U.S. National Security Memorandum
Alliance Relations
Joel Rodriguez, Emily Waxman, Mary Gallegos
Summer 2008 Memorandum Overview and Introduction:
With the new threat of global terror the United States needs strong allies now more than ever. These allies can provide strategic geo-political influence, military support, and become an important economic partner. U.S. national security policy cannot be limited just within its own borders, because, since WWII, countries have created alliances with countries aligned with its values and goals in order to combat threats to the world order. Since 9/11 there is a new consciousness of trans-national networks of terror and that emerging conflicts are no longer state against state. Without the cooperation of allied nations the United States could not combat this surfacing threat alone. With this in mind, U.S. national security policy, especially concerning the War in Iraq, has alienated many key allies especially in Europe. Also, with trans- and supra-national organizations emerging the U.S. must learn to “play nice” with the international community in order to protect its own interests.
Many key alliances will be discussed in the following memorandum and each member of this group presented a different piece of the picture. Emily Waxman contributes information about Israel, India, and how the United States national policy affects its alliances. Mary Gallegos researched NATO (and key allies within this organization), the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia and their contributions to U.S. national security initiatives worldwide. Joel Rodriguez presents the significant allies from South America and Asia and their importance to U.S. national security initiatives.
There are many other smaller allies that contribute to the United States, but as far as furthering U.S. national security policy these are seen as either a key ally now or an emerging ally that will be important to the U.S. in the future.
The U.S., Israel, and India
The United States depends on its alliances with other states. Part of the reason why the United States has these allies is to help maintain its own national security. Allies can help assist the United States, especially in terms of its foreign policy. United States allies often come to the United States’ aid in times of war or because of economic crises.
Ultimately, the United States gets a major advantage out of having relations with other states. It is important for the United States to be a major world power and needs all the help it can get in doing so. Some issues that the United States is going to have to deal with are globalization and war. In the future, the United States might have to decide whether or not to give up some of its power to a global government. Many states are joining organizations such as the UN, EU, NATO and more. The United States must figure out what kind of a role they would like to have in dealing with global organizations. The United States also must maintain their alliance relations. Ever since the War on Terror started many states have lost faith in the United States. The United
States must maintain their allies and possibly hope for one day to gain more allies. The best relationship that the United States has with other states is when they gain a lot from the other state. In the future the United States must find a balance between being a world power and also having alliance relations with other states.
One of the most crucial relationships, especially in today’s times, is the relationship between the United States and Israel. The relationship covers issues such as democracy, immigration, economy, technology, militaristic cooperation, space, crises, culture, education, art and even tourism. The relationship began on Israel’s
Independence Day in 1948. Eleven minutes after Israel declared its independence,
President Harry Truman recognized the State of Israel. He then gave $135 million in loans to help Israel take in Holocaust survivors. The primary reason why Israel is important to the United States is because Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East.
According to “Israel and the United States”, “both Israel and the United States are committed to freedom, equality, and tolerance for all people regardless of religion, race or gender” (Israel and the United States 4). The relationship between the United States and Israel is also strengthened because of the economy. In 1985, the United and States and Israel signed a Free Trade Agreement. Since both states support a free market economy both states support each other. Israel has the most companies on the NASDAQ than any other state in North America (Israel and the United States 6). Israel also houses many research and design centers for American technology. Israel is constantly sending over all sorts of technological advancements to the United States. 70% of Israel’s exports deal with high end technology (Israel and the United States 7).
Lately it seems that the most important relationship between the United States and
Israel has to do with strategic cooperation. The United States’ military helps Israel’s military. The two militaries share intelligence and militaristic strategies. In 1981 Arian
Sharon, who at the time was Israel’s Defense Minister, and American Secretary of
Defense Casper Weinberger signed a Memorandum of Understanding. In this
Memorandum of Understanding the United States and Israel agreed to help each other, especially with issues dealing with the Middle East. “In 1996 President Clinton and
Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres signed the U.S.-Israel Counter Terrorism Accord” which formally made the two states allies in dealing with terrorism (Israel and the United
States 9). Both states even assist each other with homeland security, especially in dealing with measures to prevent terrorists from getting inside the borders. The relationship even goes into space. Israel sent astronaut Ilan Ramon into space in the Shuttle Columbia through NASA. Ilan Ramon used advanced Israeli technology aboard the shuttle. He conducted many experiments especially dealing with global warming. Israel has often come to help Israel in times of need. Israel offered assistance to the victims of Hurricane
Katrina and to the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania that were bombed by terrorists using Magen David Adom (MDA) with is Israel’s version of the American Red Cross.
