Polls now indicate leftist, anti-U.S. candidates are falling from favor in Peru, Mexico and Nicaragua.
By DAVID ADAMS, Times Latin America Correspondent
Published May 13, 2006
MIAMI - A dramatic left-wing nationalist shift that has appeared to be engulfing Latin America could be running out of steam.
Latest opinion polls from Peru, Mexico and Nicaragua - all facing elections this year - indicate that candidates on the "hard" left, running on strong anti-U.S. platforms, are not faring well.
"It is a step back from the leftward trend," said Dennis Jett, dean of the International Center at the University of Florida, and a former U.S. ambassador to Peru.
The tide had appeared lately to be going in the opposite direction, with political leaders aligning themselves with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, the new father of the left in Latin America.
This was music to the ears of Cuban leader Fidel Castro, who had been running out of friends in the hemisphere until Chavez came along. Calling themselves the "axis of good," Castro, Chavez and newly elected Bolivian leader Evo Morales gathered recently in Havana to sign a "people's trade agreement,'' the Bolivarian Alternative for Latin America and the Caribbean to rival the Washington-backed Free Trade Area of the Americas.
Describing his place in the new family of left-wing nations, Morales anointed himself the son, with Chavez as the father and Castro as the grandfather.
But in the past two weeks Chavez and Morales have caused consternation in the oil and natural gas industry by threatening to take back control of production from foreign companies.
While the outcome of these nationalist energy measures remains to be seen, there is a danger they might backfire by upsetting other Latin American countries reliant on energy imports. They could also be muddying the electoral waters, turning off voters concerned by an excess of radicalism.
Only a short while ago it looked as though the leftist family of nations would be adding some new, and important, siblings.
In Peru, a left-wing nationalist and former soldier, Ollanta Humala, won a first round in voting last month. But polls show him trailing in the run-off next month against another moderate leftist, Alan Garcia.
Far more important a prize, at least in electoral terms, is Mexico's presidential election in early July.
A month ago the candidate for the left-wing Democratic Revolutionary Party, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, was holding a commanding 9 percent lead over Felipe Calderon, the candidate for the ruling National Action Party, or PAN.
The latest May 4 poll by GEA , a respected firm of economists, shows a stunning reversal. Calderon has risen to 41 percent, while Lopez Obrador, the former Mexico City mayor, has slipped back to 31 percent.
PAN campaign officials put the shift down to a refocusing of the campaign away from abstract ideological issues, such as alleged U.S. imperialism, to more concrete economic proposals, such as job creation.
Analysts also identify a series of loose-tongued comments by Lopez Obrador that have painted him as an extremist.
When he called President Vicente Fox a chacalaca, a raucous type of bird, Lopez Obrador offended Mexico's strong tradition of not insulting the presidential office. He compounded this by refusing to apologize.
"Mexico remains a terribly conservative country," former Foreign Minister Jorge Castaneda wrote in the Los Angeles Times. Castaneda, who now teaches politics at New York University, adds that Lopez Obrador "has proved unable to make the move from left-wing rabble-rouser to centrist statesman."
Critics of the "axis of good" say the left-wing triumvirate may have gotten too big for its boots, noting with irony how Chavez attacks U.S. imperialism when Venezuela is currently outspending Washington in the region by 2 to 1.
In fact, this past week's natural gas nationalization in Bolivia has led to complaints by Brazil of outside meddling by Chavez. Brazil depends on Bolivia for 50 percent of its natural gas needs and is the largest foreign investor in Bolivia's gas industry.
The Venezuelan leader also came under attack this week from Garcia, the new Peruvian front-runner, who told Miami Herald columnist Andres Oppenheimer that Chavez has a habit of "meddling and imposing his outdated model on us, a model that is only supported by the amount of money he has."
Oddly outside the fray is the United States.
In fact, analysts note that one of the recent successes of U.S. foreign policy in the region has been its "say nothing" approach, a far cry from the blunt diplomacy of the first Bush administration.
The White House last year made some key changes in the State Department team handling Latin America, bringing in Thomas Shannon, a skilled diplomat with lengthy experience in the region. He replaced a series of political appointees seen to be aligned with right-wing Cuban exiles in Miami.
Speaking in Miami last week, Shannon impressed an audience of journalists and academics with his nuanced analysis of the region. "He's very thoughtful and low key," said Jett, of the University of Florida. "I don't think American foreign policy has changed so much as the presentation. It's a kinder, gentler face."
Washington had no interest in taking on Chavez, said Shannon. "Chavez has made a strategic decision to make a rupture with us. We are going to avoid that."
Bolivia, he said, was "a work in progress," noting that Morales had indicated his willingness to sign a counterdrug agreement with the United States.
Shannon said the United States' main concern was not the ideological leaning of individual governments, but the strength of democratic institutions in those countries.
He blamed the recent "populist outpouring" on resentment over social inequalities and the failure of institutions to channel legitimate grievances.
"We have to engage these countries," he said. "We can't try to wall them off or condemn them."
That isn't the kind of language Latin Americans are used to hearing from the Bush administration. Given the volatile nature of the region right now, Washington might be wise to let Shannon do the talking, at least till election season is over.
