The Summit of the Americas is a meeting that joins the heads of state of the American continent created within the framework of the Organization of American States (OAS) to achieve a greater level of cooperation between the countries of the continent, or "Western Hemisphere," as the leaders of the United States call it. On average, the summits are organized every three years. The first Summit of the Americas took place on December 09th, 1994, in Miami, United States, convened by then-President Bill Clinton. On that occasion, the United States formally presented the proposal to create a Free Trade Area between all American countries (FTAA), except Cuba. This agreement provided for the establishment of a customs union that could economically integrate the countries of the continent. The proposal emerged during an international context in which greater economic integration was expected, driven by advances in economic globalization and the creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO). A similar agreement advanced with the result of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), created on January 01st, 1994. This idea was buried in 2005, at the Mar Del Plata Summit, given the difficulty of organizing an integration strategy that would effectively benefit developing countries in the region.

It is worth mentioning that the Summit of the Americas, since its first edition in 1994, has always made a lot of noise in the media, but delivered much less than promised by its leaders. None of the eight previous editions have seen significant advances that could change the relationship quality between the United States and Latin American and Caribbean countries. The Panama Summit in 2015 seemed to be an encouragement to overcome the climate of mistrust that continues to mark the relationship between Latin America and the Washington government. On that occasion, Barack Obama spoke of ending the Monroe Doctrine and the cold war mentality, whose most significant effect was Cuba's participation in the event and the exchange of greetings between him and Raul Castro, indicating a dètente with the government of Havana. But that was short-lived. The Donald Trump administration not only reinstituted the Monroe Doctrine but also imposed more draconian sanctions against Cuba.

Four years after the Lima Summit took place, the United States took over the organization of the meeting, which took place from June 06th to 10th in Los Angeles, California, with the motto “Building a sustainable, resilient, and equitable future.” When convened, the event was intended to bring together the heads of state of the countries of the continent with a view to seeking coordination in various matters of interest to Washington and other countries in the region. According to the Department of State, which prepared the meeting, “As the only hemispheric meeting of leaders from the countries of the Americas, the Summit serves as the most important forum to address our region’s shared challenges and opportunities. The Ninth Summit marks the first time the United States has hosted the event since the inaugural meeting in Miami in 1994. It is President Biden’s highest priority event for the region.” 

In its realization, the Ninth Summit of the Americas sought to involve the following stakeholders: 

• Heads of state and government, foreign ministers, and other senior officials from the governments of the Americas attend the Summit of the Americas and associated forums at the invitation of the host government. The President or Vice President of the United States has attended all the Summits of the Americas.

• Heads of international organizations comprising the Joint Summit Working Group, the thirteen multilateral institutions and development finance institutions committed to supporting the Summit process. You can find additional information about the Joint Summit Working Group on the Summit Secretariat website.

• National Coordinators. The Summit Implementation Review Group (SIRG) is the core management body of the Summits Process and is comprised of government officials of the countries of the hemisphere, which are represented in the SIRG by their appointed National Coordinators.

• The OAS’ Summit of the Americas Secretariat –– The leaders of our hemisphere charged the Organization of American States with hosting the Summits of the Americas Secretariat, which serves in the important institutional role of supporting and ensuring the Summit of the Americas process.

• The people and the businesses of the Americas (“Stakeholders”) — The private sector, civil society representatives, and historically marginalized and vulnerable groups have long been a part of the official summit process, principally through the Civil Society Forum, the Young Americas Forum, and the CEO Summit of the America, but also through additional forums. 

Among the goals projected by the Department of State, the Summit should discuss the following topics:

• Improve response and resilience to the Covid-19 pandemic,

• Promote a sustainable, green, and equitable economy,

• Building solid and inclusive democracies;

• Promoting diversity and social inclusion.

It is crucial to make some comments about these objectives. The United States, the hegemonic power in the hemisphere, the OAS, and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) could not act together to build strategies for the availability of health equipment, medicines, and vaccines. The social disaster facing countries in the region is proof of this failure. As highlighted in ministerial meetings and speeches by Heads of State during the Summit, the American continent, with only 12% of the world's population, accounted for 40% of deaths from Covid-19, which reveals a severe management problem for the coordination of efforts, both domestically and at the regional level. Together, the United States and Brazil accounted for 27% of deaths from Covid-19 in the world. In this regard, it is worth checking whether the United States will fulfill its pledge to train 500,000 public health professionals and physicians in the region over the next five years through the Pan American Health Organization.

