-
Contemporary Inter-American Relations by Janet Kelly [de Escobar] and Carlos A. Romero (review)
- The Latin Americanist
- The University of North Carolina Press
- Volume 47, Number 3-4, Winter/Spring 2004
- pp. 101-104
- Review
- Additional Information
Book Reviews 101 difference is. Voekel paints enlightened Catholicism like Weber painted Calvinism; that is, the new Catholicism is presented as highly rational and individualistic. However, Voekel’s strong reliance on historical evidence allows for a clear separation in chapter two, which is entitled the “Reformation in Mexico City.” In Chapter two Voekel notes that the Church was aware of how Enlightenment ideals had begun to influence Catholic doctrine. The Church being aware of this, however, decided on “classical” institutional reform from within rather than a radicalizing of doctrine and practice. Voekel documents how the Church reduced the number of saints and how the clergy was able to utilize this by stressing “their interior moral virtues over their miraculous powers and brokerage functions with the almighty” (56). J. David Granger Georgetown University Kelly [deEscobar],Janet,and CarlosA. Romero. “The United States and Venezuela: Rethinkinga Relationship.”Contemporary Znter-American Relations. New York and London: Routledge , 2002. ISBN 0-415-93185-1(pbk.).Pp. xv, 167. Some months ago I purchased this excellent volume in the great Powell’s bookstore in Portland, Oregon. Based on this sampling , the series editors, Jorge Dominguez and Rafael FernBndez, are supervisinga seminal series of volumes addressing contemporary relations between the United States and ten Latin American countries. Four of the ten volumes have been published to date. Following the editors’guidelines, including paired United States and Venezuelan co-authors in this case, Kelly and Romero do an excellentjob regarding the two nations. While deliberately small, their effort is comprehensive and very thought provoking. The great value of this tome is that it focuses on the relations between the two countries at the present and presents them within the everbroadening arena of international diplomacy, be it governmental, nongovernmental, supranational, or all of the above. While we are prone to think in a bilateral concept, Kelly and Romero effectively guide the reader to consider present-day Venezuelan-United States relations within the broader concept. Briefly examing early relations, the authors note that by 1900the United States was on the verge of world greatness with Venezuela exhausted from decades of internal strife. Venezuela The Latin Americanist Winterhpring 2004 then engendered special strategic consideration by the United States by becoming a major oil producer. Generally, however, the United States took for granted the nations to the south until World War I1 and the necessity for hemispheric solidarity. The Cold War followed and anticommunism became the political tocsin for the United States. With the fall of PCrez JimCnez in 1958 and the subsequent constitution of 1961, oil and democracy became the twin pillars of the bilateral relations between the two countries. Pursuing this twin concept, Betancourt became an anticommunist, fought Castro’s influence in Venezuela and outlawed the communists and the Movement to the Revolutionary Left (MIR). Subsequently, however, as these and other movements on the political left returned to legality and new ones emerged, Venezuela , as well as other Latin American nations, viewed the Cold War as someone else’s war. They expressed their independence by being against Great Britain regarding the Malvinas action and against the United States concerning its activities in Grenada and Nicaragua. Additionally Venezuela played a key role in the establishment of OPEC in 1960and, after the price of oil increased following the Arab-Israeli conflict of 1973,completed nationalizing the oil industry in 1975. World economic shifts, particularly since 1950, have led to “The Age of Supranationality.” National sovereignty is now mostly internal and size is important but smaller nations can somewhat equate size differences by use of various international organizations such as OPEC,LAFTA, and theAndean community. Despite growing globality, Venezuela looked inward in the 1980’s but, particularly after the establishment of NAFTA in 1994, the view became outward. Clearly, the big nation and the small nation pursued their separate goals while practicing diplomacy within the large picture and using various entities to their advantage. Examining domestic sources, in a “pluralistic” approach to foreign policy, the authors observe that on paper the two countries appear similar. In reality the picture is quite different. The United States president is very occupied with many items of a foreign nature and Latin America, including Venezuela, is...