In today's New York Times President Obama's trip to Latin America and his opening to Cuba is analyzed. In a matter of a week, President Obama's team has changed course on two long-standing foreign policy areas with grand implications. Iran and Cuba have been closely tied to the rise of the US as a global power since 1898, yet both states violently expelled American patronage in the second half of the 20th century. Iran and Cuba have defined the rise and hubris of the American century, as well as the limits to American power. The sobering outcomes of US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan brought forth the Obama presidency with its transformative promise. Since Cairo in 2009, Libya in 2011, Syria 2013 and to this latest series of agreements the Obama Administration has been attempting to change the course of the American foreign policy. The effects of this course change will certainly be significant, but a final assessment will not be rendered for a while. Nonetheless, as Columbia is opening up its arms to its former "allies" the immediate test will be whether she is willing to accept them as they are, rather than try to change them, which is the test that every parent faces.
I appreciate the analogy to the imperial parent, Columbia. When the new Cuba policy was announced, I was certain there was a clear answer to this question -- economic liberalization will draw Cuba (deeper) into the global capitalist system, meaning Columbia and her corporate brothers will force Cuba to 'change'. We've already heard of several of these corporate brothers lining up to do business in Cuba.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I've also read several arguments which suggest that opposition to the new Cuban policy amounts to Western privilege -- in trying to maintain an isolated Cuba, are we romanticizing our own notions of what it represents? The arguments in support of the new Cuban policy also remind us that economic liberalization could be accompanied by renewed political resistance.
So maybe Columbia (and the brothers) will inevitably force Cuba to change. The follow up question may be: will there also be renewed political mobilization within Cuba that serves as a check on unequal/oppressive changes?
I agree and completely share in the sentiment and statements of this post. For me, the point I latched on to the most was the idea of whether the us will embrace these nations as they are or alter them. It would be great if not inspiring to witness the rhythm, soul and human experience of the countries be embraced. Whether its the Cuban music, culture or food these things need no molding. They are perfect the way they are as they serve their people. But with the introduction of civilized relations with us comes worries, in my mind, of the imminent threat of what has happened to so many other countries during and following the worst of the cold war. The neoliberal mechanism synchronizing with its other major tools; capitalism, democracy, and the free market. We've seen this time and time again where corporations with vested interest in profit margins have taken root in foreign countries and managed to refuse to let go despite all other events around them. Evidence that comes to mind are the stories of Firestone in Liberia, French corporations in DRC, CAR and the rest of its former western African colonies. These are worrying historical points that I hope don't ekude to a future that nations like Iran and Cuba should come to expect. What instead I hope is that a renewed and revigored Obama and his administration stand for the values he has swayed from for the 5-6 years following his initial election and merge to the path that he is building now as one of the most active and progressive 2nd term presidencies we have had in a long while. But it isn't just up to Obama as much as we may think its up to the american people to advocate and support diplomacy. At the sane time not assuming that just because violent actions aren't being taken that means that the peaceful negotiations worked on now don't deserve the same level of support as unfavorable decisions deserve opposition. As Dr. Vamvakas stated, "the immediate test will be whether she is willing to accept them as they are, rather than try to change them, which is the test that every parent faces."
ReplyDeleteI agree and completely share in the sentiment and statements of this post. For me, the point I latched on to the most was the idea of whether the us will embrace these nations as they are or alter them. It would be great if not inspiring to witness the rhythm, soul and human experience of the countries be embraced. Whether its the Cuban music, culture or food these things need no molding. They are perfect the way they are as they serve their people. But with the introduction of civilized relations with us comes worries, in my mind, of the imminent threat of what has happened to so many other countries during and following the worst of the cold war. The neoliberal mechanism synchronizing with its other major tools; capitalism, democracy, and the free market. We've seen this time and time again where corporations with vested interest in profit margins have taken root in foreign countries and managed to refuse to let go despite all other events around them. Evidence that comes to mind are the stories of Firestone in Liberia, French corporations in DRC, CAR and the rest of its former western African colonies. These are worrying historical points that I hope don't ekude to a future that nations like Iran and Cuba should come to expect. What instead I hope is that a renewed and revigored Obama and his administration stand for the values he has swayed from for the 5-6 years following his initial election and merge to the path that he is building now as one of the most active and progressive 2nd term presidencies we have had in a long while. But it isn't just up to Obama as much as we may think its up to the american people to advocate and support diplomacy. At the sane time not assuming that just because violent actions aren't being taken that means that the peaceful negotiations worked on now don't deserve the same level of support as unfavorable decisions deserve opposition. As Dr. Vamvakas stated, "the immediate test will be whether she is willing to accept them as they are, rather than try to change them, which is the test that every parent faces."
ReplyDelete