The reconstruction of the post-Covid-19 economy is an essential topic in the current context. The events in Ukraine and the economic sanctions imposed on Russia have aggravated an already difficult situation. In addition to the disorganization of production chains, the pandemic generated enormous economic imbalances such as the increase in the fiscal crisis of the states, rising inflation rates, rising unemployment, company bankruptcy, the concentration of income, etc. The increase in the prices of energy and food commodities has a remarkable impact on the poorest strata, whose social indicators are getting worse every day. In this sense, the economy is pressured by social demands to effectively combat the effects of Climate Change, which presupposes energy reconversion and profound transformations in production and consumption standards.

From the regional political processes’ perspective, a characteristic that runs through all countries is radicalizing the political environment and the erosion of traditional political parties and groups. The ongoing electoral processes in Colombia and Brazil are marked by the polarization potentiated by the so-called "fake news" that abounds in social media. In the United States, where elections will take place next November, the radicalization that began during the Trump administration continues, even as the House of Representatives begins to open up to the population the backstage of the attacks on the Capitol on January 06th, 2021. On the other hand, it increased the frustration with the Biden administration for its inability to deliver to the population its main campaign promises, such as the resumption of investments in infrastructure, support for alternative energies, immigration reform, and actions to mitigate social disparities. Still, in this aspect, it draws attention to the brutal effects of sanctions on countries whose political systems are criticized by Washington, such as Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, and, to a lesser extent, El Salvador.

Themes related to social inequality, customs, ethnic and gender identities, and abortion divide and polarize public opinion – pieces that, by the way, also transcend the border of the United States and heat debates in Chile, Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia, among other Latin American countries. Female underrepresentation in spaces of power, gender violence, and attacks against minorities are relevant themes that mobilize various social movements. 

Still, concerning social inclusion, an unavoidable issue is immigration due to population flows from Mexico and the so-called "Northern Triangle of Central America," Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala, which are concentrated on the border between the United States and Mexico. Many people are searching for refuge, but also there is a lack of the rights of those groups that have crossed the border and live outside the law. Added to this are the flows of refugees from Venezuela and Haiti who wander through South America in search of better opportunities.

As we can see, the themes of the IX Summit of the Americas are very relevant. They require special attention to create effective strategies that consider the complexity of the conjuncture of the continent's countries and how the United States government acts towards its neighbors. Unfortunately, as we will discuss later, the Los Angeles Summit created more smoke than fire and did not present effective measures to address Latin Americans' enormous challenges.

The Los Angeles Summit was marked by negative repercussions related to the exclusion of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. The host alleged that these countries are not democratic and their presence would violate one of the Summit principles, the so-called “Democratic Clause,” approved by the OAS on September 11th, 2001. It is worth considering that the United States have been using the OAS to isolate Havana's government since the Revolution victory led by Fidel Castro in 1959. In addition to excluding Cuba from regional organizations, Washington has imposed an economic blockade on the country that has lasted 60 years, as we discussed at the Latino Observatory. Added to this are the pressures and boycotts against the governments of Venezuela and Nicaragua, also accused by the United States of violating the “Democratic Charter.” It is worth remembering that at the Lima Summit in 2018, Venezuela was “uninvited,” and the issue of political transition in the country was at the center of attention at the event. On that occasion, Cuba refused to participate in the Summit in solidarity with Nicolás Maduro.

