Forgotten in the US vote

The biggest Latin American issue for North Americans is the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in the US — most of whom speak Spanish. Say what you want about free trade, but in many countries, humans have replaced sugar, bananas and coffee as the number one export

As voters in the United States handicap the presidential race, Latin Americans can watch and imagine what a President Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama or John McCain might do for their countries. Which candidate is best for Latin America? Does it make any difference if Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee and does it matter if one of them or the Republican John McCain wins in November?

For decades, trade has been the modus operandi of US foreign policy in the region, but some administrations have had broader agendas. Remember Jimmy Carter’s human rights driven policy? Or the Reagan and Bush-I era of interventionism that, depending on your point of view, either saved the region from revolutionaries or suppressed needed change.

Like them or not, Carter and Reagan offered sharp contrasts in how they dealt with Latin America. In the last 16 years, however, the Democratic and Republican presidents Bill Clinton and George W Bush have offered virtually the same take: free trade all the way.

There are only the slightest of indications that Senators Obama and Clinton or even Senator McCain have any different intentions. So, trying to parse their positions to make a case for one over another is harder to do than guessing who will end up winning the World Cup.

For now, the biggest Latin American issue for North Americans is the estimated 12 million undocumented immigrants in the US — most of whom speak Spanish. Say what you want about free trade, but in many countries, humans have replaced sugar, bananas and coffee as the number one export.

So, a first question for Latin America should be how do the candidates differ on treating the undocumented countrymen already in the US? Will the US let them stay and continue to send the billions in remittances?

While the far right in the Republican Party would prefer these immigrants return home — a move that would be devastating to Latin America as well as the United States — all of the presidential candidates have clearer heads.

McCain, Clinton and Obama support Òcomprehensive reformÓ — code words for the yin and yang of managing anti-immigrant sentiment here: give Americans some promises of secure borders and they’ll swallow giving the undocumented a path to citizenship. (No one mentions in this bargain, that the United States has already spent billions to secure its borders and nonetheless some 500,000 illegal immigrants a year continue to come, but that’s another story.)

The most recent Congressional legislation makes the path to citizenship almost as difficult as the trip across the border, and all three candidates supported that bill. If looking for courage on immigration, however, Senator Obama, the son of an African father and an American mother, might have more than the others. He’s been the only candidate to defend the right of the undocumented to get a legal driver’s license — a proposal unpopular with many voters. Although it took a prostitution ring to bring the former Governor Eliot Spitzer down, his plan to give illegal immigrants the undocumented in New York driving licenses — what most experts say makes a whole lot of sense in terms of safer highways — proved his first miscalculation. Even the then popular leader had to shelve it.

So, absent any sense of vision — maybe that comes after the election — we’re back to trade that dominates what discussion there is of Latin America in the campaign. Although Clinton and Obama have been insistent that North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) will be renegotiated around labour and environmental concerns — even threatening to opt out of that trade deal — opting out is highly unlikely.

The agreements have widespread support in Congress. But, again, Obama was the earliest and the most insistent on more equitable fair trade, so he’s the more likely to have a different take than his rivals. Also, Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico, the former US Ambassador to the United Nations, who is of Latin American descent and now supports Obama, has an affinity for Latin America. Indeed, he recently became involved in negotiations with Venezuela and Columbia to release the hostages held by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or FARC.

Obama has consistently been opposed to the trade agreement with Colombia. Clinton — although now opposed — waffled earlier and McCain would charge ahead to sign on the bottom line. But, alas, this is only one trade agreement, not a vision. And, if Obama comes close to indicating he may have one, he has yet to spell it out.

Latin Americans might even ask — do the candidates really care about us? After all, US corn-based ethanol production is creating havoc on food prices and no one in the presidential race seems upset. ‘Go ethanol’, the candidates agree. It’s a cheer that means one thing: tortillas are only going to get more expensive. Given what the candidates have said so far about Latin America, that’s a trend unlikely to change. —DT-PS

Lydia Chavez, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, is at working on a book on Central America, Forgotten Battlefields

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008%5C05%5C27%5Cstory_27-5-2008_pg3_6