<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Council on Hemispheric Affairs &#187; COHA Opinion</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.coha.org/category/opinion/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.coha.org</link>
	<description>COHA is an NGO specialized in monitoring Latin American and Canadian Relations for more than 30 years...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:30:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Clinton&#8217;s Failed Attempt to Mend Relations with Latin America</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/clinton-plays-hostess-in-a-failed-attempt-to-mend-u-s-latin-america-relations/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/clinton-plays-hostess-in-a-failed-attempt-to-mend-u-s-latin-america-relations/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 19:16:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[COHA Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COHA Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front Page]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Obama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=12736</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160; Following in the wake of President Barack Obama’s trip to Brazil, Chile, and El Salvador in March, Secretary of State Hilary Rodham Clinton held a private dinner party on Wednesday, May 18, where she hosted six former Latin American presidents coming from Mexico, Colombia, Brazil, Peru, Panama, and El Salvador. The dinner was part of Clinton’s newly hatched offensive in which she hoped to further mend regional relations that could, up to this point, be described as disastrous. &#160; Although this country has always had some kind of presence in Latin America, as exemplified by free trade pacts such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI), it is perhaps better known for its infamous military intervention in countries such as Nicaragua, Chile, El Salvador, Grenada, and Guatemala. However, in recent years, the U.S. has become increasingly involved in the Middle East and Latin America has dropped from the nation’s list of priorities. Intervention in Afghanistan, Iraq, and, more recently, Libya and Syria—where threats from non-state actors have arisen—has taken firm precedence over any kind of vigilance driven by intra-hemispheric disruptions. Consequently, the U.S. has largely reverted to an old habit of ignoring [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/clinton-plays-hostess-in-a-failed-attempt-to-mend-u-s-latin-america-relations/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>COHA Opinion: Brazilian Election: What Does South American Giant Want in Post-Lula Era?</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/coha-opinion-brazilian-election-what-does-south-american-giant-want-in-post-lula-era/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/coha-opinion-brazilian-election-what-does-south-american-giant-want-in-post-lula-era/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 15:46:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[All Countries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brazil]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[COHA Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=10481</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a scene from my first book, Hugo Chávez: Oil, Politics and the Challenge to the U.S. (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2006), I discuss how Brazil became an ally of Venezuela during a key moment of heightened political tensions. It was December, 2002 and Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez was facing down an economically damaging lock-out of the oil sector launched by the right wing political opposition. The lock-out capped a tumultuous political year for Chávez: just eight months earlier, he had scarcely managed to face down a coup d’etat launched by pro-U.S. elements within the country’s military and business elite. As a result of the lock-out, Venezuela was obliged to import gasoline for domestic use. Chávez, who at the time was locked in a bitter political struggle with the Bush White in Washington, desperately needed allies. Fortunately, just across the border Venezuela found an important diplomatic supporter in Brazil. In a clear sign that the South American giant was in no mood to cooperate with U.S. efforts designed to isolate Venezuela, Brazil shipped half a million barrels of oil to the Chávez government. Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva of the Workers’ Party had just won the Brazilian presidential election two months earlier, defeating [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/coha-opinion-brazilian-election-what-does-south-american-giant-want-in-post-lula-era/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>COHA Opinion: Hardline Immigration Reform &#8211; Misconceptions and National Identity</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/hardline-immigration-reform-misconceptions-and-national-identity/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/hardline-immigration-reform-misconceptions-and-national-identity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Sep 2010 19:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[COHA Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front Page]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=10450</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Arizona’s current crackdown on illegal immigrants has ignited a heated national legal debate –recent federal, state, and local initiatives have been moving in a more restrictive direction. Even in the “blue” state of Massachusetts, a bill proposing stricter limitations on illegal immigrants’ employment rights, as well as tightened standards for tuition benefits, along with more difficult access to subsidized housing, had received widespread popular support before such steps were reined in by the state legislature.1 The most common explanation given for these policy initiatives is that illegal immigrants drain the U.S. economy of public resources while, at the same time, contributing to increased crime and drug afflictions. However, scant evidence supports these claims. In fact, most specialists insist that the U.S. economy as a whole benefits from the inflow of labor, while perceived increases in crime levels that can be traced to immigration are almost always overblown. The main reason for anti-illegal-immigrant policies is usually nothing more than a boost of xenophobic fears resulting from a rapidly changing U.S. national identity. This is an attitude that must change if this country is to remain globally competitive and united in diversity. A close look at globalization trends and U.S. tax statistics [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/hardline-immigration-reform-misconceptions-and-national-identity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Free Trade with Martinelli’s Panama: A Bad Deal for All</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/free-trade-with-martinelli%e2%80%99s-panama-a-bad-deal-for-all/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/free-trade-with-martinelli%e2%80%99s-panama-a-bad-deal-for-all/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 19:26:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[COHA Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front Page]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Panama]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=10333</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Washington is currently considering three free trade agreements (FTAs) that await congressional ratification. While U.S. lawmakers hesitate to approve deals with Colombia and South Korea, the proposed U.S.-Panama FTA does not seem to generate much controversy. Although the ongoing transgressions in Panama have not made big headlines in the States, the events transpiring in that country warrant very serious scrutiny. Law 30—nicknamed the “sausage law” because it crams many unrelated provisions into one omnibus piece of legislation—was recently passed by Panama’s National Assembly in an effort to fast-track U.S. approval of the FTA. While the new law simultaneously amends the penal code and regulates commercial aviation, some of its other stipulations dramatically weaken Panama’s labor standards. Panamanian Lawmakers intentionally slipped these provisions into the new legislation in order to minimize opposition from civil society. The move reeks of political and economic opportunism on the part of President Ricardo Martinelli and his pro-big business cronies in the National Assembly. Though the measure ostensibly seeks to improve the investment climate, it does so at the expense of the average Panamanian worker, dismantling traditional labor rights in an attempt to encourage ratification of the FTA. Given its controversial aspects, U.S. lawmakers ought to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/free-trade-with-martinelli%e2%80%99s-panama-a-bad-deal-for-all/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>COHA Opinion: Misguided Priorities at Mercosur Summit</title>
		<link>http://www.coha.org/coha-opinion-misguided-priorities-at-mercosur-summit/</link>
		<comments>http://www.coha.org/coha-opinion-misguided-priorities-at-mercosur-summit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:49:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[COHA Opinion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Colombia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Free Trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front Page]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Venezuela]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coha.org/?p=10137</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[At a Mercosur summit on August 3rd in Argentina, member states applauded their success in finally making the trade organization into a full customs union, a process that has been heatedly debated since December 1994.  Almost completely absent from the agenda, however, was the important matter of restoring diplomatic and economic normalcy between Colombia and Venezuela. Although neither country is currently a full member of Mercosur, their persistently stormy relationship has been of deep concern to almost all members. As a result, the lack of resolution for the Colombia-Venezuela dispute indicates the summit&#8217;s misguided priorities. Chavez and Uribe were both conspicuously absent at the Mercosur meeting, and member states merely said that “a solution” to the Colombia-Venezuela tensions would soon be found and urged talks to this end. Perhaps Chavez and Uribe would not be absent if Mercosur members had pledged to discuss these two nations’ pressing difficulties. Although the Mercosur summit was generally a success in terms of economic progress and other trade issues, it seems to have put the Venezuela-Colombia  tensions on the back burner. Mercosur should have prioritized the Caracas-Bogota spat as the primary focus rather than be so absorbed with the customs-union matter, which has been [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.coha.org/coha-opinion-misguided-priorities-at-mercosur-summit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

