Socialism or Death
By Alan Stoga*

Latin America today is living an unsustainable balance between good economics and bad politics.

On the one hand, high commodity prices and continued strong U.S. and Chinese import demand are propelling economic growth, although the lack of a coherent reform strategy means the growth surge will not survive the inevitable cyclical downturn. On the other hand, spiraling populism, corruption, drug and gang violence, weak leadership and outbursts of anarchy from the Rio Grande to Tierra del Fuego are undermining already weak political institutions. The economic downturn, when it comes, will make all this even worse.

These are not problems that the United States has any real capacity to solve by itself, although lack of U.S. leadership is a standard complaint in many regional capitals. Washington’s agenda of trade and security seems irrelevant to many, and the U.S. foreign policy team is preoccupied with Iraq, terrorism, Iran’s nuclear ambitions and other immediate threats to the American national security. There is little time to articulate and sell a compelling vision for the hemisphere.

However, there is no denying that President Bush forced Congress to pass a politically unpopular Central American trade agreement this summer. That evidence of raw power exercised on behalf of free trade with some of the smallest countries of the Americas should have helped Bush’s popularity in the region. Instead, it only seemed to widen the gap between the United States and most of the rest of the Americas.

What does Latin America want from the United States? The answer differs by country. The Mexicans want a super-migration deal, to be treated as equals by the U.S., and for the U.S. to ignore the rising tide of drug violence that could become a potential security risk. The Brazilians want a distracted foil against which to rally the rest of South American to their own leadership, although it is leadership without a vision. The Argentines want to prove that their experiment with radicalism will have no adverse consequences. The Colombians want a military ally. The Chileans seem to want only to be left alone. Most of the smaller countries of the region, or at least their leaders, simply want help surviving their domestic political storms.

This confusion of purpose works against any cohesive approach to the problems that threaten the region’s long run stability. But all of this is being made far more toxic by Hugo Chavez.

What does Chavez want? He wants U.S. hostility, which feeds the rhetoric of his Bolivarian revolution. He hopes the United States continues to be consumed by the Iraq crisis, which helps keep oil prices high and feeds anti-U.S. sentiment almost everywhere. And he intends to use his growing supply of petrodollars to promote left wing, populist governments — and undermine others — playing out Castro’s long time revolutionary fantasies.

Of course, like Fidel, Chavez will not win in the long run. Most Latin Americans prefer democracy to totalitarianism, would rather be rich than poor, and admire America and its values — even if they intensely dislike George Bush. Venezuela does not have enough oil and prices will not stay high enough for Chavez to convert the region into the workers’ paradise of his rhetoric.

The problem is that he can do considerable damage in the meanwhile. He will probably ruin Venezuela, as his patron saint ruined Cuba, and he continues to contribute to the violent chaos that is consuming the Andean countries. But his most lasting impact may be to drive a further wedge between the Latin Americans — or at least their governments — and the United States, exactly at the moment when the region most needs a constructive dialogue.

Chavez’ inflammatory rhetoric is almost perfectly calculated to enrage Washington, even more because it seems to paralyze all the other leaders of the region who are too cowed or weak or distracted to offer a competing vision. Instead of joining together to reject Chavez, he becomes one more reason for a growing distance between the United States and everyone else.

President Chavez recently declared, "Fidel, I think you were always right: It's socialism or death." Let’s hope the death he has in mind is not Latin America’s.

*Alan Stoga is President of Zemi Communications in New York.