The strategic error of the United States in Latin America
The United States plays monopoly while China plays politics
Even though the relationship between the United States and the Latin American region is not a natural relationship – it is based more on necessity than on affinity to simplify it in some way – it is true that historically it has been the main trading partner and ally of most of the Latin American countries. However, for a few years now, this seems to be changing. The turn towards China of many of the countries in both the south and the center of the American continent should be raising alarms in the United States; although, to tell the truth, he should have woken them up a long time ago. It gives the impression that the United States has sinned from excessive confidence and a certain neglect of a region that is strategic for its hegemony, both in economic and geostrategic terms. Let's talk about the United States and China in Latin America.
En of the book The World, published in 2020, Richard Hass writes that The countries of the region are extremely important strategically for the United States given its relative stability and the positive relationship between this and those. This, according to Hass, enhances the United States' ability to be a great power and gives it the rare luxury of being able to focus its attention elsewhere.
The first point, that is, the relative stability of the region, while debatable, is true that it does not have the level of upheaval of, for example, Africa; nor does it present terrorist threats from other latitudes, nor the risk of nuclear proliferation. There are also no serious territorial conflicts. So what's the problem that America doesn't seem to see? The answer can be divided into two, although the truth is that the division of these factors is unrealistic, since the two act together and, in reality, it is almost impossible to separate them. The two factors are political and economic.
Let's start with the politician. As I already mentioned, The relationship between the United States and Latin America is not a natural relationship. There has always been more need than affinity in this relationship. This is something that Tim Marshall points out in his book Prisoners of Geography 2015. For this author, Latin American countries do not have a natural affinity with the United States and the relationship between the two arises from the Monroe Doctrine of 1823. This doctrine warned Europe, in case it wanted to reconquer its former territories, that Latin America was the backyard and sphere of influence of the United States. Now, as Marshall continues to point out, It is this lack of naturalness in the relationship – lack of warmth to use their words – that meant that, when China knocked on the region's doors, they opened immediately.
Today, this lack of naturalness in South/North relations is even more noticeable. Let us take into account a phrase by Diosdado Cabello regarding the revolts that occurred in Chile in 2019 and that led to the call for a constituent assembly and to which similar revolts were added in Peru, Argentina, Ecuador and Honduras. So, this important figure of Chavismo said that what was happening was “barely the breeze, and a Bolivarian hurricane comes”. As well, If we take a look at how this “Bolivarian” left is taking power in several countries in the region and its affinity with China and its rejection of the “imperialism” of the United States, we can easily see why the latter should worry.. It is clear that he is losing that sphere of influence that he once had.
Now, it is true that, for the United States, losing influence over some countries in the region may not cause much alarm. However, two things should set off those alarms. The first is that it was finally true and that breeze is beginning to transform into a hurricane. It is no longer just Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Nicaragua; Now to these – except Ecuador, which has taken a turn to the right – we must add Mexico, Peru, Argentina, Honduras, surely Chile soon, as well as Colombia, Paraguay and we will probably continue adding. Furthermore, we must also add regimes that, although they do not belong to this “Bolivarian” left, are populist regimes that have found in China a more flexible, more accessible ally and less concerned with democratic issues or human rights; for example, the regime of El Salvador. This means for the United States to lose influence in the territory in which it finds itself and, when it wakes up and reacts, it will encounter China every time it looks down.
The second aspect is economic. In South America, China has displaced the United States as the main trading partner. An example of this is that, for example, 78% of Brazil's soybeans and 41% of Chile's copper are imported by China. In addition to this, China – this is already known – has enormous infrastructure projects in the Region. But not only that; also is lending large sums of money to some governments, such as Venezuela or Argentina.
In Central America, although trade relations are not yet as deep as in the south, China is attracting more and more Central American countries to itself and snatching them from the United States. For this, It is important to highlight the importance of Central America for China. It is this part of the region that can open a path between oceans. For this, Panama – although it remains under the influence of the United States – is a key piece that China is targeting. After the failure of the canal project in Nicaragua, China directs its efforts towards Panama and the infrastructure projects it already has there are no secrets.
Finally, looking north, things are not looking better for the United States. It is true that the relationship with Mexico has always been special, especially in terms of security. However, AMLO is increasingly inclined to strengthen and strengthen ties with China. This could tilt the playing field in China's favor, which would pose a huge risk to US security. Mexico could be looking to China as an alternative supplier of equipment and advice in its fight against cartels.
There is one more point that is important to note. China is not only investing in infrastructure projects and importing a good part of the production from Latin American countries. It's not just about political sympathies either. Beijing has been selling or even donating weapons to some countries such as Uruguay, Colombia, Chile, Mexico or Peru. This is important even though the Chinese weapons supply is relatively small, since It is a complement to China's efforts to win more countries for itself and wrest them from the influence of the United States.
While China focuses its efforts on these strategic actions, what is the United States doing? Or, to pose a question in keeping with the title of this article, what is America's strategic mistake? In my opinion there are two errors. One related to the direct relationship with China and another with respect to the relationship with Latin American countries.
Regarding the first, Biden's China policy appears to be inadequate. Starting because your approach begins by wanting recompose the internal political fracture with a kind of economic Pearl Harbor, which is already a miscalculation. Another mistake in Biden's China policy is to posit an almost Manichean division between Chinese authoritarianism and American democracy. On this, strives to convince that China is the bad guy instead of highlighting the democratic values and economic freedoms that it supposedly represents and that the United States always claims to have defended. This means that efforts are concentrated on China and not on themselves, unlike China, which has itself as the center. Besides, This trade war that comes from Trump and that Biden has continued – despite having criticized it so much during the campaign – and that he has also turned into a technological one, seems to forget an aspect that the Chinese do not neglect. This aspect is the political one. The United States is playing monopoly while China is playing politics.
With respect to the relationship between the United States and Latin America, the former's mistake is to continue as if nothing happened. He continues to believe that he can concentrate his efforts on more distant areas without seeing what is happening on his own continent. This means that it is not paying enough attention to political relations with those who share the continent with it, while China does not miss the opportunity to occupy the space that the United States is neglecting. Basically, The problem is that they continue to think in terms of 1823 in a Latin America of 2021, also forgetting the, shall we say, artificial nature of their relationship with these countries.
China, due to many of its economic measures, in addition to its political game, will end up becoming a dominant force no matter what the United States does.. It will soon have the largest economy and is already the largest in terms of purchasing power. It is the largest trading partner and importer of goods, in fact, It is the largest trading partner of almost twice as many countries as the United States. If we add to this the political game and the apathy of the United States in the Latin American region, we can say that it is more than evident that China will end up relegating it to second place. To this I only have to add a phrase from Jesús Núñez, who was my professor in the Master in International Affairs. The phrase is the following: Whether China becomes the hegemonic power depends more on the errors of the United States than on its own successes.. China seems to be aware of this; United States, no.
Master in International Affairs: Economics, Politics and Law from the Universidad Pontificia Comillas – ICADE – specialized in the legal-political itinerary and special interest in Latin American politics. Graduated in Law from the University of Lima (Peru). He interested in history, music, literature, politics and law.
