How China Changed U.S. Latin America Geostrategy? : Analytic Narrative of the U.S. Geoeconomic and Geopolitical Strategies in the 21st Century in Latin America and the Caribbean
Alasalmi, Topias (2023)
Alasalmi, Topias
2023
Politiikan tutkimuksen maisteriohjelma - Master's Programme in Politics
Johtamisen ja talouden tiedekunta - Faculty of Management and Business
This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Hyväksymispäivämäärä
2023-05-22
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202305055331
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:tuni-202305055331
Tiivistelmä
For the first time United States declared its hegemonic ambitions in the Western hemisphere in 1823. In his State of the Union Address President Monroe called upon the European powers to suspend their colonial ambitions on the American continent. He warned that any intervention in the region would provoke a strong military reaction by the United States. Since then the entire Latin American and the Caribbean region became the red line zone for extra-hemispheric powers to assert their influence. After the WWII United States had achieved its hegemonic ambitions set by President Monroe and the United States levied vast influence on the hemisphere; it had constructed large network of bases to Central American and Andean region, played a central role in creation and operation of the hemispheric multilateral organizations, and was the number one trading partner of the region. All leading to the ‘90s when United States began to promote more integrated and cooperative hemisphere by promoting democracy and market liberalization. In this spirit, NAFTA free trade area was created, and the governments of Western Hemisphere met regularly at the Summit of the Americas to discuss the issues concerning the hemisphere. United States also started to promote hemispheric wide free trade agreement which would have reached from Canada to the southern tip of Chile. This hemispheric liberal dream, however, was soon put on hold when the terrorist attacks to New York changed the United States’ threat perception to non-state actors. Since then, the “War on Terror,” global financial crises, regional integration and disintegration, rise of anti-U.S. governments, rise of China, COVID-19 pandemic, and Russia’s war of aggression have affected its policies toward the region.
In this thesis I evaluate the United States geostrategy toward Latin America and the Caribbean region in the 21st century by using the Analytic Narrative (AN) method. While using the analysed narrative scheme of the method, in the first stage of the research I formulate a narrative of United States’ Latin America and the Caribbean policies over the period 2001–2022. The narrative is formulated by using secondary literature, policy documents, news articles, and foreign economic aid data focusing on United States military and economic policies. In the second stage, the narrative is analysed through the comparative framework of geopolitical and geoeconomic strategy. Here, my first research task is to recognize which geostrategy explains better the United States geostrategy toward the region during the period. To address this question I extract the factors of each strategy from the narrative and compare the factors against the comparative framework. My second research task is to expose the shifts between the strategies and to identify the factors which have caused the shifts. To expose the factors AN method comes particularly practical as it allows researcher to identify the shifts from one institutional equilibrium to another. In this part I focus on perceived threats, but also other factors rising from secondary literature such as regional development. Special focus is given to China, because the increased influence of extra-hemispheric actors is particularly interesting in the case of Latin America and the Caribbean due to its strategic meaning to United States, but also because Edvard Luttwak in his seminal article argues that importance of military power and military alliances are declining, and the logic of conflict is moving into the realm of commerce. The final research task is to test how well the assumptions of these strategies work in U.S. foreign policy. This is also a characteristic of AN method as the last stage of study revises both the model and the original narrative.
The key finding of the study is that the United States strategy toward Latin America and the Caribbean region in the 21st century has been threat-based military oriented geopolitical strategy. Whether the threats have been narcoterrorists, anti-U.S. governments, or extra-hemispheric actors the answer has been increased military approach. This especially concerns the Central America and the Caribbean region, where keeping the “line of defense” has been the number one priority. Geoeconomic strategy have been mainly used to support this geopolitical strategy although specific geoeconomic strategies have also been used when United States aimed at countering the Venezuelan oil strategy and blocking China’s dual-use infrastructure investments in Central American and the Caribbean region. The most interesting recent development to geoeconomic direction in the United States’ strategy has been the “nearshoring” initiative which seems to be changing the perception of Latin America and the Caribbean region from the “source of threats” to the “region of possibility” which can replace the Chinese manufacturing. This supports the view of geoeconomic shift of strategic competition, although still accompanied with military component. Concerning the Wigell’s and Vihma’s framework my study found that geoeconomic strategy can produce a similar type of balancing behaviour as geopolitical strategy when it comes to strategically important region of the Great Power.
In this thesis I evaluate the United States geostrategy toward Latin America and the Caribbean region in the 21st century by using the Analytic Narrative (AN) method. While using the analysed narrative scheme of the method, in the first stage of the research I formulate a narrative of United States’ Latin America and the Caribbean policies over the period 2001–2022. The narrative is formulated by using secondary literature, policy documents, news articles, and foreign economic aid data focusing on United States military and economic policies. In the second stage, the narrative is analysed through the comparative framework of geopolitical and geoeconomic strategy. Here, my first research task is to recognize which geostrategy explains better the United States geostrategy toward the region during the period. To address this question I extract the factors of each strategy from the narrative and compare the factors against the comparative framework. My second research task is to expose the shifts between the strategies and to identify the factors which have caused the shifts. To expose the factors AN method comes particularly practical as it allows researcher to identify the shifts from one institutional equilibrium to another. In this part I focus on perceived threats, but also other factors rising from secondary literature such as regional development. Special focus is given to China, because the increased influence of extra-hemispheric actors is particularly interesting in the case of Latin America and the Caribbean due to its strategic meaning to United States, but also because Edvard Luttwak in his seminal article argues that importance of military power and military alliances are declining, and the logic of conflict is moving into the realm of commerce. The final research task is to test how well the assumptions of these strategies work in U.S. foreign policy. This is also a characteristic of AN method as the last stage of study revises both the model and the original narrative.
The key finding of the study is that the United States strategy toward Latin America and the Caribbean region in the 21st century has been threat-based military oriented geopolitical strategy. Whether the threats have been narcoterrorists, anti-U.S. governments, or extra-hemispheric actors the answer has been increased military approach. This especially concerns the Central America and the Caribbean region, where keeping the “line of defense” has been the number one priority. Geoeconomic strategy have been mainly used to support this geopolitical strategy although specific geoeconomic strategies have also been used when United States aimed at countering the Venezuelan oil strategy and blocking China’s dual-use infrastructure investments in Central American and the Caribbean region. The most interesting recent development to geoeconomic direction in the United States’ strategy has been the “nearshoring” initiative which seems to be changing the perception of Latin America and the Caribbean region from the “source of threats” to the “region of possibility” which can replace the Chinese manufacturing. This supports the view of geoeconomic shift of strategic competition, although still accompanied with military component. Concerning the Wigell’s and Vihma’s framework my study found that geoeconomic strategy can produce a similar type of balancing behaviour as geopolitical strategy when it comes to strategically important region of the Great Power.