Mixing deceit with diplomacy

An American president visiting South America knows what to expect. Demonstrations, protests, accusations of unfair trade. The Monroe Doctrine, where Washington considered everything south of Texas its backyard to guard against European intervention, has left a legacy that almost guaranteed protests would erupt as soon as President George W. Bush set foot in South America.

On top of this the passions stirred by the Iraq debacle mixed with Hugo Chavez's inflammatory rhetoric and the stage was set for a showdown. But Bush can be reasonably satisfied with his trip. The protests were not as well attended or as disruptive as organisers had planned. And pressing matters of common interest were discussed.

Bush stuck to his script and did not play into Chavez's hands. He needed co-operation with Brazil over green fuel and a possible trade deal with Uruguay. Aid agreements with Colombia and Guatemala had to be cemented and Mexico had to be placated over immigrants.

The White House said the six-day tour was to show the US cared about the region's crippling poverty. That's the language of diplomacy. The real reason was to regain influence in a region that has slipped beneath Washington's radar.

America has taken its eye off the ball and Bush was desperately trying to mend bridges. In commercial and security terms South America will be of growing importance to the US in the 21st century but Washington has been paying scant attention to it.

South America is a deeply divided region where rich and poor represent a polarisation of politics. The continent needs co-operation and unity of purpose. When Bush was running for the presidency he promised to make the region his foreign policy priority.

He failed to do so and a string of left-wing governments is a reminder that Washington must pay greater heed to what happens south of the Rio Grande.