What happens in Latin America -- or more specifically, United States policy towards its southern neighbors -- continues to interest me in the 16 years since I finished my stint as U.S. ambassador to Guatemala.

Certainly, Latin America has suffered from neglect by U.S. policy makers since the events of 9/11. But throughout our history we have gotten Latin American policy wrong, or we’ve ignored it totally. We do more damage through ignorance -- paying no attention to it -- than we could possibly do through trying to get something done down there.

The world has great hope for new leadership coming from the United States. The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama is a reflection of this. My advice to our new president would be: "Please, Mr. President, let’s deliberately get more involved in Latin America with your team." We already have several strengths to build on in Latin America. Perhaps the most important is that many ordinary people there look to the United States with great hope. As many as 750 people would line up in front of the American Consulate in Guatemala at 11 at night waiting for the doors to open at eight in the morning, in hopes of obtaining a visa.

This reservoir of good will stands in stark contrast to the "anti-Yanqui" rhetoric displayed by Latin American leaders who have been bought and paid for by the oligarchs on the right or the socialists of the left. But this too, Mr. President, can be changed with a new, positive effort.

Venezuela

We don’t have to scratch our heads to figure out why Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez doesn’t like us. We didn’t like him when he was in the army. Then there was an election. The Venezuelans in a legitimate, open election, elected him to be their president. We still didn’t like him. In addition, he was supporting the Castro brothers in Cuba and selling them oil at a huge discount. It was decided to foment a coup in concert with the Venezuelan oil company with the object of overthrowing the legally elected regime. The worst thing that could have happened did happen: it failed. I’m surprised we’re surprised he doesn’t like us.

The fall-out for us of this misadventure has been gravitation of other Latin American countries into Chávez’ sphere of influence. In his position as a major oil exporter, he has gone to Latin American countries and said, "Look, you ally yourself with me, you support me, you help me get the 'Yanquis' out of here and I’ll sell you oil at 20, 25 percent of the posted prices." Well guess who likes that: everybody.

Cuba

Under the Obama administration, we’re relaxing somewhat our restrictions on travel to Cuba, but it’s a small and slow start. Eventually, after Raúl Castro dies, I hope we can increase our contacts. Americans will go there for vacations on their unspoiled beaches. We’ll trade more, we’ll make a deal with them to drill some of their oil, to mine some of their bauxite. Gradually the rift will heal over, but it isn’t going to happen quickly. And it won’t happen unless we remove our relationship with Cuba from limbo and instead strengthen, improve and continue to ease up on our restrictions on travel and business.

The drug war

It’s my personal opinion that when you add up all the expenditures we make in Latin American countries and along our border with Mexico -- by the Drug Enforcement Agency, CIA, the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security, the check points, the border patrol -- it’s costing us billions of dollars a year. It’s in the range of what we’re spending in Iraq or Afghanistan. And the question has never been asked, "Is it a smart allocation of resources?"

We need to have a national discussion about this policy -- the way we’ve been discussing health care, or what to do in Afghanistan. Would it be better to legalize drugs, have the government sell them and raise tax money on them and take the trade out of the hands of the crooks? I don’t know the answer to that, but I think we need to discuss it fully as a country, and involve Latin American leaders and experts as well.

The old formula of simply ignoring Latin America is not going to work any more. Now is the time to debate, discuss and develop a new policy towards Latin America. We could certainly put to better use the talented men and women who labor on Latin America issues at the State Department.

Tom Stroock was U.S. ambassador to Guatemala from 1989 to 1993. He was elected to several terms in the Wyoming Senate between 1967 and 1989, serving as Senate vice president, and also as chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee. In 1984 he created the Stroock professorship of Natural Resources Conservation and Management at the University of Wyoming.