Even though the Cold War ended two decades ago, its outdated strategies continue to shape US foreign policy. Nowhere is this more evident than in the foreign relations of the United States with Latin American countries. Because US interests in the region have changed, the United States must apply new strategies to achieve its new goals. Instead of militaristic intervention and paternalism, the United States should adopt an increasingly hands-off approach as Latin American countries assert themselves more strongly in the world arena. The exception to this strategy is trade, since increasing trade in the Americas is the best way to alleviate poverty and many other problems that plague the region. Not only are paternalistic policies expensive and ineffective, but they also strengthen anti-US sentiments within the region, creating more problems than solutions. The United States should not worry that its influence is declining but instead adjust to the reality that Latin American countries deserve respect in managing their internal affairs as the United States helps them further integrate into the world community and the global economy.

An Evolution of Interests

The end of the Cold War is significant not just because communism fell in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. The post-Cold War order also brought about a change of US strategic interests in Latin America. For more than four decades between the end of World War II and the demise of the Soviet Union, US policy in the region was part of a grander Cold War strategy. Policies and actions were examined and carried out in the light of the greater goal of containing and eventually defeating communism. To deal with the specter of communism, the United States often depended on the use of covert force. The best-known examples of successful US intervention in Latin America occurred in 1954, when the United States overthrew President Jacobo Arbenz of Guatemala, and in 1973, when the United States encouraged the Chilean military to oust Salvador Allende, the democratically elected president of Chile. In both cases, the reason was that those leaders were too close to communism for US comfort.

But with the fall of the Soviet Union, fear of communist influence in Latin America should no longer drive US policy. US goals in the region have shifted from resisting communism to promoting growth, stability, and democracy. As a result, it is not only reasonable but also necessary that the United States change its policy from interventionism and paternalism to cooperation. The United States should work with Latin American countries as equal partners in promoting the common welfare of the Western Hemisphere.

Military Relations and US Paternalism

US military policy toward Latin America still contains remnants of the Cold War era. As a result, the relationship between the United States and Latin America should be reformed to better suit the needs of the 21st century. The United States has and should continue to decrease its military presence in Latin America.

The United States developed strong military ties in the region following World War II. Most weapons systems were either purchased from the United States or obtained from excess US stocks. The United States provided the model for training and doctrine and assumed a tutelary role which included deciding which weapons systems were transferred in order to maintain regional stability.

Nowadays, when a Latin American country wants to modernize its weapons systems, Western European countries and former members of the Soviet Union regularly compete with the United States as suppliers. The sophistication, complexity, and cost of US weapons systems also exceed the needs and resources of most Latin American nations. The United States, for example, no longer produces non-nuclear submarines, opening opportunities for several western European countries that do. Now that the Cold War is over, the United States should not encourage Latin American governments to buy its expensive weapons systems, which would shift resources away from efforts toward reducing poverty, creating economic growth, and improving education.

While the tutelary relationship may have significantly eroded, the United States still gives billions of dollars in military assistance to Latin America. Some of the aid is targeted toward helping countries fight narcotrafficking and terrorism by leftist guerrillas and right wing criminals known in Colombia as “paramilitaries.” Despite limited successes, the US Defense Department needs to continue to convince Latin American countries to do more on their own against international terrorism and other 21st-century problems such as migration, natural disasters, and narcotrafficking.

Latin America’s Independence

As Latin America further embraces the world and becomes a player with a greater stake in world affairs, circumstances will not always develop in a manner perfectly compatible with US interests. After all, the United States has spent the past four decades actively ensuring that its backyard has been favorable to its policies. Disengagement naturally means that the region will become less loyal to the United States. Many in Washington are concerned by this decline of US influence in Latin America. Their observation is factually correct, but this decline in influence is not necessarily a negative development. It is an indication that, because of globalization, the governments of the region are looking beyond the Western Hemisphere to participate in a global system. Globalization encourages diversification of trade and global interdependence, thus strengthening the self-confidence of countries in this hemisphere and reducing their dependence on the United States.

One way in which Latin America is showing its increased global orientation is by strengthening its relationship with China. Trade between China and Latin America grew from US$200 million in 1975 to US$40 billion in 2004. The United States, however, should not fear being displaced by China as the major economic player in the region. Latin America is not yet a significant trading partner for China. Only 3.6 percent of Chinese imports come from Latin America. Furthermore, increased Sino-Latin American trade affects different parts of Latin America differently. Commodity-producing countries benefit from the rise in their export prices. On the other hand, direct competitors of China, such as Mexico, have been adversely affected, especially in the sectors of machinery, transport equipment, and manufactured goods. Countries producing apparel and footwear are also facing increasing competition. Though economic links between China and Latin America have strengthened in recent years, US–Latin American economic relations, reinforced by historical partnerships, are still very strong.