The stance of the United States displeased the Mexican government. President Lopez Obrador refused to participate in the Summit due to the exclusion of these countries. This position was followed by the governments of Bolivia and Honduras, which imitated Mexico and only sent their foreign ministers. The countries of the Caribbean Community of States (CARICOM), as well as the governments of Chile and Argentina, also complained about the exclusion of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. As reported by CNN Chile on Gabriel Boric's speech at the Summit of the Americas: "I don't like the exclusion of Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua," said the president before his peers and American authorities. “Because it would be different to sustain in a forum like this, with all the countries present -even those that decided to withdraw due to this exclusion-, the urgent need for the release of Nicaragua's political prisoners or also the moral and practical importance of ending a once and for all with the unjust and unacceptable blockade of the United States against the people of Cuba”,

Other heads of state also withdrew from the summit, such as Nayib Bukele from El Salvador, and Alejandro Giammattei, from Guatemala, but for different reasons. Uruguayan President Luis Alberto Lacalle Pou did not attend due to symptoms of Covid-19.

The US veto of the presence of the rulers of Havana, Caracas, and Managua is directly related to the logic of the country's internal politics. Pressure groups linked to the Cuban-American community and the new arrival of Venezuelans to Florida and Texas are pressing the Biden administration not to relax the sanctions imposed during the Donald Trump administration. According to Reuters, on June 06th, “Biden aides have been mindful of pressure from Republicans and some fellow Democrats against appearing soft on America’s three main leftist antagonists in Latin America. Miami’s large Cuban-American community, which favored Trump’s harsh policies toward Cuba and Venezuela, is seen as an important voting bloc in Florida in the November elections that will decide control of the U.S. Congress, which is now in the hands of the Democrats.”

Democrats fear losing several seats during the November midterm elections in states like Florida, Texas, Nevada, New Mexico, etc., where Latino/Hispanic votes count beyond the electoral funding of influential Latino anti-communist organizations. We can look more closely at the influence of these groups in the US Senate, where three influential senators from Cuban origins, such as Bob Menendez (D-NJ), chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, Marco Rubio (R-FL), and Ted Cruz (R-TX) have a strong influence with their pairs. 

We have to pay attention to this issue because, in a divided plenary, where the dissent of a Democratic senator can compromise government projects, every vote counts. For example, in the Build Back Better Initiative vote, the opposing position of two Democratic senators made Biden's main project unfeasible.

Regarding the sanctions imposed by the United States on Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela, it is not feasible to expect a radical change from the Washington government in the medium term. The Biden government has taken two discreet measures to ease the remittance of foreign exchange to Cuba, reopening consular services in Havana for issuing visas and easing the exportation of Venezuelan oil by European companies, such as Italy's Eni and Spain's Repsol. These are shy steps, but they are viewed with great suspicion by anti-communist groups linked to the Cuban community in the country. The current political balance and the existing polarization between the Republican and Democratic parties prevent implementing effective reformist measures.

Finally, it is worth drawing attention to the double standard of conduct in the United States when it raises the issue of democracy and human rights in its relations with Latin American countries. For that, we use the interview made by the Mexican TV network Televisa Univision with Secretary of State Antony Blinken: 

“QUESTION: Yeah, but maybe the question is: If the U.S. is treating other dictatorships the same way, why treat Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua in one way and China and Saudi Arabia in a different way?

SECRETARY BLINKEN: I think in each of these cases, there are a multiplicity of interests that come into play. We have to look out for all of the interests of the American people, and hopefully the people that we’re engaged with. And what President Biden has done in each of these cases is to put human rights and democracy at the heart of our foreign policy, but it’s not the only thing that we look at. We have to bring everything together in a way that advances the interests of the United States. And one could go through each of these at the same time, but there isn’t – there are underlying principles, including the principle that we need to be standing up for the rights of people when they’re being repressed in one way or another. But the question is: How do we do that most effectively? And the answer in an individual case may be a little bit different.”

As Blinken states, what really counts in US foreign policy is its own interest, even if that overrides its values.

While certain countries boycotted the Summit (or were excluded), attention is drawn to the effort made by the Biden government to count on the presence of the Brazilian President at the Summit. The personal relationship between Biden and Bolsonaro was strained due to the Brazilian President's positions regarding the 2020 elections and his declared support for Donald Trump. Additionally, Bolsonaro's ideological positions place him at the opposite pole from the political and ideological perceptions of broad sectors of the Democratic Party. Issues such as respect for human rights, family planning, ethnic and gender equity, and the defense of the environment have created a 180-degree gap between the Brazilian leader and the elite that is in power in Washington. In this sense, the visit by Special Envoy to the Summit, Christopher Dodd, on May 24th was necessary to smooth Bolsonaro's path at the Los Angeles Summit. As Bolsonaro declared, US diplomacy promised that it would not create embarrassment, which in fact occurred. 

