By Marcos Roitman Rosennman on January 22, 2023
Simon Bolivar
The dreams of those who fought for political independence in Latin America at the beginning of the 19th century not only sought to put an end to the domination of the Spanish empire, but were also the bearers of a proposal for regional integration. However, their hopes clashed with a reality: the birth of imperialism. This was a much more sophisticated form of control, articulated under the process of internationalization of production, markets and labor. Its purpose, the submission of the young nations, establishing puppet States; pliable governments, with plutocracies far removed from a national-popular proposal.
Imperialism focused its efforts on appropriating natural resources, flora, fauna and subsoil wealth. The territories of Latin America were prey to plunder. The gold and silver of the conquest were followed by raw materials indispensable to accelerate the industrial revolution: petroleum, nitrate, copper, guano, wheat, rubber, sugar, cocoa, etc. Great Britain and France took the lead. They were a century ahead in the development of capitalism. Behind them was an emerging player, the United States. The division of the world into areas of influence sharpened the contradictions and conflicts between the imperialist powers. Latin America became a continent in dispute. But this also required an inter-imperialist pact, to derail any project of unity whose banner was the anti-imperialist struggle. In the 20th century, this dilemma was repeated in Asia and Africa. Contemporary history is plagued by plans that have ended up breaking up regional unity and integration projects. In Latin America, the Monroe Doctrine marked the beginning of hostilities. Since 1823, the United States has sought to prevent the intervention of extra-continental actors in the exploitation and control of the subcontinent. The slogan, “America for the Americans” defines U.S. foreign policy for the region. If in the 19th century its threat was France and Great Britain, after World War II it was the Soviet Union and, in the 21st century, its place is taken by China.
The United States has always wanted the whole pie and is not willing, far from it, to let other international players have a prominent presence in the region. Today, its loss of influence is making it more belligerent. Latin America is vital for it to maintain its power on a global scale. Not only as a supplier of raw materials, but also as a guarantor of hemispheric security on its southern flank. Thus, it will always hatch destabilizing plans to break integration attempts where it has no representation, no voice and no vote. It conspired against the Amphictyonic Congress of Panama in 1826, whose objective was to create a confederation of Latin American countries from Mexico to Chile. Simón Bolívar, its promoter, saw his hopes frustrated by the treason and the Manichean intervention of the United States. His phrase pronounced in 1829: “The USA, which seems destined by Providence to plague America with miseries in the name of freedom” is engraved in the conscience of the peoples of the region and is the history of Yankee imperialism in Latin America. In its two centuries of interventions, it has created an ideology and developed institutions from which to carry out its proposals for domination. It has woven networks, mutating its policies time and again under different acronyms. Its greatest success was the creation in 1948 of two pillars of its imperialist policy: the Treaty of Reciprocal Defense (TIAR) and the Organization of American States. Both organizations, with the complicity of the pliable governments, allow it to legitimize spurious wars, invasions, coups d’état, assassinations, violation of human rights and countless threats. Gregorio Selser documented them in a monumental work entitled Chronology of Foreign Interventions in Latin America, published by the Autonomous University of Mexico City and UNAM.
Their control of the OAS transforms the organization into a pillar of their imperialist policies. Suffice it to point out two examples: the expulsion of Cuba and the recognition of Juan Guaidó as president of Venezuela. Nor should we forget that its secretaries general end up behaving like harlots. Chile’s José Miguel Insulza and Uruguay’s Luis Almagro Lemes have demonstrated a follower-ship bordering on impudence. Their actions can only be justified under the indignity of traitors. Their acquiescence to the coups d’état in Bolivia and their support to the current president of Peru are proof of their attitude.
This January 24, the Celac summit will be held in Argentina. It is a key moment to regain protagonist position and be a counterweight to the policies of the OAS, the TIAR. To be a dike of containment to U.S. interventionism in the region. It is an opportunity that cannot be missed. It must be the cradle of an emancipating, revitalized thought, the basis for a regional integration proposal. The call opens a door to subtract power and raise the foundations of a great homeland, the dream of Simón Bolívar, Augusto Sandino, Lázaro Cárdenas, Fidel Castro, Salvador Allende or Hugo Chávez. It is time for change and to pick up the baton. The presidents of Brazil, Mexico, Colombia, Argentina, Cuba, Venezuela and Bolivia must assume responsibilities and lead a new Latin American integration project. The future of democracy in our America depends on their determination and anti-imperialist commitment.
Source: La Pupilia Insomne. Translation Resumen Latinoamericano – US