SCOTT SIMON, HOST:
When it comes to foreign policy in Latin America, the Trump administration has favored a more muscular approach, demanding control of the Panama Canal, a bailout for Argentina with strings attached and opposing tariffs on Brazil to influence the trial of a former president - and as we just heard, killing alleged drug smugglers on boats in the Caribbean - all part of an escalating pressure campaign against the regime of Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela. We're joined now by Ivan Briscoe. He's senior director of policy at the International Crisis Group. Thanks so much for being with us.
IVAN BRISCOE: It's a pleasure to be on your show. Thank you.
SIMON: What do you believe defines the Trump administration's approach to Latin America?
BRISCOE: I don't believe that you can sum it up easily. I think it's got various strands, and that's what we see at play across the region at the moment. The core, of course, is domestic policy, which is controlling migrants, coming down hard on the drug epidemic, especially the use of fentanyl, restoring manufacturing industry to the United States. I think a lot of that is bound up with policy towards Latin America, which is where most of the migrants have come from and the drugs come from and where a lot of the manufacturing industry has gone. That sense of Latin America is doing United States wrong has been used by Trump since the very start in his political career.
But there are two other elements, I think, which are really important. One is the Monroe Doctrine - you know, the idea that United States is the sole, real major power that can act across the Americas. No other power can do so. But a last element is Trump's one-on-one relationship with leaders who are in his partisan ideological camp with which he has a strong personal relationship and with whom he's willing to do one-on-one deals, it seems, favors for favors, in an effort to build a broader pro-Trump, if you like, coalition across Latin America. And that side of his approach is one which we're just starting to see more of, and the consequences are very uncertain.
SIMON: Let me follow up on Venezuela because we have these strikes on boats and a now-confirmed CIA presence operating in Venezuela. Do you think, at the same time, that's likely to foment any kind of regime change in Venezuela?
BRISCOE: I'm not so sure. And I think this is what's driving a little bit U.S. policy towards Venezuela at the moment - the perception that the Venezuelan government is actually weaker in some ways than it has ever been. This is a message which has - obviously being propagated by the Nobel Prize winner and Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado. But there's no denying there's truth in it. The Venezuelan government lost elections last year. It prevented the real results being released. It led a crackdown. But that was a major event which has caused it discredit in the region with its neighbors. And obviously, it weakens the movement from within.
But the problem - of course, the most practical problem in the way, is the fact that that government is screwed into power. It has got a very efficient, repressive machinery. It is very close to the military. And so is there any real possibility of peeling away some of those allies or peeling away military support to generate change? I'm not sure.
SIMON: Let's listen to something that the Nobel Peace prize winner and opposition leader in Venezuela, Maria Corina Machado, said on our program WEEKEND EDITION Sunday.
(SOUNDBITE OF ARCHIVED NPR CONTENT)
MARIA CORINA MACHADO: Once Maduro goes, the Cuban regime will follow. The Nicaraguan regime will follow. And for the first time in history, we will have the Americas free of communism and narco-dictatorships.
SIMON: Do you share that confidence?
BRISCOE: No, because history would say that we have seen that message propagated from leading Latin American politicians, leading lights in Washington for decades. How many years is it since the Cuban Revolution? It's almost hard to do the calculation in one's head - 66 years, isn't it? It's a very long time. So one's heard it before, and one tends to disbelieve it because in each case, it's difficult to see how that process gets going, because these are highly authoritarian, repressive states with powerful secret police and intelligence services, which clamp down very soon on any signs of dissent.
SIMON: Why do you think the Trump administration has made the Argentina bailout dependent upon the results of the Argentine elections? Why has President Trump come down so much on the side of President Milei?
BRISCOE: Well, they share a lot in common. Milei - he won with the promise of clearing out the political elites, freeing up the economy, stopping all the nonsense - so very similar messages - conservative social values, lean state, tough on security. Trump sees in Milei this soulmate, and he believes that by building strong connections to individual leaders - Milei, Bukele in El Salvador, Noboa in Ecuador - this will be the start of a gradual move in the region towards much more pro-Trumpian governments which will work more closely with the United States and will engage in those sorts of transactions and those sorts of favors for favors, which I think Trump believes is the most efficient way to run diplomacy.
But I'm just not sure whether this hard play towards Latin American countries, insisting that voters listen to what he's saying and do his bidding is going to work. Latin Americans are very sensitive to infringements of their sovereignty, all the more so from the United States, and it's a very dangerous game to play.
SIMON: Ivan Briscoe is senior director of policy at the International Crisis Group. Thanks so much for being with us.
BRISCOE: Thank you very much. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
