One year after the election of President Barack Obama, it's time to ask whether his ambitious campaign promises about Latin America are being fulfilled, or whether, like others before him, he has placed the region at the bottom of his foreign policy priorities.

Let's take a quick look at some of Obama's key campaign promises for the region:

-- Obama, who had never had much contact with Latin America before his run for the presidency, promised to launch "a new alliance of the Americas" to end "years of negligence" toward the region. These vows largely fizzled as a result of the 2008 economic crash.

-- Obama told me in a campaign interview that, in an effort to focus more U.S. attention on Latin America, he would propose changing the 33-country Summit of the Americas -- held every three or four years -- into an annual event.Obama has yet to make that proposal.

-- Obama promised to appoint a special envoy to the Americas, as a way to focus greater attention to the region. So far, he has not done that.

-- Obama promised to close the U.S. detention center at the U.S. Naval base in Guantánamo, Cuba. As president, Obama has ordered the prison camp emptied by Jan. 22. White House officials say the deadline may slip, but that they are still committed to closing the prison camp. IMMIGRATION DEBATE

-- Obama promised to make immigration reform, including the legalization of millions of undocumented immigrants, a "top priority" during his first year in office. Administration officials say they hope to have an immigration debate in Congress in 2010.

-- Obama promised to "substantially increase our aid to the Americas." While the U.S. economic crisis has largely dashed such plans, Obama supported in April a decision by the G-20 -- a group of mostly industrialized countries -- to expand International Monetary Fund loans to developing countries, as well as to increase the representation of emerging economies within the IMF board.

-- On Cuba, Obama had promised to "immediately allow unlimited family travel and remittances to the island." As president, he has ordered and implemented both measures.

-- Obama promised to depart from the Bush administration's "unilateral" policies toward Latin America. Most Latin American diplomats give credit to Obama for condemning the June 28 ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, and for working alongside countries in the region in efforts to restore that country's rule of law.

-- Obama promised a closer relationship with Mexico. Mexican officials give him credit for supporting the Merida Initiative to help fight drug cartel violence, and for ordering U.S. law-enforcement agencies to move against the smuggling of U.S. weapons to Mexico. They also applaud the fact that he did not suspend flights to Mexico as Cuba, Argentina and other countries did when the swine flu pandemic broke out in Mexico earlier this year.

`8 OUT OF 10'

Asked to rate Obama's performance with Mexico, Mexico's Ambassador to Washington Arturo Sarukhan told me, "On a scale from 1 to 10, I give him an eight."

Overall, White House officials say that the best thing Obama can do for the region is to resurrect the U.S. economy. That will get U.S. trade, foreign investments and family remittances back on track and boost the region's economies, they say.

My opinion: Obama has not made Latin America one of his top foreign policy priorities, although it's not entirely his fault. He has a lot on his plate, most importantly reversing the U.S. economic crisis that he inherited. He has not been able to put his own Latin American team in place because conservative Republicans are blocking the congressional confirmation of his nominee, Arturo Valenzuela, as head of the State Department's office of hemispheric affairs.

But Obama has succeeded in changing the U.S. image in Latin America, to the point that most polls show that he is among the most popular leaders in the region. The big question now is whether he will use that goodwill to meet his campaign promise to be "a relentless advocate for democracy" and help the poor in the region.

I still hope that he will, although -- given his foreign policy priorities -- I'm somewhat less ready to bet on it than I was a year ago.

Victory in Afghanistan Requires Fully Supported Counterinsurgency
James Danly

In order to declare victory, we need to aid the Afghans in establishing a legitimate government whose population does not effectively support terrorist networks. The only viable course is to commit the resources necessary to conduct a full-spectrum counterinsurgency of the kind employed to such great effect during the surge in Iraq

Counterinsurgency Cookie Cutter Doesn't Fit Afghanistan
Gian P. Gentile

'Counterinsurgency' has become the new American way of war. A once obscure theory of internal conflict, it has become ubiquitous in military circles and dominates thinking on both current and future wars. More important, its precepts are being followed without serious inquiry or examination, and the U.S. military has become so enamored with the theory that it seemingly will not consider any serious alternative methods to achieve the president's objectives in Afghanistan.

Despite Obama's Concessions, Russia Remains Unhelpful on Iran
Joshua Kucera

The Obama administration's announcement last month that it was scrapping plans to build missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic removed a prime irritant in the U.S.-Russian relationship; Russians felt the missile defense network was targeted as much at them as against the purported threat, Iran. And the move appeared at first to pay dividends. However ...

Can United States Truly Press 'Reset' Button With Russia
Ian Bremmer and Alexander Kliment

Today, Moscow and Washington elites glower at each other over a host of global disputes, and Russia, far from blossoming into the pro-Western, market-oriented democracy that the 1990s shock therapists dreamed of, has developed into a quasi-authoritarian petro-state at home, guided by zero-sum revisionist ambitions abroad.

Arrogant U.S. Misses the Message From Pakistan's People
William Pfaff

There has always been in American foreign policy circles a virus called arrogance, caused by the hereditary assumption that Americans know better than others. Surprisingly, this does not always prove the case, but the condition seems highly resistant to treatment, even by experience. There seems a high probability that the disease has struck Obama administration policy circles dealing with Pakistan

For Europe, U.S. Is Country That Cries Wolf
William Pfaff

Officials such as Philip Gordon regularly travel to Europe to ask for support for American initiatives. The Europeans reply that they have not been consulted in making these policies. The Americans say we will be happy to discuss them, but we are putting up most of the men and money, so it's too late to change anything. Maybe next time.

With al-Qaida Diminished, There's No Sense in Expanding Afghan War
William Pfaff

Al-Qaida's relations with the Taliban today are troubled. Effective counter-terrorism strategy in Afghanistan is on the brink of completely eliminating al-Qaida. There will be no organization to return. This is the result of effective international and domestic intelligence cooperation as well as good police work. So why, one asks, is the U.S. expanding its war in Afghanistan?

Afghan Mythologies
Victor Davis Hanson

As President Obama decides whether to send more troops to Afghanistan, we should remember that most of the conventional pessimism about Afghanistan is only half-truth. Remember the mantra that the region is the 'graveyard of empires,' where Alexander the Great, the British in the 19th century, and the Soviets only three decades ago inevitably met their doom?

United States: Single-eyed Vision
Robert C. Koehler

The promise the United States once represented to the world has spent itself, and what we have to offer in terms of opportunity, or at least hope, is overshadowed by the spreading shadow of our hubris. And it's all coming home to roost.

In the Quicksands of Somalia
Bronwyn Bruton

The U.S. government needs to change its Somalia policy -- and fast. For the better part of two decades, international attempts to create a government have failed. And since 9/11, U.S. attempts to prevent Somalia from becoming a safe haven for al Qaeda have visibly backfired, alienating the Somali population, and propelling an indigenous Salafi jihadist group, called al Shabab, to power

Changing North Korea
Andrei Lankov

When it comes to dealing with North Korea the United States and its allies have no efficient methods of coercion at their disposal; the regime is remarkably immune to outside pressure. Its leaders cannot afford change, so they make sure their state continues to be an international threat, using nuclear blackmail as a survival tactic while their unlucky subjects endure more poverty and terror. Since outside pressure is ineffective

(c) 2009, The Miami Herald DISTRIBUTED BY TRIBUNE MEDIA SERVICES