Along with sharing ideas, Israeli culture is also shared. Education is also highly valued among both states. American and Israeli universities have collaborated on research especially in dealing with science and technology. Some of these collaborations have resulted in the Nobel Prize.
There are so many benefits that the United States gets out of its relationship with
Israel. Democracy is the first huge advantage. All sorts of economic and technological advancements that Israel provides for the United States have helped to strengthen that bond. In the future, the United States must continue to support Israel, especially since
Israel’s borders are surrounded by enemies. Israel has been an ally of the United States since its establishment in 1948. Both states need each other just as much, especially since the United States has a vested interest in the Middle East.
Another very important ally that the United States has is India. The United States and India have the two largest democracies in the world and the two states are united because of that connection. On July 18th, Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and President George W. Bush met to officially declare the two states allies. The two states have had a history of economic relations, defense cooperation, energy cooperation and science and technology relations. India and the United States have a history of exporting goods to each other. India exports jewelry and textiles to the United States and the
United States exports machinery to India. According to the Embassy of India, The
United States is one of the largest foreign direct investors to the United States (“India-
U.S. Relations: a General Overview” 1). Also in 1995, defense cooperation was established between India and the United States. According to the Embassy of India, the new agreement includes “cooperation in defense technology, continued joint and combined exercises and exchanges, expansion of defense trade, increased opportunities for technology transfer, collaboration, co-production” and research and design (Embassy of India 1). They established a defense policy group which includes sharing of military exercises of the navies, armies, and Special Forces. The United States and India worked together in the “U.S. – India Disaster Response Initiative” which helped victims during the 2004 tsunami. India also contributed $5 million dollars to Hurricane Katrina relief.
2005 also brought about energy cooperation between the United States and India. Both states invested a lot of money into the energy sector which included nuclear energy cooperation. The two states signed a science and technology treaty. The two states have come together recently in dealings with space technology. In 1996 President Bush visited
India to strengthen ties even more. In the future it will be important for the United States and India to continue to share ideas. India is extremely close to the Middle East which is especially important because of the United States’ current involvement in the War on Terror. India’s location, democratic values, technology, and economy all aid to the
United States in some way making India a very important ally to the United States.
NATO, U.K., Australia, and Canada
When speaking of U.S. alliances one must understand NATO (North Atlantic
Treaty Organization) and its importance to U.S. national security. Since the treaty was signed on April 4, 1949, its primary goal was maintain freedom and security for its signatory states during the nearly 40 years of the Cold War Era. Once the Cold War ended in the late eighties, many thought that NATO should be disbanded because the
Soviet threat no longer existed. Yes, NATO’s original function changed, but instead of ending this important alliance it has evolved to meet future threats that face its member states (Scheffer 9). There is a new dynamic within the member states of NATO ever since the creation of the EU (European Union) because many of these countries are becoming more loyal to the EU as a trans-national or supra-national organization than
NATO. This schism could prove difficult for the U.S. in the future since many European nations have strained ties with the U.S. over President Bush’s increasingly unpopular national security policies including the War in Iraq. From containment of the Soviet
Union, to now the fight against Global Terror, NATO has been a valuable asset to the
United States in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
First, NATO’s mission in Afghanistan has been very important to the mission of the United States in combating terror in this country. The ISAF (International Security
Assistance Force) has described its strategic mission as,” Through the UN-mandated
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) NATO is assisting the Afghan
Government in extending and exercising its authority and influence across the country, creating the conditions for stabilisation and reconstruction” (“Helping to bring security, stability and foster development in Afghanistan” 1). The help from the ISAF is essential in stabilizing the country through their disarming of illegal militant groups, humanitarian aid, and their anti-narcotics effort that stop the sale of narcotics to fund Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations within the country. Although Afghan forces take the responsibility for the security of the country the ISAF has a vital role in supporting any security efforts in order to maintain order within the country otherwise any rebuilding effort would be compromised. All of these efforts are part of a five year agreement between NATO and the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan to secure and rebuild the nation in order to promote peace and future economic growth (“Helping to bring security, stability and foster development in Afghanistan” 1). Though their main task was just to assist in maintaining security they have been forced to take a greater role in counter- terrorism tasks which have directly helped the U.S. military and, more importantly, national security agenda.
