Posted on 11/02/2005 1:04:43 AM PST by jmc1969
WASHINGTON -- Despite tense relations with Venezuela, President Bush says it might be OK for the South American nation to have a nuclear reactor for peaceful energy uses.
Bush acknowledged he had not heard about Venezuela's request for a reactor when asked about it Tuesday in an interview with Latin American reporters in advance of his five-day trip to the region. But he didn't reject the idea, even though he has had numerous disputes with Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
As Chavez, Bush and leaders from 32 other nations in the Western Hemisphere prepare to gather Friday at the Summit of the Americans in Argentina, the Venezuelan leader is trying to boost his profile by putting his disputes with the United States at center stage.
On Tuesday, Chavez said he would bring to the summit a message that the United States' "capitalist, imperialist model" was responsible for exploiting developing economies and ruining the global environment. He also warned he might share Venezuela's U.S.-made F-16 fighters with Cuba and China, accusing the United States of making it difficult for his country to obtain spare parts for the planes, which Venezuela originally purchased in 1983.
Chavez has said his government was preparing for a possible U.S. invasion aimed at taking over Venezuela's oil fields, an allegation that U.S. officials have denied. He also has denounced the U.S.-led war in Iraq and said world leaders should consider moving the United Nations headquarters out of the United States.
Chavez recently said he is interested in working with Iran to explore peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Chavez has insisted Iran has the right to develop nuclear energy despite opposition from the U.S. government, which fears Tehran may be developing a nuclear weapons program.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
They are simply lousy with oil. Why a Venezuelan nuke?
How nice of Chavez to give us one for target practice.
Mindboggling!
For all the brilliant policies he has put forward concerning the fight against terrorism,this proclamation reeks of befuddlement.
*
Nov. 1, 2005, 10:24PM
SUMMIT OF THE AMERICAS
Demonstrators await Bush in Argentina
President's talks with Venezuela's Chavez are likely to be strained
By JULIE MASON and JOHN OTIS
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle
WASHINGTON - President Bush heads to South America on Thursday at a time when Washington's long-sought free-trade plan with the region has gone cold, anti-American sentiment has heated to a steady boil and massive street protests seem likely.
The trip, which ends on Monday, is geared toward the economy and trade, and will take the president and first lady Laura Bush to the Summit of the Americas at Mar del Plata, Argentina, and then on to stops in Brazil and Panama.
Not only are negotiations for the so-called Free Trade Area of the Americas stalled, but Bush is also hobbled by tricky relationships with several South American leaders he will meet at the summit, notably Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, a leftist who calls Bush ''Mr. Danger."
"The fly in the ointment is going to be Chavez," said Stephen Johnson, a former State Department official and senior analyst at the Heritage Foundation.
The Venezuelan, who will meet with Bush at the summit, "is going to try to elicit attention away from Bush to try to enhance his own image," Johnson said.
Bush is not a popular figure on Latin American streets, said Larry Birns of the Council on Hemispheric Affairs in Washington. "People don't identify with him. They identify with Chavez."
Ex-soccer star to protest
Outside the meeting rooms, the most dramatic action at the summit promises to be in the streets, where former Argentine soccer star Diego Maradona will lead what are expected to be sizable protests against Bush.
Thousands of demonstrators have already massed in Mar del Plata for a "People's Summit," the Associated Press reported.
"I think (Bush) probably needs to get in and get out," said Julia Sweig of the private Council on Foreign Relations, "and maybe the more interesting things are going to be happening on the streets, rather than in the room."
Bush is not fond of summits and is not expected to emerge from this year's meeting with much substance to show for it.
Birns said the trip was expected to provide a respite for Bush from one of the most challenging periods of his presidency, which has included polls showing a decline in support because of concerns over the Iraq war, an indictment of a top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney and the withdrawal of one Supreme Court nominee and the naming of another.
"Flying the flag abroad doesn't necessarily hurt an embattled president with lots of domestic issues," Birns said.
The summit is the fourth in a series of regionwide meetings. At the first Summit of the Americas, held in 1994 at Miami during the Clinton administration, peace treaties that ended several civil wars and a push for a hemisphere-wide free-trade agreement seemed to promise a new era of prosperity for Latin America and closer cooperation with Washington.
But 11 years later, experts say, 43 percent of Latin Americans remain in poverty, regional trade talks have stalled, and the Bush administration — preoccupied by Iraq and the war on terror — has ignored nations south of the border.
"Relations between the U.S. and Latin America are probably as bad as they've been at any time since the end of the Cold War," said Peter Hakim, president of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington think tank.
The Bush administration also has lost influence among many Latin Americans who believe that Washington tacitly backed a 2002 coup that briefly ousted Chavez and did little to help Argentina during that nation's economic meltdown in 2001.
"Those two events really undermined Washington's capacity to be seen as an important leader," Sweig said.
Instead, a new generation of leftist politicians is winning power and influence.
