tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post2994183599888959297..comments2023-10-26T04:53:21.986-05:00Comments on <a href="http://huckupchuck.blogspot.com">The Huck Upchuck</a>: McCain, Spain, and Latin America RevisitedHuckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15878450464298055466noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-51713408231419076352008-09-25T17:09:00.000-05:002008-09-25T17:09:00.000-05:00Speaking of countries who are engaging in Cold War...Speaking of countries who are engaging in Cold War era diplomatic shenanigans:<BR/><BR/>"Russia may launch nuclear energy cooperation with Venezuela, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said Thursday during talks with the country's fiercely anti-US leader Hugo Chavez."<BR/><BR/>Hmmmm....Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09314671073556804015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-38730054705930001592008-09-19T17:07:00.000-05:002008-09-19T17:07:00.000-05:00Eric - Thanks for that link to Venezuela. I wasn'...Eric - Thanks for that link to Venezuela. I wasn't aware of this recent Chavez reaction. But it doesn't surprise me. I think it's all hot air from Chavez, put on for show. In a few weeks time, the embassies will be back to their normal operations, I predict.<BR/><BR/>I still think McCain's fundamental lumping of Venezuela and Bolivia in with the "Axis of Evil" narrative is reminiscent of a Cold War approach to universalizing threats or challenges to U.S. interest under a catch-all framework of good-vs.-evil. It misses the reality of contemporary U.S.-Latin American relations completely. Chavez and Morales are nationalist leaders who do not have the great power rivalry of the Cold War within which to locate their anti-U.S. rhetoric. And their actual policies are much more pragmatic for the absence of this possible Cold War type of alliance. And it is equally ludicrous to think of Venezuela and Bolivia as somehow identified with the threat of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism or nuclear power, too. McCain, if he is as knowledgable of Latin America as he claims to be, should know this.Huckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15878450464298055466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-6782561464000002602008-09-19T13:40:00.000-05:002008-09-19T13:40:00.000-05:00"I think the current diplomatic kerfuffle of recal..."I think the current diplomatic kerfuffle of recalling ambassadors affects the US and Bolivia, and not the US and Venezuela."<BR/><BR/>Actually, it's both of them:<BR/>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080912/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/venezuela_us<BR/><BR/>"...but I think it is fairly clear that Venezuela represents nothing like the can of worms that one thinks of when considering the "Axis of Evil" enemy countries like Iran and North Korea."<BR/><BR/>It is a differnt type of beast than Iran or North Korea, but I think it is something akin to the same type of situation we had with Cuba in the 60's, with similar military and foreign policy implications, especially if Chavez keeps inviting the Russian military into the region and calls it "a warning". It is certianly a bigger concern than FARC or the Sandinistas ever were. <BR/><BR/>"And for McCain to adopt this kind of hardline posture towards leftist nationalist governments in Latin America is to completely, in my view, misunderstand the fundamental nature of U.S.-Latin American relations."<BR/><BR/>If courting Latin America means we have to play nice with people like Chavez, then I'm OK with our politicians neglecting the region!Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09314671073556804015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-67709966249195653002008-09-19T13:11:00.000-05:002008-09-19T13:11:00.000-05:00Cynthia,I agree that McCain's sweeping approach to...Cynthia,<BR/><BR/>I agree that McCain's sweeping approach to foreign policy is much different than Obama's more nuanced and open-ended vision. I think there is something to be said for both views, and frankly would like to find a leader who represents the average between McCain and Obama on foreign policy(someone who wouldn't sit down with Ahmadinejad, but also wouldnt' go around singing "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran"). <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, that politician, if they exist, isn't running for President in '08.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09314671073556804015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-3834149008150704942008-09-19T12:58:00.000-05:002008-09-19T12:58:00.000-05:00Eric - I'll re-listen to that interview again; but...Eric - I'll re-listen to that interview again; but it seems that you and I took away a very different interpretation of that exchange -- from the performance of the interviewer, to the shrewdness of McCain. But, I'll be fair and have another listen with as open a mind to your perspective as I can.Huckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15878450464298055466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-44708288326784055522008-09-19T12:55:00.000-05:002008-09-19T12:55:00.000-05:00"Venezuela is a bigger can of worms than you are l..."Venezuela is a bigger can of worms than you are letting on here, Huck. They just ejected our ambassador from their country, and recalled their ambassador from America, so diplomatic relations are quckly shutting down between us and them."<BR/><BR/>Eric - I think I understand quite well the can of worms Venezuela presents to the US; but this can of worms only goes so far. And I'll stick with my contention, though, that this can of worms is not all that abnormal for U.S.