Crisis at the OAS
Photo by Element5 Digital on Pexels.
In 1948, the Organization of American States (OAS) was created, a regional multilateral organization made of 35 independent nations in the Western Hemisphere. Its original purpose was to serve as a forum through which the member nations engage in dialogue and address shared challenges. However, over time, its primary objectives have changed to tackle four key issues: the promotion of democracy, the protection of human rights, the advancement of economic and social development, and the enhancement of regional security cooperation.
Now, this important organization finds itself changing once again, as internal and external struggles place the OAS in a position fraught with challenges: The recent election for the Secretary General highlighted in-house divisions, and global conflict and the new Trump administration add external pressure to the organization.
The March 10th election proved to be contentious for member states in the organization's search for new leadership. Secretary General-elect, Albert Ramdin of Suriname, competed against Paraguay's Rubén Ramírez Lezcano before he dropped out of the race. Various Caribbean, as well as Andean and Southern Cone states backed Ramdin, who opts for more neutral stances and mediation to resolve conflict with controversial members like Nicaragua and Venezuela. China, an observer country with no voting power, has also supported Ramdin.
Before he left the race, Argentina supported Ramírez Lezcano and so did the United States, albeit indirectly. Other member states, like Mexico and Colombia, signaled that they would not support the U.S.-backed candidate, though. In recent years, political polarization, disagreement on previous leadership, and an overall lack of consensus on organizational trajectory have resulted in setbacks. For example, Mexico’s former president called for the organization to be dissolved and replaced entirely. Other members, however, supported decisions made by previous leadership. Because of these internal tensions, timely decisions cannot be made, affecting the efficacy of the group.
Issues outside of the Hemisphere also create obstacles for the OAS. The COVID-19, Pandemic, Haiti’s 2021 presidential assassination, the Russia-Ukraine War, and the Israel-Gaza war have significantly changed the international geopolitical landscape; and Donald Trump’s return to office, dismantling of USAID, withdrawal from the WHO, and controversial immigration decisions in the region certainly do not ease tensions.
In his first term, President Trump skipped the 2018 summit, an unprecedented move, and attempted to drastically cut funding. Now, his increased trade barriers, tariffs, and proposed mass deportations (and recent deportation of Venezuelans) have been met with backlash in varying ways from Mexico, Colombia, and Brazil, for example; the threat to “reclaim” the Panama Canal has also triggered a negative reaction.
As the OAS grapples with internal fractures and mounting global pressures, the stakes for the entire region—North America, Latin America, and the Caribbean—are high. Stability is no longer a given, and the organization remains the only unified body capable of connecting all nations in the Western Hemisphere. In a time of rising geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainty, and shifting power dynamics, weak leadership is not an option. If the OAS cannot find a way to overcome its divisions and act decisively, external forces, be it global superpowers, economic crises, or political upheavals, will shape the region’s future instead. Should that happen, it won’t be on terms that benefit the nations of the Americas.