- Protectionist US trade policies are pushing countries closer to China, says UK-based economist Rhys Jenkins
- Fragmentation among Latin American states weakens collective response to US pressure, says expert on US-Latin America relations Livia Peres Milani
ISTANBUL
The Trump administration's new policy to reassert absolute US dominance in the Western Hemisphere and push out all foreign rivals is a "total illusion" that is unworkable in the face of modern economic realities, according to international relations experts.
The policy, detailed in the latest National Security Strategy – a congressionally mandated document setting out the executive branch’s security priorities – seeks to reverse what Washington describes as “years of neglect” by blocking competitors such as China from positioning forces or gaining control of “strategically vital assets” in the Americas.
But analysts told Anadolu that Latin America’s deep economic ties with Beijing, combined with contradictions in Washington’s own trade and foreign policies, undermine the feasibility of a hemisphere dominated exclusively by US influence.
"The idea that ... the US can persuade Latin American and South American governments to ... break off relations with China is ... a total illusion," said Rhys Jenkins, a professor at the UK's University of East Anglia.
Livia Peres Milani, an international relations expert from Brazil, agreed, saying the policy is neither realistic nor possible under current global conditions.
Doctrine reborn for a historic 'backyard'
The new strategy is rooted in Latin America's long-standing central role in US foreign policy.
"Latin America was the first region of international expansion of the United States and has historically occupied a central strategic position for Washington, both economically and geopolitically," said Luciana Wietchikoski, an international relations professor at Brazil's Unisinos University.
She noted the region's "privileged position in the extraction and supply of strategic raw materials" and the geopolitical importance of "shared land and maritime borders ... as well as the control and security of vital routes such as the Panama Canal."
The 2025 strategy seeks to revive the logic of the Monroe Doctrine, the 1823 policy declaring the Western Hemisphere off-limits to external powers. Although former Secretary of State John Kerry declared the doctrine “over” in 2013, the new strategy frames US dominance in the region as essential to national security and prosperity, branding the approach a “Trump Corollary.”
Milani said the thinking reflects a realist view of international relations, in which a great power must first secure its regional sphere before projecting global influence. In this view, the Americas remain Washington’s strategic “backyard.”
Historic continuity, mechanism change
While the tone is confrontational, some experts see the policy not as a radical break but as an intensification of a long-standing US approach.
Wietchikoski said the policy follows a pattern dating back more than two centuries, with Washington repeatedly redefining threats in the region — from European colonialism to communism, and later drug trafficking and migration.
Wietchikoski said Washington now "mobilizes this entire discursive and material apparatus to contain China’s commercial expansion."
“I do not consider this stance radical or surprising," Wietchikoski said, explaining that references to countering China have appeared in US strategy documents since the Obama administration.
Unlike past administrations where coercive mechanisms were "less visible," they are now "explicit in both documents and actions," she added.
China's role: Commercial giant or geopolitical foe?
At the heart of Washington's concern is China's expansive economic footprint.
Jenkins said China’s engagement in Latin America has been driven primarily by trade and investment interests, particularly in raw materials and infrastructure, though these ties also strengthen diplomatic relations.
Milani noted that even if a project is economically driven, "the US perceives ... these kinds of issues as related to its strategic interests in the region."
A controversial pillar of the new strategy is its hint of intent to interfere in domestic politics, vowing to "reward and encourage the region’s governments, political parties and movements broadly aligned with our principles.”
That approach was evident when Washington announced support for a $20 billion bailout for Argentina ahead of the country’s midterm elections. Trump later warned that the US generosity would end if far-right President Javier Milei lost power.
“Right-wing [and] far-right political forces in Latin America ... are really connected ... to their US counterparts," Milani said.
China ties outweigh political orientation
Experts say the strategy’s central weakness lies in underestimating the depth of Latin America’s economic integration with China, which accelerated after Beijing joined the World Trade Organization in 2001.
By 2015, China had already overtaken the US as the top trading partner for most South American countries, and political orientation might not be enough to change that. Jenkins pointed to the example of Brazil's former right-wing president, Jair Bolsonaro, who despite anti-China rhetoric, saw the commercial relations with Beijing continue to grow.
Analysts are also skeptical that the US can replace what China offers. Milani believes the US does not have "sufficient means" to do so, while Jenkins noted that in infrastructure, the "US just doesn't have a track record in expanding significantly."
The strategy itself acknowledges that many countries engage with rival powers because of economic incentives. It argues that Washington must demonstrate the pitfalls of “allegedly ‘low cost’ foreign assistance,” prove the “higher quality” of US business and use “leverage in finance and technology to induce countries to reject such assistance.”
Tale of two hemispheres
Experts emphasize that the Western Hemisphere is not a monolith, and the US strategy faces a sharp geographic divide in its effectiveness.
Jenkins said Washington retains significant leverage in Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean due to geography and trade ties. He pointed to recent Mexican tariffs on Chinese goods as evidence of effective US influence.
"It may have more success in ... smaller countries, Central American countries ... where it's obviously got more leverage," Jenkins said.
South of the Panama Canal, however, dynamics change sharply. In South America, Chinese state-backed investments in infrastructure have created relationships that the US has been unable to match.
Milani said those ties are more complex and, for many countries, increasingly indispensable.
Nevertheless, Washington continues to exert pressure. Venezuela, closely aligned with China, has become a focal point, with Trump declaring a blockade on sanctioned oil shipments and authorizing lethal attacks against vessels the US government accuses of drug trafficking.
Washington's contradictions
Analysts also highlighted contradictions within US policy.
Jenkins highlighted a conflict between protectionist trade policies and tariffs that "push countries more towards China" and the geopolitical goal of pulling them away.
Canada is a prime example, where tariff threats and annexation rhetoric fueled a backlash that helped re-elect a liberal government, which had been previously polling far behind a more pro-Trump Conservative candidate. Prime Minister Mark Carney recently told CBC News that Canada has “too many eggs in the American basket. We would like to maintain that relationship but we absolutely need to grow others – it’s India, it’s China, it’s the EU, the UK, it's Thailand, it's the Philippines, it’s Mercosur.”
At the same time, Milani argued that Washington’s coercive tactics are "making the region more and more unstable," which could fuel the very migration the administration seeks to stop.
'Last region' to relinquish
Looking forward, experts see a determined US, unlikely to cede influence in what it considers its home turf, setting the stage for prolonged regional tension.
"Latin America was the first region into which the United States expanded ... and will continue to be its fundamental zone of influence," Wietchikoski said.
She said as US “international hegemony” declines “this would be the last region” it would “relinquish."
Wietchikoski predicted that as Chinese and Russian presence expands, the US "tends to mobilize all its extensive resources to defend what it conceives as its backyard."
Milani noted that Latin American countries remain fragmented and lack a unified response to US pressure. Their future position, she said, will depend on whether they can coordinate common strategies.
Jenkins sees a gradual shift toward multipolarity, with countries seeking diversified partnerships to reduce dependence on “US hegemony.”
Despite US efforts, he added, the region is likely to continue seeking partnerships with both Washington and Beijing and “take advantage of the conflict.”
