In the heart of Washington, D.C., the Organization of American States (OAS) headquarters houses a Hall of Heroines and Heroes of the Americas, where George Washington’s bust shares space with notable figures like Simón Bolívar and other pivotal personalities from across the region.
This assembly of statues signifies the essence of Pan-Americanism, suggesting that despite being the most powerful nation in the western hemisphere, the United States is merely one among many equals in the OAS, established over 77 years ago to promote peaceful resolutions among neighboring countries.
During a recent meeting at the Permanent Council, Monocle observed the protocol in action, underscoring the power dynamics at play: the voice of St. Kitts and Nevis, home to around 47,000 people, echoed the same weight as the United States.
Under the flags of 34 nations, delegates posed tough questions to candidates from Colombia and Peru for the role of assistant secretary-general, with Albert Ramdin from Suriname poised to assume the office on May 30, marking a historic milestone as the first Caribbean secretary-general of the OAS.
The OAS embarks on this new chapter at a critical juncture, facing growing challenges to multilateralism and its own functionality.
Historically, the OAS has been viewed as an entity heavily influenced by Washington, receiving approximately half of its $99 million budget from the U.S. Treasury. Monuments around the building reinforce this perception, particularly with Bolívar’s bronze figure in juxtaposition to an obelisk in honor of American Cincinnatus, emphasizing the OAS’s connection to U.S. foreign policy.
Critics have often labeled the OAS as an extension of U.S. interests, a perception supported by leftist factions who derisively call it the “Ministry of Colonies.” They point out its failure to address persistent crises in countries like Haiti and Venezuela.
Rebecca Bill Chavez, president of Inter-American Dialogue, voiced her concern, asking, “If you look at the region’s most pressing challenges, where is the OAS?” She illustrates the growing frustration with the organization’s impotence in addressing crucial regional issues.
Defenders of the OAS acknowledge its flaws yet argue that it has adapted and evolved, showcasing its independence through human rights monitoring, election supervision, and efforts to combat organized crime, narcotics, and migration.
Amidst smaller nation dynamics, the OAS has successfully mediated tense situations, reinforcing the region’s geopolitical stability throughout the 20th and into the 21st century.
In a pre-office statement to Monocle, Ramdin pointed out the long-standing peace in the western hemisphere, asserting that there are no major conflicts or open wars currently challenging the region.
However, the Trump administration’s reevaluation of U.S. participation in international organizations complicates matters for the OAS, which has historically served as a multilateral forum beneficial to U.S. interests. Sir Ronald Sanders, Antigua and Barbuda’s OAS ambassador, quipped that the U.S. treats the organization as “their property,” raising questions about the future of U.S. support.
On the day Monocle visited the OAS, news focused on significant developments in the Middle East, such as Benjamin Netanyahu’s return to the White House, highlighting a possible neglect of Latin American relations.
Once a region of priority for U.S. foreign policy, Latin America now grapples with feelings of abandonment.
During interactions with Brazilian ambassador Benoni Belli, who chairs the Permanent Council, insights were shared about the OAS’s establishment in 1948 amid anti-communist sentiments, granting legitimacy to the Monroe Doctrine.
American interventionism was starkly controversial during the Cold War, particularly as military dictatorships in Latin America perpetrated grave human rights abuses under the guise of fighting communism. Cuba, after its revolution, faced suspension in 1962—a ban that lingered until 2009 even though Havana declined the invitation to rejoin.
An infamous instance was the 1983 U.S. invasion of Grenada, which resulted in the resignation of the OAS secretary-general due to the disregard for the organization’s authority in such geopolitical maneuvers.
The transition toward democracy in Latin America allowed the OAS to reaffirm its autonomy, one notable example being the Nicaraguan elections in 1990. The Sandinistas, once adversaries of U.S. policies, invited the OAS to observe their electoral process, strongly indicating a move away from U.S. influence during this period.
Belli remarked on this epoch as a “golden era,” when the OAS effectively safeguarded democracy without being perceived as a tool of American imperialism.
Fast forward to current times, the OAS faces obstacles, with examples of success like the mediation of Guatemala’s post-election crisis being overshadowed by failures like Nicaragua and Venezuela.
Ortega’s regime has continued unchecked, with Nicaragua withdrawing from the OAS in 2021, while Venezuela exited in 2019—with a certain irony that both countries still maintain a voting presence due to OAS protocol.
Sanders expressed exasperation at the perceived mockery from Caracas and Havana during votes, observing how their ghostly specters linger within the body.
As the OAS grapples with its challenges, the Trump administration’s view on the organization remains uncertain and multifaceted; while ambivalence has characterized U.S. policy towards the OAS for two decades, the relationship continues to evolve.
Viewing the current geopolitical landscape, some within the OAS are still hopeful about its fate. Rebecca Bill Chavez believes the Biden administration’s signals thus far indicate promising prospects for the organization’s survival, despite Trump’s notorious contempt for international partnerships.
Transitional leadership under Albert Ramdin, who is perceived as a technocrat ready to steer the OAS away from Almagro’s more politically charged style, may play a pivotal role in fostering dialogue and cooperation.
Ramdin’s diplomatic experience positions him as an ideal facilitator amid the turbulent regional landscape. With significant tasks on the horizon, including mediation in disputes between Belize and Guatemala and escalating tensions between Venezuela and Guyana over the Essequibo region, he is anticipated to navigate complex political waters.
The legacy of regional cooperation, as envisioned by leaders like Taft and Bolívar, now rests upon Ramdin, as he emphasizes that small nations can be effective in this diplomatic domain, acting as non-threatening brokers in discussions.
However, financial constraints loom large as Sanders emphasizes that the OAS has been financially strained for years, with several member countries failing to meet their financial obligations. The U.S. aid cuts have exacerbated the dire financial situation.
Ramdin has engaged in discussions with U.S. officials, recognizing that the organization’s viability depends largely on Washington’s support and financial decisions moving forward.
He aims to convey the necessity of a united hemisphere beneficial to U.S. interests, advocating for economic collaborations that prioritize investment within the Americas, fostering mutual development and stability.
As Ramdin prepares to take office, he remains acutely aware of the weight of expectations placed upon him to revitalize an organization that faces scrutiny and skepticism regarding its future role in the multilayered tapestry of regional diplomacy.
image source from：https://monocle.com/affairs/organisation-of-american-states/
