Many expectations surrounded the 5th Summit of the Americas from the outset and, for better or worse, they were fulfilled.
The impact of President Obama's participation was very positive principally because a new leader was representing the US in the region and his presence showed our country’s capacity for domestic change. The election of an African-American was a powerful statement to the rest of the continent, which had the least respect forthe last US president of any in recent memory.
Obama's hope for an "equal partnership" with the continent's nations and his desire for the US to be an "effective partner" with Central American leaders is a 180 degree turn-around from his predecessor. At the same time, he remained faithful to his promise to listen to his Latin American colleagues. And, he certainly got an earful!
Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega took the opportunity to deliver a lengthy anti-US diatribe and Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez chose an inappropriate moment to steal a photo-op by giving Obama a copy of Eduardo Galeano’s book, Open Veins of Latin America.
The greatest frustration with the Summit was the inability of the Latin American group to arrive at consensus on a final declaration. This failure exposed a serious regional divide that is covered-up by a blanket of unity in its shared antagonism towards the United States and in questions related to Cuba.
We believe Obama did right to listen to the complaints and to also remind those gathered that —even given the history of US-Latin American relations— it is inaccurate to blame the United States for all of the region's problems. This serves only to evade each country's own responsibilities in the matter.
To speak of a new era already feels repetitive but it is the new US reality as represented by Obama. We asked ourselves prior to the Summit if the other nations of the Americas are ready for such a change. Unfortunately, our doubts are not resolved.
Many expectations surrounded the 5th Summit of the Americas from the outset and, for better or worse, they were fulfilled.
The impact of President Obama's participation was very positive principally because a new leader was representing the US in the region and his presence showed our country’s capacity for domestic change. The election of an African-American was a powerful statement to the rest of the continent, which had the least respect forthe last US president of any in recent memory.
Obama's hope for an "equal partnership" with the continent's nations and his desire for the US to be an "effective partner" with Central American leaders is a 180 degree turn-around from his predecessor. At the same time, he remained faithful to his promise to listen to his Latin American colleagues. And, he certainly got an earful!
Nicaragua’s Daniel Ortega took the opportunity to deliver a lengthy anti-US diatribe and Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez chose an inappropriate moment to steal a photo-op by giving Obama a copy of Eduardo Galeano’s book, Open Veins of Latin America.
The greatest frustration with the Summit was the inability of the Latin American group to arrive at consensus on a final declaration. This failure exposed a serious regional divide that is covered-up by a blanket of unity in its shared antagonism towards the United States and in questions related to Cuba.
We believe Obama did right to listen to the complaints and to also remind those gathered that —even given the history of US-Latin American relations— it is inaccurate to blame the United States for all of the region's problems. This serves only to evade each country's own responsibilities in the matter.