On the other hand, the visit would help create a right-wing counterpoint to the views of center-left governments that govern Argentina, Mexico, Chile, and Peru, among others. The United States counts the Brazilian government as an ally to harass the governments of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua.

The meeting between Biden and Bolsonaro at the Summit of the Americas was quite convenient for both. On the one hand, the President of the United States managed to save the meeting in the face of the emptiness caused by Lopez Obrador's refusal to attend the Summit due to the exclusion of Cuba, Venezuela, and Nicaragua, even more so with immigration being one of the main themes of the event and Mexico being the key variable for solving any equation. For Bolsonaro, featuring in a photo next to the President of the United States helps him overcome the international isolation where he finds himself. 

However, despite the mise-en-scène, there was no tangible result for either side, as the Bolsonaro government did not obtain concessions in trade, and neither will Bolsonaro make progress in defending the Amazon rainforest and its inhabitants, such as Biden supported.

The question remains as to how this rapprochement will affect the position of the United States in the face of Bolsonaro's threats of not recognizing the results of the next elections if he is not re-elected. For the Brazilian President, from the electoral point of view, it was a positive point. Whether or not the State Department endorses eventual institutional ruptures is always a handy seal, as we have seen in the last 15 years in Honduras, Paraguay, and Bolivia.

Several political and economic analysts described the Summit of the Americas as an opportunity for the US government to counter China's presence in Latin America. The Asian giant has consolidated itself in the last decade as the largest trading partner of several regional countries, especially Brazil, Chile, Peru, and Argentina. In addition, 20 Latin American and Caribbean countries signed memoranda of understanding with China under the Belt and Road Initiative. Even countries that have not joined the Chinese initiative, such as Brazil and Colombia, have solid Chinese investments in infrastructure, especially in the energy sector. It seems that this goal was not reached at the Los Angeles Summit for lack of practical actions in the economic field.

The Summit's final declaration did not mention any economic initiatives that could rival China's. However, in vague terms, the Biden administration announced the creation of a "Partnership of the Americas for Economic Prosperity." According to Reuters on Jun’ 08th, “President Joe Biden announced on Wednesday a proposed new U.S. economic partnership with Latin America aimed at countering China's growing clout as he kicked off a regional summit marred by discord and snubs over the guest list. (...) Biden is seeking to present Latin American countries with an alternative to China that calls for increased U.S. economic engagement, including more investment and building on existing trade deals. However, his "Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity," which still appears to be a work in progress, stops short of offering tariff relief and, according to a senior administration official, will initially focus on "like-minded partners" that already have U.S. trade accords. Negotiations are expected to begin in early fall, the official added.”

According to the website Politico, on June 07th, the proposal for the partnership: “It’s also a key component of the administration’s broader agenda for bolstering ties with its southern neighbors in order to address persistent challenges like immigration and climate change, while also fending off the growing economic and political influence of its main geopolitical rival, China. But the president’s proposals, which mirror its approach to economic engagement in other regions of the world, are unlikely to satisfy the desire among Latin American countries for more trade access in the U.S. — and, among those that already have free trade agreements, for more economic engagement and investment, writ large. (...) The U.S. already has free trade agreements with more countries in the Western Hemisphere than any other part of the world. Those include major trading partners like Canada and Mexico, as well as Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama and Peru.”. In this respect, Mercosur countries, such as Brazil and Argentina, would not be covered by this initiative.

The United States Senate also mobilized to encourage Latin American and Caribbean countries to rejuvenate the relationship through productive investments. Senators Bob Menendez (D-NJ), Todd Young (R-IN), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Bill Hagerty (R-TN), and Chris Coons (D-DE) introduced a bipartisan resolution calling for more significant support for the reshoring and nearshoring to reallocate global supply chains to the United States and partner countries in the Western Hemisphere. In the proposition, the senators underscore the risks that continued over-reliance on supply chains based solely or primarily on China poses to US national security and economic prosperity.

