A new chapter in the relationship between the US and Latin America

In 2004, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Cuban leader Fidel Castro, launched the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas, a regional alliance of leftist leaders designed to subvert the agreement hemispheric free trade that the United States had sought for more than a decade .

In the years that followed, hoping to Washington to reach an agreement with 34 countries faded, and its influence in the region declined as voters in the region put their trust in populist politicians who promised to share the bonanza generated by rising prices of raw and unseat the festering political elites in power matters. Exports from the region to China grew more than 25 percent between 2000 and 2013 and allowed Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela and Bolivia finance generous social programs that lifted millions of people out of poverty.

But the wall of leftist governments in Latin America threatens to break apart due to widespread cases of corruption, the slowdown of the Chinese economy and bad economic policy decisions. In general, these leaders failed to create diversified economies capable of withstanding economic cycles, with its ups and downs. The social welfare system and pensions won the loyalty of voters have not been sustainable. The leaders of Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, failed to comply with certain democratic traditions to expand their mandates or eliminate these limits and created networks of patronage to co-opt some independent public institutions.

The region is experiencing its second consecutive year of economic contraction. And while treasuries have remained empty, voters in Argentina, Bolivia and Venezuela have disowned populist leaders in the polls. Brazilian lawmakers took his immunity to President Dilma Rousseff to judge by unclear financial transactions. In Venezuela, Hugo Chavez's successor Nicolas Maduro struggle for survival. And last year in Ecuador President Rafael Correa, left, decided not to seek a fourth term amid a growing economic crisis. Cuba, meanwhile, tries to create a constructive relationship with the United States.

This new political environment has opened the door to a new generation of leaders seeking a new course for Latin America. It offers the United States the possibility to start its relationship with its neighbors, especially with some who throughout history have accused Washington of imperialist or negligent, or both.

For example, the new governments in Argentina and Brazil could be more receptive to increase its cooperation with the United States, more than they have been since the beginning of the century. Although Washington no longer yearns to sign new trade agreements a kind of lightning rod in the 2016 presidential race would be foolish not to seize the opportunity.

The United States can help their neighbors to be more competitive and stable to promote investment in technology, innovation and quality education. And it can show the new security scenario in Colombia, one of the fastest growing in the region, as evidence of the potential of partnerships to medium and long term in the field of safety economies. Washington can do more for Central America and the Caribbean find more sustainable energy sources, especially when they can no longer rely on oil subsidized by Venezuela. And they can also support anti-corruption initiatives by citizens clamoring across the continent.

Still, the future of Latin America can not depend on the United States. After all, to build a more promising future the region needs leaders who can be accountable to their citizens, who are willing to invest in long-term prosperity and not in their own political careers and are prepared to recognize the colossal errors their predecessors.