Trump revives “big stick” approach to Latin America

by Jim Hodgson

With all of my passion for justice and in the face of so many gross injustices, I can get paralyzed. And with Trump in power next door, there is always something new to distract us from what went before or from demanding freedom for captives or the release of the #EpsteinFiles.

Just today, he threatened Canada again. #ElbowsUp, still.

Yesterday, it was a plan to end Israel’s war in Gaza that even the New York Times admits “checks every box on Israel’s wish list.” It does nothing to strengthen Palestine or assist recovery after the genocide, and will impose a new, colonial-style authority on the people. 

Let’s step back for a moment.

Last week, I was going to write about Trump’s efforts to rescue his far-right cronies in Argentina and Brazil. Here’s a short version.

Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, faces a collapsing peso and political setbacks. Milei’s chainsaw approach to slashing government was a model for Trump and Elon Musk. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Sept. 22 that Washington is ready to do “whatever is necessary” – from central bank swaps to direct peso purchases or buying Argentine debt through the Treasury’s Stabilization Fund. The moves are intended to ease political opposition to Milei that has grown as the economy collapses. Milei – already dependent on a $20 billion IMF package – sought U.S. support ahead of congressional elections in October. Investors have been pulling money out from Argentina since Milei’s party lost an election in Buenos Aires province on Sept. 7, provoking worry that he will soon lack legislative support to advance his agenda. 

Front-page of a Buenos Aires newspaper shows Trump managing the rescue plan for Argentina’s Milei. Right: response from Occupy Democrats.

Earlier, Trump imposed a 50% tariff on goods from Brazil, claiming that Brazil engages in unfair trade practices and that the government is engaged in a “witch hunt” against Trump’s ally, former president Jair BolsonaroBolsonaro was convicted earlier this month of attempting a coup after voters dumped him from office. He was sentenced to more than 27 years in prison, sparking Trump’s ire. The present Brazilian government called the U.S. move “a new attempt of undue interference in Brazilian internal affairs.”

When he spoke of the U.S. rescue of Argentina’s Milei, Bessent told reporters that the Trump administration hoped to solidify what it sees as a rightward shift in Latin American countries, including potentially Colombia. (Colombia is now government by a left-centre coalition led by President Gustavo Petro, who cannot succeed himself. His party is currently selecting a new candidate.) 

New and old threats

Bessent’s move came hours before Trump took centre stage at the United Nations General Assembly to press his MAGA-style policies on the rest of the world. 

In the speech, Trump threatened to “blow out of existence” Venezuela’s president, Nicolás Maduro. Maduro responded with a plan to declare a state of external unrest to enable rapid mobilization in defence of Venezuela. He had earlier sent a letter to Trump, proposing direct talks. When asked about the letter, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, said it was “full of lies” and said the administration still views Maduro as an “illegitimate leader.”

Trump’s threat came after he moved warships into the south Caribbean and after recent attacks on Venezuelan fishing boats (alleged without evidence to be carrying drugs). Trump and his minions seem determined to revive the worst applications of U.S. foreign policy in Latin America, from the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine to Teddy Roosevelt’s “big-stick” diplomacy in the early 20th century.

A recent US government document revealed the Trump administration plans to redirect $1.8 billion in foreign aid toward a new “America First” strategy, Reuters news agency reported Sept. 24. It would give priority to neutralizing “Marxist, anti-American regimes” in Latin America. The report said $400 million would support activities to end illegal immigration to the US, counter China, and “confront the Marxist, anti-American regimes of Venezuela, Cuba and Nicaragua.” The document, known as a Congressional Notification, follows news that the upcoming National Defense Strategy will also pivot the U.S. away from a focus on adversaries like China and Russia to instead prioritize efforts in the Americas.

But not everyone serving Trump is onside with these approaches. On Sept. 29, the Washington Post reported that eight current and former officials have said there is a deep rift between the political appointees at the Pentagon and the military leaders there. Reflecting on the Post report, historian Heather Cox Richardson said that War Secretary Pete Hegseth “is withdrawing forces from Europe, reducing the concentration of power and consolidating commands abroad while focusing on using the military in the U.S. and neighboring countries.

Among Trump administration opponents to use of force to provoke regime change in Venezuela is Richard Grenell, Trump’s special envoy to the country, said Drop Site News on Sept. 29. Grenell has successfully re-opened channels for export of Venezuelan oil to the United States. Grenell and his supporters say diplomatic negotiation is the best way to protect U.S. economic interests. Among those who oppose Grenell is U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio. 

Amid controversy and offers of support, Haiti has a new transitional council

by Jim Hodgson

More than 40 church, labour and aid organizations called on Canada to support Haiti’s transitional council (CPT) and to provide additional aid.

