OAS Committee proposal

According to the New York Times, the US has proposed the creation of a committee at the OAS where NGO's, labor unions, and citizen groups can bring complaints against their government. The New York Times article says most governments oppose it because they see it as targeting Venezuela.

First, most countries don't care whether this committee would target Venezuela. In fact, most countries would like to see some of Venezuela's abuses aired and would back a reform that would allow that. But no country wants to have the OAS turn back to a US puppet organization and no country wants to see their most radical elements have a soapbox at a committee in the OAS.

If we set up this committee, who decides which critics are legitimate and come to testify and which are kept out? If there are no rules, then democracy activists in Venezuela, labor unions in Colombia, Sandinistas in Nicaragua, Mapuche in Chile and the ACLU in the US could all come testify. All of those groups have some legitimate grievances, and all of them have a political agenda. If the OAS only allows certain groups to come in, then it loses credibility in the region and we take a giant step backwards.

Second, why are we keeping this proposal quiet? Democracy reform is the debate we want at the OAS. And we want it LOUD. If we go around in back rooms hiding our proposals, we invite New York Times articles like this one and we allow Venezuela to set the tone of the debate. Nearly every country agrees that the OAS needs a better system to handle democratic breakdowns. The single worst thing we can do is put out a secret proposal that allows US opponents to criticize without offering their own solutions.

Make this debate public, put our idea on the table, and invite every country in the region to put forward their own proposal. Instead of ramming through the US backed bill, let's debate multiple proposals and come to a consensus. Don't make this debate about Venezuela, make this debate about how we handle democracies that have broken down. Our only goal should be to keep the agenda of democracy reform on the table to make sure some sort of reform is passed. Long term, a proposal written by Chile or Brazil or Mexico that passes with the backing of nearly every country in the region will have greater legitimacy and effectiveness than a proposal the US begs, bribes and coerces its way through the system.