-Latin American relations. In fact, whether it's Venezuela or Bolivia now, the Zapatistas or Lula in Brazil in the 1990s, the Apristas in Peru of the 1980s, the FARC in Colombia, the Sandinistas in Nicaragua or the Unidad Popular in Chile of the 1970s, or the Cubans in the 1960s, the practice of strong anti-US rhetoric by leftist/nationalist leaders and movements in the region is not new. In fact, it goes as far back as Pancho Villa in the early years of the 20th Century or even as far back as Simon Bolivar and his Pan-American ideals of the early 19th Century. And it has <I>never</I>, with the singular exception of Cuba, prevented pragmatic and practical relations from existing between the U.S. and the countries of the region.<BR/><BR/>But more to the point relative to the facts of your own citation above, unless I have missed something over the past week or so, I think the current diplomatic kerfuffle of recalling ambassadors affects the US and Bolivia, and not the US and Venezuela. Let's remember that the U.S. implicitly supported an anti-democratic coup attempt against Chavez not long ago; but, even still, the formal relations between the U.S. and Venezuela are operational, if not somewhat tense. Yes, Venezuela does represent a nuisance to the U.S., but I think it is fairly clear that Venezuela represents nothing like the can of worms that one thinks of when considering the "Axis of Evil" enemy countries like Iran and North Korea. And for McCain to adopt this kind of hardline posture towards leftist nationalist governments in Latin America is to completely, in my view, misunderstand the fundamental nature of U.S.-Latin American relations.Huckhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15878450464298055466noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-75576223746630327112008-09-19T12:21:00.000-05:002008-09-19T12:21:00.000-05:00Huck, First, I don't think the interviewer did fin...Huck, <BR/><BR/>First, I don't think the interviewer did fine at all. Her English was poor, and that is a big issue when you are dealing with nuance, intent, and clarifiaction. However, I'll concede the point because as I mentioned, upon subsequent listening, I think McCain understood what she was asking. I don't think he was confused at all.<BR/><BR/>Regarding the way the shift to Spain was handled, what I think happened is that she shifted to Spain before McCAin was able to make all the points he wanted to make about Latin America, so he brushed off the question in order to get in his blurb about Mexico and finishing points on the greater region, that he wants to invite Latin American leaders to the White House. Politicians do this all the time.<BR/><BR/>Here is where the confustion enters: McCain, in deviating from the question, spoke of wanting to invite Latin American leaders to the White House, and she asked him, as a follow up to that question, whether that invitation would be extended to Zapatero.<BR/><BR/>So now, she is in effect asking him whether he thinks Spain should be included in regional talks of Latin American policy. It's a strange question, but not completely illegitimate. Spain has been selling warships and airplanes to Venezuela, and those military weopons may soon be used in joint military excercises scheduled this year between Venezuala and Russia right off our coastline, in the Carribean. Venezuela is a bigger can of worms than you are letting on here, Huck. They just ejected our ambassador from their country, and recalled their ambassador from America, so diplomatic relations are quckly shutting down between us and them. There is a lot of defense related rhetoric associated with Russia in this campaign, and Venezuela and Cuba are Russia's only military gateway to the West. There is a real diplomatic issue with the fact that Spain is arming Venezuela, and the entire mess has regional implications. So it's not like her question was completely cut-and-dry. <BR/><BR/>So I think McCain was trying to determine whether he wanted to open this can of worms within the confines of this interview, and he decided to punt instead. And he punted poorly, I'll grant you that.<BR/>But a big part of the problem is that the question became very muddled.<BR/><BR/>Of course, the other option is that McCain really didn't know where Spain is located on a map, or who it's Prime Minister is.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09314671073556804015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3704399.post-31101149710177815502008-09-19T12:20:00.000-05:002008-09-19T12:20:00.000-05:00"All in all, I thought that interview showed McCai..."All in all, I thought that interview showed McCain to have a pretty good handle on the Latin American issues that were discussed. I'd be interested to know if Obama could name as many Latin American leaders as McCain did in that interview."<BR/><BR/>Obama absolutely does know who these leaders are. I heard him answer questions during his campaign about Chavez, Lula, and Morales. And I agree with you Jimmy, that if McCain highlights Latin America in his foreign policy platform, he should at least be able to distinguish Morales from Chavez (because there are important differences) and not just lump them into one "if you are not with us, you are against us" category.<BR/><BR/>Perhaps this type of shallow foreign policy knowledge will be acceptable to the average lay voter, but it ain't an acceptable response for me. Call me crazy, but I like my world leaders to be able to engage in intelligent, provocative dialogue about...the world.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com