Persons seeking a detailed review of post-1980 U.S. economic policies and their effects on Latin America will find this hook valuable. It is a product of a multicountry, multidisciplinary effort coordinated by SELA (Sistema Económico Latinoamericano), and is based on papers presented in Caracas in 1984. The contributors are listed in the introduction, but receive no further attribution in the body of text.
The study, which is divided into seven chapters, shows a strong North American influence with heavy reliance on documentary and statistical evidence, most of which comes from U.S. government sources. Persons not trained in economics and banking may find much of the text heavy going, despite the large number of explanatory references that are included when new terms are used. However, anyone conversant with the problems that are discussed should have little trouble.
One major theme runs through the book: the U.S. made economic policy as if it were the only country on earth. Consequently, the solutions it proposed were and are those that would best suit its own interests. The authors review such problems as debt, protectionism, industrial policy, and general economic development policy. In each case, they explain what the U.S. perspective was on the problem, how the policy makers thought the problem could be solved, and the policy initiatives that were suggested. For example, in the papers dealing with the debt problem, the authors make clear that the major goal of U.S. policy was to ensure the stability and solvency of the U.S. banking system regardless of the consequences for the debtor countries. Similarly, on matters of industrial policy, the U.S. approach centered on minimizing the domestic employment effects brought about by overseas competition. As a result, the topics of industrial policy and trade policy became intertwined. Protectionism then reared its head and legislative gridlock ensued. The subsequent inaction on these matters was viewed as a source of serious concern for Latin America, especially as it related to the debt problem.
Readers interested in a nonpolemical approach to economic policy matters will find these papers quite useful. By examining the bias of the U.S. strategists in dealing with these issues, Latin American analysts can gain a great deal of insight on how to base their positions in discussions of those issues. More importantly, by understanding that the U.S. internal policy dynamic has a tendency to consider matters both unilaterally and piecemeal, Latin American observers of U.S. economic policy may be able to attain a more reasonable set of expectations on how U.S. policy makers, regardless of political stripe, will or will not deal with the problems of the region.
