La situation de l’h\u00e9g\u00e9monie des USA sur le reste des deux Am\u00e9riques est de plus en plus pr\u00e9occupante. Les Am\u00e9ricains ont perdu le contr\u00f4le de l’Organisation des \u00c9tats Am\u00e9ricains (OEA)<\/a> lorsque leur candidat a \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9limin\u00e9. D\u00e9sormais, ils sont plac\u00e9s devant la possibilit\u00e9, voire la probabilit\u00e9 d’un \u00e9chec de leur proposition de zone de libre-\u00e9change de l’Am\u00e9rique centrale (CAFTA). L’importance de la bataille pour CAFTA est mise en \u00e9vidence par une rapide analyse de Michael A. Weinstein, dans sa rubrique Intelligence Brief du groupe PINR<\/a> : \u00ab Failure to consummate C.A.F.T.A. would result in a loss of U.S. credibility, decreasing its influence in trade negotiations elsewhere and signaling that it cannot make good on its commitments. Already embroiled in disputes over immigration policy with Washington, Mexico City would be encouraged in its present southward turn, and the Central American states would be more open to economic and strategic penetration by other power centers, particularly the Brasilia-Caracas combine.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tPour Washington, l’enjeu de CAFTA n’est pas seulement \u00e9conomique. Si l’arrangement ne se fait pas, c’est toute la position strat\u00e9gique et politique de l’Am\u00e9rique centrale, jusqu’au Mexique lui-m\u00eame, qui est menac\u00e9e. Il s’agirait alors d’une menace fondamentale de renversement d’axe g\u00e9opolitique, du Nord et des USA, tournant vers le Sud et la fronde anti-am\u00e9ricaine instrument\u00e9e par le Venezuela et le Br\u00e9sil. On assisterait \u00e0 la situation compl\u00e8tement paradoxale de voir les Etats-Unis isol\u00e9s sur leur propre continent, avec d’\u00e9ventuelles menaces sur leurs fronti\u00e8res terrestres.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tCAFTA devrait \u00eatre ratifi\u00e9 avant mardi prochain, mais cet objectif initial ne sera sans doute pas atteint. Voici quelques commentaires de Weinstein :<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00ab Under pressure from publics threatened by economic competition from China, particularly in the textile sector, the administrations of the Central American states are counting on C.A.F.T.A. to stem job loss and bring in fresh investment, averting a recession that might bring them down and usher in left-populist governments. Strong left oppositions are waiting in the wings in El Salvador and Nicaragua, which has recently seen unruly street protests over economic concerns and which has been politically deadlocked by a confrontation between a left-right alliance of convenience in its parliament and President Enrique Bolanos.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bb Washington’s greatest hemispheric threat is that Central America will follow the pattern of much of South America and join a leftward turn that might take Mexico along with it. Yet C.A.F.T.A. is in trouble in the U.S. due to opposition to it by a varied coalition of interests, notably sugar growers, some segments of the textile sector, labor unions, environmentalists and human rights organizations. The coalition has made serious inroads in the U.S. Congress, where enough resistance to the trade pact has emerged on both the Democratic and Republican sides of the aisle to force the Bush administration to hold back on asking for a vote on ratification. According to the original time frame, U.S. ratification was to have been completed by May 31, but that deadline will not be met and no ratification vote has been scheduled.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bb The Bush administration has become so concerned about the fate of C.A.F.T.A. that it mounted in the past two weeks a major public relations and lobbying effort in support of the treaty; this effort involved bringing all six presidents of the Latin American partners to the U.S. to try to sway congressional sentiment. In addition to Gutierrez, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Agriculture Secretary Mike Johans and Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick were mobilized to sell the benefits of C.A.F.T.A. to the constituencies of their departments. Due to other more highly visible issues Iraq, Afghanistan and judicial appointments the lobbying blitz occurred beneath the major media’s radar screen and ended without substantially improving the chances for C.A.F.T.A.’s ratification.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \tMis en ligne le 26 mai 2005 \u00e0 07H40<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" La situation de l’h\u00e9g\u00e9monie des USA sur le reste des deux Am\u00e9riques est de plus en plus pr\u00e9occupante. Les Am\u00e9ricains ont perdu le contr\u00f4le de l’Organisation des \u00c9tats Am\u00e9ricains (OEA) lorsque leur candidat a \u00e9t\u00e9 \u00e9limin\u00e9. D\u00e9sormais, ils sont plac\u00e9s devant la possibilit\u00e9, voire la probabilit\u00e9 d’un \u00e9chec de leur proposition de zone de libre-\u00e9change… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-66445","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66445","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=66445"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/66445\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=66445"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=66445"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=66445"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}