In addition to Venezuela, left-leaning chief executives have been elected in eight other countries in the region, including Argentina, Brazil and Chile. Polls suggest that leftists may win Bolivia's election later this year and Mexico's presidential election next year.
Many Latin American leaders take a dim view of the war in Iraq and Washington's preoccupation with Islamic terrorism. Yet their efforts to shift the agenda to jobs, economic growth and immigration are often ignored by U.S. officials, said Bruce Bagley, an international studies professor at the University of Miami.
During a swing through South America in August, for example, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld spent most of his time talking about terrorism and drug trafficking and pressuring governments to isolate Chavez.
"He got a quite chilly reception," Bagley said.
Trade deal hits snag
Efforts to expand trade — once the raison d'être of the summit — have also received a cold shoulder by some Latin American governments because of Washington's insistence on maintaining lucrative subsidies for U.S. farmers.
Rather than pushing the Free Trade Area of the Americas, which would bind the economies of the U.S. and 33 countries, Washington is now focusing on less grandiose deals like the recently signed Central American Free Trade Agreement. That accord liberalized trade between the U.S. and six countries — Guatemala, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Panama and the Dominican Republic.
Experts predicted that Bush will work during his upcoming trip toward forging intermediate deals, like trade pacts with Colombia, Ecuador and Peru, that could move the larger hemispheric initiative down the road.
In Brazil, Bush will stop in for a visit with his counterpart, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, widely known as Lula, whose government is mired in one of the worst political scandals in Brazilian history.
Hoping to keep friendly ties
Brazil has South America's biggest economy and is a major trade partner with the U.S., and Bush would like to keep the relationship friendly, experts said.
The president's last stop will be Panama for a visit with President Martin Torrijos. The U.S. is pushing for a widening of the Panama Canal, which would allow bigger ships and aircraft carriers to pass through.
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.mpl/headline/world/3432324
President Bush be polite on this trip but I have a feeling Chavez is going to be an ass (as usual).
Its just I see a lot of hostlitilty to the UN especially when it tries to limit US action or impede on US sovereignty.
But at the same time I see a lot of support for the US in involving itself in issues which impede on other countries sovereignty.
FINALLY, Chavez has said something smart. I agree with him 100%! I wish I could agree with Bush saying it's OK for them to have a nuclear power plant. Chavez is a loose cannon and he wouldn't hesitate to nuke us if he could.
That said, I'm VERY sorry Bush is making this trip to So. America. He's going to agree to more unconstitutional trade agreements, and it's going to cost us billions. He's done more to advance globalism than any President we've had. Our sovereignty is slipping away ever time he leaves the country.
"But at the same time I see a lot of support for the US in involving itself in issues which impede on other countries sovereignty"
.......................................................
When other countries stop support for those who attack and kill millions or who boost those willing to directly attack the USA or It's economy, then you will have a point..until then your stuck on stupid.
I am totally speechless.
===
ON THE NET...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=venezuela
LOL, tut tut insults.
Have you studied American foreign policy stretching back to the 50s, in the Middle East, Far East and South America, of direct and indirect interventions. Dirt Wars fought, black ops , overt and covert subversion.
And I am not speaking froma left wing liberal approach but as a Military man who has taken part in a number of activities.
If you studied American foreign policy around the world both covert as well as overt you would understand the rest of the worlds attitude.
On the one hand you see America feeding the world on the other you see America supporting unsavory dictatorships because they are our unsavory dictatorships.
Should we have supported the Saudi Royal Family without our military and intelligence tacit support they would of collapsed long ago.
If we did not overthrow Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and replace him with the Shah, would the present Iranian government be in power now.
LOL where did that come from. As for this Do we remove dictators who do not commit genocide or directly threaten the USA, what about legally elected governments who threaten Economic interests.
. "As for this Do we remove dictators who do not commit genocide or directly threaten the USA, what about legally elected governments who threaten Economic interests."
....................................................
Hmm was Kim Il legally elected, Was Chavez? by what standards do you make that claim? The corruption at the ballot box does not just exist in Washington State.
Is everyone preparing for a US invasion. Nice to know We have um thinking.
No Kim Il Jong is an evil dictator.
Hugo Chavez although not what you may call a stable leader (reminds me of Noriaga) of the best for Venezuela during her economic hardships was still democratically elected, and this was with international election monitors.
There are other countries we could discuss, but I guess you know them as well as I do.
especially if like me you served during the cold was as well.
We are democratic the USSR was a Communist dictatorships, but when it came to dealing with third countries, allies, prospective allies, potential enemies and those whose neutrality was seen as a threat to either side there was not much of a difference between us.
And how many times have those covert ops returned to bite us firmly in the behind.
On the funny side it would be rather ironic if Hugo Chavez was found to have past links with the CIA, or has they are fondly known in the Intelligence Community The Boy Scouts.
Cheers Tony
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.