Organization of American States: Difference between revisions

[[File:"International Union of American Republics" logo in 1909 - from publication Cacao (1909) (IA cacao00inte) (page 1 crop).jpg|thumb|The OAS logo in 1909<ref>{{Citation|last1=catalog|first1=International bureau of the American republics, Washington, D. C. [from old |title=Cacao |url=https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cacao_(IA_cacao00inte).pdf |access-date=13 October 2021 |last2=Book|first2=Start this}}</ref>]]

[[File:Pan American between 1910 and 1920 (cropped).jpg|alt=|thumb|The [[Pan American Union Building]] in 1910, shortly after its construction in [[Washington, D. C.]]]]

 

The pursuit of regional solidarity and cooperation again came to the forefront in 1889–1890, at the First [[International Conference of American States]]. Gathered together in Washington, D.C., 18 nations resolved to found the International Union of American Republics, served by a permanent secretariat called the Commercial Bureau of the American Republics (renamed the International Commercial Bureau at the Second International Conference in 1901–1902). These two bodies, in existence as of 14 April 1890, represent the point of inception to which the OAS and its [[Secretary (title)|General Secretariat]] trace their origins.

 

===21st century===

The OAS conducted an audit of the [[2019 Bolivian general election]], which opposition supporters argued was fraudulent. The OAS report contended that the results were marred by "clear manipulation" and significant irregularities leading to the [[2019 Bolivian political crisis]]. Bolivian president [[Evo Morales]] resigned soon after, having lost the confidence of the country's military in what he described as a coup.<ref>{{Cite news|last1=Faiola|first1=Anthony|last2=Krygier|first2=Rachelle|title=Bolivia's Morales resigns amid scathing election report, rising protests|language=en-US|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/bolivia-to-hold-new-elections-after-protests-and-international-criticism/2019/11/10/4778e842-03b2-11ea-ac12-3325d49eacaa_story.html|access-date=18 March 2021|issn=0190-8286}}</ref> Some media outlets debated whether it should be referred to as a coup.<ref>{{Cite web|date=11 November 2019|title=AP Explains: Did a coup force Bolivia's Evo Morales out?|url=https://apnews.com/6b2c94306089451d9761878c9f7ce2f1|access-date=4 December 2019|website=[[Associated Press]]|quote=Whether the events Sunday in Bolivia constitute a coup d'état is now the subject of debate in and outside the nation. ... Bolivia's "coup" is largely a question of semantics}}</ref> On 21 December, the Technical Mission of Electoral Experts sent by the European Union published a 67-page report made similar observations and conclusions to that of the OAS. They noted that "there were minutes with an unusually high number of null votes, blank votes and a hundred percent participation of voters in a series of polling stations" and highlighted the general failure of the TSE to declare these irregularities.<ref name="eu1">{{cite web|title=Unión Europea Misiónde Expertos Electorales Bolivia 2019 Informe Final|url=https://www.uetrabajandojuntos.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/EU-EEM-BOL-2019-FR-ES.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200706084129/https://www.uetrabajandojuntos.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/EU-EEM-BOL-2019-FR-ES.pdf|archive-date=6 July 2020|access-date=15 October 2020|publisher=European Union in Bolivia|language=es}}</ref><ref name="eu2">{{cite news|date=21 December 2019|title=Informe de la UE detectó "numerosos errores" en elecciones de Bolivia {{!}} Voice of America - Spanish|language=es|work=www.voanoticias.com|publisher=Voice of America Spanish|url=https://www.voanoticias.com/a/union-europea-detecto-errores-irregularidades-elecciones-bolivia/5215093.html|access-date=15 October 2020}}</ref> Studies commissioned by the American [[left-leaning]]<ref name="The Perils Of Petrocracy">{{cite news|last1=Rosenberg|first1=Tina|date=4 November 2007|title=The Perils Of Petrocracy|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/04/magazine/04oil-t.html?pagewanted=7|access-date=5 October 2014|quote=… Mark Weisbrot, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, a left-wing Washington policy group.}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Sussman|first1=Anna Louie|date=7 September 2015|title=Are Women the New Face of Organized Labor?