Opinion - News Analysis   

The Left in Latin America

Dhiraj Nayyar

To those who despair at the thought of U.S. hegemony forever, Latin America is a point of hope. To those who believe that allying with the U.S. and its policies is the only way forward, Latin America is a warning.

WHAT, POSSIBLY, could the following motley group of people have in common: a divorced single mother with three children, a former army colonel who still occasionally sports his army fatigues, a cancer specialist, a coca farmer, an uneducated man who lost a finger in an industrial accident, and a provincial governor known for his unorthodox thinking? Well, quite a lot actually. Michelle Bachelet, Hugo Chavez, Tabare Vazquez, Evo Morales, Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, and Nestor Kirchner are the unlikely six-some carrying out some heavy digging, and churning, in America's favourite backyard. They are, with varying degrees of success, re-laying the landscape of the region; political, economic, and social. In the process, there is hope for those looking at alternatives to the American-propounded political and economic ideology.

Long the bastion of U.S. supported right wing dictators, military or otherwise, following the `right' economic policies and the right (pro-U.S.) foreign policy, Latin America is changing rapidly; it is becoming more democratic, more Left-liberal in its economic policies, and independent of the U.S. in foreign policy.

The spread of democracy and its consolidation is the biggest change. It is not only the fact that there are free and fair elections and a free media. It is also those who are emerging on top through the political process. An industrial worker, Mr. da Silva, has risen to the Presidency of Brazil. Similarly, Mr. Morales, a coca farmer and indigenous Indian, is President of Bolivia. Ms. Bachelet is among the very few women to have reached the top in the Americas (even the U.S. has not had a woman President). Such people would not have ascended to the top a decade ago. Most of them have endured great hardship through the years of dictatorship in their countries, some tortured, some imprisoned, others stifled. But they have triumphed in the end.

Change in economic policy

The second change is in the sphere of economic policy. The United States along with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) have been promoting unbridled free market policies in Latin America. It has not only been about privatisation, foreign investment, and the liberalising of barriers to trade. It has also been about a tight squeeze on government expenditure through nearly two decades, which has meant little spending on the poorer sections of the population. The end result of all that has been a lower rate of growth between 1980 and 2000 than there was between 1950 and 1980, the period of so-called state dirigisme. And a sharp rise in inequality and poverty, largely attributable to austerity policies, which made the poor worse-off, and liberal macro economic policies which have made the rich richer, mostly by allowing them to take money abroad but also by distributing privatised assets to many of the elite. The six-some have all been elected on planks to overturn this economic policy and make it more pro-poor, largely by increasing the role of the state in delivering goods and services.

Some have gone further. Mr. Kirchner, in Argentina, has forced creditors, both institutional and private, to restructure and renegotiate debt, a step unprecedented anywhere in the developing world, where countries are more used to succumbing to the demands of rich creditors.

And foreign policy. Well things are changing there as well. George W. Bush's plan for a free trade of the Americas has met with stiff opposition. Mr. Chavez rants against America while meeting regularly with Fidel Castro, Mr. da Silva and Mr. Morales, mainly to express solidarity against their Big Brother. Mr. da Silva's Brazil has gone as far as to make it mandatory for all U.S. nationals to be fingerprinted on arrival at airports. These may be small steps, of not the greatest significance at the moment. But they do signify an attempt by a corner of the world to take on the U.S. and its big brother attitude in foreign policy.

To those who despair at the thought of U.S. hegemony forever, Latin America is a point of hope. To those who believe that allying with the U.S. and its policies is the only way forward, Latin America is a warning. History may yet be beginning from its proverbial end in the most unlikely of places. Social democracy, Latin American-style, may yet be a credible alternative to Anglo-American-style capitalism. And it may act as a counter to American hegemony in international affairs. A lot, of course, depends on the motley crowd and their achievements, even their unity. Here's wishing them luck.

And perhaps now, even that perennial rebel, by the name of Ernesto Che Guevara would be resting easy in his grave after watching a farmer reach the Presidency of Bolivia and an industrial worker ascend to the Presidency of Brazil. That is what he wanted. Did he not?

(The writer is a research scholar in Economics at Trinity College, Cambridge and can be reached at dn234@cam.ac.uk.)

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Markets at a historic high
Not as good as it can get
Geneva talks: not much scope for optimism
Moderate Islam has lost its voice
Why we love to hate our jobs
The Left in Latin America
Behind the transition in Karnataka
America's `long war' on terror
Deplorable
Vote against Iran
Speaker & courts
Sensex soars

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu