U.S. strategy towards Latin America
The strategy towards Latin America refers to how the U.S. pursues its political, economic, security, and diplomatic interests in the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean. This would exclude the increasingly corrupt government in Mexico as that would require its own analysis. Historically and today, U.S. policy has often focused on security and stability and, at least on paper, preventing hostile foreign powers from gaining influence in the region, combating transnational crime, drug trafficking, and organized criminal networks, managing migration flows and border security. This has clearly not worked out very well as there are problems with drug trafficking, cartels, Chinese influence and mass immigration.
The U.S. is also focused on expanding trade and investment in the region by supporting market-oriented economic policies, securing supply chains, energy resources, and access to critical minerals. The U.S. apply sanctions or diplomatic pressure against governments viewed as anti-U.S. such as Cuba, Nicaragua, Colombia, Venezuela and Brazil to mention a few. The U.S. is also trying to counter the influence of outside powers such as China, Russia, and, in earlier periods, the Soviet Union. In 1823, the U.S. announced the Monroe Doctrine, which asserted that European powers should not establish new colonies or interfere in the Americas. Over time, this became a foundation for U.S. influence in the hemisphere. This strategy has mostly been neglected over the years, but it seems like the focus on Latin America has grown during the presidencies of Trump. This has resulted in strengthening economic partnerships and nearshoring manufacturing, competing with growing Chinese investment and trade in the region, combating drug trafficking, especially involving fentanyl and other synthetic drugs. It is really a matter of balancing three goals, economic goals such as promoting trade, investment, and economic development, security such as addressing crime, narcotics trafficking, and migration challenges and influence meaning maintaining strong regional partnerships while competing with rival powers.
Trump’s approach to Latin America, both in his first term and especially in his second term beginning in 2025, has shifted U.S. policy in several important ways. Trump has made reducing migration from Latin America a central goal of U.S. policy. This has been done by increased deportations and border enforcement, putting pressure on countries such as Mexico, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, and others to help stop migrants before they reach the U.S. Trump has successfully used diplomatic and economic pressure on governments that resisted accepting deportees. Trump has also taken a harder line toward governments viewed as hostile to U.S. interests, particularly Cuba Nicaragua and Venezuela. His administration strengthened sanctions, restricted travel and financial transactions involving Cuba, and emphasized efforts to isolate these governments.
A major theme of Trump’s Latin America policy has been limiting China’s economic and strategic presence in the Western Hemisphere. This has been done by pressuring governments to reduce cooperation with Chinese projects, raising concerns about Chinese-linked operations around the Panama Canal. The current administration is trying to make Latin America a higher foreign-policy priority than it had been in recent years. Trump has increasingly used tariffs and trade threats as diplomatic tools. Rather than treating trade and foreign policy separately, the White House has linked tariffs to migration issues, cooperation on deportations and actions by governments such as Venezuela. This approach is definitely a revised Latin America strategy with an approach as a revival of ideas associated with the historical Monroe Doctrine, the view that the United States should play the dominant role in the Americas.
The most significant change in relationship is probably with Argentina. Under Argentine President Javier Milei, in power since 2024, Argentina has moved significantly closer to the United States politically, economically, and strategically. Milei has emphasized stronger ties with Washington and has aligned Argentina more closely with Western countries on many foreign-policy issues. Recent developments include expanded trade and investment cooperation, greater security and defense collaboration, cooperation on critical minerals, technology, and supply chains. Hundreds of American companies operate in Argentina, particularly in energy, technology, manufacturing, and finance. This covers in particular oil, gas, and lithium, agriculture, technology and digital trade, space and scientific cooperation and defense and security. Argentina has also pursued closer cooperation with NATO and requested recognition as a NATO Global Partner.
This is quite a change compared with the past. During the Falklands War, the U.S. ultimately supported Thatcher and the UK rather than Argentina. During some left-leaning Argentine governments, especially those of Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, relations were often more strained. Washington increasingly views Argentina as an important partner in South America because of major lithium and critical-mineral reserves, access to the South Atlantic and Antarctica.
On the positive side in recent development would be policies strengthen border security, combat organized crime, and slightly push back against rivals such as China. The policy might rely too heavily on coercion, with strained relations with some Latin American governments, which may reduce U.S. influence over the long term. To play a more active economic role would likely deepen relationships, but there are many other priorities for the U.S. Latin America remains important though, and will likely continue to increase in importance going forward.