|work=[[The Wall Street Journal]]|url=http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/09/07/are-women-the-new-face-of-organized-labor/|access-date=20 September 2015}}</ref><ref name="nbcnews.com">{{cite news|last1=Fox|first1=Maggie|date=24 July 2013|title=Obamacare won't slash workers' hours, report finds|agency=NBC News|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-care/obamacare-wont-slash-workers-hours-report-finds-f6C10732487|access-date=31 October 2014}}</ref> think tank [[Center for Economic and Policy Research|CEPR]] argued that the OAS report's statistical analysis was inaccurate and unreliable.<ref>{{Cite web|date=21 October 2020|title=Data from Bolivia's Election Add More Evidence That OAS Fabricated Last Year's Fraud Claims|url=https://www.cepr.net/data-from-bolivias-election-add-more-evidence-that-oas-fabricated-last-years-fraud-claims/ |first1=Jake |last1=Johnston |website=Center for Economic and Policy Research |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231025083030/https://cepr.net/data-from-bolivias-election-add-more-evidence-that-oas-fabricated-last-years-fraud-claims/ |archive-date=Oct 25, 2023 }}</ref> The author of the OAS's vote return analysis stated that the CEPR's explanation of the results was implausible.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Nooruddin|first=Irfan|title=Analysis {{!}} Yes, Bolivia's 2019 election was problematic. Here's why. |date=March 10, 2020 |language=en-US|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/03/10/yes-bolivias-2019-election-was-problematic-heres-why/|access-date=18 March 2021|issn=0190-8286}}</ref> The organization has been criticized by Mexico<ref>{{cite news|last1=Garcia|first1=David Alire|author-link1=|last2=|first2=|author-link2=|last3=|first3=|author-link3=|date=17 March 2021|title=Mexico to OAS: Stop interfering in Bolivia's internal affairs|publisher=[[Thomson Reuters]]|work=Associated Press|department=|publication-date=17 March 2021|editor1-last=Esposito|editor1-first=Anthony|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/mexico-oas-stop-interfering-internal-affairs-bolivia-2021-03-17/|url-access=|access-date=14 February 2022|quote=}}</ref> and the CEPR<ref>{{cite web|last1=Williams|first1=Jack R.|last2=Curiel|first2=John|date=|year=|orig-date=|editor-first=|title=Analysis of the 2019 Bolivia Election|url=https://jackrw.mit.edu/sites/default/files/documents/Bolivia_report-short.pdf|url-access=|access-date=14 February 2022|publisher=[[Center for Economic and Policy Research]] (CEPR)|quote=}}</ref>{{Better source needed|reason=The current source is insufficiently reliable ([[WP:NOTRS]]).|date=February 2022}} for their perception of interference into the internal affairs of Bolivia.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Hetland|first1=Gabriel|author-link1=|last2=|first2=|author-link2=|date=7 March 2020|title=Opinion: The OAS helped undermine, not restore, democracy in Bolivia|newspaper=[[The Washington Post]]|department=|publication-date=7 March 2020|editor1-last=|editor1-first=|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/03/07/oas-helped-undermine-not-restore-democracy-bolivia/|url-access=|access-date=14 February 2022|quote=|editor3-link=|editor3-first=|editor3-last=|editor2-link=|editor2-first=|editor1-link=|editor2-last=}}</ref> The OAS observed the subsequent [[2020 Bolivian general election]] stating there was no evidence of fraud.<ref name="nofraude">{{cite web|last=Tancara Castillo|first=Cándido|date=23 October 2020|title=ONU, OEA y Uniore descartan fraude en elecciones generales|url=https://www.paginasiete.bo/nacional/2020/10/23/onu-oea-uniore-descartan-fraude-en-elecciones-generales-272528.html|website=Pagina Siete|language=es|access-date=8 June 2021|archive-date=14 April 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210414225506/https://www.paginasiete.bo/nacional/2020/10/23/onu-oea-uniore-descartan-fraude-en-elecciones-generales-272528.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> ''[[The New York Times]]'' concluded that there was some fraud, but that it was unclear how much or if it was sufficient to change the result of the election, and suggested the initial analysis by the OAS was flawed.<ref>{{cite web|last=Kurmanaev|first=Anatoly|date=7 June 2020|title=A Bitter Election. Accusations of Fraud. And Now Second Thoughts.|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/world/americas/bolivia-election-evo-morales.html/|work=The New York Times}}</ref>

 

*[[Honduras]]{{refn|Suspended between 2009–2011.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/americas/06/01/honduras.oas/ |title=OAS readmits Honduras to its ranks |date=1 June 2011 |access-date=1 November 2012 |publisher=CNN}}</ref> See [[#Suspension of Honduras (2009–2011)|Suspension of Honduras]] below.|group=Note}}

*[[Mexico]]

*[[Panama]]

*[[Paraguay]]