Also, according to the note issued by Bob Menendez: “As countries come together for the upcoming Ninth Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles, the resolution recognizes that the United States has a unique opportunity to work alongside our neighbors to increase supply chain resiliency and security and contribute to the post-pandemic economic recovery of Latin America and the Caribbean. The resolution expresses support for United States’ coordination with the Inter-American Development Bank, regional governments, and the private sector, to attract foreign direct investment to the Western Hemisphere and facilitate regional economic integration. The resolution also calls for efforts to address ongoing barriers to nearshoring in Latin America and the Caribbean, including underdeveloped physical and digital infrastructure, concerns about the rule of law in several countries, and the need for greater compliance with international labor and environmental standards.”

According to the press release issued by the White House, the Partnership for Prosperity seeks to achieve the following objectives:

• Reinvigorating Regional Economic Institutions and Mobilizing Investment. To deliver on our aspirations, we will work to pivot our public institutions and financing mechanisms to leverage far greater levels of private investment. We will together reinvigorate the hemisphere’s regional economic institutions, such as the Inter-American Development Bank, including through reforms to drive climate ambition, social inclusion and private sector development with the possibility of future capital for IDB Invest, and ensure international financial and economic institutions adequately prioritize the region. We will also work to support countries that are host to large numbers of migrants or refugees, or who want to make ambitious reforms in line with the Partnership’s goals.

• Making More Resilient Supply Chains. Our economic security rests on supply chains that are diverse, secure, transparent, and sustainable. We recognize the importance of diversifying and rebalancing our supply chains to minimize disruption risks. As we work to create resilient supply chains, we will prioritize development of our workforce and take steps to ensure supply chains are transparent and free of exploitative labor conditions.

• Updating the Basic Bargain. Public investments and innovations in public administration can make life better and fairer for our respective citizens. We will explore how to broaden participation in the formal economy, including tax and anti-corruption measures, as well as cooperation and infrastructure investments in areas such as migration, education, health, unemployment and retirement, childcare, and women’s economic empowerment.

• Creating Clean Energy Jobs and Advancing Decarbonization and Biodiversity. In line with our climate goals and to support good jobs, we will work together to accelerate clean energy technology, more sustainable forest conservation and management, and low emission and resilient agricultural practices. We will work to decarbonize our economies, enhance biodiversity, and build resilience to climate impacts. We will deepen cooperation on technologies and best practices, mechanisms to increase public and private investment, and explore technical assistance to advance quality infrastructure and programming.

• Ensuring Sustainable and Inclusive Trade. The pandemic has only underscored the importance of secure and resilient regional trade flows, as well as the growing role that digital technologies and services play in our economies. We will focus on how to better cooperate on customs facilitation, advance transparency and good regulatory practices, pursue high standards on the digital economy, responsibly support emerging technologies, build resilience in our energy and food supply chains, advance strong labor and environment standards, and incentivize corporate accountability and a race to the top to foster regional economic development.”

First of all, it is noteworthy that the above proposal is wholly associated with the Build Back Better World Initiative, despite not being directly mentioned. Partnership for Prosperity looks like new packaging for the same product. Despite trumpeting new initiatives, both Joe Biden and the senators discussed above, no declaration signed by the participants of the Summit of the Americas related to investments in infrastructure or the transfer of production chains from Asia to Latin America, the so-called "nearshoring."

Nor has a viable infrastructure investment strategy been presented that is capable of retaining immigrant labor in their own countries and addressing the poverty and violence afflicting the region's countries. The announced "Partnership of the Americas for Economic Prosperity" is in addition to other initiatives that only remained on paper, such as the "Alliance for Progress," FTAA, "Growth in the Americas," or Build Back Better World (B3W). It remains to be seen about the future of this proposal. But the historic of failure weighs heavily.

The issue of immigration was the only one to generate an official document that, even so, was not signed by all the participants of the Summit since it only included the following countries: Argentina, Barbados, Belize, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, United States, and Uruguay. “The Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection” is structured around four pillars: (1) stability and assistance to communities; (2) expansion of the legal channels of reception; (3) human migration management; and (4) coordinated emergency response.