But divisions within the council—formed April 12 to preside until new elections can be held—became apparent April 30 after the council chose its chair, former senator Edgar Leblanc Fils, and named an interim prime minister, Fritz Bélizaire. The CPT is made up of a range of political actors, including some who supported the former, relatively progressive, presidents Jean-Bertrand Aristide and René Préval, and others who supported the more recent U.S.-backed presidents Michel Martelly and Jovenel Moïse, along with civil society and business sector representatives.

With the Bélizaire announcement, it became clear that four of the seven voting members of the CPT had formed what they called an “indissoluble majority block.” 

This manner of working, writes journalist Gotson Pierre of Alterpresse, was not foreseen in the multi-party agreement on April 3 nor in the April 12 decree that created the CPT. “Can such a block derail the transition? In such a case, of what use would it be?” he asked. 

Then on May 8, it became apparent that the role of CPT chair will revolve among the four long-time politicians who comprise the so-called indissoluble block. 

This move was strongly criticized as “absurd” and a sign of “a serious problem in Haitian political culture” where “political actors defend their personal and clan interests to the detriment of national interests.” Political scientist Joseph Harold Pierre said the CPT chair needs to have a strong rapport with the international community, something that cannot develop in just five months.

Canadian response to the multidimensional crisis in Haiti

These concerns are important. One might have expected that decisions would be taken by consensus, especially given that the CPT includes two non-voting civil society representatives.

Even so, this transitional council still seems to be the best way forward in the face of an unprecedented crime wave, rulers that no-one elected, and the imminent arrival of an international police force led by Kenya. 

A letter endorsed by about 40 organizations that were brought together by the Association québécoise des organismes de coopération internationale (AQOCI), the Concertation pour Haïti (CPH) and Cooperation Canada calls on Canada to support the CPT, stand against arms trafficking to Haiti, and to deploy appropriate humanitarian aid.

Part of the letter states:

1. Support the political transition process

Canada should recognize and support the recently sworn-in Transitional Presidential Council so that it can implement the “Political Accord for a Peaceful and Orderly Transition” as quickly as possible. This agreement, despite its imperfections, offers the opportunity to restore constitutional normalcy, the proper functioning of institutions and legal order for Haitians. 

Canada should insist on the broad and effective representation of all segments of society, particularly women, youth and the diaspora, within the transitional bodies provided for in the Political Accord. The participants deplored the fact that only one of the nine appointed members of the Presidential Council was a woman (without a deliberative voice). Furthermore, to enable Haitians to take their destiny back into their own hands, Canada should help recall the place and role of the diplomatic corps in Haiti, whose sometimes excessive interference in national affairs offends national dignity. 

Canada should take note of past mistakes and exercise increased vigilance to restore integrity and honesty in governance while preventing the violation of human rights in Haiti. 

2. Take a stand against arms trafficking to Haiti

Canada should engage in courageous and uncompromising advocacy with the United States to stop arms trafficking to Haiti, based on the recent report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. 

Canada must encourage international responses guided by the will of the Transitional Presidential Council and the institutions of the Political Agreement for a Peaceful and Orderly Transition to restore security, promote law enforcement and support Haiti’s coastal defense. This requires providing the security forces (police and army) with logistical and financial support, without which the situation will remain precarious, hampering any progress towards democracy. For its part, Canada must be transparent and consider legal proceedings or the imposition of sanctions (seizure of funds or travel ban) against those involved in the transport. 

3. Deploy appropriate humanitarian aid

Any sustainable solution for the well-being of Haitians requires a paradigm shift. Canada must reconsider the current project-based approach to humanitarian aid, which too often fails to reach the most vulnerable people and the most affected territories. Together with civil society organizations, Canada should initiate a new way of coordinating humanitarian and development actions to support local economies, promote local expertise and respect the dignity of populations. To this end, Canada should implement the triple nexus approach, combining interventions structured in the humanitarian, development and peace (including social cohesion) fields. 

Faced with a multifaceted crisis and immense humanitarian needs, Canada should also increase and diversify its funding to reach more of the sectors affected (agriculture, health, protection of civilians, hygiene and sanitation, shelter, education, economic support, etc.), while considering the question of access to the services offered. At a time when the population has witnessed the airlift of diplomats being evacuated and given that almost 50% of the population is at risk of acute food insecurity by June 2024 (IPC, 2024), it is essential to ensure that access to aid is facilitated throughout the country. 

Being Haiti’s second biggest donor is not enough. The above recommendations are part of an overall call for greater coherence in Canada’s foreign policy towards Haiti. Canada can once again demonstrate its values and feminist approach to promoting peace and security in the world by becoming a champion of Haiti’s cause in the international community.