NATO also has forces in Iraq under the NTM-I or NATO Training Mission –
Iraq. This mission was established on 14 August 2004 at the request of the Iraqi interim government to train Iraqi forces in order to build a security force to one day be self- sufficient. Their main goals are giving training assistance to new Iraqi forces, sending military equipment, and technical support and education (“NATO’s Assistance to Iraq”
1). Although NATO is not involved in combat in Iraq, the assistance through this training program has been invaluable. This enables the U.S. military to focus more on stabilization of the country until these Iraqi forces are able to work independently. Also, all NATO members are contributing to this mission, whether within the country or without, through monetary donations and the shipping of equipment in order to supply the Iraqi forces (“NATO’s Assistance to Iraq” 1).
Historically many of the United States’ most important allies are also part of
NATO; these countries include Germany, France, and Spain. Since the end of WWII and the beginning of NATO, which included the fight to keep Germany from Soviet rule, the
U.S. has maintained a strong alliance with Germany. Recently, this alliance has been strained with Germany’s lack of support for the War in Iraq. They lead ISAF troops in
Afghanistan and have remained in the northern part of Iraq which has not seen much action and the U.S. has criticized them for not taking a more active role in many of the more important and dangerous missions. Most Germans polled want their troops withdrawn from Afghanistan and the defense minister has refused to lend more troops to
NATO forces (The List: Who’s Left in Afghanistan?”).
Since U.S. involvement in WWII they have had a strong alliance with France being part of the five “victors” of that particular war. The French – U.S. alliance has been strained for many years because French citizens and the government were opposed to the U.S. led War in Iraq from even before the invasion in 2003. They have, though, sent troops to Afghanistan and participated with the ISAF in many missions there. Their efforts have been concentrated in Kabul, Kandahar, and Jalalabad in order to combat the
Taliban and stabilize these important areas (“France in Afghanistan”). Spain is another country that has participated in the ISAF effort in Afghanistan and also participated in the
Iraq war but this alliance went sour after support for the war declined and their new
Prime Minister decided to pull troops out of Iraq. All of these tensions prove that U.S. national security policy is affected by and affects many key allies. Germany, France, and
Spain were once very important allies that now appear to balance against the world’s hegemony.
Another, and possibly the most important, U.S. ally is the United Kingdom. The
UK is a founding member of NATO and also a direct ally to the U.S. and their most ardent supporter. Under Prime Minister Tony Blair, after 9/11, they were willing to cooperate with any U.S. policies concerning Islamic terror networks. They followed The
United States into Afghanistan, as did many other nations, in order to overthrow the
Taliban and stabilize the country. The real litmus test of this alliance came during the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq. In 2002, Prime Minister Tony Blair met with
President Bush at his ranch in Crawford, Texas to discuss an invasion of Iraq and Blair quickly made plans to take this idea to the UN in order to “legitimize” the proposed invasion (Clarke 4). As the U.S.’s partner in this proposal to the UN they provided intelligence and moral support for the case to go to war in Iraq.
After five years in Iraq, British forces remain even after many other countries have made a complete withdrawal from the country. Although there is now a new Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, there still remain steady troop levels in order to support the U.S. led mission for now but Brown has mentioned a possible timetable for troop pullout in the future. Their resolve is the same and the United States which is to have success in Iraq and means that the Iraqi government and security forces are able to sustain order in the country. The UK has proven true by risking its own allies, and compromising its position in the European Union, in order to trust in U.S. foreign policy and defend it even after much criticism. The United Kingdom is also important to the
U.S. because they are a key part of the European Union and an avenue for Washington to have influence in this important alliance (“The U.S.-U.K. Alliance” 1). Largely, the
U.S. has much to gain from this alliance, although, it may place Britain in a more precarious position with the European Union, and other allies, in the future.
