THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR

1
THE GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR
2
READING

• Smith, Talons, ch. 10
• DFC, chs. 1, 3
• CR 4 Smith, Global Scenarios

3
ENDING THE DECADE OF UNCERTAINTY (1990-2001)

• Change of administration
• Change of party
• Change of context 9/11

4

• PHASE 1 INITIAL ORIENTATIONS
• High level of presidential interest
• Relationship with Mexico
• (and Vicente Fox)
• Near-agreement on immigration reform
• Support for FTAA
• Composition of administrative team
• Isolation of Cuba

5

• PHASE 2 9/11 AND THE AMERICAS
• Change in regional priorities
• Unilateralist impulses
• End of wholesale immigration reform
• Stamp-collecting
• PHASE 3 TWO-LEVEL GAMESGEOCONOMICS
  GEOPOLITICS

6
UNLEASHING WARCHRONOLOGY

• September 11, 2001 attacks on U.S.
• September 20, 2001 Bush speech
• October 7, 2001 bombardments in Afghanistan
• March 2003 invasion of Iraq

7
(No Transcript)
8
WAR ON TERRORTHE RULES OF THE GAME

1. Nations can respond however they chooseincluding
   the use of indiscriminate force.
2. Preventive action is appropriate and acceptable.
3. There is no need to adhere to international
   treaties or conventions.
4. Alliances are formed around one central issuethe
   anti-terror campaign. Support is black-white.
   Democracy and human rights are secondary issues.
5. Spectator nations must tread cautiously.

9
U.S. LOSS OF SOFT POWER
10
U.S. PRESTIGE IN LATIN AMERICA
11
CHANGING VIEWS OF U.S. IN LATIN AMERICA

• Distaste for Abu Ghraib, Haditha, collateral
  damage and loss of life
• Solidarity with innocent civilians, hidden
  admiration for Osama bin Laden
• Rejection of American society, not just U.S.
  foreign policy
• Resentment of Bush unilateral approach
• Distrust of democratic crusade

12

• THE PATTERN
• Insufficient attention
• Blame incumbents for their problems, especially
• if unpopular within Bush circles
• No preventive action
• Deny involvement
• Recognize successor
• Result What about democracy?

13
TWO-LEVEL GAMES

• Geo-economic game new geopolitical game,
  superimposed and simultaneous
• Geopolitics gt geo-economics if necessary
• Low priority for region
• Benefits of inattention (benign neglect?)
• Examples
• FTAs on basis of geopolitics
• Reluctance on immigration reform
• Allies in wars on drugs
• Contradictions and trade-offs

14
GWB and Latin America Historical and Comparative
Perspective _________Latin America as
Priority___________ ______ Low _______
_______ High _____ Operational Mode for
U.S. ____ Unilateral Ad hoc
Systematic imposition
intervention (Bush 2001-09)
(Reagan 1981-89) _______ _________________
__________________
Intermittent, Consistent, Multilateral
low-level high-level
diplomacy engagement (Clinton
1993-2000) (Kennedy 1961-63)
__________________________________________________
__________
15
WHAT COULD LATIN AMERICA DO?