21 February 2006
More on the Sheraton Affair.
|El Universal publishes an English language daily which basically consists of reprints from the Miami Herald. It does, however, contain some locally produced material. The point is that el Universal is a semi-official paper of the Mexican state. It reflects the official view, so this report is interesting.|
The writer looks at the recent Hotel Sheraton affair, where a group of Cuban officials were turfed out of their rooms and had to move to another hotel about 100 yards down the street. After looking at some of the possible reasons for this American inspired action, the writer goes on the ask:
Could it be that the Cubans and the oilmen were incidental players in the Hotel Sheraton fracas, and that the intervention of the U.S. Treasury was designed to show the Mexicans who still rules in the hemisphere? In its caution (or weakness?), the Fox government has not taken the bait and appears to be ready to prosecute the Sheraton for “discrimination” rather than taking the violation of its sovereignty to the various courts of world opinion.
I am not entirely convinced that the Marines are on their way, but it does concern me that el Universal has published something like this. If it had come from one of the small, leftist papers I doubt if I would even have commented upon it. It is the fact that el Universal has done so that gives me pause.
U.S. DOMINANCE In the Americas, the United States has long considered it a right and a duty to exercise dominance over its “sister republics,” and to intervene when necessary to protect its interests in the face of intrusion by other powers, be they Spanish, French, British, Soviet or drug lords. “Chronic wrongdoing,” President Theodore Roosevelt told the U.S. Congress way back in 1904, “or an impotence which results in a general loosening of ties of civilized society may in America, as elsewhere, ultimately require intervention by some civilized nation” — namely, the United States.
Are “impotence” and “chronic wrong doing” loosening the “ties of civilized society” in Mexico? Is that what Washington is thinking? Are the “civilizers” on their way?
What could be going on? One obvious explanation is that the government wants to tell the Americans that they are on to their little game and that they should back off. Mexico clearly does not want a row, so if Washington is prepared to let sleeping dogs lie, so is Mexico. Since anything other than diplomatic wrangling is out of the question, given America's involvement in Iraq, this article seems to be saying that Mexico can add to America's diplomatic woes if it wants to.