According to the document, the actions of the signatories would be a target to:

Promoting Stability and Assistance for Communities of Destination, Origin, Transit, and Return: We affirm that countries of origin and countries and communities hosting large numbers of migrants and refugees may need international financing and assistance related to development, basic humanitarian needs, protection, security, public health, education, financial inclusion, and employment, among others. We support efforts that allow all migrants, refugees, asylum seekers, and persons in situations of vulnerability to integrate into host countries and access legal identity, regular status, dignified employment, public services, and international protection, when appropriate and in accordance with national legislation, to rebuild their lives and contribute to those communities. We plan to continue efforts to prevent and reduce statelessness. We intend to expand efforts to address the root causes of irregular migration throughout our hemisphere, improving conditions and opportunities in countries of origin and promoting respect for human rights. We reaffirm the importance of safe, dignified, and sustainable return, readmission, and reintegration of migrants to help them reestablish themselves in their communities of origin. We further reaffirm the importance of ensuring all foreign nationals receive prompt consular assistance when needed or requested, and returnees are treated humanely and in a dignified manner, regardless of their immigration status, including in the process of their repatriation and return.

Promoting Regular Pathways for Migration and International Protection: We affirm that regular pathways, including circular and seasonal labor migration opportunities, family reunification, temporary migration mechanisms, and regularization programs promote safer and more orderly migration. We intend to strengthen fair labor migration opportunities in the region, integrating robust safeguards to ensure ethical recruitment and employment free of exploitation, violence, and discrimination, consistent with respect for human rights and with a gender perspective. We intend to promote, in accordance with national legislation, the recognition of qualifications and the portability of social benefits. We intend to pursue accountability for those who commit human rights violations and abuses. We plan to promote access to protection and complementary pathways for asylum seekers, refugees, and stateless persons in accordance with national legislation and with respect for the principle of non-refoulement. We seek to promote border security and management processes that respect human rights and encourage and facilitate lawful, safe, and secure travel within the region. We commit to guarantee human rights to individuals in vulnerable situations and to provide access to international protection, as appropriate. We further intend to provide specialized and gender-responsive attention to individuals in situations of vulnerability.

Promoting Humane Migration Management: Renewing our commitment to respect and ensure the human rights of all migrants and persons in need of international protection, we recognize each country’s responsibility to manage mixed movements across international borders in a secure, humane, orderly, and regular manner. We intend to expand collaborative efforts to save lives, address violence and discrimination, counter xenophobia, and combat smuggling of migrants and trafficking in persons. This includes expanded collaboration to prosecute migrant smuggling and human trafficking criminal organizations as well as their facilitators and money laundering networks. We commit to provide appropriate protection and assistance to victimized individuals. We intend, in accordance with national legislation, to improve and facilitate regional law enforcement information sharing, with the purpose of supporting the investigation and prosecution of crimes. We intend to explore new mechanisms, while preserving and leveraging existing regional, subregional, hemispheric, and global fora, to strengthen cooperation on border management and apply current mechanisms on visa regimes and regularization processes to combat exploitation by criminal groups. In the instance of foreign nationals without a need for international protection and without a legal basis to remain in their country of presence, we commit to conduct any returns in a manner consistent with our respective obligations under international human rights law and international refugee law, and that respects the dignity of the individual, integrates safeguards to prevent refoulement, and promotes the return of children to safe conditions.

Promoting a Coordinated Emergency Response: Recognizing the imperative of promoting safe, orderly, and regular migration, and the safety of migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers in the region, we intend to work to cooperate in emergency response and humanitarian assistance in situations of mass migration and refugee movements. We plan to strengthen existing regional coordination mechanisms and, as appropriate, the participation of civil society and international organizations to advance those aims. This includes strengthening information sharing, as appropriate and in accordance with national legislation, enhancing early warning systems, leveraging existing relevant fora and processes, and defining a common set of triggers that activate a coordinated response.

A Shared Approach to Reduce and Manage Irregular Migration: To advance the common goals laid out in this Declaration and create the conditions for safe, orderly, humane, and regular migration through robust responsibility sharing, we intend to work together across the hemisphere to:

• Convene multilateral development banks, international financial institutions, and traditional and non-traditional donors to review financial support instruments for countries hosting migrant populations and facing other migration challenges, without prejudice to existing financing priorities and programs.

