By Sonia Rosita Boddie
The OAS was founded in 1948, at the behest of Washington to promote multilateral dialogue and decision making of a hemispheric nature between governments of the Americas. Its structure was an extension of the doctrine of “Americanism”, promoted by the United States of America since the late nineteenth century. Americanism was in fact a corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, as the United States of America in that same century decided that America would be for the Americans. In this way, they sought to eliminate any direct political influence of European powers in our continents. But of course, this direct influence that the European powers exercised on our continents, would now be held by the United States.
After the Second World War, the current Organization of American States served for nearly half a century as an institution serving the interests of the United States. A history of political manipulation had its greatest expression in January 1962, when at the proposal of the United States, the Council of Foreign Ministers took a decision, that resulted in Cuba being expelled from their midst. Even there, in the ongoing Cold War, some countries in Latin America (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Mexico) did not agree with the proposal, even though the U.S. influence was so great, and as a mark of disapproval, they did not vote against it, but rather refrained from voting.
The OAS, through its history, has only on most occasions blatantly responded to the interests of the government of the United States. The OAS did nothing when there were dictatorships in Latin America. Augusto Pinochet Ugarte massacred the people of Chile for over fifteen years and the role of the organization during that time was really sad and passive. Nor did they take decisive action on behalf of Argentina, when it went to war with Great Britain, over the South Atlantic Falkland Islands, which are called “Las Malvinas” by Argentina. Some members of the OAS have only now in 2010 at the Summit of Rio (where the United States was not present), exemplified a “Johnny come lately stance” by finally unanimously supporting Argentina’s claim over the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands and rejected the oil exploitation by Britain in the islands.
Its lack of performance in recent times is most noted in Haiti, with regards to their ongoing political conflicts and social unrests. Even though Haiti falls within its area of influence, the United Nations has continuously been the driving force behind this country’s stabilization. CARICOM has also played a more pivotal role than the OAS by its intelligent and decisive action with regards to the Haitian situation.
And when the U.S. is not being dogged for solely promoting the interest of its country and ignoring those of the other members, it is blamed for rifts between itself and other members of the OAS, for economic policies and trade decisions.
Additionally, with regards to the lives of our people in Latin America and the Caribbean, the OAS remains somewhat distant and diffuse, with little relevance to our livelihood. The OAS really should be more aware of social problems in the region. Little is being done to alleviate the social ills plaguing our societies.
Moreover, when any government in any way contradicts the wishes of the United States, the OAS is quick to respond. It can therefore be said that after carefully analyzing the OAS’s functionality, that it is merely a “puppet” of the United States of America. The strong influence exerted by the United States of America has blurred the image of the organisation. There is no total autonomy.
So far, in the present circumstances, the balance of the OAS is in deficit. There has been no motor development or regional consultation forum. It appears that political influences and pressure have distracted the organisation from its true role as it pertains to the region. Only a few initiatives, such as the control of prohibited substances, remain.
Precisely because of the above mentioned, as well as many other reasons, the organization has proven over the years to be inefficient and bureaucratic. Today, more than ever, there is undoubted reason for the creation of the Latin American and Caribbean community. For the good of the people of the region, it is hoped that with the birth of this new organization, the slack left by the OAS would be picked up and problems unique to Latin America and the Caribbean would be effectively addressed. It is indeed welcoming news to the people of the region that the U.S. and Canada would not be a part of our regional bloc, as the time has come for us to break away from the chains of the hegemonic powers and reduce their abilities to dictate our affairs and how they are managed.
The creation of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States is not only a long awaited push for continued regional integration, to boost the promotion of the regions agenda on the global stage, but it is indeed a historic move towards the constitution of a purely Latin American and Caribbean regional organization. It is the gestation of an avenue, where we can more effectively solve ourselves, with our own strengths, visions, morals and values.
The inception of this Community, gives evidence to the fact, that our leaders have now taken the mantle, and revived the dream and path, that the great Latin Leader Simon Bolivar traced for our people. It is a dream, which was grounded in the furtherance of a more united Latin America and the Caribbean. As Bolivar once said, “If we are together, we are stronger, we are free, we are more democratic”. This organization then can therefore be viewed as a weapon against colonialism and arm-twisting by the U.S.
The people of the region must therefore be pleased and feel a sense of pride with the recent Cancun Declaration that was adopted by our leaders and highlighted the objectives of our new community. The Declaration not only outlined that the bloc would be the main forum for political dialogue for the area, but it noted that the bloc would strengthen community and global projects in the field of Latin American and Caribbean identity based on common values: respect for international law, sovereign equality of states, non-use of force or threat, democracy, respect for human rights, respect for the environment, international cooperation for sustainable development, unit integration of states in the region and ongoing dialogue to promote peace and regional security, as these are the pillars to enhancing and strengthening the position of the region in the global arena.
Similarly, the declaration provides that the Community will work on the basis of solidarity, social inclusion, equity and equal opportunities, flexibility, voluntary participation, plurality and diversity.
And yet, while we rejoice over the positive objectives of the Latin American and Caribbean community, we must be mindful that the actual commitment to anti-imperialism amongst the nations is varied. It therefore remains to be seen, if through economic and cultural exchanges the influence of the U.S. would be reduced or if those countries still too timid to stand up to the U.S. and take an independent stand, will end up derailing this important process.
Nevertheless, the move towards creating the Latin American and Caribbean Community must be highly praised, as the basis on which it is said to be founded clearly, provides the best alternative to the outdated OAS that has failed the people of the region, by poorly representing and promoting their interest.
.jpg)