What Obama’s New Cuba Policy Means for the Rest of the Americas

[Mika]

What Obama’s New Cuba Policy Means for the Rest of the Americas
While Washington won’t be able to break apart
Latin America’s “pink tide,” its new stance on Cuba
is a test case for reasserting U.S. hegemony in the
Western Hemisphere.

{snip}

On December 17, 2014, having apparently decided that the United States could pursue its hemispheric interests more effectively by normalizing its relations with Cuba, President Barack Obama announced his country’s willingness to restore full diplomatic relations between the two countries. This marked an obvious landmark not only in U.S.-Cuba relations, but in Washington’s relations with the entire continent. More than ever, U.S.-Cuba relations may now be seen as a test case of Washington’s determination to replace intimidation with leadership/hegemony in its relations with Latin America.

U.S. hemispheric priorities including economic and energy integration, a multilateral hemispheric dialogue with emerging powers, the accommodation of Bolivarian elites, immigration, public security, and drug policy have all been undermined by the lack of a stable U.S.-Cuba relationship. Obama’s initiatives toward Cuba are thus best understood as an attempt to better the possibilities of U.S. leadership in the Western Hemisphere.

The United States wants to be able to rely on a hemispheric order that is supportive of liberal-democratic hegemony and a regional market economy, and the components of such an order are falling into place. Not even the turn to the left of the past decade can be considered a deviation from this tendency. In Brazil, the left has governed with developmentalist policies, compatible with the preponderant role of a market economy. Similarly, the Bolivarian economic order rejects neoliberal fundamentalism, but despite its rhetoric of “socialism of the 21st century,” its economic policies can be located within a framework driven by the market.

Rest of article here.

[Demeter]

1. It's far too late for US hegemony

Reagan blew that baby out of the water in Latin America in the 80's.

Obama is busy destroying it everywhere else, and that's a good thing, although not his intention...

Hegemony is not a good thing for anybody, and not a goal for the USA. It goes against our first principles, also our second and third....it was a means of protection for a struggling nation, back when Europe was Empire. Now, it's not to be contemplated by the Hegemony, let alone allowed by the victims.

[hack89]

2. I think it has more to do with Cuba facing up to economic reality

with Venezuela in an economic tailspin and their billions of annual economic subsidies to Cuba in serious jeopardy, I think Cuba took a realistic look at their future and decided that American dollars are their only hope for the future. I am sure the present political and social turmoil in Venezuela is a stark reminder to the Cuban government of what could happen to them if their economy falters. It is no coincidence that Cuba started secret negotiations with America soon after Hugo Chavez died - even they recognized that he was a transcendent figure in Venezuelan history and that Maduro would not be able to fill his shoes.

Venezuela bought power and influence in the region with cheap oil. When that cheap oil goes away, there is no one else for those countries to look to but America. It is not so much they created this crisis as they are simply taking advantage of a golden opportunity that fell into their laps.

[Mika]

3. 2+2=5

[hack89]

4. It is hard to argue Cuba has any leverage

are you denying how much their economy depends on Venezuela?

[Judi Lynn]

5. Interesting ariticle from Arturo López-Levy. Thank you for posting this. n/t