Another country that lent legitimacy to the U.S. decision to invade Iraq is
Australia. Historically Australia has been an ally of the United States and was a very important part of the Vietnam War. They followed the United States into Afghanistan through the ISAF and continue to financially support the effort to combat terrorism in that particular country. They also followed the U.S. into Iraq which was a tremendous victory for the U.S. in the campaign for global support. Their mission primarily focused on training Iraqi security forces and rebuilding efforts near the south of Baghdad. Now,
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made good on his campaign promises and recently withdrew troops from Iraq but remains a supporter in Afghanistan (“FED: Aust combat troops begin arriving home from Iraq” 1). Another reason this alliance is important is
Australia’s strategic location near Asia. If tensions between the U.S. and North Korea reach a dangerous point the U.S. would have a base of operations for launching a future attack against this volatile rogue nation.
In addition to these alliances, Canada is important to the U.S. mainly because of their proximity. The neighbor to the north was a fellow founding member of NATO and is an important economic partner as the two nations comprise the largest trading partnership in the world with many free-trade agreements between them (Canada-U.S. Relations 2). Also, energy being an important national security issue, Canada is
America’s greatest supplier of energy including petroleum and uranium which is important during 2008’s energy crisis. It is one of world’s largest suppliers of oil and is not a member of OPEC which makes this relationship even more ideal for the United
States because they are more politically aligned with Canada than the oil cartel countries.
Since the 9/11 terrorists entered through the U.S.-Canadian border there has been a greater effort to secure this vast border. Their involvement in the United States’ War on
Terror has helped the U.S. to work to better secure its northern border and their cooperation has lead to arrests of terror suspects in important Canadian cities (Canada-
U.S. Relations 17). Also, Canada has made great sacrifices in Afghanistan with their stations in Kandahar they have experienced a great disproportion of casualties compared to other nations in the NATO coalition (“The List: Who’s Left in Afghanistan?” 3). This alliance is as valuable, if not more valuable, than any other alliance including the United
Kingdom because they are so naturally inter-linked with the U.S.
Asia and Latin America
As nations steer more towards globalization and away from isolation, we must look at the up and coming nations of power and our relationship with them as alliances or enemies. This portion of the memorandum will analyze our relations with nations that may be critical to our survival as the superpower in the world. The following will probe into our relations with Latin America, Japan, and South Korea because these are areas of world importance to not just our position in the world but also as a threat or advantage to our domestic well being. The relationship between Japan and the U.S. has been similar to a big brother, little brother relationship. The big brother (U.S.) protects the little brother, leads and advises the little brother on how to prosper while still leaving a sense of dependence for the protection of big brother. Little brother grows up and feels he can manage on his own until faced with realities of the world (i.e. global market and democracy) then little brother sees and accepts the lessons taught to him by big brother. My analogy refers to the post WWII relationship between Japan and the United States. Since Japan’s defeat, the U.S. has aided and helped Japan become the power that it currently is. While the ride has had its ups and downs since the Mutual Defense Treaty was signed by both nations on September 8th, 1951; the goal for peace in East Asia has actually been more of a success than a failure. The United States would the “protector” of Japan, stationing troops in the nation for peace and security purposes.
The treaty was set to help rebuild Japan’s military for defense, not offense, build a stable economy, open trade between the United States, Japan and other nations in East
Asia such Korea and China to trade with each other. The main goal for this treaty was to promote and ensure peace in the world. Japan is a needed ally to the United States in the east part of the world as we were “fighting” the cold war against the Soviet Union. Since this treaty Japan has grown into an economic superpower allowing its political status to rise within the world. There have been ups and downs as stated earlier between the U.S. and Japan especially after the fall of the Soviet Union where U.S.-Japan alliance was put into question, but never the less we continue to be strong allies today as I quote John
Negroponte (United States Deputy Secretary of State) saying “Japan is a partner of first order, whether combating terror, curtailing North Korean and Iranian nuclear ambitions or addressing developmental and governance challenges”. This quote sums up how and why an alliance between the U.S. and Japan is vital to our national security as we need allies to help combat the war on terror, nuclear proliferation, and stabilize peace in East
Asia.
