The real significance of the election of the new Argentine president is not what she has in common with Sen. Hillary Clinton. Instead, the true meaning lies in the further consolidation of opposition to U.S. policies in Latin America.

The Bush administration has focused on opening up Latin American markets for U.S. corporations and pursuing a failed “war on drugs”. Meanwhile, Latin American voters have been electing candidates that, to varying degrees, reject Washington-favored policies in favor of strong social welfare programs and increased local control over resources.

A senator, a first lady, and now Argentinaís first elected female leader, Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner may be a good omen for candidate Clinton. And yet Fernandez de Kirchnerís victory was made possible by the popularity of her husband, sitting President Nestor Kirchner, who rejected U.S.-promoted economic policies – with great success.

Nestor Kirchner came into power in 2003 in the midst of a devastating recession. With their jobs evaporated and their currency worth next to nothing, thousands of formerly middle-class Argentines had to resort to selling their possessions on the street and rummaging through garbage for food. The International Monetary Fund, back by the U.S. government, had ordered that Argentina make more spending cuts, provoking massive rioting.

Only after Kirchner rejected the IMF medicine and began adopting policies aimed at protecting the poor and jobless did the country begin making a remarkable recovery. Kirchner also rankled the Washington establishment by opposing a proposed hemispheric trade pact, calling for improved relations with Cuba, opposing the Iraq War, and forming a strong alliance with President Bush's most outspoken critic in the region, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Fernandez de Kirchner is expected to continue her husbandís policies and her win reinforces a political shift that has brought to power political leaders critical of U.S. policy toward the region. Such candidates have been successful in Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela – and have come close in several other countries including America's next-door neighbor, Mexico. These countries and their voters are sending the United States a clear signal: Adapt or be left out.

The Bush administration, however, hasn't gotten the message. Rather than embracing these new democratically elected leaders and helping them meet votersí demands, Bush continues to promote the same policies.

For example, in recent weeks, the United States has intensified a campaign to win approval in Congress for trade deals with Colombia, Panama and Peru – despite widespread opposition from labor and other leaders, both in those countries and here at home. Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez and top trade negotiator Susan Schwab brought members of Congress to Colombia last week in an effort to boost support for the trade pact, despite the countryís abysmal record on labor and human rights.

During the same week, Bush requested $550 million for anti-drug assistance to Mexico and Central America. Opponents of the aid package point out that Washingtonís past counter-narcotics work in Latin America has not resulted in any significant curb in drug use, and has increased human-rights abuses and conflict.

Such policies have made Latin American voters turn against the United States and turn out to the polls in droves to vote for candidates who share their sentiment. Cristina Fernandez de Kirchnerís solid win in Argentina is a clear sign that this movement isnít going away any time soon. The Bush administration can choose to adapt or not have a seat at the table that will determine the region's future.

Nadia Martinez is co-director of the Sustainable Energy and Economy Network at the Institute for Policy Studies (www.ips-dc.org) in Washington, D.C. She can be reached at pmproj [at] progressive [dot] org.