only the latest example of a well-worn path in Latin America of attempting to transfer good feelings resulting from international sporting victories to support the government in power.  One need only think of the World Cup in Argentina in 1978, for example.  More broadly, former Eastern Bloc nations routinely used sport to promote the legitimacy and superiority of their systems internationally, and Cuba continues to do so to this day, though with less overt success.  It may be cynical and heavy-handed, but it apparently still works.

Read More

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

More at Stake at U.S.-Honduras World Cup Qualifier Than Just a Soccer Win

October 7, 2009

This Saturday the eyes of much of the hemisphere will be on Honduras as the United States sends its finest warriors into the country to do battle with their Honduran counterparts.  No, we’re not talking an invasion by the Marines, but rather a critically-important soccer match between the two nations in qualification for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.  That fact that the game occurs smack dab in the middle of an ongoing political crisis in Honduras—with deposed President Manuel Zelaya remaining under self-imposed house arrest in the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa, and the Organization of American States (OAS) having just sent a delegation to the country to attempt to resolve the matter— is not being allowed to get in the way of the match.  FIFA has spoken, and despite some misgivings by observers, no leader in their right mind dares take on soccer’s global governing body, a group that, much like the International Olympic Committee, demands fealty from even the most powerful leaders around the world (see also: Copenhagen, 2016 Olympic Summer Games).  Coup or no coup, the World Cup qualifier must and will go on.

In soccer terms, the game is important because a victory by the United States, in a hostile environment, will lock in a trip to South Africa.  On the flip side, Honduras is also in the hunt for one of the region’s three guaranteed slots for South Africa, but needs a result at home to keep pace with the United States, Mexico and Costa Rica.  The atmosphere would already have been intense; layer upon layer of politics will make the game ever more so.

A valid case can be made that the game should be played at a Central American venue outside Honduras (or even in the United States: to be honest, the last time Honduras played in the United States it was a virtual home game for los catrachos given the number of national supporters in the stands).  Be that as it may, the key now will first and foremost be to ensure the safety of the players and spectators.  It will also be to ensure that the excitement surrounding the game remains self-contained.  As the brief "soccer war" between Honduras and El Salvador showed in 1969 (also in a World Cup qualifier prior to the 1970 World Cup finals held in Mexico City), soccer games have the potential to ignite passions that simmer over other issues, causing an eruption of popular emotion that could potentially get out of control if not adequately contained.  Anyone seeking to stir things up in Honduras—from within or without—might-well attempt to use the passions surrounding the game as a way to provoke an over-reaction by the security forces, which will quickly be condemned by the international community and give the de facto Micheletti government yet another black eye while deepening the crisis further.

Read More

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Brazil on a Roll

October 2, 2009

The announcement today by the International Olympic Committee (IOC) that Rio de Janeiro will be the host of the 2016 Olympic Summer Games is a fitting acknowledgement by the international community that Brazil’s time has arrived.  It is also a bouquet to the government of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and an effort to get the Games—finally—to South America.  Beating out Madrid, Tokyo and Chicago (my hometown), the Rio selection was immediately hailed by many across the region and offers the opportunity for Brazil to showcase itself to the world, much as China used the 2008 Games in Beijing.

The Olympics are part of a strategic approach to sport that Brazil has recently employed as yet another means to raise its international profile.  Starting with the XV Pan American Games in 2007, also held in Rio, and the upcoming World Cup soccer championship in 2014, the Olympics offer Brazil the crown jewel of international sport, a trifecta only accomplished once before over such a short period of time (the United States also achieved the feat, with the Pan Am Games held in Indianapolis in 1987, the World Cup in 1994 and the 1996 Atlanta Olympics).* 

Much will be made of the fact that President Lula’s star power apparently eclipsed that of President Obama, as well as the new Prime Minister of Japan and the King of Spain and Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, all of whom dutifully traveled to Copenhagen to implore the IOC to select their respective bid cities.  And, indeed, President Obama’s riding in on Air Force One to rescue the bid for Chicago was a high-risk strategy that, had it not been his own home town, the White House might very well have chosen to bypass. 

Read More

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Washington's Systemic Lack of Strategic Vision for the Americas

September 21, 2009

Even in the best of times, under Democratic and Republican Administrations and Congresses alike, Washington’s appetite for things Latin American is limited.  On occasion, a crisis breaks through the public consciousness and attracts top-level attention for a period of time, but the ability to sustain a policy that does more than just lurch from crisis to crisis really doesn’t exist.  When such crisis does occur, however, Washington becomes fixated on the issue and almost completely neglects other issues in the hemisphere. 