South Korea along with Japan is vital to the fight against the North Korean threat of nuclear proliferation. North Korea is the United States longest running adversary as the United States helped divide Korea at the end of WWII. South Korea has long been an ally of the United States similar to Japan; the U.S. signed a mutual defense treaty where the U.S. agreed to help South Korea develop its defense systems. This way we are able to keep troops in South Korea till this day, strengthening America’s presence in East Asia with soldiers also stationed in Japan. The stories between Japan and South Korea United
States relations are strikingly similar as alliance road in South Korea has been a rocky one. South Korea was the United States seventh largest market for imports as we their second largest market for agricultural products in 1980’s, but bad blood would boil between the nations capitals as the citizens of Kwangju would blame the U.S. for the uprising against General Chun Doo-Hwan.
Despite the bloody mess this week long upbringing caused, the United States still presently holds a healthy relationship with South Korea as we will need to for the future in our efforts to secure national security along with holding our presence strong in East
Asia as we try to stabilize peace and non-proliferation in this section of the world.
The United States relationship with Latin America is one that would take a whole major course load to investigate as any other United States alliance relation would. The difference here is that there are so many countries involved. This is stated I decided to focus on Mexico and Venezuela. I chose these countries in particular given the topic of this class and paper and delineated that these are the two countries detrimental to our national security.
Other nations inside Latin America are important and vital to our future as allies, but I chose these because of the current border control crisis and the all too public feud between the United States (George Bush) and Venezuela (Hugo Chavez). Venezuela being in the top ten of the world’s largest oil producers also puts the country in a position of power or threat against the United States with the current oil crisis in the world. Since
Hugo Chavez has been president of Venezuela our once allies have become somewhat of an enemy, with Hugo Chavez dealing and trading with Fidel Castro, undermining the
United States foreign policy of isolating Cuba. This open feud has caused much controversy, but more importantly it has helped in the current price hike of oil which is detrimental to the U.S. economy today. Hugo Chavez is a leader that supports a socialist- like government coming from the Bolivarian Revolutionist ideology. This is a serious issue to the United States in our efforts to spread democracy, especially in Latin America where we have instilled much effort, time and blood to achieve. If Hugo Chaves gains more power in Latin America he has the ability or at least the opportunity to spread this idealism across this portion of the world where we have seen dictatorships run all too often. There have been allegations against the U.S. for involvement in the 2002 coup attempt against Chavez by Pedro Carmona which was eventually unsuccessful as Chavez returned to power.
Our broken relationship with Hugo Chavez is due mostly in part to his disagreement to United States foreign policy can possibly a threat as this is a leader with potential power to grow larger and undermine the United States efforts for democracy and world peace. Hugo Chavez is not a believer in globalization, but, there can and should be efforts to try to mend or at least treaty for peace in this situation. This an issue of National security, not a prominent one, but one that needs to be looked at instead of ignored before it becomes to large to control
One cannot speak about Latin America and the United Stated without speaking about Mexico and its impact on the United States. Along with the mentioning of Mexico and Latin America one must include the infamous acronym; NAFTA. Mexico is important to our economy because of they are a part of the North American Free Trade
Agreement, but, they are also prominent to our national security due to the issue of the
Mexican-American border. On October 26th, 2007 President George W. Bush finally signed a bill to authorize a seven hundred mile fence across the border of Mexico and
Texas which has been coined “The Great Wall of Mexico”. With an under reported eight to twelve million illegal immigrant population in 2003 by Secretary of Homeland
Security Tom Ridge one would wonder why the bill was signed four years later!
National security against the war on terror being so vital that we find the need to go to war with Iraq and Afghanistan (not saying it is not justifiable), one would ponder why we would leave our home to fight while having the back door to our house swinging open.
This is like leaving your family inside your house to fight a robber across the street while leaving your backdoor wide open for his friends to come in. Never the less this is a prominent national security issue as the open border left room for terrorists and drug smugglers to run free. Even with the “Great Wall of Mexico” there was still more then enough ample for a terrorist to infiltrate the country though the border and hide within the illegal immigrant community. NAFTA is an issue of economy that also threatens our national security as many manufacturing labor working Americans lost jobs due to thee agreement. This along with out-sourcing has been detrimental to our economy which is also a case of national security as an unstable economy equals an unstable nation leaving us in a vulnerable position.
