Latin America, threatened by a new wave of US interventionism.

BarcelonaRecent history is replete with episodes of intervention by the United States, as well as other major powers, in countries of the Global South to influence political and economic decisions in favor of their interests. In Latin America and in the case of the US, the most recent explicit examples are the support for coups d'état and neoliberal dictatorships of the second half of the 20th century. After a softening of these dynamics in recent decades, since Donald Trump's arrival at the White House, especially during his second term, interventionism has once again become fiercer and less disguised, and in recent months cases of interference have multiplied.

"It's nothing new, but it's been a long time since we've seen it in such a blatant way," notes CIBOB researcher Ana Ayuso. Washington asserts in its renewed national security strategy -the same one in which they indicate they will support far-right parties in Europe—a continent in decline—that Latin America is part of its security space and that, for this reason, they will intervene in everything that might affect them. This amounts to "putting into writing a practice they were already carrying out," asserts Ayuso.

One of the most recent and blatant examples of US interference in the continent has been in Argentina, where just before an election, Trump conditioned the swap Financial support for the continued rule of Javier Milei's party. In Honduras, also before an election, Washington pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, convicted of drug trafficking and a member of the Asfura party, which Trump sees as an ally in the country. He also warned that if the results were not favorable to Asfura, he would withdraw aid to the country. And in countries like El Salvador, Ecuador, Paraguay, and Bolivia, the US president has not publicly stated who he prefers to lead the country.

In the case of Venezuela, "no one doubts anymore," says Ayuso, "that the military escalation with attacks on alleged drug trafficking networks is aimed at removing Nicolás Maduro from power." Washington, which has already stated that Colombia will be the next target in the supposed fight against drug trafficking, supports the Venezuelan opposition to such an extent that the anti-Chavista Maria Corina Machado – who has not ruled out a US military intervention when questioned by journalists – asserted that the US helped her leave the country. traveled to Oslo last week to collect the Nobel Peace Prize.

With these interventions, Trump seeks to "install compliant governments that will bend to his interests," Ayuso points out. The US is thus trying to regain commercial control of the region and curbing China's growing presenceWhile also challenging Russian influence in countries like Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba, they also seek, with an executive branch composed of ultraconservatives and anti-communists, to eliminate the possibility of leftist governments succeeding in Latin America.

A climate favorable to neoliberalism and ultraconservatism

This attempt by the White House is part of the current "global counterrevolution," explains Mònica Clua Losada, professor of political science at UPF, who emphasizes that "it's not a fluke," but rather the result of efforts by organizations such as the Heritage Foundation and the Atlas Network. Since the 1970s and 80s, they have been dedicated to supporting prominent figures and think tanks Conservatives and liberals "with the aim of influencing public opinion and creating a climate favorable to their positions," with a particular focus on Latin America.

Ayuso agrees with this analysis, but warns that the current situation "is not only a consequence of propaganda," but also that "traditional parties have failed to address the problems of many people." This scenario creates an ideal vacuum for Trump, who has free rein to "foster a right wing that aligns with his project of hegemonic domination over the continent."

The dynamic is as follows: when public opinion supports parties aligned with the US president, Trump's intervention becomes more diluted, as has happened in the case of Chile. In the Andean country, all the polls predicted a clear victory for the ultraconservative José Antonio KastAnd the US limited itself to showing support for the candidate. In contrast, when it is not so clear that Trump's right-wing allies can win an election, the US increases its interference.

The geopolitical dispute

The US intervention is also explained by the determination "not to allow South American states to establish alliances with countries outside the continent," explains Federico Navarrete, a historian at the National Autonomous University of Mexico. This framework is reminiscent of the Monroe Doctrine. In fact, the US has renamed this doctrine "Donroe," after the "d" in Donald Trump.

In a context where China has been gaining closer ties with some Latin American countries, the US sees its historical dominance threatened. "China has been gaining access to the region's strategic resources, partly due to the lack of attention from the US, which has focused on immigration and security," asserts Ayuso. Although these are also the issues Trump uses rhetorically to justify actions such as the military escalation in the Caribbean, all the experts consulted point out that the underlying reasons go much deeper and must be understood within the context of a global struggle for hegemony. In fact, the same national security strategy details that US alliances and offers of aid will be "conditioned on the reduction of adversarial external influence."

In this battle for influence on the continent, in one of the most paradigmatic cases, China has already expressed its "firm support" for Venezuela in "its sovereignty, independence, and stability," according to the Venezuelan government, which claims that Minister Wang conveyed this message on Wednesday. The Kremlin, for its part, He warned Trump on Thursday not to make any "fatal mistakes" in Venezuela

Nevertheless, Navarrete sees two openings for the sovereignty of Latin American countries. On the one hand, he predicts that, as has happened in the past, US intervention will eventually provoke a backlash, the channeling of which remains to be seen. On the other hand, he points out that Trump is "essentially pragmatic," and that he has already stated he will try to find some kind of compromise with governments that are not aligned with him. Ayuso also portrays his behavior as that of someone who "creates friends and enemies. Friends will receive favors, and enemies will face sanctions, tariffs, or interventions."

Trump's pragmatism "has been successfully exploited by Mexico and Brazil," Navarrete notes. With a strategy based on making concessions in specific areas and avoiding direct conflict, both countries have seen the worst US threats fail to materialize. However, Navarrete does not see this recipe as applicable to the smaller countries in the region, for which he foresees a bleaker future.