Such is the case right now.  Since June 28, Washington’s primary focus on the region has been on Honduras. Even the confirmation of the U.S. ambassador-designate for Brazil, Tom Shannon, has been held up by the Senate over dissatisfaction of U.S. policy actions to sanction the government of de facto Honduran President Roberto Micheletti.  The Senate hold on Tom Shannon, a highly-regarded career diplomat who has served both Democratic and Republican administrations with distinction, was placed back in the summer, even before the September 3 State Department announcement that pre-emptively sought to delegitimize Honduras’ scheduled November 29 elections.  Since then, Washington has become even more polarized, so it’s unclear why a hold that was placed before the September 3 announcement would be lifted after the announcement without some compromise on the issues.  (Full disclosure: I’ve known Tom for over 15 years and worked with him in the White House, and I consider him to be a personal friend.) 

But the practical implications of this stalemate mean that the United States has no ambassador in the largest Latin American country, and may not for some time—even though the issues surrounding Brazil's emergence on the global scene are compelling—all because we continue to wrap ourselves around the axle on Honduras.  It’s all so depressingly familiar, particularly for those who went through the 1980s.  In fact, some of the Washington players are exactly the same ones who were involved in the 1980s disputes, from both sides.  But 2009 is not 1982; and the shape of the hemisphere has changed dramatically.  The longer we focus on Honduras, the longer we unilaterally decrease our footprint even further in the rest of Latin America, creating even more of a vacuum for others to fill. 

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Australia's Natural Gas Project Calls into Question Latin America's Energy Tactics

September 14, 2009

Prior to the economic crisis that began exactly one year ago with the Lehman Brothers collapse, Latin America was on an economic tear.  For over five years the region had enjoyed historic economic growth, reducing poverty and building the small but growing middle class.  Growth was based primarily on the commodities trade; Asian nations, particularly China, were sucking up virtually everything Latin America could grow, mine or drill. Many Latins are now looking at the prospects for renewed mid-term growth in Asia as the key to restoring their own economic fortunes.  On the surface, that makes sense.  But if the idea is simply to return to the previous model exporting primary commodities, with a healthy dose of politics thrown in, the result may not be as lucrative for Latin America as the immediate past proved to be. 

Primary commodities face competition no matter where they come from; there is generally little product differentiation absent efforts to add value through processing and refinement, technology, manufacturing, branding, or other knowledge-based inputs.  This is particularly true in energy, and a major new project off the west coast of Australia could, in extremis, challenge Latin America’s development model. 

The Gorgon Project, according to the Financial Times, among the world’s most ambitious and costly natural gas projects, is set to be given the official go-ahead this week.  Once fully on-line, the project will catapult Australia to the top ranks of global producers, changing the pan-Pacific energy profile, particularly with reference to liquefied natural gas, or LNG.  The project will help China and Japan reduce their dependence on coal while amplifying Australia’s role in supplying the Asian nations—China, Japan, India, and South Korea—that Latin America has targeted for commodities exports.  In contrast, Latin Americans continue to tie themselves in knots over basic questions of ownership, production and basic supply arrangements in the natural gas sector, even to the point of foregoing uncertain gas supplies from immediate neighbors such as Bolivia and Argentina to import LNG from Asia. 

Read More

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

An Increasingly Dangerous Game

September 3, 2009

Honduras’ deposed President Mel Zelaya was here in Washington the week prior to Labor Day urging the United States, without a hint of irony, to re-install him in power as soon as possible.  At the same time, he told a late summer audience that as the diplomatic process grinds on without clear prospects for resolution, he was building support for another attempt to re-enter Honduras.  His last two attempts having failed, first by air and then by land, his next option would appear to be by sea, a la Fidel’s famous journey in the Granma.  At the very least, this would do away with a reprise of the Honduran version of the hokey-pokey (you put your right foot in, you take your right foot out, you put your left foot in and then you shake it all about….), or the Python-esque flying circus aspects of his first attempt in July.  On a more serious note, though, during his visit Zelaya also pointedly refused to speculate to the Washington Post’s Mary Beth Sheridan whether or not violence would be a part of his ramped up strategy of return. 

Nonetheless, on September 3 the State Department announced the termination of assistance to Honduras and revoked additional visas.  Prejudging the November elections, Department spokesman Ian Kelly also said that the United States would not be able to support their outcome, suggesting that they would be illegitimate unless a positive conclusion of the Arias process had already occurred.

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

A Reflection on Brazil's Gift to Obama

July 10, 2009

What is it about South American leaders and public gifts to President Obama? In April, we were treated to the spectacle of Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez giving a copy of Eduardo Galeano’s Open Veins to the U.S. President at the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad—a disingenuous publicity stunt that backfired and stole the headlines from other, more substantive and important issues. And now we have Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva at the G8 summit in Italy giving Obama a soccer jersey signed by all the members of the Brazilian national soccer team.

