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 GAMES— GEOCONOMICS + GEOPOLITICS

6. UNLEASHING WAR: CHRONOLOGY September 11, 2001: attacks on U.S. September 20, 2001: Bush speech October 7, 2001: bombardments in Afghanistan March 2003: invasion of Iraq

8. WAR ON TERROR: THE RULES OF THE GAME 1.Nations can respond however they choose—including 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 issue—the 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 > 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?