Dubious Credentials and Mission of Proposed New U.S. Ambassador to Argentina
Marc R. Stanley, a Texas lawyer with
longstanding links to the Democratic Party who
worked on Joe Biden's presidential campaign has
been chosen by Biden to become the next U.S.
Ambassador to Argentina.
"Arrogant, provocative, contemptuous and scarcely
concerned with concealing his intentions to
interfere in internal affairs" is how Pagina 12
columnist Raúl Dellatorre described Stanley, after
observing his performance during a confirmation
hearing before a committee of the U.S. Senate on
October 26. In his column, Dellatorre notes that
despite his many years working for the Democratic
Party, Stanley's arrogant and contemptuous style
is more Trump-like than would be expected from
someone nominated by Biden, with Stanley seeming
more like a lobbyist for big business interests
than a diplomat. In fact, Stanley who presents
himself as a political activist and leader of the
American Jewish community, has not had a
diplomatic appointment before. His confirmation is
still pending.
At his confirmation hearing Stanley described
Argentina as "a beautiful tourist bus whose wheels
are not working properly," then made a point of
telling members of the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee what the government of Argentina was
doing wrong or failing to do, and how he would
intervene to address the situation if he is
confirmed as the U.S. ambassador.
For example, he said Argentina had yet to "join
the United States and others in pushing for
meaningful reforms in countries like Venezuela and
Cuba" and pledged to engage with the Argentine
leadership at all levels "to seek ways to achieve
our mutual goal of a hemisphere that honours our
highest ideals." What this of course means is that
Stanley will push Argentina to align itself more
closely with the U.S. policy of isolating Cuba,
Venezuela and Nicaragua.
Asked by members of the Senate committee about
his views on Argentina's relations with the
International Monetary Fund (IMF), Stanley said he
had pledged to both parties to "help Argentina
restructure its IMF debt." "The IMF debt, at $45
billion, is huge," he said. "The problem, however,
is that it is the responsibility of Argentina's
leaders to come up with a macro plan to repay it,
and they have not yet done so. They say one is
coming soon." According to Dellatorre that last
remark was made in an ironic, almost mocking tone.
Stanley told the Senate committee his
determination to help Argentina address its
economic challenges was because the country was "a
great bilateral partner" in terms of trade and the
economy, but first it needed to be economically
healthy. Innocuous sounding words, but their
implications for the Argentinian people who have a
bitter experience with having to bear the burden
of odious debts incurred by neoliberal rulers are
anything but benign.
Dellatorre warns that Stanley's promise to insert
himself into the Argentine government's
negotiations with the IMF will be to push for an
arrangement that guarantees, first and foremost,
repayment of the enormous debt incurred by the
previous government of Mauricio Macri and a
payment plan current President Alberto
Fernández has said is impossible to fulfil.
Nor did Stanley shy away from signalling his
intent to interfere in Argentina's economic
relations with China, in particular preventing it
from gaining access to the latest Chinese advances
in communications technology. He told senators:
"As the United States sees increased competition
with the People's Republic of China in Argentina
and elsewhere, I will make it a priority to hold
its feet to the fire, especially when products
like 5G technology are entering the regional
market, and allowing China access to all the data
and information of the Argentine population."
In another Pagina 12
commentary about Biden's choice for the new U.S.
ambassador, Argentine academic Atilio Borón
writes, "Stanley's words oozed rancid
interventionism, typical of the years of ‘gunboat
diplomacy.' They confirm the validity of the
Monroe Doctrine, which is about to turn 200 and
continues to be the fundamental reference for the
U.S. government when it comes to defining its
relations with Latin America."
One thing may be how the U.S.
defines its relations with Latin America in terms
of a 200-year-old colonial doctrine. Another thing
is how the people of both the U.S. and Latin
America view them and what they will accept.
This article was published in
Volume 51 Number 12 - December 12, 2021
Article Link:
https://cpcml.ca/Tmlm2021/Articles/M5101217.HTM
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|