Now, as a soccer head myself, I can think of no better gift to receive from the Brazilian President than a signed jersey. I certainly hope that it is displayed properly in the White House, and even though there is no record of the First Family having any particular interest in or affinity to soccer, nonetheless this is quite a cool gift. No complaints there. Except one. It was barely a week ago that the United States and Brazil played the championship game of the Confederations Cup in South Africa, the 2010 World Cup host. This was the first time in history that the United States men’s soccer team made it to the final of an extra-regional international soccer tournament. For Brazil, this was old hat, a big yawn, which paled in comparison to their five (yes, five) World Cup Championships. But for the upstart Americans, this was a big deal.

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Arias Mediation Efforts - Not U.S. Sanctions - Offer Best Hope for Honduras

July 7, 2009

Secretary of State Clinton’s meeting today with deposed Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was intended to show the support—visibly—of the United States for a return to the status quo ante, but it also served a more important purpose: by getting Zelaya on board with the idea of allowing Costa Rica’s President and Nobel Laureate Oscar Arias to mediate the constitutional crisis, the United States buys time to consider all appropriate options and actions.  Cooler heads can now prevail, because we’ll presumably be spared additional acts of the theater of the absurd that saw Zelaya circling high above Tegucigalpa with a camera crew from Venezuela’s TeleSur on board and a number of other regional actors on a chase plane in tow. Repeated attempts to return would have been polarizing and unhelpful, potentially adding to the violence on the ground.  And really, do Hondurans of any political stripe need to be lectured about the practice of democracy by the Presidents of Ecuador, Nicaragua, Paraguay, or Argentina? 

Now, everyone can take a deep breath and attempt to resolve the crisis away from the Tegucigalpa tinderbox.

That includes the United States. A number of loud voices have already been heard urging that the United States should attempt to isolate Honduras, cutting off trade, aid, education, military, and other benefits beyond the pause that has already been announced. Others suggest that individuals in the de facto Honduran government should have their U.S. visas yanked.  Some even go so far (quietly) as to suggest that Temporary Protected Status for Hondurans living in the United States should be suspended to pressure the Honduran economy through reduced remittances and the forced return of migrants. 

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Time for Cooler Heads to Prevail on Honduras - Here is One Option

July 2, 2009

It’s a shame for the people of Honduras that the country’s supreme court and military acted so clumsily to bundle the president, Manuel “Mel” Zelaya, off to exile in the middle of the night almost a week ago now. There is no getting over the visual images, which call to mind the worst excesses of extra-constitutional government across Latin America’s tumultuous history, leading directly to the vociferous and sustained outcry from across most of the political spectrum worldwide.

Those arguing that the Hondurans acted within their rights under their constitution miss the point. This is a fruitless line of argument that competes against every latent emotion now bursting to the forefront on Latin America. Whether or not it was technically legal, the coup in Honduras was ill-considered at best, and dramatically limited the options available to those seeking to shine the spotlight where it should be shone, squarely on the erratic and increasingly anti-democratic behavior of President Zelaya.

Read More

2 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Latin America Comes Calling - Uribe and Bachelet Visit Washington

June 29, 2009

President Álvaro Uribe of Colombia comes back to Washington today—his 13th time here since being elected in 2002—to meet with President Obama following their face-to-face meeting at the April Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago. It’s an opportunity to set an agenda looking ahead across the broad range of issues confronting both nations. The pending trade agreement will be discussed, but with Uribe already planning a return trip to Washington in September specifically to lobby, the agenda for the meeting today will be broader, including, no doubt, a joint statement on Honduras.

That’s important, because Colombia has been willfully misrepresented by trade opponents and their allies in Washington as a human rights wasteland. On top of that, for the past several years U.S. policy has been characterized as one dimensional and as supporting a president who his opponents claim is a quasi-autocrat with caudillo, or strong-armed, tendencies, and who, for good measure, was too close to an unpopular U.S. president. The meeting today, together with their discussions in April, will show again that the Colombian president is a serious, thoughtful leader. It will also emphasize that the bilateral agenda with Colombia goes well beyond passage of one agreement, as important as that is, and that the U.S.-Colombia relationship is strong and enduring. 

Read More

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Can Brazil Save the World from Climate Change?

June 18, 2009

What if Brazil held a key to saving the world from destroying itself through an inexorable process of man-made global climate change?  Far-fetched?  Perhaps.  Then again, perhaps not.  Having just returned from exploring energy issues in Brazil with experts from the policy, government and the private sectors, I’ve come back with some hard truths that must be addressed, and a better understanding of the role that Brazil can play in energy and climate change issues, but only if we get the market signals right

First, there’s no doubt that global energy demand will grow as incomes and populations increase.  There is just no getting around the fact that energy demand could double—that’s right, double—by 2050. That’s only 40 years from now.  Think of how quickly the last 40 years have gone, and understand that this is really not that far off.  

