His rival, banana tycoon Alvaro Noboa, the wealthiest man in the country, who won the first round, demands that the votes be re-counted. However, the gap is wide, and the victory of the left-wing forces looks inevitable.
The elections were interesting for two reasons. First, the voters had to choose between the two extremes. The left candidate advocated the rupture of trade relations with the United States, and a switch of the economy to left-wing Latin American countries, primarily Cuba and Venezuela. His opponent urged stronger ties with the U.S., and promised to break up with Hugo Chavez's Caracas. (Incidentally, Venezuela will also hold presidential elections in the near future but practically nobody doubts that Chavez will keep his position, and continue swearing hard at the "great northern neighbor" from all rostra. Recent polls show that Chavez enjoys the support of around 60% of all voters.)
Secondly, every election in Latin America suggests the following question: how many points will Washington lose in what has been proclaimed its zone of vital interests by the moth-eaten Monroe doctrine? It is enough to mention Cuba, Brazil, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Nicaragua (after Daniel Ortega's victory). Ecuador will join the ranks now. A left-wing candidate came very close to winning the election in Peru. The situation in Mexico is no better for the U.S., either. The recent elections produced two presidents at once - after a dubious vote count, the election committee officially named one president, whereas the other took offense and proclaimed himself president independently. Formally an impostor, he enjoys support of millions in his country. To sum up, Latin America seems to be drifting away from the United States, having broken away at the Mexican border where the U.S. is now building a fence.
It is also important to establish what has caused Latin America's obvious swing to the left, and stronger anti-American attitudes. In the past Washington attributed every left-wing manifestation to Soviet or Cuban intrigues, but the Soviet Union is no more, while Cuba is preoccupied with its own problems because of Fidel Castro's illness. Even if Havana exerts influence on events, it is doing so by inertia, which is slowing down. For all the respect which Chavez demonstrates to the Cuban patriarch, it is he rather than Fidel who leads the left-wing column, or to be more precise, its radical elements. We should not forget about the left-wing, but moderate Brazil led by Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
I think there are several explanations for a change in Latin America's attitude to the U.S. To start with, having convinced itself of its omnipotence after the Soviet Union's disintegration, the U.S. has become markedly more active in its efforts to spread the ideas of Americanism all over the world. In some places, the job has been very tough and expensive. Iraq is the brightest example. The situation in Afghanistan is also going from bad to worse. There is not a ray of hope in the Middle East, and it is not clear what to do about Iran's nuclear ambitions, and demonstrative missile launches by North Korea.
There are other worries as well. Friendship with other NATO members is somewhat odd - they have not been rushing to help their leader. Relations with the European Union are far from smooth. In addition, there is a market-communist Beijing with its nuclear and space technologies, and Moscow, which is gaining strength and independence. In the beginning of the past century, an American ambassador, say, in Argentina, was more important for the White House than his colleague in far-away Russia on the eve of the 1917 revolution, but now things are different.
Priorities have changed as well, and Washington has relegated Latin American problems slightly into the background. But this has been enough for Latin America, or at least its considerable part, to switch to the language of Bolivar.
But there is one more reason why many Latin American countries re-orient themselves to bilateral relations, choose China and the EU, and look with hope at Moscow or Canada. Needless to say, the U.S. is still Latin America's chief economic partner, which is only natural for economic and geographical considerations. The problem is that Washington is using these considerations, as well as its political and military might exclusively in its own self-centered interests. Latin American nations have grown sick and tired of this unfair partnership, which has prevented many of them from making steady progress.
Reluctant to put up with this permanent inequality and tired of listening to Washington's permanent instructions, Latin America is drifting to the left, and even allows itself to speak rudely to the White House in the UN (in Chavez's unparliamentary language). But this is not its fault - enough is enough.
I don't think that Latin America will part with the U.S. today or tomorrow, but the willingness of millions of people there to do so is a bad omen for Washington.
Recently, I was surprised to learn from a CNN commentator that even in Canada the U.S. rating has dropped by 30 points in the last few years. In other words, Canada may drift away, too.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and may not necessarily represent the opinions of the editorial board