• Improve regional cooperation mechanisms for law enforcement cooperation, information sharing, protection-sensitive border management, visa regimes, and regularization processes, as appropriate and in accordance with national legislation.

• Strengthen and expand temporary labor migration pathways, as feasible, that benefit countries across the region, including through new programs promoting connections between employers and migrant workers, robust safeguards for ethical recruitment, and legal protections for workers’ rights.

• Improve access to public and private services for all migrants, refugees, and stateless persons to promote their full social and economic inclusion in host communities.

• Expand access to regular pathways for migrants and refugees to include family reunification options where appropriate and feasible, in accordance with national legislation.

Despite the broad commitment made by the parties, the Los Angeles Declaration deals only with the consequences of immigration and not with the deeper causes related to underdevelopment and the economic model that concentrates wealth. As we read the document, the Los Angeles Declaration goals are more detailed, we added up the amount of resources to be invested by the United States, and we came across a total of US$404 million. This amount is paltry compared to the $40 billion “aid” package for Ukraine. In addition, the release of 20,000 refugee visas is insignificant compared to the 600,000 immigrants who try to enter the country annually from the border with Mexico.

Finally, the absence of the leaders of the countries of the so-called “Northern Triangle of Central America,” Guatemala, El Salvador, and Honduras, where the largest contingent of illegal immigrants departs, is another not very good news. Without combating the causes of immigration, such as unemployment, poverty, and armed violence, one cannot hope that the despair that anguishes immigrants will come to a good end. This week, a new caravan with thousands of people crosses Mexico bound for the border. For them, the United States has nothing to offer other than increased repression, the expenditure of which far exceeds the US$404 million pledged during the Summit of the Americas.

As we mentioned at the beginning of our analysis, the Summits of the Americas generally receive privileged treatment from the media. It was no different from the Los Angeles meeting. In it, the host sought to seduce his guests by dealing with topics that are relevant to their populations. The Summit also had an internal objective: to convince the country's 62 million Latino/Hispanic population that the Biden administration is concerned about problems related to their countries of origin and the impacts of legal and illegal immigration in the United States. The topics discussed were tailored to please the most active currents of the Democratic Party, precisely in a state with a majority of Democrats and a strong Latino presence such as California.

However, despite the promises and speeches, the government of Joe Biden does not have the political clout to back its commitments. There is no way to confront the Supreme Court to soften the harsh immigration rules created by his predecessor. There is no way to overcome the restrictions verified in Congress due to the veto power of Republican senators. There is no way to overcome the cold war mentality because of the intense pressure power of anti-communist Latino groups that persist in dealing with their ideological adversaries as if Soviet troops were a mile away from the Capitol.

Furthermore, except for the more specialized segments of the Washington bureaucracy, there is no priority in US diplomacy for Latin American and Caribbean affairs. The State Department's attention turns to the grand global chessboard that involves Europe, Russia, and China. In this regard, the great concern surrounding Latin America is the fear that "extracontinental powers," such as Russia and China, will challenge US hegemony in their backyard. In this sense, as we pointed out, the Los Angeles Summit should respond to the competition established for trade, investment, and finance.

Viewed in perspective, the promises made in Los Angeles will not materialize. The eternal desire of Latin American elites to one day receive a kind of "Marshall Plan" to develop the region and integrate it into a large market that runs from Alaska to Patagonia is nothing more than an illusion. The hegemonic power, as Antony Blinken confessed, seeks to defend its own interests. Seen from the upper bank of the Rio Grande, Latin America is a land of bandits and lazy people who don't know how to take advantage of the opportunities created by the United States. This stigma that was related to the Mexicans extended to the entire continent. Here, corruption, violence, and drug trafficking were the landscape. Puritan moralism and racism blind the eyes to other dimensions and potential of Latin America and the Caribbean. But soon, we will have another Americas summit, and new empty promises will come. We hope that, at that moment, organisms like CELAC and a resurrected Unasur can effectively create an action plan that can actually build another reality for the population of this part of the world.