To conclude this report it is important to highlight that U.S. national security policy greatly affects the strength of our alliances and its alliances greatly affect the shaping and implementation of national security policy. In a world where globalization is increasing the interaction between states the U.S. cannot allow itself to be excluded from the world’s most important trans-national organizations. Without these strategic alliances it cannot exert its power in various parts of the world through their cooperation with nations in such areas as Asia, South America, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan could not have gone forward without the help of key alliances such as NATO and Israel. It remains to be seen which allies the United States will continue relations with and which ones will part ways with U.S. policy but one this is certain; Alliance relations are extremely important to the national security of the United
States. Works Cited
Agee, Phillip .“How United States Intervention Against Venezuela Works”.” Summary, CIA Electoral Interventions, and Nicaragua as a Model for Venezuela”.6 Sept. 2005
“Background Note: South Korea.”.” Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs”. Mar. 2008 http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2800.htm
“Background Note: Venezuela”. Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs”. June 2008http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/35766.htm
“Basic Strategies for Japan's Foreign Policy in the 21st Century New Era, New Vision, New” Diplomacy. Task Force on Foreign Relations for the Prime Minister. 28 November 2002.
“Canada Bears Brunt of Fighting in South Afghanistan.” Morning Edition 3 June 2008. Research Library. ProQuest. Georgia State University Library, Atlanta, Ga. 12 Jul. 2008.
Cook, W. Colleen. Rush, G. Rebecca. Sullivan P. Mark. “Mexico-U.S. Relations” Issues for Congress. 23 May 2008
CRS Report for Congress: Canada-U.S. Relations. Federation of American Scientists 15 May 2007. 12 Jun 2008. < www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/96-397.pdf>
“FED: Aust combat troops begin arriving home from Iraq.” AAP General News Wire 1 June 2008. Research Library. ProQuest. Georgia State University Library, Atlanta, Ga. 12 Jul. 2008
“France in Afghanistan” République Francaise 12 Jun 2008.
“Foreign Relations.” 7 May 2007
“Helping to bring security, stability and foster development in Afghanistan” NATO: International Security Assistance Force 12 Jun 2008
"India- U.S. Relations: a General Overview." Embassy of India. 2006. 13 July 2008
“Issues in Australian Foreign Policy” The Australian journal of politics and history vol:54 iss:2 (2008) pg:271-288.
Israel and the United States. Washington D.C.: Embassy of Israel, 2007. "India- U.S. Relations: a General Overview." Embassy of India. 2006. 13 July 2008
“Issues in Australian Foreign Policy” The Australian journal of politics and history vol:54 iss:2 (2008) pg:271-288
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer (2007, August). NATO Today and Tomorrow. NATO’s Nations and Partners for Peace, (4), 8-12. Retrieved July 12, 2008, from Research Library database. (Document ID: 1443556971
“Japan’s foreign relations and role in the world today.” 12 April 2007
Johnson, Stephen.“U.S.-Mexico Relations: No More Business as Usual”. Executive Memorandum #689. 20 July 2000
Michael Clarke. “Strategy and Fortune: British Security Policy in Transition. “RUSI Journal 1 Oct. 2007: 6-12. Research Library. ProQuest. Georgia State University Library, Atlanta, Ga. 12 Jul. 2008
New Diplomacy. “Task Force on Foreign Relations for the Prime Minister”.28 November 2002.
”NATO’s Assistance to Iraq” NATO: International Security Assistance Force 12 Jun 2008
Plunk, Daryl M. “Korean Politics and U.S. Foreign Policy”. Heritage Lecture # 68.14 August 1986.
“The List: Who’s Left in Afghanistan?” ForeignPolicy.com March 2008. 12 Jun 2008
U.S. Department of State Office of the Historian Bureau of Public Affairs Press Statement. Release of Foreign Relations, Volume XXIX, Part 1, Korea Region, 1964-1968.30 Oct. 2000
“The U.S.-U.K. Alliance” Power and Interest News 14 Jan 2004. 12 Jun 2008
“Viewpoints: US-Latin America relations”. Otto Reich and Noam Chomsky Interview. 30 Mar. 06.