That means current energy sources will be under significant strain to meet this growing demand.  Alternative sources that are clean, plentiful and efficiently produced and delivered will be essential to develop and widely employ even as traditional fuels remain critically important for the foreseeable future. And in our drive to satisfy energy needs, the environment will be increasingly impacted, no matter what we do.  The question will be whether we can find ways to mitigate the impact through conservation, energy efficiency and properly pricing the cost of energy, including the externalities created by energy usage.  

Read More

0 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Panama’s Election this Weekend Opens the Door for Free Trade

April 30, 2009

Panamanians go to the polls on Sunday to elect their next president.  Knowledgeable observers including Jaime Daremblum predict that supermarket magnet Ricardo Martinelli will win the election, his primary opposition, Housing Minister Balbina Herrera, being far behind in the polls.

Martinelli is well versed in politics as well as in business, having served as Minister of Canal Affairs and as board chairman of the authority that oversees management of the Canal.  His tenure was notable for its lack of drama.  When the Canal officially reverted to Panama in 1999 under the terms of the Panama Canal Treaties signed with the United States, numerous observers predicted that the Panamanians would either run their most important asset into the ground within a matter of months, or they would turn it over to the Chinese.

Well, neither prediction came to pass over the past 10 years, nor has the prediction that Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez would be able to underwrite the Herrera campaign and exercise undue influence over the incoming government as he has long sought to do elsewhere in Central America.  Panama is not Nicaragua, nor is it Bolivia.  Nor is it Colombia or Costa Rica, for that matter.  In fact, since the country’s founding in 1903, Panamanians have repeatedly shown a knack for independent actions that have routinely confounded their critics.

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Post-Summit: Where Do We Go From Here?

April 20, 2009

As the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad and Tobago recedes, several impressions dominate.  The first is that most of the hemisphere remains enthralled by Obama-mania and his message to the hemisphere of inclusion, social justice and the more humble exercise of U.S. power and influence.  There is a real electricity there, and on balance, much of the hemisphere is ready to put paid to the paralysis of past meetings and engage constructively with the new Administration.  I’ve participated in a number of Summits previously, the only one with a similar positive spirit was the first, in Miami in 1994.

Some of the hemisphere remains skeptical, including the leaders of Argentina, Bolivia, Nicaragua, and others, but their pronouncements at the Summit were notable for the backing they did not receive from other leaders and simply came off as being tone deaf.  Because really, even as global economic recovery continues to be of primary concern, which hemispheric leader wanted to use valuable time at the Summit to hear a diatribe from Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega—who gamed Nicaragua’s election and now works hard to subvert Nicaraguan democracy through the institutions of democracy—about the previous alleged sins of the United States?  Or to hear Bolivian President Evo Morales prattle on about goofy assassination plots he claims were cooked up in Washington.  Talk about magical realism…

Read More

1 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink

Here’s How We Can Move Forward Quickly on the Pending Trade Agreements

November 10, 2008

In my AQ article discussing the hemispheric agenda from the Washington perspective, I noted that expanded trade with the United States continues to be a critical driver of hemispheric development, even more so in a period of global economic stress.  Latin American nations enjoying FTA’s with the United States have put them to very good effect.  It’s my hope that the Colombia and Panama agreements would be taken up and passed shortly by Congress so that those two critical allies will also be able to build their economies more effectively during difficult economic times. 

A vote on both agreements in the lame-duck, though perhaps unlikely, has always seemed to me to be the appropriate way to move them in a manner consistent with the political realities that I refer to in my AQ piece.  Panama is non-controversial and could probably move in any event, but if this window is missed for Colombia, there aren’t too many realistic scenarios that would achieve a vote early in the next Administration, particularly as a stand alone bill.  Alternatively, it’s conceivable that the new Administration could ask for additional fixes from Colombia before submitting the agreement to Congress for a vote.  This would take some months to conclude, assuming Colombia goes for it, and would push back potential ratification further.  But we also have to remember that that has already been done once, and Colombia already adopted changes in good faith that were made at the behest of the Congressional majority. 

Here’s my suggestion for the many Democrats and Republicans who are looking for a plausible path forward: vote in the lame duck, pass it, and make entry into force contingent on various measures that the Government of Colombia would agree to take on—transparency, human rights, and other matters as appropriate, along with the routine commercial issues that are always addressed prior to entry into force of agreements. 

Read More

19 comments Login or register to post comments Permalink